The question is not which is better. It is which problem you are solving, because a production company and a UGC creator make two different objects that only resemble each other on screen.

When an agency is worth its price

  • A brand film meant to last for years.
  • Complex shoots: multiple locations, crew, equipment, safety.
  • Strict image constraints, typical of luxury and automotive.
  • A campaign going to television or cinema, where technical quality is a minimum requirement.

When an agency destroys exactly what you needed

When you buy a video designed to feel like a person's recommendation and have it produced like a commercial. Perfect lighting, grading, a trained voice: the audience recognises advertising in two seconds and scrolls. You paid more to get less result, which is the worst possible spend.

The order of magnitude in Italy

One day of traditional production with a small crew costs about the same as a package of six or eight UGC videos including rights. The difference is not twenty percent, it is a multiple, and the performance difference in ads is almost always in UGC's favour.

The combination that works

One brand film a year for the website and presentations, and a continuous flow of UGC for ads and product pages. They are two separate budgets with two separate functions: mixing them ends with the brand film used as advertising and UGC asked to represent the brand.

The question to ask first

"Does this video need to last three years or three weeks?" If the answer is three weeks, traditional production is out of the question.

Keep reading

Find UGC creators in Italy →

Frequently asked questions

Is an agency always more expensive?

Yes, usually by a multiple, not a percentage.

Does agency video perform better in ads?

Usually not, it reads as advertising.

When is production genuinely needed?

Complex shoots, television, strict image constraints.

Can you use both?

Yes, with two budgets and two distinct functions.