IOV Members’ Survey Part 1: Some (very tentative) conclusions and comments The intention of the surveys was to achieve “a fuller profile on our members to better understand what they do and with the goal of achieving a better fit with what the IOV offers. There will be a second survey looking at the range of services the IOV offers and/or hopes to develop.” Despite doing our best to make the surveys easy to complete and breaking them into two parts, the volume of responses was disappointingly low. Nevertheless there were useful responses, not least where free commentary was allowed. This should help us (currently Cheema and myself, but ultimately, we hope, a functioning Executive body) to have a better idea of what members want (and can offer).
This analysis looks at Part 1 of the survey which received 34 responses.
- 82% of respondents are 56 or older. Fairly obviously we need to draw on the wisdom and experience of our mature members while refreshing our membership with younger film-makers, a population that is cautious about spending on such things, having in many cases, limited uncommitted cash, and who have grown up in the digital age where anything can be researched online (even if much of it is unreliable). .
- A range of geographical locations were represented, but no meaningful conclusions can be drawn from this data. .
- Three quarters of respondents run their video business from home. 12% have a purpose-built home studio, while a further 8% rent premises. .
- 82% are PC users. This may be misleading given the limitations of the sample. .
- For Video Editing Software, Adobe Premiere leads the way by a substantial margin, with Apple, AVID and Vegas well represented. Again caution is required. .
- Mid-size and full-size (tripod/shoulder-mounted) cameras predominate and it looks like members often deploy smaller POV cameras where required. .
- Sony is way ahead in terms of camera brands used by our members, although again there is a range of preferences. .
- The question about Production Capability somehow got mangled on analysis and may have confused some respondents. Of those who did respond most are outputting HD while a few are at least originating in UHD/4K. .
- Perhaps unsurprisingly the categories of Corporate, Wedding/Event, and Freelance are where most members earn their living, with more in the world of Corporate Production than Weddings. Members do all sorts of other things too! .
- The question about how far people were willing to travel for video work brought broad range of responses with some saying pretty local while most would do long distance (presumably if the money was right!) .
- 50% of respondents described themselves as full-time in video production, while 18% did little or no production work, some being retired. .
- Just over 20% described themselves as specialists (i.e. concentrating on a particular market), 35% were Generalists and the remainder (the largest group at 44%) responded “a bit of both.” .
- In terms of IOV qualifications the responding group was definitely unrepresentative with a whopping 67% holding the Master Member accreditation. If only this was the norm across our membership! There was an interesting range of “other” qualifications some but not all within the film world. Good film-makers bring something from other areas of their lives that informs and enriches their work IMHO. .
- The final question in Part 1 was “…how important is it to you for your business to be part of the Institute of Videography?” 38% thought it “Highly important”, while at the other end 32% considered it “Of little importance.” One interpretation of the latter is that whatever those members’ reasons for being members it was not because the IOV was a significant factor in bringing work their way.
An analysis of responses to Part 2 will follow shortly, together with proposals as to how the surveys will influence activity and priorities in the near future. Tony Manning Chair and Arbitration Officer, Institute of Videography