I'm a producer in the third area and am developing a ten episode web series. The episodes range from 10-20 minutes. Right now the first 7 episodes are written, totally 85 pages. It's a dramedy, but there's some action and some visual effects.
When I tell people my budget they all get overwhelmed at how high it is, but I feel I've trimmed as much as I can while still paying everyone a respectful amount and covering myself legally and securely with a contingency buffer.
I know I have high ambitions, but it's made me curious what other people's concept of a budget are. Many of the filmmakers I know are still producing small passion projects of timed film competition films, but our community is growing toward becoming a stronger force in the indie film community.
When thinking about making a low budget project (web series, feature, short), what range do you think of? I know there are obviously a lot of factors involved, I'm just looking for estimates of range.
Hello Sandrene,
I hope all is well.
Low Budget is between $625,000 and $2,500,000
Modified Low Budget is between $200,000 and $625,000
Ultra Low Budget is under $200,000
According to an article from Back Stage a few years ago, “There are four budget categories for movies being produced under a SAG-AFTRA contract.
Any film with a budget greater than $2.5 million uses the basic agreement. Smaller projects qualify for one of the following contracts:
Low Budget Agreement. The budget must be between $625,000 and $2,500,000. Actors are paid a weekly rate of $1,752 and a daily rate of $504.
Modified Low Budget Agreement. The budget must be between $200,000 and $625,000. Actors are paid a weekly rate of $933 and a daily rate of $268.
Ultra Low Budget Agreement. The budget must be under $200,000. Actors are paid a day rate of $100.
Best Wishes!
2 people like this
My idea of a "low budget project" is something under $25,000.
1 person likes this
Correction: SAG ULB is anything under 250K, with a daily rate of $125.
Sandrene: A film, TV, or web series budget is determined by a fairly simple equation or formula. If producers adhere to this formula, their projects have a high chance of success. Here is the formula:
Budget = anticipated sales of a film, TV, or web series project.
Anticipated sales of a project = what distributors will pay.
What distribs will pay = who is in the film, TV, or web series.
2 people like this
An equally useful question as the one posed here might be "what is your definition of "independent" filmmaker or film ?
When I was doing what many or most people on S32 are doing now, it was unashamedly called "amateur filmmaking", and no one got bent about it. Ever try calling an amateur filmmaker an amateur in the last 20 years? Bad idea. On the other hand, if I describe a million dollar film I made with real actors in 35mm as an "indie" ( which it was ), it conjures the notion I am a YouTube vlogger. It's a symptom of the perceptions of the age, where everyone views themselves and their level as the same as peers, and rising. Lack of common semantics and perceptions casue for much initial miscommunication. Those with higher mileage can usually figure out where others or their projects are at instantly... but not always
1 person likes this
the different episode run times is problematic in every way. Stick to a common page count, re-use same locations, actors, crew, block a consistent shooting and post schedule.
Thanks for the responses. I'm very familiar with union rules and know how to make a budget, I'm more interested in what people's perception is.
Dan, the benefit of making web content is you're not limited by page count. If I wanted to do that, I would just write for television. And again, I'm not concerned with my budget, it is very conservative for what I want to do while still being fair to my cast and crew. My question wasn't to find ways to cut it down.
Royce, that's an interesting question. A lot of people equate the term amateur with talentless, but I always saw it as someone who does something as a hobby. I called myself an amateur photographer for years and eventually switched to saying freelance photographer when I noticed it made people doubt my skills, even after seeing my work. As for the concept of indie, I think it's anything that's made without the backing of a studio or the promise of major distribution. Which I think most people would agree with, so maybe the problem is with a narrow vision of the producing and distribution processes. I know many of the people who usually only think of 5 figure budgets also don't fully grasp what a producer does, and usually doesn't think about marketing and distribution during their development stage. The line gets blurred even more since we're seeing a trend of indie films winning Oscars and Golden Globes.
2 people like this
Just to give you our experience. We shot our last feature for around $15,000. This was a single location shoot to save on cost (and we still ended up utilizing 2 other locations that fell into our lap). We also kept the main actor count down to 3-4 and shot gorilla style with a skeleton crew. Most of the budget went into sound (being one of the most important parts of your film), insurances, housing and travel, and catering. After that, finding passionate, talented volunteers to jump on board a project that they felt could help their career. I think you are doing the right thing, however, making sure you pay your crew a respectable wage -- they will ultimately work harder for you.
If I had it my way when it comes to budget on my next single-location feature, I would like a range between $100,000 -- $150,000. When it comes to the low budget feature I want to shoot next (not being a single location style film) I am hoping to get investors to come in at $1.5 million to $3 million.