Last year NCRA surveyed Certified Legal Video Specialists to learn more about the current state of legal videography. Two hundred and nine videographers responded, although not everyone answered every question. Here are some facts and figures from those responses.
More than half of the respondents -- 55.5 percent -- indicated they have worked eight years or more as a legal videographer. Another 34 percent have between one and seven years of videography experience, and 10.5 percent at the time had worked in legal videography for less than a year.
But only about a third of the respondents work solely as a legal videographer. 66.5 percent indicated they do other work as well, including corporate and industrial videography (40.6 percent); training films (26.3 percent); television production (22.6 percent); wedding videography (19.5 percent); and advertising (11.3 percent).
The largest category of additional work, however, was "other" at 57.1 percent. Among the kinds of work mentioned were court reporter; reporting firm manager; performing arts; legal and forensic photography; trial presentation; teacher; disk jockey; software development; rancher; documentaries; hotel AV; detective agency owner; family biographies; family and special events; indie features; 3-D animation; sporting events; duplication; educational productions; and "any occasion but weddings."
While many court reporters have expanded into videography, that was not the case for the typical survey respondent: Only 15.5 percent indicated they were court reporters who have earned CLVS certification.
Of those who do not work solely as a legal videographer, 59.1 percent said they spend half their time or less on legal videography, with 42.4 percent spending a quarter of their time or less.
Reflecting the part-time nature of the work for most respondents, nearly a third -- 31.9 percent -- said they earned $19,999 or less annually from legal videography. At the other end, 23.8 percent indicated they earned $70,000 or more as legal videographers. Additional breakdowns: $20,000 to $29,999, 14.6 percent; $30,000 to $39,999, 9.7 percent; $40,000 to $49,999, 9.7 percent; $50,000 to $59,999, 5.9 percent; and $60,000 to $69,999, 4.9 percent.
So, what's on people's minds? Not surprisingly, many are interested in business issues -- marketing, working with attorneys (especially difficult ones), building relationships with reporting firms, getting paid, establishing a fee structure, and hiring videographers all were mentioned, as was the perception people have of legal videography: "Overcoming the 'video-guy' image," as one respondent put it. The issue has important pocketbook implications: "Clients tend to treat videography as a commodity," one person wrote. "Whoever shows up is okay."
One issue that appeared in several different ways is the tension between independent videographers and reporting firms, large and small, that bring videography in-house as a staff function. Some of them do so, it was asserted, with people who are uncertified and have minimal training to keep costs down. Such matters tend to be minimized when markets are booming and everyone is busy. But such did not appear to be the case for many videographers when the survey was taken.
Technical issues were on people's minds as well. Learning about and buying new equipment were mentioned several times as major concerns, as were the ins and outs of managing and converting multiple formats; synching video and transcript; and dealing with Blackberries, fluorescent lights, and notebook computers.
Lack of certification requirements to work as a videographer was a major point for many people, as was the overall issue of professionalism. It was evident from several comments that many respondents take pride in the quality of their work and that they are frustrated by the lack of quality they see from some providers. "I do a lot of digital post-production, and the main problem I have is with legal videographers who are sloppy and don't uphold to a standard," wrote one respondent. Wrote another, "I do a great job for the 'market' price. I can't stand anyone who does cut-rate work for a cut-rate price."
Thanks to all who participated. In the months ahead, we will try to address some of these topics here in the JCR and in the CLVS section of the NCRA Web site.