We are all familiar with E = mc². Einstein’s 1905 theory holds today as we expand our understanding of the universe: whatever point in space we occupy, time is relative to our perception at that moment.
That idea adapts unexpectedly well to video and film post-production. After four decades of watching the same trade-offs play out on project after project, I started writing them down as a formula. It is only half a joke.
Quality (Q)
As content volume grows and competition for attention gets harder, the impact of a video can no longer be judged on return on investment alone. There is brand awareness, reputation and consumer perception — none of which is easy to measure without expensive survey work.
In the end, whatever the budget, viewers know quality when they see it. And as with any theory, force majeure during production can wreck the calculation entirely.
Time (t)
The time invested in a production is directly proportional to its quality, regardless of finished runtime. Spend minimal time on script and concept and you will spend it later in physical production or post to reach the same standard. The less time spent overall, the lower the quality — there is no version of this where the hours simply disappear.
Scale: each day allowed per finished minute = 1. A three-minute video with six days to edit rates a 2. Twelve days rates a 4.
Budget (b)
Not every production requires — or can afford — cinema-level quality. With an experienced crew, high quality is achievable at lower price points, but quality remains relative to budget. More funding buys more time on each stage, which improves the whole.
Scale: every $100 per finished minute = 1. Budget $400 per finished minute on a five-minute project and you rate 20.
Scripting and development (sd)
This is the most important variable in the formula, and the one most often skipped. A strong script with a clear narrative arc becomes the blueprint for everything after it. Having a plan — knowing where you are going — lets the technical and post elements support the story instead of substituting for it.
With a weak script, typically an outline of bullet points, focus necessarily shifts to cinematography, animation or music used as a crutch. You can see it in the finished piece every time.
Scale: general outline = 1. Clear narrative with general visual direction = 2. Clear narrative with detailed visual direction = 3.
Technical production (tp)
Capturing every scripted visual and audio element is the technical production. Quality here comes from cinematography, crisp audio and motivated lighting, plus the on-camera talent, the narration and the director’s ability to hit the mark in minimal takes. With this many moving parts, time is money — literally.
Rapid technical advances at a fraction of former costs have made higher quality far more accessible. Using those advances with genuine experience is what separates results.
Post-production (pp)
Constructing the final piece from the script blueprint and the technical puzzle pieces requires ruthless organization. Crafting hundreds — sometimes thousands — of elements through the art of the edit is lengthy and detail-driven. Every frame counts in pacing. Proper color balance scene to scene is what lets a production flow.
To err is human, and production is no exception. Given the number of layers being orchestrated, errors are near-certain. Every second, every frame, every layer needs review across visual, audio, graphics and animation. The finished video is the official work of record, so accuracy is not aspirational — it is required. That standard takes time and multiple expert sets of eyes.
Why bother with a formula at all
Because the trade-offs are real, predictable and negotiable — and most clients have never had them laid out honestly.
You can have it faster, cheaper or better, and the formula shows you exactly what each choice costs the others. That conversation, held before production instead of after, is worth more than any piece of gear you will ever buy.