For the Skye one the other week, I noticed during the helicopter shots that about 10 vehicles seemed to be parked-up at the entrance of the grassed coffin - granted some of them could have been the locals who'd been booked to come and give their opinion on the finished house.
That staircase was ridiculous at £40k, but it did look very good, and you could see why it had taken 4 months to make.
Well that's true. It's the same format every time. Halfway through the program there is a calamity and Kev goes into depression mode. But in the end, hey, all's well and he is brimming with praise. 'I just love these "sharp" lines'. Sharp??????????
I still hate these glass boxes, which nevertheless claim to be "passve" or highly energy efficient. Most of the places look like a hospital. Often too they never have curtains either even though they are overlooked by neighbours.
You can tell these people are either in cloud cuckoo land or publicity seekers. I expect they have to pay to be on the program.
Based on the invite at the end of every program, there seems to be a shortage. I expect they can only film ones that seem likely to be quickly finished. So that rules out many DIY projects.
I was involved in some filming. I previously imagined there would be dozens on people but no, there were only three. The person in charge said that because it was the same format every week, that was all they needed. They did all the editing as well. They travelled round the country in a camper van.
Any idea what that would cost? I'll give you a clue - about 1000 quid a day.
What do you mean by a 'full crew'?
You think they'll work for less money because of 'less pressure'?
Using more than one camera doesn't necessarily increase the costs as things get finished more quickly. And there obviously is often more than one camera used - for the time lapse stuff.
Still all takes time which has to be paid for.
Dunno what universe you're in, but having a staff crew to cover the time scale involved would be prohibitive. Even large organisations like the BBC or even long running soaps with a defined production schedule use mainly free-lance.
That is not the limiting factor. Costs of filming the project are.
So, about 20 grand an episode, then. He seems to visit each project fewer than a dozen times per episode for one or two days at a time. 50% failure rate makes it 40 grand per broadcast episode, if you include the adverts in the running time, which, IME is peanuts for broadcast TV. It works out at about 50 grand per hour of running time.
Cameraman, sound guy, lighting, assistant lighting guy to hold things, assistant producer, producer, make up.....
Possibly, not, though they may well work for less per day for a steady gig.
If your major cost is the cameraman, then that's debatable. Can two cameras get the job done in half the time on set, when you're only using one presenter? The time lapse camera is just set up at the start of the shot, and taken down at the end. It doesn't need supervision while it's working.
Call it another few grand a show to edit, and you've still got minimal costs for something that's turned out to be very popular, which will be bringing in revenue for years.
Call it under 10% of the cost per hour of a soap.
He's obviously making a living, or he'd have stopped a long time ago. The advertising revenue must pay his price, or the TV companies would have stopped screening them.
If I checked, how many different cameramen would I see on the credits per series? You've already said their per diem is a grand or so. If it's the same guy on all the shoots, or just a few, that would save setup time, as he would know how the presenter likes to work.
How much do you reckon per episode shot, and how much would the broadcaster be paying his company per showing? Bearing in mind that someone here who's seen them filming has said there are normally only three people on site.
Replying to myself I know, but I just noticed that the witness I mentioned is Harry.
I don't think this can be right, and there have been some broadcast projects that have failed - I recall one where they made two or three programmes about it and it still wasn't finished. No production company is going to spend 10 days on a project, at £1,000 a day, and then give up on it, never mind on a regular basis.
Exhibitionists.
Exhibitionists.
Wouldn't surprise me at some of them.
1000 quid a day is just for taking shots of the build progress - no presenter.
I dunno for sure, but my guess is the budget is in excess of 100 grand per episode.
I think you mis-spelled 'nitwit'.
I think you may be right.
Wasn't it on here that someday asked him if it was his house that appeared in a show, one where they visit each others, house poke amongst the drawers and then criticise the houses. I think it did turn out to be his so in this case he may not have his barmy hat on.
G.Harman
By the sound of it, I am the only person involved in filming first hand & therefore the only one actually knows what I'm talking about. So that makes you the nitwit.
That is correct. So that makes me the expert round her on this topic at least.
I realise standards here are not high.
If you want to brag about allowing several strangers to be filmed taking the piss out of your house, feel free ... ITV seem to have conveniently "lost" it from their internet player
Wrong on both counts.
And the bit where harry rifled the contents of the female contestants knicker drawer:-)
Well that's me and the Skullster that will not be seen such TV programmes then-:) Anyone else?
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.