Free camera for your production

The free camera plan

  • This is unethical

    Votes: 9 42.9%
  • This is a guerrilla tactic and you gotta do whatcha gotta do

    Votes: 11 52.4%
  • I'm not sure... hmmm.

    Votes: 1 4.8%
  • Didn't know about this! Going to do it now!

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    21

indietalk

IndieTalk Founder
Staff Member
Admin
Hey guys, I'm sure all of you know about the "Buy a camera... shoot your film... return camera within 30 days" plan. It was even documented in My Date With Drew. I am going to include a poll with this post.
 
I've never done this and I don't think I ever would, but lets just say its probably not the worst thing you could do on a movie.
 
I personally think that it is immoral.
Everything you do in the world returns to you.
So, if you do something immoral, you will get immoral attitude from someone else.
 
It's just so unnecessary.

If you need any kind of camera for your film, from a DVX100 all the way up to an Arri super 16mm, there is always someone within driving distance who owns one, operates one and who bought it because they wanted to use it.
 
So, everyone with the moral dilemma, can you honestly say you never bought an expensive piece of electronics and returned it within 30 days even though it was not defective? Ever hear of buyer's remorse? Many people buy it, try it, don't want it or decide they don't need it, and return it. That's just the facts of the retail world and part of the reason the return policies exist in the first place. The only difference between buyer's remorse and guerilla tactics is intent. But, then, "intent" also differentiates Murder 1 from Manslaughter, so I guess I can see where the moral dilemma comes into play.

Now what is definitely NOT ethical is the perpetual warranty where something breaks out of warranty and you go buy an identical item, drop it in the new box, and return it. I've never done that. ;)

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. :P
 
It's not a moral decision, it's a practical one.

If I find a local owner owner operator then I've got a resource I can go back to for reshoots or other projects... plus I don't spend the entire shoot worrying about the camera... the owner is doing that for me.

If I "borrow" and return, I'm running the risk of having to return a new camcorder that's been banged up in production. That's a hassle I don't need, especially as the guys in those shops are often the same guys that help me out with stuff.

The essence of guerilla film making is working smart. This strikes me as a choice of last resort. I can't imagine any circumstances where I'd need to do this.
 
Stone cast, I haven't returned things just because I haven't wanted them after purchasing them.

As far as this goes, I always try to make it so that every new avenue I open for my productions is one that will allow me down it again happily, with a cup of tasty coffee in hand waving hello as I pass by. Purchasing, then returning can sour a relationship with an equipment dealer (even if it is just Best Buy). Taking the staff out for beers and using their discounts to buy equipment, I have no remorse about whatsoever :)
 
I went with "Unethical". :cool:

The Beastie Boys pulled this off with one of their concert videos. They bought 100 or so mini-DV cameras (which were loaned to fans at the concert). Got an incredible amount of footage to play with in the editing room... then returned every single camera they bought.

Sure, that's bit of a bigger scale than most people are thinking of here... but I'd like to see some justify that kind of abuse of a return-policy for a commercial video product.
 
Well how it is immoral? can any one tell me. I mean sorry it might be a language problem but as far as i have heard indietalk means buy a cmera shoot the film and sell it at some low price?????


SO how it is immoral???

And if you mean in deep sence that after working out we say that dont like this CAMERA then obviously this is immoral.


If it is the second case then it is unethical.
Regards
 
Last edited:
The guys who made the blair witch project did just this... they bought their cameras, shot the film and returned it.. the film made millions world wide.

I don't think its "unethical". You guys shouldnt feel sorry for the people who work at best buy ect... its not like they are getting a commission for it... and usually when you go and return something, your returning it to someone else who works at the return counter, who couldnt care less what you were returning... the money is going to big multi-million dollar companies. I personally havent done this myself because I like my camera. However, I believe it is a guirilla tactic.
 
Having been a business owner, I find your mindset here distressing. As a small business owner, that type of business would have shut our doors (we ended up failing for other reasons). Your next argument is the robin hood argument... well, best buy is big, etc. etc... but I don't see the difference, if you're willing to do it to the large corporate enterprise, you're hurting the pocket book of your nextdoor neighbor who is a share holder in the company. So you may not be hurting the best buy employee, but someone expects to see revenue from the purchase, in the case of large corporations, the money ends up going to the share holders... i.e., me, your neighbor, anyone else who has purchased shares in a company (which the company uses as operating capital - like a loan/war bond/whatever) expecting their ROI to come from that investment.'

So no, returning the camera doesn't hurt the company or its employees for a company of that size, it hurts the investors in that company.
 
Knightly, you beat me to the punch (or keyboard).

I agree with you entirely. To add a little to it...what happens to the camera after you've done that? If it's a Prosumer that counts minutes, and somebody does check it, they can't sell it as new with 100 hours on the drum or whatever. So you really are stealing money from the company/small business. And really any opened box camera will be sold for less than it's original value. As for the better cameras, you don't find them at Best buy. If you want to use a best buy camera, ask your neighbor to borrow theirs, because everyone's got a camera. And the better cameras will be usually at small businesses, which gets back to killing our friends.

Chris
 
It seems to me it would almost always be easier and more cost effective to just rent something if this seemed like the only option available..

Most places (like Best Buy) have a restocking fee for electronics if they've been opened.. You could buy it, break the seal on the box, and return it all within the same day -- and never even actually take the camera out of the box -- and still be charged a 10-15% restocking fee at Best Buy.

Suppose that camera cost $1000, well, a 10% restocking fee is $100, you could probably rent the same camera for a weekend for half that, or borrow it for free.

Of course there are other benefits to be had from renting too. In the event something goes wrong with the camera you can get a replacement, and you're probably covered by a rental insurance policy (the rental house I use adds on insurance to every rental, unless you've got your own policy you are going to cover the gear with)... If you do the buy & return thing, if you break the camera, you're pretty much stuck with that broken camera, and now it's going to cost the full retail price and whatever the cost of repair would be. Leaving ethics out of the argument entirely, it's just not a sound business model for most circumstances..
 
Last edited:
Having been a business owner, I find your mindset here distressing. As a small business owner, that type of business would have shut our doors (we ended up failing for other reasons). Your next argument is the robin hood argument... well, best buy is big, etc. etc... but I don't see the difference, if you're willing to do it to the large corporate enterprise, you're hurting the pocket book of your nextdoor neighbor who is a share holder in the company. So you may not be hurting the best buy employee, but someone expects to see revenue from the purchase, in the case of large corporations, the money ends up going to the share holders... i.e., me, your neighbor, anyone else who has purchased shares in a company (which the company uses as operating capital - like a loan/war bond/whatever) expecting their ROI to come from that investment.'

So no, returning the camera doesn't hurt the company or its employees for a company of that size, it hurts the investors in that company.

Point taken. Your right.


cibao: what do you mean prosumer counts minutes? just curious
 
Back
Top