CodyValkyrie
Charter Member 2016
I was reading the B-25 thread, and it got me thinking about costs to develop. One of the reasons I no longer have been as active as I once was in this industry, as well as many others, is the cost to develop (whether coding, video editing, etc.). When I can go out into the real world and get clients to hire me at $800 a day to film, it's hard to justify banging my head against a desk and being frustrated when filming in FSX for a measly fee. People may not understand what it takes to do my job for FSX, so let me give you a short taste:
1) First, I need legitimate copies of Vegas, After Effects, FSX and any software I might be filming. This includes securing rights from third party developers in some cases. This can cost hundreds.
2) I need to secure the rights to music, unless I'm using canned royalty free music at no cost, which everyone else in the industry is using. I prefer to stand out a bit, and that can cost (a lot sometimes).
3) A computer JUST for FSX to do my job traditionally costs me around $2,000. Setting up the software in such a particular way that it is useful for me to film as I have in the past can take days.
4) Because of the memory requirements and the old software, expect crashes about every 20 minutes. In those twenty minutes, you might get a couple of shots because you spent the majority of the time just GETTING the shot.
5) Try to do all of that while flying, or fiddling with software (add the complexity of an FMC to the mix).
I did much more than that, and many of my long time clients will tell you I brought more to the table than a good eye for camera work. I worked hard behind the scenes to get collaborations with developers, provided marketing that lasted far beyond just making a video, and brought a full marketing concept to the business to ensure our videos were viewed by the most people. I was successful enough to have hired at least two crews over the years to keep up with demand.
Now, when a client asks me to do a video for less than a few hundred, and I spend days in some cases working on the project, I usually cannot justify the cost. As such, it's gone mostly back to being a hobby for me and I've somewhat left the industry and released my employees because I can't afford to work here. When something takes as much time as a full time job to do, naturally, you want to get paid for it. If you cannot get paid what you are worth in similar but parallel industries, you walk, because at the end of the day, you still need to put food on your plate.
So, when people complain about the complexity of an aircraft not meeting their standards, you need to consider the following:
1) The complex products have developers that can probably afford to actually hire support for what they are worth, or they are outsourcing to keep costs down.
2) If the price of the product is higher, this is usually, but not necessarily why.
3) If a product isn't as complex, or doesn't have as much advertising, it's because the developer cannot afford to do so.
Now, developers are stuck between a rock and a hard place because customer demands are rising, and so are costs, but the profit margin has been depleted heavily. Only a few companies are successful in a market like this, and it's because of complete innovation, but that has only driven customer demand higher. There is one product in mind, that I know the developer spent a huge chunk of change on, that secured the rights from the aircraft manufacturer, only to be met with less than 1,000 sales after one year. Needless to say, that company doesn't produce much for consumers anymore.
I think we all need to take a moment and be a bit more grateful for whatever we receive. If you know me, I've been a staunch supporter and friend with the guys over at A2A for years, and that is rightfully justified. That being said, after working in the industry, I've learned to enjoy much less complex products knowing full well that the developers have done the best damn job they possibly can, and I'm grateful for that. Not every airplane can be a Accu-Sim or PMDG quality, and I've learned to enjoy products without these qualities. While some may rail on Carenado or Alabeo, I for one love these aircraft because even with some of their problems, they are still light years ahead of what pioneers like Chuck Dome were doing with FS5.0 and releasing on Compuserve.
In other words, be grateful for what you have. Developers, try to pay your people what they are worth.
[EDIT, I would like to note I'm not directing this at anyone. I'm just sharing my general thoughts on the industry after having worked in it for years, and becoming a hobbyist again.]
1) First, I need legitimate copies of Vegas, After Effects, FSX and any software I might be filming. This includes securing rights from third party developers in some cases. This can cost hundreds.
2) I need to secure the rights to music, unless I'm using canned royalty free music at no cost, which everyone else in the industry is using. I prefer to stand out a bit, and that can cost (a lot sometimes).
3) A computer JUST for FSX to do my job traditionally costs me around $2,000. Setting up the software in such a particular way that it is useful for me to film as I have in the past can take days.
4) Because of the memory requirements and the old software, expect crashes about every 20 minutes. In those twenty minutes, you might get a couple of shots because you spent the majority of the time just GETTING the shot.
5) Try to do all of that while flying, or fiddling with software (add the complexity of an FMC to the mix).
I did much more than that, and many of my long time clients will tell you I brought more to the table than a good eye for camera work. I worked hard behind the scenes to get collaborations with developers, provided marketing that lasted far beyond just making a video, and brought a full marketing concept to the business to ensure our videos were viewed by the most people. I was successful enough to have hired at least two crews over the years to keep up with demand.
Now, when a client asks me to do a video for less than a few hundred, and I spend days in some cases working on the project, I usually cannot justify the cost. As such, it's gone mostly back to being a hobby for me and I've somewhat left the industry and released my employees because I can't afford to work here. When something takes as much time as a full time job to do, naturally, you want to get paid for it. If you cannot get paid what you are worth in similar but parallel industries, you walk, because at the end of the day, you still need to put food on your plate.
So, when people complain about the complexity of an aircraft not meeting their standards, you need to consider the following:
1) The complex products have developers that can probably afford to actually hire support for what they are worth, or they are outsourcing to keep costs down.
2) If the price of the product is higher, this is usually, but not necessarily why.
3) If a product isn't as complex, or doesn't have as much advertising, it's because the developer cannot afford to do so.
Now, developers are stuck between a rock and a hard place because customer demands are rising, and so are costs, but the profit margin has been depleted heavily. Only a few companies are successful in a market like this, and it's because of complete innovation, but that has only driven customer demand higher. There is one product in mind, that I know the developer spent a huge chunk of change on, that secured the rights from the aircraft manufacturer, only to be met with less than 1,000 sales after one year. Needless to say, that company doesn't produce much for consumers anymore.
I think we all need to take a moment and be a bit more grateful for whatever we receive. If you know me, I've been a staunch supporter and friend with the guys over at A2A for years, and that is rightfully justified. That being said, after working in the industry, I've learned to enjoy much less complex products knowing full well that the developers have done the best damn job they possibly can, and I'm grateful for that. Not every airplane can be a Accu-Sim or PMDG quality, and I've learned to enjoy products without these qualities. While some may rail on Carenado or Alabeo, I for one love these aircraft because even with some of their problems, they are still light years ahead of what pioneers like Chuck Dome were doing with FS5.0 and releasing on Compuserve.
In other words, be grateful for what you have. Developers, try to pay your people what they are worth.
[EDIT, I would like to note I'm not directing this at anyone. I'm just sharing my general thoughts on the industry after having worked in it for years, and becoming a hobbyist again.]
I knew my time in the industry was limited, but I managed to do something I don't think any other videographer did, and that's put nearly every company in the industry on my portfolio. I can say with some degree of honor that as far as I knew, my guys got payed higher than anyone else in the industry (other than myself). Greener pastures I suppose, and I'm finally starting to enjoy simming again. 9+ years is a long time making videos for Flight Simulator. I've made oodles of friends in the industry, and had a ton of success. I think my time is best put behind a real camera now, although I'll put something fun out every once in a while for my own entertainment.
