|
Forums >
General Industry >
Pay rates based on experience
I was looking through the profile pages and I noticed under experience there are four options under that box, no experience, some experience, experienced and very experienced. So I'm wondering should there be a sliding pay scale based on a given model's level of experience? Does anyone base thier pay for photo shoots on that criteria? The scale I have in mind is something like this: No experience $100/hr. Some experience $150/hr. Experienced $200/hr. Very Experienced. $250/hr. Any insight or suggestions are welcome, feel free to tell if I'm being a cheap skate. Apr 18 24 07:15 pm Link Pay should be based on talent, dependability, and demand. Apr 18 24 07:24 pm Link Also pay should be based on the type of shoot. $150 would definitely be the upper end for most Model Mayhem shoots, Apr 18 24 07:38 pm Link the vast majority of internet models anyone wants to work with base their rates on a derivative of demand: amount of skin showing. "anyone wants to work with" isn't a bad statement, its the just about the demand for attractive and moderately skilled models that have no qualms about their body being shown, captured, syndicated, and attributed to them. that's what people want, less models offer that, the ones that do tier their rates based on that demand. I think self identifying as tiers of "experience" is nice, for commercial clothed modeling, but what's needed for that trade isn't that hard or distinguishable given the large number of available models for that. You can test this theory by putting out a casting call for $50/hr or less and seeing who responds. The crowd is there. Even if ModelMayhem is dead where you are, post up a classic classifieds ad around town. Personally, I would prefer to book models based on a budget I offer and time. And sometimes I get a flexible muse that agrees with that philosophy. (But when you're offering $120 and higher its easier for a lot of people to agree about alot of things, as they usually spend more time haggling with people and would prefer not to.) But I understand the demand based pricing on levels of skin. Apr 18 24 09:23 pm Link My offered rate is usually based looks, experience, and concept. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. It'll be my eyes deciding that. Long hair and fewer tats are pluses for me. Others differ, and that is a great thing. What the model claims as experience is not as important as what I see in their portfolios - posing and expressions. They may have been a model for 10 years, but that does not always translate into 10 years of knowing what they are doing. Concept - the more I ask of the model, the higher the compensation. Sitting for a headshot won't be the same pay rate as asking a model to pose nude in public. Underwater modeling is not the same as studio shoots. Apr 19 24 03:12 am Link AdamKnight wrote: No. Apr 19 24 03:48 am Link I see a few problems with this including: 1. What someone self identifies as their experience level on their profile is so subjective as to be an almost meaningless field. 2. Experience doesn’t necessarily correspond to how much I will value resulting images. A model’s look for example may matter far more than how many previous shoots she or he has done. Apr 23 24 12:17 pm Link Mark Salo wrote: I also pay according to how much I am going to make on the shoot. Like if I'm netting serious money and sometimes with residuals then I want the model paid proportionately. Apr 23 24 03:23 pm Link AdamKnight wrote: It's been more than a few months .. maybe a couple years since I've done a model shoot, but I find the $100/hr for a "No Experience" model rather high! I don't know for sure, but I believe you are starting rather on the high end with pay a bit early. I don't want to come across as cheap. I would pay $200 an hour for someone Very Experienced .. but that many of the models who have shot with me are negotiating lower rates. The last model I shot with charged me $400 for a relaxed "half day" shoot where we took breaks as needed. She did pose nude through the majority of the shoot, and she was very experienced. It was a great shoot. Apr 23 24 06:52 pm Link Dan Howell wrote: Curious what these "market conditions" you speak of are, if not a photographer willing to pay X negotiating with a model asking for Y and reaching an agreeable compromise...or not. Apr 24 24 09:08 am Link Focuspuller wrote: You're kidding, right? Apr 24 24 03:03 pm Link Dan Howell wrote: Sorry. Thought you were espousing a free market, not an imposed set of arbitrary and ironclad prices outside of supply and demand. Apr 24 24 03:58 pm Link Focuspuller wrote: umm ... supply and demand literally is free market. Apr 24 24 04:11 pm Link Dan Howell wrote: 100% true. Sometimes they go hand-in-hand but not always. I've seen extremely talented but inexperienced photographers/videographers land very lucrative gigs for a wide variety of reasons. It's literally supply and demand. Apr 24 24 04:53 pm Link AdamKnight wrote: I have absolutely no idea how you came up with those numbers and we live in the same area. Hire what your budget allows but you might want to ask them first before throwing out numbers that high. Apr 24 24 05:26 pm Link Why would I pay someone $100. an hour who has no experience to do anything? Apr 24 24 05:48 pm Link Weldphoto wrote: Because some people can generate results without a lot of experience and $100 for photography is very cheap. I would put photographers with little to no working experience but a good portfolio into this price range. Apr 25 24 10:24 am Link Weldphoto wrote: If you're trying to get natural expressions and natural postures then hiring a professional isn't always going to work. It's then easier to work with someone new to the industry. Apr 25 24 10:30 am Link |
