If I thought I could offer enough money for it to be fair I would do that. But I simply can't afford the money. What I am giving to those who have already agreed to help is MORE service in exchange - in quantity - regardless of what you think of the subjective quality. It works well for those who agreed to work with me (and who know the quality of my work). I don't understand your problem with it - unless you just think I am a terrible at what I do - which is why I was insulted by the sarcasm. It implied that not only am I not special but that my work has little value to anyone.
To me and for those who agreed to help this was a good solution - it created more work for myself in the future and got me the help I needed now and secured help for them in the future. If you would never have need of my help I can see how it could be construed as insulting. The only reason one might need my help is if he or she knew they would be facing deadlines similar to mine in the future - and wanted to get that help secured for the future by giving help now. Does it make more sense now? In addition I also posted this same exact request other places where the readers might not have the skills with synhtestration as I am sure most here do.
Money is just an exchange of value. I am giving more value back than what I receive. What's wrong with that?
By the way this not a large budget film. I am not being selfish here and I couldn't possibly have gotten more money from the director who is personally financing the film.