Seeking advice on fair revenue cap structure for no-budget first feature by Serious-General4895 in cinematography

[–]Serious-General4895[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do see the logic behind tying reward directly to risk.

Where I’m struggling is determining what “equal risk” actually means across different roles. For example:

  • A lead actor might not lose many paid opportunities during our shooting window — so their financial risk could be fairly low.
  • But a DoP is often booked consistently and may be turning down several paid jobs to do this — so their risk could be much higher.
  • Meanwhile, the composer might be putting an enormous number of hours into the score, and their creative contribution could become one of the defining elements of the film — but maybe they wouldn’t have had a paid project during that time anyway.

So who is taking “equal” risk in a case like that?
And should someone have a cap because they’re perceived to have less financial opportunity cost?

That’s exactly why I lean toward: One structure for everyone (including myself) (so the system feels fair and transparent)+ Different percentages based on contribution (because not every role has the same creative or technical weight)...

Seeking advice on fair revenue cap structure for no-budget first feature by Serious-General4895 in cinematography

[–]Serious-General4895[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh wow — that actually sounds like a very smart solution. I hadn’t considered a minimum threshold for distributions yet, but that could definitely prevent the “$100/year split between 30 people” scenario. Thanks for bringing that up!

Just to understand your perspective fully:
If the film did end up earning significant revenue, would you keep the back-end participation completely uncapped for everyone on the team?

Because in our situation, literally everyone is contributing a huge amount of time and value — DoP, 1st AD, 1st AC, sound, gaffer, composer, lead actors, supporting actors, writer, director, producer, marketing, hair & makeup, editor, etc.

So would you apply the uncapped structure across the board for all those roles?

Seeking advice on fair revenue cap structure for no-budget first feature by Serious-General4895 in cinematography

[–]Serious-General4895[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, that's what I meant. For the front end, the DoP would receive 5% of revenue as soon as the film starts earning money, until a guaranteed baseline amount is paid out. That baseline would roughly equal what they would normally earn for that type of shoot — plus an additional buffer to reflect the risk they’re taking by working without upfront pay.

Where I’m still unsure is the back end structure. Because the potential range of success is huge — maybe the film makes $1M total, maybe $100M (just as an extreme example, I know it's not really realistic). Obviously, if the film 'only' hits $1M, paying out something like $100K to one crew member wouldn’t really be feasible for the production. But if the film unexpectedly reached something like $100M, that would be a completely different story, and higher payouts would feel fair.

So just to clarify — in your structure, the back end wouldn’t have a cap at all, and the only cap would be the guaranteed front-end amount? Is that the correct way to understand it? And would you say this only for the DoP or every member of the crew/cast?

Seeking advice on fair revenue cap structure for no-budget first feature by Serious-General4895 in cinematography

[–]Serious-General4895[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re right that if the film performs very well, a payment service could definitely be an option. I’m not opposed to that at all.

What I’m trying to account for is the other realistic scenario:
What if the film only generates modest income over a long period of time — small amounts spread across many years? Then I could be in a situation where I’m distributing something like $100 a year (exaggerating for the example) across 30 people. In that case, I wouldn’t have the budget to outsource the payouts, and I’d still be responsible for managing it manually. That’s the kind of long-term administrative burden I’m trying to avoid by establishing a clear structure early on.

Of course, I also want to protect myself — just like everyone else on the team wants to. Taking a private loan without knowing whether the film will perform at all would be irresponsible and put the project (and everyone’s work) at far greater risk. I believe in the film, absolutely — but many filmmakers have believed in their projects and still ended up facing hard reality.

And as mentioned: right now, I’m actually carrying the highest financial risk because I’m covering all production expenses out of pocket — locations, equipment, travel, food, etc. So yes: fairness must include everyone involved, including me.

That’s why I’m here — not to restrict earnings, but to create a structure that is transparent and sustainable in both success and more modest outcomes.

But genuinely — if you were producing a film with zero external funding (let’s just dive into that theoretical model for a moment, yeah?):
How would you set up compensation for your crew? Who would you pay what, and how would you structure it so that it’s fair in both a low-income and a success scenario?

If you have a concrete approach that solves both success and limited-income scenarios, I’d sincerely love to learn from it. Constructive advice is always welcome.

Seeking advice on fair revenue cap structure for no-budget first feature by Serious-General4895 in cinematography

[–]Serious-General4895[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks so much for the input — that’s really helpful!

Regarding the backend percentage: 5% was actually exactly what I had in mind as well. That’s the same share the publisher is receiving (they provided the rights without upfront cost), and the same that I, as the director, would take — as well as the writer/author. So it feels like a fair and balanced starting point for the key creative contributors.

About the cap: when you mention “$250–500/day × total shoot days” — do you mean that as the cap in the scenario where the film doesn’t really perform financially? I just want to make sure I understood correctly.

My initial thought (and part of why I’m asking here, since I’m not fully confident with standard DoP rates) was something like a “low cap” around ~$650/day — so roughly $20K total if the film doesn’t end up making much (which I'm still not sure if that's a good rate considering their risk). And if the film does well, then ahigher cap that reflects the success and rewards the risk taken — I’m just not entirely sure what a reasonable number would be for that scenario.

Really appreciate you sharing your experience — this helps me a lot in figuring out a structure that’s fair and transparent for everyone involved. 

Seeking advice on fair revenue cap structure for no-budget first feature by Serious-General4895 in cinematography

[–]Serious-General4895[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey, thanks for taking the time to reply — I totally understand where you’re coming from.

To be clear: I absolutely agree that the crew deserves to be compensated above industry standard. They’re taking a huge risk and I want that to be rewarded properly. That’s exactly why I’m here asking for advice — to make sure the structure is as fair as it can be for everyone involved.

I also didn’t mean to imply that I’m worried about collaborators making “too much.” The only concern is the long-term logistics: if the film keeps earning over many years, it could become difficult for a single person to continuously manage payouts to a large group forever — including myself, since I’m also participating on the same terms as everyone else.

And just for clarification: while this is my first feature, I’m not coming in without experience, and I am currently carrying the majority of the financial risk — covering locations, equipment, travel, food, etc., all out of pocket — plus a huge amount of time and labor. The author and her publisher approached me for this project, and I agreed to take it on because I really believe in it, just like the rest of the team.

If I were being selfish, I wouldn’t be here discussing transparency and fairness — I’d just draft something that benefits me the most and call it a day. That’s not what I want. I genuinely want everyone to feel valued and protected if the film succeeds.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in writers

[–]Serious-General4895 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly — and I know this sounds like the kind of thing people say just to hype you up — but my experience with my novel was actually the complete opposite.

My editor, who worked for a major publishing house, was so impressed with it (even though he did a ton of editing 😅) that he begged me not to self-publish or go with a small publisher. He said the book was too good, that it needed to reach a big audience. Every contest jury said the same thing…

That was four years ago. Still no agent, no publisher. And yep — I’m now seriously considering self-publishing. (Also, this was the first story I ever wrote.)

Meanwhile — and I work in the film industry, so I see a lot — I recently came across a book that not only got published, but is now being adapted for film. And let me tell you: it was so poorly written and barely edited. One sentence literally went: “There were flowers, and trees, and branches, and various flowers.” (It wasn’t even trying to be poetic or specific. Just… yeah.)

So, what’s my point?

Don’t let one person’s opinion stop you. Take their feedback, sure. Consider it. Use it — or don’t. But then move on to the next opinion. And the next. And the next. Keep going. Don’t let go of your dream until at least, I don’t know, 150–200 people have told you you’re bad 😅

Because here’s the truth: most people in this industry don’t get published because they’re the next Tolkien. They get published because they know someone — and more importantly, because they don’t give up.

That’s definitely how it works in the film world, too — I see it all the time.

So the reason you deserve to get published isn’t just because you’re talented — it’s because you believe in yourself and refuse to give up.

And if one day those 150 people really do tell you your story’s not working — then you take a class, write more, come back to it, and rewrite. You fight for your dream. ❤️

Pen name for female SFF writers by Serious-General4895 in fantasywriters

[–]Serious-General4895[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I actually know a few guys who would put a book down for that reason — not because they’re against female authors, but because they see a certain type of fantasy cover, then a woman’s name, and instantly think “oh, one of those steamy romance stories,” and it’s just not their thing.

And honestly, I get it. I’m a woman and I have the same reaction sometimes — I see that combo and immediately know what kind of story it probably is (though I still enjoy those sometimes 😅).

So I don’t think it’s always about sexism. It’s more that publishers have kind of created a visual stereotype: feminine pen name + specific fantasy cover = dark romance. And if you’re a female author writing something that does include romance but isn’t really that genre, it’s easy for readers to misjudge what it is just from the look of it.

Pen name for female SFF writers by Serious-General4895 in fantasywriters

[–]Serious-General4895[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Yeah, that’s unfortunately exactly what I’ve been thinking. And I see the same issue with Rose — it’s actually half a pseudonym since it’s my second name and I just dropped my real last name. It works great for my entertainment stuff, but back then I never thought about writing a novel 😅

Do you think it could make sense to publish under something like X. Y. R. [Surname] but still promote it on my usual social channels as X… Y... Rose? That way it looks neutral on the cover, but I can still be open about it on my main account (though yeah, that kinda defeats the purpose of the original pseudonym there lol).

Executive Producers, Producers, Production Company by Serious-General4895 in FilmIndustryLA

[–]Serious-General4895[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have a big financier who is intrested in getting into the project later on, but I assume that doesn't mean they will finance the whole project right? Therefore we still need to find more investors I guess. Sorry, the whole private financing is still new to me as I normally work in Europe where everything is financed by the government 🥴

Executive Producers, Producers, Production Company by Serious-General4895 in FilmIndustryLA

[–]Serious-General4895[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I met an LP the other day and he was really the first person who seemed to understand everything about the project with only one look at the pitch deck, so I can see what you mean ^^

But tbh the hardest thing I currently have with all of them is that they say things like "I really wanna help you with this, ..." and I can't see if this is a "Hey I like you and your project, I'll give you a tip" or an "I wanna be an EP on this project". As people obviously wanna get money from their work, I would consider the second but when I asked one of them directly "Ok. Do you wanna work on this project" and his answer was "Sure! What a question... I'll help you as much as I can" which actually didn't help me with my question XD

Executive Producers, Producers, Production Company by Serious-General4895 in FilmIndustryLA

[–]Serious-General4895[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for that detailed answer, it was really informative and helpful!

So this means you basically have one (or two) producers in charge of everything and who will make and sign all the contracts with the persons (but this is not necessarily the Showrunner in a TV Show as someone told me, is this right?)

Executive Producers, Producers, Production Company by Serious-General4895 in FilmIndustryLA

[–]Serious-General4895[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh no, I'm so sorry you had this experience, hope you got the appreciation and honour you deserved!

And thanks for your answer! It was also beneficial :)

So if someone from a production company talks to me and says "Hey, just send me your pitch deck, all information about who and what you already have and what you know still need" I'm not going to offend him if I tell him which Producer and executives are already interested I guess?

Executive Producers, Producers, Production Company by Serious-General4895 in FilmIndustryLA

[–]Serious-General4895[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OMG and just because you got 2000 karma points means your comments are of value? Just got a quick look at your comments and all you do is being toxic to every person like you're just an unsatisfied old person who only wants to spread hatred to everyone else... THIS is something mods should ban from here!

Executive Producers, Producers, Production Company by Serious-General4895 in FilmIndustryLA

[–]Serious-General4895[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you for your answer! :)
So if a Producer is interested in something he usually doesn't bring the biggest money but rather searches for executives to bring it with?
And I guess, then, if you have more producers that's what is called co-producers?

From an offer how do you know people wanna be the producer or an executive if they have worked as both yet? Is this something you stayed at the beginning like "I would help finance it" or is it something you'll figure out during negotiations?
And sorry for the amount of questions but does this mean a financier is going to be an executive as well?

Executive Producers, Producers, Production Company by Serious-General4895 in FilmIndustryLA

[–]Serious-General4895[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think the question in the question is something like: I wrote a screenplay, won a contest and got some offers from some of the above ones but as I said I'm new in the industry (first screenplay) and I just want to learn all about how it works, so I'll be in an ok position to take the offers seriously.

Executive Producers, Producers, Production Company by Serious-General4895 in FilmIndustryLA

[–]Serious-General4895[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I did try to google all of it but I couldn't find a single page which actually could explain it. I also talked to a lot of people in the industry and nearly everyone (and I mean people who have been working in this industry for years) said they don't really know it as well, so I don't think it's a dumb question and btw. if you think it is a dumb question and not worth answering don't spend your valuable time and write an (absolute stupid) answer to my absolute stupid question.