Kayla_Ann wrote:
Trying to create a directory of photographers who have OnlyFans that will either do trade shoots for all RAW images, or who pay models for content. This directory is mainly for my purposes, but I know other women who occasionally enjoy modeling but do not have an MM account that I may be sharing this information with as well to help them out.

So if you're a photographer with an OF, give a shoutout.

(Note--I'm looking for photographers that shoot female presenting models specifically.)

I think this can be a new avenue for both photographers and models. I know several.models here in my city that are more willing/more enthusiastic when they know they are going to be able to use the content on their Onlyfans page. Also to be able to have input on the themes and structure of the shoot. Models are having a stronger sense of what they want now.

veypurr wrote:

I think this can be a new avenue for both photographers and models. I know several.models here in my city that are more willing/more enthusiastic when they know they are going to be able to use the content on their Onlyfans page. Also to be able to have input on the themes and structure of the shoot. Models are having a stronger sense of what they want now.

Yea, I prefer to collab with photographers to create art whenever possible. Unless it's an extremely advanced photographer, I already feel I have a sense of the style of photography I like, I have a sense of photo editing I like (and that I do myself), and I also have a bucket list of photoshoots that I am building that I would like to do as well.

I got into modeling because I love art... not because I love modeling. So having the rights over my own artwork has always been a large goal of mine--though I am still willing to do normal modeling and turn over all rights to the right photographer or for the right price. So pages like OF or some form of selling my art has to happen for me to attain that goal.

James S wrote:
How about BentBox? I pay models for content for my BentBox account, and I'm perfectly willing to trade content for content for BentBox, OnlyFans, Patreon, or whatever site they like.

Yes that's fine too. I probably could have re-worded my prompt. Mainly just said OF because if a photographer has an OF they usually would be ok with me using images for an OF as well.

FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY wrote:
It's early.

Can You repeat the question?

You want to do trade work or be paid and receive all the RAW images from the set that You are presumably going to edit then attempt to profit from?

sounds reasonable.

Photographers aught to be lining up to take this deal.   

it is early.
since your sarcasm woke up before your reading comprehension; if you re-read the first post it pretty much says looking for photographers who hire models for onlyfans content or photographers who work trade. "either".
standard - paid or trade stuff. no unreasonable requests.
personally, i dont mind trading for RAW images. thats the easiest thing i can do!
shoot and hand over a copy of my card after and be done with my part of the arrangement? perfect!

FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY wrote:
It's early.

Can You repeat the question?

You want to do trade work or be paid and receive all the RAW images from the set that You are presumably going to edit then attempt to profit from?

sounds reasonable.

Photographers aught to be lining up to take this deal.   

So how would you rate the value and utility of your post?  I give it a 0/10, especially given the fact that your profile image shows a model wearing an Only Fans t-shirt. Some photographers understand how to make money with models, other photographer try (and fail) to make money off of models.

Dan Howell wrote:
So how would you rate the value and utility of your post?  I give it a 0/10, especially given the fact that your profile image shows a model wearing an Only Fans t-shirt. Some photographers understand how to make one with models, other photographer try (and fail) to make money off of models.

+1
His post highlights a reason why models don't want to shoot with photographers here. The are still stuck in the old days of "If we shoot trade then you get 3 - 5 images only and have no ownership or rights to use them to make money" and "hell no I don't give RAWs."

MoRina wrote:
+1
His post highlights a reason why models don't want to shoot with photographers here. The are still stuck in the old days of "If we shoot trade then you get 3 - 5 images only and have no ownership or rights to use them to make money" and "hell no I don't give RAWs."

Your assessment (assumption, pick one) of My practices are incorrect, except for the last bit.

Dan Howell wrote:
So how would you rate the value and utility of your post?  I give it a 0/10, especially given the fact that your profile image shows a model wearing an Only Fans t-shirt. Some photographers understand how to make money with models, other photographer try (and fail) to make money off of models.

alrighty then.

Yes, the Model has OF.

Paolo D Photography wrote:
it is early.
since your sarcasm woke up before your reading comprehension; if you re-read the first post it pretty much says looking for photographers who hire models for onlyfans content or photographers who work trade. "either".
standard - paid or trade stuff. no unreasonable requests.
personally, i dont mind trading for RAW images. thats the easiest thing i can do!
shoot and hand over a copy of my card after and be done with my part of the arrangement? perfect!

OK, got it, I think.

I'm still not giving RAWs', period.

FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY wrote:
I'm still not giving RAWs', period.

Why?

I have some commercial clients who want both adjusted TIFFs (which are sometimes and accurately called raw) and camera RAW format because they actually know what to do with them. I guess you wouldn't want to work with my clients. I'd venture that there are some models out there who are probably better at working with images than you or me for that matter.

I find absolute rules/laws in photography laughably tedious.

Dan Howell wrote:
Why?
.

I lose control over My work.

Select RAW's or TIFFs if going to a paying client perhaps, keywords select and paying.

The way I read the OP the Model is seeking to shoot trade and wants all of the RAW files, that's not going to happen.

ROUA IMAGES wrote:
Interesting.  I see why models with OnlyFan accounts want images of themselves for their own profit (not that they should be paid and ALSO provided images to do so - that wasn't the OP's stated situation, anyway - ) but - photographers with OnlyFan accounts? Of models who are okay with being paid and then releasing all rights to their images for use for photographer's content?

For photographers who have these kinds of accounts:  Lucrative?  Are there consistent patrons who continually want to pay to see images you took of a model?  Enough to make it worthwhile?

This isn't sarcasm, it's a genuine question.

I don't think so.

It's as elsewhere, the masses want to ooh and ahh at the Model, they could care less about who shot the image.

For the Model on social media currently the selfie rules

FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY wrote:

I lose control over My work.

Which is funny because you freely admit that you lack post-processing skills in another forum here. Exactly what control are you holding onto?

Dan Howell wrote:
Which is funny because you freely admit that you lack post-processing skills in another forum here. Exactly what control are you holding onto?

Which images get out.

As mentioned, select RAW's could be released to a paying client. I wouldn't see a problem in that.

On a trade basis a Model receives watermaked jpegs.

I don't shoot at Your level Dan. I shoot as a hobby, You shoot for profit so it's most likely a mood point.

FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY wrote:
I don't think so.

It's as elsewhere, the masses want to ooh and ahh at the Model and for the Model on social media the selfie rules.

That does seem the standard nowadays. Certainly the model gets far more attention for being in the picture than the photographer does for taking it.  I can't imagine an OnlyFans patron paying a photographer consistently for the images they took of models rather than preferring to just "sugar daddy" the models directly. 

But if the OnlyFans market does realistically have that audience maybe it's time to negotiate differently.  Or more often with that in mind.

ROUA IMAGES wrote:
That does seem the standard nowadays. Certainly the model gets far more attention for being in the picture than the photographer does for taking it.  I can't imagine an OnlyFans patron paying a photographer consistently for the images they took of models rather than preferring to just "sugar daddy" the models directly.

I love the smell of misogyny in the morning.

So when a photographer publishes sexy images of a woman and makes money he's just a smart businessman. When a woman publishes images of herself and makes money, she's just essentially a prostitute.

Ok.

ROUA IMAGES wrote:
That does seem the standard nowadays. Certainly the model gets far more attention for being in the picture than the photographer does for taking it.  I can't imagine an OnlyFans patron paying a photographer consistently for the images they took of models rather than preferring to just "sugar daddy" the models directly.

MoRina wrote:
I love the smell of misogyny in the morning.

So when a photographer publishes sexy images of a woman and makes money he's just a smart businessman. When a woman publishes images of herself and makes money, she's just essentially a prostitute.

Ok.

I don't see where this conclusion came from based on ROUA IMAGES comment ?

FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY wrote:
I don't see where this conclusion came from based on ROUA IMAGES comment ?

I don't understand it either.  Complete non sequitur.

FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY wrote:
I don't see where this conclusion came from based on ROUA IMAGES comment ?

Fleming Design wrote:
I don't understand it either.  Complete non sequitur.

Let me go a little slower for those in the back.

A sugar daddy/sugar baby relationship is a term to describe prostitution.

A photographer shoots and sells sexy images of a model to someone who he calls a customer or client.

A model shoots and sells sexy images of herself to someone and the mysogynist calls her customer a sugar daddy.

Do you still not see a problem? We are in the exact same business, but only one of us is called a prostitute.

MoRina wrote:
A sugar daddy/sugar baby relationship is a term to describe prostitution.

Is this is a Tennessee thing?

Out here they are not one and the same.

Kayla_Ann wrote:
Trying to create a directory of photographers who have OnlyFans that will either do trade shoots for all RAW images, or who pay models for content. This directory is mainly for my purposes, but I know other women who occasionally enjoy modeling but do not have an MM account that I may be sharing this information with as well to help them out.

So if you're a photographer with an OF, give a shoutout.

(Note--I'm looking for photographers that shoot female presenting models specifically.)

Thank you for posting this!  I've got friends who have OF accounts that I promote, but I don't have a content profile myself as I'm about supporting the models first!  Watched Zivity.com  launch with a blast, peak out and then nose dive into a totaled out crash. I'm learning by observation.  So understandable I am cautious about the longevity of OF.

A little history about me first. I've visited Florida years ago and had a blast!  As Tyler, the original creator of this site is from there. Like you, Kayla Ann, I am into art. Have you ever been to Carmel, California?  It's a town where Ansel Adams and Ed Weston retired. There are more art galleries per square foot than any other town .. at least it seems that way! 

Somehow MM is still around as FB & Instagram are hammering on us photographers and models who like posting nudes.  I can't even send a Onlyfans Link via "so called" private (but not private) Messenger on those sites without getting hammered!  I'm done with FB jail! They put me in there for simply defending a nude art model who had "the parts" hidden with posing and shadows.

So I'm still here because it's the only place I can post nudes, but had taken time off while being caregiver to my mom.  She has since pasted a couple years ago and I'm getting back my mojo as a photographer from the film era.  In the past, I've shot content for model websites in trade, or in pay going either way.  With so many models doing their own shooting, it's no longer a cut and dried issue. I'm not here to tell anyone how to run their business, but I say "Keep your mind open!"

All that said, I'd love to work with other photographers and models who would like to make an income from "fans" and others who sponsor our photography and videos, but also I have in mind building a better website than OG and MM.  My ideas involve including a platform that allows people to "meetsafe" as well as online streaming.  It takes a team to do great things!  Now that I am no longer a caregiver, I have the time to rebuild something great!  Time is short, so let's get busy! 

I'd post links but then Admin here would blast me about it .. just google my name and you'll find me on FB where I keep many business pages, Instagram where I'm an influencer for small businsses. LinkedIn where I keep in contact with website builders, and Twitter .. there are more, but I've gotta lay off the java ... this is getting a bit  much just to say I'd like to be on your list!  Rock on! 

FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY wrote:

Is this is a Tennessee thing?

Out here they are not one and the same.

I've lived on both coasts and several states in the middle, although not Tennessee, and MoRina's
description is the one I've heard everywhere.

Dan Howell wrote:
adjusted TIFFs (which are sometimes and accurately called raw)

Wrong.

Red Sky Photography wrote:
I've lived on both coasts and several states in the middle, although not Tennessee, and MoRina's
description is the one I've heard everywhere.

I think he was being purposely obtuse in order to backpedal. I'm not really sure what he could possibly believe the definition was that wouldn't still make my point. Either that or his comment was just a slam on people from the South. 🤷‍♀️

PHP-Photography wrote:

Wrong.

You might want to check your history on that. I’m guessing you’ve never worked with an art director or graphic designer.

PHP-Photography wrote:

Wrong.

Dan Howell has professional credentials!

Dan Howell wrote:

So how would you rate the value and utility of your post?  I give it a 0/10, especially given the fact that your profile image shows a model wearing an Only Fans t-shirt. Some photographers understand how to make money with models, other photographer try (and fail) to make money off of models.

I am very appreciative to everyone who dealt with this one so I don't have to say much.

I'll just add that photographers shoot with me for a wide variety of reasons and our negotiations for usage rights can be equally diverse. We're all artists here aren't we?

I think we should be able to respect each other and also respect our diversity of talents and what we can all bring to the table.

If anyone doesn't want to respect me or doesn't like how I do business, you simply don't have to do business with me.

Am I the only one who knows that phrase "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all?" It seems to be one that people either haven't heard or didn't take to heart as much as they should have.

ROUA IMAGES wrote:
For photographers who have these kinds of accounts:  Lucrative?  Are there consistent patrons who continually want to pay to see images you took of a model?  Enough to make it worthwhile?

I follow a photographer on Twitter who has a very successful OF page. He is also married to a professional female model who is equally talented (and also does photography herself actually) and they collaborate a lot. They do trade shoots with models for content and he has quite a lot of business and the models and him cross promote each other's platforms.

MoRina wrote:

I think he was being purposely obtuse in order to backpedal. I'm not really sure what he could possibly believe the definition was that wouldn't still make my point. Either that or his comment was just a slam on people from the South. 🤷‍♀️

For the record... Sugaring is a form of sex work. Sex workers consider sugaring sex work whether or not there is actual sex involved (there almost always is some sexual component involved), though in RARE cases you may find a client that does in fact only want companionship--but that's a controversial issue in which many still argue it should be called sex work.

Also, photographers who shoot nudes aren't called sex workers, but girls who post nudes on OnlyFans are called sex workers. That isn't misogyny... It's just the actual facts of the matter. If you're a photographer with an OnlyFans and you aren't in the photos, you aren't a sex worker.

If anyone wants to debate sex work. Come at me. I know many people in various aspects of the sex work industry.

I'm not here for anyone who doesn't respect people who make money in ways that don't hurt other people.

If you don't respect sex workers, you are not invited to be on my list or work with me or anyone I know.

ROUA IMAGES wrote:
Interesting.  I see why models with OnlyFan accounts want images of themselves for their own profit (not that they should be paid and ALSO provided images to do so - that wasn't the OP's stated situation, anyway - ) but - photographers with OnlyFan accounts? Of models who are okay with being paid and then releasing all rights to their images for use for photographer's content?

For photographers who have these kinds of accounts:  Lucrative?  Are there consistent patrons who continually want to pay to see images you took of a model?  Enough to make it worthwhile?

This isn't sarcasm, it's a genuine question.

For the record, I have also participated in the situation you are stating already in which I have been paid for content that was to be used on a website (not OF) and handed over full rights for the photos without getting anything but money in return. It certainly isn't my favorite situation by far, but it's a business investment like anything else--I still have bills to pay and I need paid shoots in order to be able to afford content trade shoots.

Dan Howell wrote:

Why?

I have some commercial clients who want both adjusted TIFFs (which are sometimes and accurately called raw) and camera RAW format because they actually know what to do with them. I guess you wouldn't want to work with my clients. I'd venture that there are some models out there who are probably better at working with images than you or me for that matter.

I find absolute rules/laws in photography laughably tedious.

Also love this comment. There are photographers who I wouldn't have worked with if they wouldn't have agreed to allow me to edit the photos myself simply because their strong suit was in the actual photo taking, not in the editing of the images. You can actually look at my portfolio and compare some of the photographers who posted work I shot with them with their edits, vs some shoots I posted from the same shoots but my edits. And I also don't think having different edits in the world reflects badly on the photographer--I work with them in those situations because they have a good idea for taking photos--the editing can really be done by anyone after that.

There's also the simple matter, that most photographers don't want to hand me 60 edited images from a photoshoot, but many photographers have no problem handing over 500 RAW images when it means their work with me is done.

I'm also planning on attending Adobe Max this month to continue to advance my editing skills. Part of the fun of modeling for me is actually getting to manipulate images, which is why I value photographers who allow me that enjoyment more than photographers who don't.

FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY wrote:

Which images get out.

As mentioned, select RAW's could be released to a paying client. I wouldn't see a problem in that.

On a trade basis a Model receives watermaked jpegs.

I don't shoot at Your level Dan. I shoot as a hobby, You shoot for profit so it's most likely a mood point.

Yes, I would never be interested in working with you. I'm glad we cleared that up.

MoRina wrote:

+1
His post highlights a reason why models don't want to shoot with photographers here. The are still stuck in the old days of "If we shoot trade then you get 3 - 5 images only and have no ownership or rights to use them to make money" and "hell no I don't give RAWs."

Honestly, yes. Unless they are one of the most amazing photographers I have ever seen, I am never going to say yes to that deal. Half the time the photos the photographers I work with end up posting are some of my LEAST favorite images in the set. I would be so sad if some of the gems in my portfolio now never saw the light of day.