Photographer
STUDIOMONA PHOTOGRAPHY
Posts: 33697
Avon, Minnesota, US
Chantelle Gascoigne wrote:
agreed...very good way to put this... Thanks, that's just how I feel about this matter 
Photographer
Royal Photography
Posts: 2011
Birmingham, Alabama, US
FaceReality wrote:
what good does making more "good" tfp shots do? if they have a few that showcase their look what does that get them outside of more tfp when client hiring factors are usually determined by look, not experience?
--face reality The good it does is it is the best form of advertising and networking they can do. Getting in a shoot with a good photographer doing a tfp/cd means far more than just starting a profile and saying "I dont do TF anything". Besides, when I look at the images a model shows I am always thinking....are those great shots because the model did an awesome job or because the photographers were awesome (even including PSing the photos to make the model look better than she really is)?
Photographer
Rebecca Tillett
Posts: 68
Tulsa, Oklahoma, US
Nihilus wrote:
It would if more people would get the chance to run into your port. Thanks so much, Nihilus.
What an amazing compliment. 
Model
LaViolette
Posts: 9865
Hollywood, Florida, US
Bryan Benoit wrote:
Let me preface my comments by saying that I shoot lots of TFP/CD. I don't make money from photography and I am glad that some really nice models have agreed to shoot with me. I think that I produce images that benefit their portfolios and we both get something out of it... but at no point I get mad if a model wants to make $$$.. after all they have expenses just as I do. She agrees to work with me.. GREAT.. she doesn't ... MOVE ON.
Why is it that some photographers seem to think that it their god given right that models should just continue to shoot TFP for them and that photogs are the only ones entitled to make money?
If the model has a market for her services she should take advantage of it even if she is not the most experienced model out there. If someone wants to pay them why not?
When you got your first job out there you got paid (in photography or otherwise). I am sure that you did not give back the paycheck because you didn't think you deserved it due to lack of experience.
If you don't think that the model has what it takes to get paid then move on to someone else. The 'market' will determine how many offers she gets.
End of my Xmas rant... So was Santa good to all of you? I like you
Model
Cristina Ashley
Posts: 1294
Buffalo, Illinois, US
I don't get those 'models' either. Not that i'm a 'model' anyways, but i'm not too good to work tfp. 
Photographer
Sienna Hambleton
Posts: 10352
Toledo, Ohio, US
Hell, as long as models thank me via the value menu at MacDonalds and buy me ciggies and coffee, TFPCD works for me.
Photographer
Luminos
Posts: 6065
Columbia, Maryland, US
Isn't there already about 100 threads on this?
Photographers charge what they can. Often, their prices exceed their skills. Often their skills exceed their prices.
Ditto for models.
So let the photographers who don't do TFP pair up with the models who don't do TFP, and let them stick their tongues out at each other all day.
And let the rest go shoot.
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 21528
Chicago, Illinois, US
What some models don't know is that agency models Test shoot all the time.
They shoot with new photographers as well as well known photographers.
These may be people known to agencies and sometimes some not known but
up and coming. Trying to make a living or enough money to live on by charging
photographers you might meet on-line is a serious hustle. It can be done but
as we've seen in past threads models have stated they have problems with
last minute cancellations and people not paying.
Many of the better photographers won't pay you and those that do are often
looking for erotic nudes. Most photographers with decent skills and good work
can find enough models to practice with. This is if they live or are near some
of the larger cities. In fact more photographers might try the agency route then
looking on line for models. Some of you have said it so well. If you can pay
and don't mind do so. If not then don't.
Photographer
SLE Photography
Posts: 68937
Orlando, Florida, US
...Stacy wrote:
If it makes you feel better I'm not gonna charge you. I don't charge anyone, cause I only shoot with people I want to work with... See, how do I get in THAT club?
LOL
'cause you're one I WOULD pay to work with!
Photographer
J Schumacher
Posts: 1220
Gustine, California, US
...Stacy wrote:
If it makes you feel better I'm not gonna charge you. I don't charge anyone, cause I only shoot with people I want to work with... Yay, exactly like me....
come closer.
Photographer
Doug Vosler
Posts: 932
Redlands, California, US
Doug Swinskey wrote:
modeling is unlike any other industry...its based solely on your looks.... Are you sure about this? Some gorgeous girl, flakes out on 75% of her jobs... I'm pretty sure that is going to stop her from making any real money. Sure, she'll have hornballs dying to work with her, but no real money.
Photographer
Quay Lude
Posts: 6386
Madison, Wisconsin, US
Ashley Belle wrote:
i have said it once, twice, three times... now i'll say it again...
Photographers do not pay models, clients do...
get in a magazine or signed to an agency, than you can get paid... Cheers Ashley!!!
Photographer
Doug Vosler
Posts: 932
Redlands, California, US
FaceReality wrote:
what good does making more "good" tfp shots do? if they have a few that showcase their look what does that get them outside of more tfp when client hiring factors are usually determined by look, not experience?
--face reality Allen Coefield wrote:
The good it does is it is the best form of advertising and networking they can do. Getting in a shoot with a good photographer doing a tfp/cd means far more than just starting a profile and saying "I dont do TF anything". Besides, when I look at the images a model shows I am always thinking....are those great shots because the model did an awesome job or because the photographers were awesome (even including PSing the photos to make the model look better than she really is)? Actually, I'm gonna have to go with FR on the one. Although I am sick of models comign to me asking for TFP... I do advise ones that I work with to find 2 or 3 good photographers to build their portfolio, because there is not much they are going to gain from shooting with photographer after photographer.
The model, should size up the work of the photographer, and if she feels that the images she coudl gain from a shoot would be a valuable asset to her portfolio, then do it. Otherwise, pass up the opportunity, or put a pricetag on it.
Photographer
c_d_s
Posts: 7771
Lubbock, Texas, US
MrE Creations wrote:
Oh yea? I know some newer actors and actresses who do pretty good work. Why arent they being paid $20 million a movie like their EXPERIENCED counterparts? Maybe because they need some more work on a few things and dont have any big credits? They should be charging just as much per movie as all the EXPERINCED actors and actresses just because they had a few minor roles right? Hmmm... Experience has absolutely nothing to do with an actor's compensation. Cameron Diaz, Charlize Theron, Angelina Jolie, Lindsay Lohan, were all paid for their first feature films when they had no experience. Now they all make millions, yet actors with decades of experience and training get scale, if they get to work at all.
Actors get paid a lot of money only because the studios who hire them perceive that the actor will attract enough ticket buyers to net them a profit above what they pay the actor. Unless they drop dead or voluntarily leave the business, every actor making big bucks will eventually take gigantic pay cuts just to stay employed, even though their experience continues to grow.
Modeling is pretty much the same deal.
Photographer
S W I N S K E Y
Posts: 24376
Saint Petersburg, Florida, US
Doug Swinskey wrote:
modeling is unlike any other industry...its based solely on your looks.... Doug Vosler wrote:
Are you sure about this? Some gorgeous girl, flakes out on 75% of her jobs... I'm pretty sure that is going to stop her from making any real money. Sure, she'll have hornballs dying to work with her, but no real money. if you dont have the look..you wont ever be offered the job...
flaking is a moot point if you dont ever get offered a gig..
how do you get the gig?..cause of how you look...not how many gigs you got in the past..
not sure what your argument is.....
Photographer
Doug Vosler
Posts: 932
Redlands, California, US
Doug Swinskey wrote:
Doug Swinskey wrote:
modeling is unlike any other industry...its based solely on your looks.... if you dont have the look..you wont ever be offered the job...
flaking is a moot point if you dont ever get offered a gig..
how do you get the gig?..cause of how you look...not how many gigs you got in the past..
not sure what your argument is..... I don't think the OP ever questioned anyones looks... that's my point. Why would he spend time posting about someone that isn't marketable in the first place?
Talk about a moot point....
Model
Catriona
Posts: 3674
Portland, Oregon, US
Everyone should bear in mind that this is the same photographer who started a thread whining that he couldn't find "any" models in his area (Southern California) who were willing to pose nude, which he eventually revealed really meant no models who looked EXACTLY like Playboy models who were willing to do Playboy-style glamour nudes for $150/hr, and when several beautiful models offered to work with him he either called them "too old" or said they were too far away and he didn't want to pay for travel, even for the models who offered to do the shoot TFP. So basically, like many photographers who bitch and complain about the audacity of models expecting to actually be paid for their work, he wants to get as much as he can for as little money and effort on his part as humanly possible.
I like TFP. But the thing is, the whole point of TFP is that it's supposed to be a mutually-beneficial arrangement. If a model has no use for the photos you want to take of her, either because it's not a genre she's interested in, she doesn't feel your work is of a quality she wants to display, or she already has too many similar images, then doing TFP is not beneficial to her, now, is it? Do you expect models to pose for you just out of the kindness of their hearts? Would you shoot any model who approached you, no matter what she looked like or what kind of shots she was willing or not willing to do, for free, just because? As Looknsee points out, a lot of models, especially on this site, do not model as their full-time job - we have day jobs, or go to school, or both, and have social lives and families as well. In order to build "enough" experience - a couple of years, I believe the OP said? (Which is interesting, when you consider that he only wants to work with very young models - where would an 18-year-old have obtained several years' experience doing bikini/nude glamour, I wonder?) - doing TFP to be "worth" paying, should models just put all their other obligations aside to work for free for anyone who asks?
Model
Julia B
Posts: 73
Nashville, Tennessee, US
Looknsee Photography wrote:
What the heck business is it of yours?
I think it's simple: models can ask for whatever compensation they want. Photographers can decide not to engage a model, based in part on the compensation the model wants. If a model doesn't get work, perhaps she'll reconsider her rates, but who cares?
Why do you want an explanation for a model requesting to be paid? Okay, I'll make some excuses up:
>>> Models tend to be younger & less financially stable than photographers.
>>> Models have expenses (makeup, wardrobe, transportation).
>>> Because photographers aren't paying them, many models need to have
other jobs. Plus, they may have school & homework & an active social
life. Therefore, they have little time for modeling, and
they have to be selective.
... or maybe they just don't like your work enough to pose for you for free.
So, keep it simple: If they are worth it, pay them; if not, then at least don't judge them. Talk about hitting the nail on the head. Any shoot will cost me at least 200 bucks. Hair, Nails, and Toes is 100 bucks off the top. Then there are shoes, clothes, or lingerie (which is the most expensive) that are needed for the content of the shoot. Also, there are alot of times that I don't like the photographer's work enough to pose for them for free. By listing that I don't do TFP, I usually only get TFP offers from outstanding photographers. Works great for me.
Photographer
SLE Photography
Posts: 68937
Orlando, Florida, US
Julia B wrote:
By listing that I don't do TFP, I usually only get TFP offers from outstanding photographers. Works great for me. Really? Do they ask you to do nudes as well?
Photographer
S W I N S K E Y
Posts: 24376
Saint Petersburg, Florida, US
Doug Swinskey wrote:
modeling is unlike any other industry...its based solely on your looks.... Doug Vosler wrote:
Are you sure about this? Some gorgeous girl, flakes out on 75% of her jobs... I'm pretty sure that is going to stop her from making any real money. Sure, she'll have hornballs dying to work with her, but no real money. Doug Swinskey wrote:
if you dont have the look..you wont ever be offered the job...flaking is a moot point if you dont ever get offered a gig..
how do you get the gig?..cause of how you look...not how many gigs you got in the past..not sure what your argument is..... Doug Vosler wrote:
I don't think the OP ever questioned anyones looks... that's my point. Why would he spend time posting about someone that isn't marketable in the first place? Talk about a moot point.... a quick review:
1. the OP said inexperienced models shouldnt ask for pay...
2. i said experience doesnt mean shit, contributing to an image does
3. the op asked if i would i hire an inexperienced doctor
4. i mentioned the industry is unlike any other. his question doesnt apply
5. you came in and maybe im just tired, but i still dont understand your point...
Model
Julia B
Posts: 73
Nashville, Tennessee, US
SLE Photography wrote:
Really? Do they ask you to do nudes as well? haha. seriously though, 9 out of 10 always ask for some kind of nude, implied etc, whether it is paid or TFP, and regardless of their skill. It's kind of annoying to get the "guy with a camera" types. I don't get those so much since I listed no nudes.
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 21528
Chicago, Illinois, US
Its curious to me that so many actors work in independent films and do
community theater very often for free. Its not quite fair perhaps to compare
acting to modeling but they do it because they love what they do. Photographers
quite often do the same. Many of us invest thousands in equipment and education
all for the love of art. Sure some stay GWC'S but most want to better themselves
and produce solid work and making money is not their focus.
I think what I miss is passion from models. Where a model tires me out from
a shoot with her energy and excitement rather then someone who is only focused
on what someone is paying. I recall a few models on shoots where I enjoyed
shooting them so much that I forgot the time and I was the one that had to
go. To me thats whats so often missing about many of the model profiles.
Many come across as greedy harpies, focused on every dime instead of people
with a passion for producing works of art.
Isn't that what many photographers want? Models that want both of us to
have great images and are willing to go that extra step to do it. I just don't
get that from many of the models on MM. Where its any excuse to cancel
a shoot and how much are you paying comes before what the shoot is for.
I understand models interest in money. Rent and other things aren't free but
if their focus is just on their next buck and if it means a lack of passion or
real interest in my work and helping me get better images. Then I'll take a pass.
Photographer
SLE Photography
Posts: 68937
Orlando, Florida, US
SLE Photography wrote:
Really? Do they ask you to do nudes as well? Julia B wrote:
haha. seriously though, 9 out of 10 always ask for some kind of nude, implied etc, whether it is paid or TFP, and regardless of their skill. It's kind of annoying to get the "guy with a camera" types. I don't get those so much since I listed no nudes. I was being serious, even if I stated it in a somewhat flip fashion.
I wondered since you say "No TFP" but said here you do it if you like the photograher's work and also say "No Nudes" but have them.
That's one of those things that always makes me wonder
Model
Julia B
Posts: 73
Nashville, Tennessee, US
SLE Photography wrote:
SLE Photography wrote:
Really? Do they ask you to do nudes as well? I was being serious, even if I stated it in a somewhat flip fashion.
I wondered since you say "No TFP" but said here you do it if you like the photograher's work and also say "No Nudes" but have them.
That's one of those things that always makes me wonder Sorry! Either way, you got your answer. Yeah, it's a trick of sorts. It weeds out all of the (most of the) "guys with a camera".
Photographer
SLE Photography
Posts: 68937
Orlando, Florida, US
Julia B wrote:
Sorry! Either way, you got your answer. Yeah, it's a trick of sorts. It weeds out all of the (most of the) "guys with a camera". *Nod* I understand where you're going, and I hear that a lot. I just always would wonder (were I on your end of it) if I was keeping away people I might want to work with.
Believe me, we photographers get idiots asking us for work too, I usually feel it's worth the time to weed them out rather than keeping away people worth working with.
It's a rough situation either way tho.
Photographer
Doug Vosler
Posts: 932
Redlands, California, US
Doug Swinskey wrote:
Doug Swinskey wrote:
modeling is unlike any other industry...its based solely on your looks.... Doug Vosler wrote:
Are you sure about this? Some gorgeous girl, flakes out on 75% of her jobs... I'm pretty sure that is going to stop her from making any real money. Sure, she'll have hornballs dying to work with her, but no real money. Doug Swinskey wrote:
if you dont have the look..you wont ever be offered the job...flaking is a moot point if you dont ever get offered a gig..
how do you get the gig?..cause of how you look...not how many gigs you got in the past..not sure what your argument is..... a quick review:
1. the OP said inexperienced models shouldnt ask for pay...
2. i said experience doesnt mean shit, contributing to an image does
3. the op asked if i would i hire an inexperienced doctor
4. i mentioned the industry is unlike any other. his question doesnt apply
5. you came in and maybe im just tired, but i still dont understand your point... My point is... a super hot girl that is a ditzy bitch and can't show up when she is supposed to isn't going to be a successful model... which means that more than looks counts.
If this is a TRUE statement, which I believe it is, then that would make your statement FALSE.
Model
Catriona
Posts: 3674
Portland, Oregon, US
Tony Lawrence wrote:
Its curious to me that so many actors work in independent films and do
community theater very often for free. Its not quite fair perhaps to compare
acting to modeling but they do it because they love what they do. Photographers
quite often do the same. Many of us invest thousands in equipment and education
all for the love of art. Sure some stay GWC'S but most want to better themselves
and produce solid work and making money is not their focus.
I think what I miss is passion from models. Where a model tires me out from
a shoot with her energy and excitement rather then someone who is only focused
on what someone is paying. I recall a few models on shoots where I enjoyed
shooting them so much that I forgot the time and I was the one that had to
go. To me thats whats so often missing about many of the model profiles.
Many come across as greedy harpies, focused on every dime instead of people
with a passion for producing works of art.
Isn't that what many photographers want? Models that want both of us to
have great images and are willing to go that extra step to do it. I just don't
get that from many of the models on MM. Where its any excuse to cancel
a shoot and how much are you paying comes before what the shoot is for.
I understand models interest in money. Rent and other things aren't free but
if their focus is just on their next buck and if it means a lack of passion or
real interest in my work and helping me get better images. Then I'll take a pass. I understand all of this. At the same time, too many photographers like to present ANY model who won't do TFP - or won't do TFP with them - as "greedy harpies" who only care about money and have no passion for what they do, and I don't believe that's true. There are plenty of models on this site who very clearly love their work and are passionate about modeling - and only work for pay. (Wynd Mulysa, Betcee May, Jeska Vardinski...these are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head.) I did a 9-hour TFP shoot once because the photographer and I were just having such a good time we didn't want to stop. My boyfriend is a photographer on this site, and we frequently do shoots just for the hell of it. (Today he shot me nude in the men's room of an abandoned amusement park...hooray for the holiday spirit!)
One can love to do something and still feel they should make money doing it. I'm planning on going into private practice as a therapist after grad school because I genuinely enjoy psychology and have a serious interest in people's problems. But is the fact that there's very good money in the field also a motivating factor? You bet.
It's more possible to be passionate about something that genuinely excites you. When a photographer whose work doesn't excite me approaches me, my response, if not a flat-out "no," is "my rates are [blank]." If a photographer - and I don't mean you, Tony; I like your work a lot - feels that he's constantly running into models who aren't passionate about working with him/her and only care about money, maybe there's a reason for that?
Model
Julia B
Posts: 73
Nashville, Tennessee, US
SLE Photography wrote:
*Nod* I understand where you're going, and I hear that a lot. I just always would wonder (were I on your end of it) if I was keeping away people I might want to work with.
Believe me, we photographers get idiots asking us for work too, I usually feel it's worth the time to weed them out rather than keeping away people worth working with.
It's a rough situation either way tho. Good point.....
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 21528
Chicago, Illinois, US
Catriona wrote:
I understand all of this. At the same time, too many photographers like to present ANY model who won't do TFP - or won't do TFP with them - as "greedy harpies" who only care about money and have no passion for what they do, and I don't believe that's true. There are plenty of models on this site who very clearly love their work and are passionate about modeling - and only work for pay. (Wynd Mulysa, Betcee May, Jeska Vardinski...these are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head.) I did a 9-hour TFP shoot once because the photographer and I were just having such a good time we didn't want to stop. My boyfriend is a photographer on this site, and we frequently do shoots just for the hell of it. (Today he shot me nude in the men's room of an abandoned amusement park...hooray for the holiday spirit!)
One can love to do something and still feel they should make money doing it. I'm planning on going into private practice as a therapist after grad school because I genuinely enjoy psychology and have a serious interest in people's problems. But is the fact that there's very good money in the field also a motivating factor? You bet.
It's more possible to be passionate about something that genuinely excites you. When a photographer whose work doesn't excite me approaches me, my response, if not a flat-out "no," is "my rates are [blank]." If a photographer - and I don't mean you, Tony; I like your work a lot - feels that he's constantly running into models who aren't passionate about working with him/her and only care about money, maybe there's a reason for that? I had a past model I paid who was also a stripper. She and I shot for less then
a hour before I stopped and paid her. What a joy less and boring shoot. She
received two cell calls and after the second asked me, how long the shoot would
take. Thats when I ended it. Beyond the fact that she wasn't professional I
don't want models looking at their watches I want models who want me to get
good work. How does that happen when the only thing they are focused on
is payment?
Models who respond to these threads like you are unique because you seem
to bring a passion to your craft and trust me modeling is a craft. Take a
look at some of the model profiles. Notice how many say no TFP. Which
is fine but compare that to the many talented photographers who do offer
TFP or Test images. Many photographers don't mind paying but I think they
do mind models who don't bring anything to the shoot besides a bad attuide
and a smile. I'm not against paying I simply question what is the value of
paying someone who places zero value in you.
Model
Nicolas E
Posts: 438
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Tony Lawrence wrote:
I had a past model I paid who was also a stripper. She and I shot for less then
a hour before I stopped and paid her. What a joy less and boring shoot. She
received two cell calls and after the second asked me, how long the shoot would
take. Thats when I ended it. Beyond the fact that she wasn't professional I
don't want models looking at their watches I want models who want me to get
good work. How does that happen when the only thing they are focused on
is payment?
Models who respond to these threads like you are unique because you seem
to bring a passion to your craft and trust me modeling is a craft. Take a
look at some of the model profiles. Notice how many say no TFP. Which
is fine but compare that to the many talented photographers who do offer
TFP or Test images. Many photographers don't mind paying but I think they
do mind models who don't bring anything to the shoot besides a bad attuide
and a smile. I'm not against paying I simply question what is the value of
paying someone who places zero value in you. Rule #1 - During a shoot, cell phone is turned on vibrate/silent. And if an important call is expected I notify the photographer in advance (prior to shooting).
If any models aren't doing that they deserve a kick in the a$$
Photographer
Hamza
Posts: 7791
New York, New York, US
MrE Creations wrote:
Most pay models on their skill and ability to help produce a great shot and inexperienced models havent developed those skills yet. Thy get a few good shots and start chasing $$$ rather than learning their craft. Modeling is ALOT more than just standing there and looking pretty. Dude! If you need the help of a model to get a great shot, you are the one that needs to develop skills.
A model's job is to do what the photographer tells her to do. Simple!
Now if the photographer wants a model's input, for him to ask is acceptable, but for him to 'require' her help is preposterous! What's next, asking the model what the exposure will be?
Do you think Avedon, Ritts, Newton, etc. asked their models for help when they were creating great images? I don't think so...
Give me a break!
I personally would rather work with a model that had the look I was looking for rather than experience so she could help me do my job.
Photographer
Hamza
Posts: 7791
New York, New York, US
MrE Creations wrote:
Doug Swinskey wrote:
why should they do this, cause you want them to?...
thats a stupid reason to do anything... No, because models charging hundreds of dollars an hour that have very limited experience suck. They think they can get away with it just because they are hot and have had worked with a few good photographers? That justifies them charging what pro models with years of experience and credits charge? Pretty ridiculous. You wanna spend $200 an hour on a beginning model you have to teach simple things like keeping their chin down to? Oh why do I even bother...
MrE Creations wrote:
...Stacy wrote:
nope, dosn't apply in acting/art or photography either. isn't that nice? talent/technique is more important... Oh yea? I know some newer actors and actresses who do pretty good work. Why arent they being paid $20 million a movie like their EXPERIENCED counterparts? Maybe because they need some more work on a few things and dont have any big credits? They should be charging just as much per movie as all the EXPERINCED actors and actresses just because they had a few minor roles right? Hmmm... Dude, will you PLEASE come up with an analogy that applies to the original post? Do you think Tom Cruise makes 20 million a movie because of experience? If that were the case, 90 year old actors would be making in excess of $50 million a movie! It's about Supply and Demand.
If a model has or doesn't have the look, and she wants to charge, what is it to you? You don't like it? Don't pay... SIMPLE.
Photographer
studio36uk
Posts: 22898
Tavai, Sigave, Wallis and Futuna
Adam Evans wrote:
Rule #1 - During a shoot, cell phone is turned on vibrate/silent. And if an important call is expected I notify the photographer in advance (prior to shooting).
If any models aren't doing that they deserve a kick in the a$$ As I do work in video and radio production, and obviously stray sounds are more than a mere distraction they are expensive in production terms. I can safely say that there are certain rules that absolutely apply in many circumstances. No cell phones on-set AT ALL is one of them. It's a rule that would be right up there with... like... no smoking around the SFX explosives. They are left somewhere else... in your car or at home.
Picture this... a six or seven person paid crew, on a rented set, with rented lighting, sound gear and camera, with 3 principal paid actors and 25 paid background extras... in the middle of a scene one of the extras has their cell phone go off, or better yet decides to make a call to their sweetie just to chat about going to the club that night.
Guess what the reaction would be. You get three guesses and the first two don't count.
So why the hell does anyone even begin to put up with it from models on a location or in the studio? No, no, no, no, absolutely no! If they are that friggen important that they can't be out of touch with the world, or the world out of touch with them, for a couple of hours then they are probably too damn important to be there in the first place. Bye, Bye... and don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out!
Studio36
Photographer
J C ModeFotografie
Posts: 14718
Los Angeles, California, US
Tony Lawrence wrote:
What some models don't know is that agency models Test shoot all the time.
They shoot with new photographers as well as well known photographers.
These may be people known to agencies and sometimes some not known but
up and coming. Trying to make a living or enough money to live on by charging
photographers you might meet on-line is a serious hustle. It can be done but
as we've seen in past threads models have stated they have problems with
last minute cancellations and people not paying.
Many of the better photographers won't pay you and those that do are often
looking for erotic nudes. Most photographers with decent skills and good work
can find enough models to practice with. This is if they live or are near some
of the larger cities. In fact more photographers might try the agency route then
looking on line for models. Some of you have said it so well. If you can pay
and don't mind do so. If not then don't. Tony - yours is the first reply that I have come across in this thread that comes from real world experience!
What nobody else seems to get here is that:
- clients have the big money to pay models, not photographers
- models do benefit from trade shoots because they get to practice their skills and get feedback in the form of pictures
- unless the model signs a model release on the pics from a test shoot, the photographer cannot legally make money from those images; this is a reason why an agency will take a photographer off it's testing list and possibly seek legal reparation if a photographer tries to make money off one of it's models and not give the model and the agency it's "cut"
JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER
Photographer
S W I N S K E Y
Posts: 24376
Saint Petersburg, Florida, US
Doug Swinskey wrote:
modeling is unlike any other industry...its based solely on your looks.... Doug Vosler wrote:
Are you sure about this? Some gorgeous girl, flakes out on 75% of her jobs... I'm pretty sure that is going to stop her from making any real money. Sure, she'll have hornballs dying to work with her, but no real money. Doug Swinskey wrote:
a quick review:
1. the OP said inexperienced models shouldnt ask for pay...
2. i said experience doesnt mean shit, contributing to an image does
3. the op asked if i would i hire an inexperienced doctor
4. i mentioned the industry is unlike any other. his question doesnt apply
5. you came in and maybe im just tired, but i still dont understand your point... Doug Vosler wrote:
My point is... a super hot girl that is a ditzy bitch and can't show up when she is supposed to isn't going to be a successful model... which means that more than looks counts. If this is a TRUE statement, which I believe it is, then that would make your statement FALSE. i see you've added another intangible to the equation on your own...as if me and the OP were dicussing flakey ditz's. ok, i suppose if we are going to vear off course a bit and suggest if a model flakes or does a poor job on a consistant basis, she will not have a successful career. sure that would be true, but in whos book? what is a successful career? anyway thats not what me and the OP were talking about...
to bring it back around to the intention of the OP.
unlike a doctor or any other professional, a model does not require years of education or training to be considered for paying work..she must only have "a look"..hence my suggestion that the modeling industry is unlike any other, you are judged soley on you how you look...nobody really cares if a doctor is ugly...
to close:
a doctor doesn't get a job with a partnership or hospital because they are good looking, but a model does (unlike any other industry)...if this statement is true, then i guess you could add another element to make it false..but whats the point of that?.....just having me be wrong?
Photographer
studio36uk
Posts: 22898
Tavai, Sigave, Wallis and Futuna
JAY carreon wrote:
- unless the model signs a model release on the pics from a test shoot, the photographer cannot legally make money from those images; this is a reason why an agency will take a photographer off it's testing list and possibly seek legal reparation if a photographer tries to make money off one of it's models and not give the model and the agency it's "cut"
JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER You miss the small point that most [nearly ALL] of the models here and doing this are NOT represented by agencies. So what an agency will or won't allow in the normal course of agency business, or why, or being on or off an agency's testing photographer's list, doesn't make a damn bit of difference in Internet la-la land modelling. Not a fig's worth of difference.
As to the photographer making money from unreleased images? They certainly can make money on those... just perhaps not in the broadest possible choice of ways... but there are ways to do it and quite legally.
Studio36
Photographer
studio36uk
Posts: 22898
Tavai, Sigave, Wallis and Futuna
Doug Swinskey wrote:
...she must only have "a look"..hence my suggestion that the modeling industry is unlike any other, you are judged soley on you how you look... The "problem," such as it is, seems to be twofold, Doug
The first part of the problem is that the "look" sometimes means, at GWC level, that if the model has tits she has THE "look", and he'll pay to see them.
The second part of the problem seems to flow from the first, where the model gets it in their head that because they have tits and a GWC will pay to see them that everybody will, and should, pay to see them.
No experience required either way. The only honest approach would be for a model to get paid to turn up and show her tits; for the "photographer" to pay her to do it; and just dispense with the pretence and with the friggen camera altogether.
Studio36
Photographer
Doug Vosler
Posts: 932
Redlands, California, US
Doug Swinskey wrote:
i see you've added another intangible to the equation on your own...as if me and the OP were dicussing flakey ditz's. ok, i suppose if we are going to vear off course a bit and suggest if a model flakes or does a poor job on a consistant basis, she will not have a successful career. sure that would be true, but in whos book? what is a successful career? anyway thats not what me and the OP were talking about...
to bring it back around to the intention of the OP.
unlike a doctor or any other professional, a model does not require years of education or training to be considered for paying work..she must only have "a look"..hence my suggestion that the modeling industry is unlike any other, you are judged soley on you how you look...nobody really cares if a doctor is ugly...
to close:
a doctor doesn't get a job with a partnership or hospital because they are good looking, but a model does (unlike any other industry)...if this statement is true, then i guess you could add another element to make it false..but whats the point of that?.....just having me be wrong? I believe the point of the original poster had something to do with insufficinet experience and training, which also eliminates two other things... a track record, and references... and again, maybe I'm wrong, but if someone has a client, or is doing a personal projhect they would like to make money on, and thus is paying the model, I think they care about both the track record and references...
In fact, that's part of the reasons their are agencies... otherwise there would just be the model yellow pages... the agencies serve as a reference for the model, because if she's a flakey bitch, they'd stop representing her.
Photographer
S W I N S K E Y
Posts: 24376
Saint Petersburg, Florida, US
Doug Swinskey wrote:
...she must only have "a look"..hence my suggestion that the modeling industry is unlike any other, you are judged soley on you how you look... studio36uk wrote:
The "problem," such as it is, seems to be twofold, Doug
The first part of the problem is that the "look" sometimes means, at GWC level, that if the model has tits she has THE "look", and he'll pay to see them.
The second part of the problem seems to flow from the first, where the model gets it in their head that because they have tits and a GWC will pay to see them that everybody will, and should, pay to see them.
No experience required either way. The only honest approach would be for a model to get paid to turn up and show her tits; for the "photographer" to pay her to do it; and just dispense with the pretence and with the friggen camera altogether.
Studio36 i was trying to keep my comments (which i should have disclaimed) in the professional arena. cause everyone knows, anything goes with the gwcs and netmodels...(the real world ceases to exist online).
i was talking more about the real world of modeling..the land based world..
|
