"Colour me Green!"

I think he'd be better off hiring a DP when he needs one.

For $10k he could probably make a deal with a local HVX200 or EX3 shooter at $500/day (DP with camera) or $200/day (just camera, tripod, mic).

Hopefully that would get him better looking video since he would either have an experienced camera person on board or he would have better equipment on hand then he could afford to buy.

Additionally he would be helping his local economy and making contacts.

Personally, I would go with owning the equipment. :-)

A DP is someone who runs a camera department, managing the shooting and lighting crew. Sometimes they operate the camera, sometimes they're not allowed near.

A videographer on the other hand is someone who can (should be able to) tell a story with video, and do the preproduction planning, shooting, and post production (editing, titling, adding music, etc.)

Tim is on the right track that the use of a knowledgeable outsider should at least be part of the discussion. A lot of companies right now are buying gear without having the slightest clue about how to use it.

The fact that they didn't spec any money for lighting equipment is an indication of this. They are probably figuring that every ceiling in the building is full of wonderful fluorescents providing ample light, not realizing that the result will be something like "Clerks" (the movie).

As a minimum they should task someone with learning as much as possible about production.

Perhaps they are only looking to do video for YouTube and their web site. "How hard can that be?"

Umm, quite hard if you don't know what you're doing.

I'm with Tim and Coursedesign.

Getting the stuff is only a small part of the battle. In my experience in situations like this companies will spend a bunch of money on a camera and mic, get a cheap tripod and no lights and then try and shoot something... and it looks and sounds terrible.

They then hire a pro to come in and use their gear to shoot it but they have to rent a decent tripod and lights and mics and c-stands and flags and monitor, etc so it can look good. Then they are wondering why they didn't just rent a camera too since the guy they hired is already telling them that they bought the wrong camera for their purposes. He also tells them that they need the bigger batteries and the adapter and a different tripod plate...

I think the money would be better spent finding someone that can do a great job for a decent price and building a relationship with them. Then he/she worries about EVERYTHING and they just get the results. And they already have a budget of $10,000 for the projects as well :)

Bizarre responses. I was not implying that the video should be made by an amateur. My assumption is that this person knows their way around a camera. If not, then naturally it would be futile to pursue this type of purchase. In my world I want to own the equipment AND be responsible for being properly trained to use it AND be in control of the process. I'm sure there are plenty of great people out there that can do this for you; I'm just not interested in that. Hopefully, I've been a little clearer this time - Get the equipment BUT only if you are capable of using it properly. How's that?

Additionally, buying the equipment implies an investment for long term use. $10,000 buys about 20 days of pro-videographer ($10,000/500) services. Since the original post eliminated the need for audio (from the list), I'm assuming they have in-house expertise to work with. Otherwise, as indicated above, it's not smart to buy equipment (without expertise). I think we are all in violent agreement ;-).
Merry Christmas all!
Randy

Some time ago i was asked similar question (where the institution had about $50k to spend). At first i put together a great package but then i realized.... who will operate all that gear? My answer was... some college intern. All the sudden the need for really nice gear that in right hands would produce spectacular images went away and cameras that create a decent image in the auto settings came to mind (BTW, if you haven't noticed most pro cameras in auto settings are pretty dreadful).

Because the original poster was asked this question it looks like there is noone in that institution that is willing to learn (as otherwise they would be googling the answers at this very moment) thus most answers here that it's probably better to hire a pro are right on the spot.

> My assumption is that this person knows their way around a
> camera. If not, then naturally it would be futile

My assumption is that a person "knows there way around a camera," wouldn't ask video editors for camera package advice.

> A DP is someone who runs a camera department, managing the
> shooting and lighting crew. Sometimes they operate the camera,
> sometimes they're not allowed near.

I pity the crew person who does not allow the DP near the camera!

In my 20+ years on sets, including large features, I've seen that the DP can do whatever he wants near the camera, including firing the first assistant.

This is a union issue that is not always decided by the DP.