C David Stephens wrote:
There's a post on here somewhere about shooting a calendar, finding a sponsor to pay for it, and sending the calendars to our troops in Iraq for free.

Now that would be something models might reasonably do for free, but I wouldn't expect them to pay for the privilege. I'd even shoot a month for free, who wouldn't?

Absolutely!

Catriona wrote:

$250, but still - I'd be all over that if I weren't so broke-ass. Maybe someday...

Considering some people charge a hefty some for photoshopping....( I searched one time online and usually photoshopping fees run at anywhere from $25-125 per image) that price is a steal.

C David Stephens wrote:
There's a post on here somewhere about shooting a calendar, finding a sponsor to pay for it, and sending the calendars to our troops in Iraq for free.

Now that would be something models might reasonably do for free, but I wouldn't expect them to pay for the privilege. I'd even shoot a month for free, who wouldn't?

If I had money, I'd contribute to the expenses for that! I'd just mark it as a donation to keeping our troops happy and of sound mind. Hooray for the brave men & women protecting our country!!

Katy Goldapple wrote:
I hate these type of threads...It kills me because there is this huge double standard. It's okay for everyone to jump on to a model's case when she requests "paid work only", yet most people don't even blink an eye when a photog requests the same thing

Ah, but you see, the mentality is that photographers should be getting paid for their experience. I've been doing this for years - how DARE some girl with no experience expect ME to pay HER?

The problem with this is that, if a model has little or no experience but does have a good look, a decent photographer should be able to get good photos out of her. How many internationally-famous supermodels were signed to agencies when they had never modeled for anyone before? Almost all of them. A photographer who has lots of experience, but still isn't capable of producing quality photos, on the other hand - what hope does a model have that he'll suddenly, magically get better if she gives him money?

Catriona wrote:

Ah, but you see, the mentality is that photographers should be getting paid for their experience. I've been doing this for years - how DARE some girl with no experience expect ME to pay HER?

The problem with this is that, if a model has little or no experience but does have a good look, a decent photographer should be able to get good photos out of her. How many internationally-famous supermodels were signed to agencies when they had never modeled for anyone before? Almost all of them. A photographer who has lots of experience, but still isn't capable of producing quality photos, on the other hand - what hope does a model have that he'll suddenly, magically get better if she gives him money?

THANK you!

Especially when they have a portfolio filled with images which look largely the same, and want a model who will give them images which are different from those they already have....

It seems to me that the photographer is the one in charge of that part.  The model is the one posing, but he's the one choosing the setting, lighting, composition, and when to snap the shutter....

Carole Hayes wrote:

A couple of HUNDRED BUCKS to be in your calendar? 

A calendar that you're going to find a sponsor to pay for??

A calendar that you aren't going to sell?

You just really need a new calendar for the office that bad, and you don't like what you've seen in the stores?

Oh no... I intend to make a small profit. Capitalism is a wonderful thing, don't ya think?

In fact.. perhaps SnapOn tools or somethin'.. make a LOT of money!! what's wrong with that?? If I had pro models working for me, they're SURELY get a cut of the proceeds as well!!!! OF COURSE THEY WOULD!! LOL!

This ended up being a good thread.. I like it..

NO.. Not a couple hundred bucks for the "honor" of being in the calendar. A couple hundred bucks for:

A professional shoot with an established photographer.

Professionally done hair and makeup by a tremendously talented mua.

5-10 professionally worked pics for their portfolios to PRINT AND USE AS THEY PLEASE.

Exposure.

Experience.

And yes, they're paying a couple hundred bucks for MY TIME. 4 hrs of shooting and about 6 hrs of ps work.. 10 hrs of my time for $200.. $20 per hr.. freakin' cheap.

I see NO problem in charging aspiring models a fee to help build their ports and give them the opportunity to join in a project such as that. (shrug) is that wrong?? Seriously??

I'm really seriously asking.. cuz that's what I'm doing and I'd like to do this thing right.

There are 4 spots we've already filled with professional and established models. Those ladies ARE being compensated because their presence in the calendar gives it credibility. Of course I'd pay a pro!! What else??

I'm not sure if I see the problem or the argument.

When I was starting out as a photog, I was given opportunities to shoot.. but RARELY or NEVER with established models. Why should an inexperienced model benefit and PROFIT from MY years of experience with out paying?

My work brings them work. They'd profit from my work and I do it for free?

What's the difference?

Jack Blake wrote:
In fact.. perhaps SnapOn tools or somethin'.. make a LOT of money!! what's wrong with that??

Snap On tools don't make a dime from their Calendars, it's tax deductible!  They GIVE the calendars away as promotional items...

Iona Lynn wrote:
Welcome to the Internet

Good morning OP

You have just stepped out of your safe little world of agency modeling, and into the big bad world of internet photography. There are no rules here; a girl who is 5’ 1” in 4” stiletto heals can get paid work from photographers, so can a girl who is bigger than a size 4. The typical agency rules don’t apply to us anymore. Sorry about that, in just a few days your in box will be filled with silly little girls with crappy web cam photos saying they love your work, yet you need to pay 150.00 an hour to shoot them. Not to make it too complicated there are several different camps of people all colliding on this site:

Agency models and photographers = work for clients and have a set of standards
Artist models and photographers = work for art and the chance to be in the galleries.
Amateur models and photographers = work to learn some of these guys and girls will move up and do some great work in the above categories.
GWP and GWC = it’s all about the b(o)(o)bies.

Welcome to our world…………………………………………..



Welcome to the internet
Good morning OP

Hey don't forget student photographers and agency style models = work for grades

Carole Hayes wrote:

THANK you!

Especially when they have a portfolio filled with images which look largely the same, and want a model who will give them images which are different from those they already have....

It seems to me that the photographer is the one in charge of that part.  The model is the one posing, but he's the one choosing the setting, lighting, composition, and when to snap the shutter....

The model I worked with tonight was tfcd.. we had a great shoot.. got some killer images. I chose to work with her cuz she had something I wanted.. Just as she chose to work with me cuz I had something she wanted.

MY complaint has been that NO ASPIRING models have thought they should pay.. AS I would expect to pay an established model should I choose to ask her to shoot with me.

I get asked all the time.. but never offered any compensation other than the "honor" of having their pretty face in my port.

If I started asking established models to work with me cuz I like their work, then I'd expect to have to compensate them accordingly. Tyra Banks would laugh even if I offered to pay her. And I laugh when susie-trailerpark tells me she wants to be a model, but doesn't wanna buck up to build her port.

Yes.. years of experience count.. as does the quality of the work.. as does the "look". From either the model or the photog.

Jack Blake wrote:

The model I worked with tonight was tfcd.. we had a great shoot.. got some killer images. I chose to work with her cuz she had something I wanted.. Just as she chose to work with me cuz I had something she wanted.

MY complaint has been that NO ASPIRING models have thought they should pay.. AS I would expect to pay an established model should I choose to ask her to shoot with me.

I get asked all the time.. but never offered any compensation other than the "honor" of having their pretty face in my port.

If I started asking established models to work with me cuz I like their work, then I'd expect to have to compensate them accordingly. Tyra Banks would laugh even if I offered to pay her. And I laugh when susie-trailerpark tells me she wants to be a model, but doesn't wanna buck up to build her port.

Yes.. years of experience count.. as does the quality of the work.. as does the "look". From either the model or the photog.

Jack Blake wrote:

The model I worked with tonight was tfcd.. we had a great shoot.. got some killer images. I chose to work with her cuz she had something I wanted.. Just as she chose to work with me cuz I had something she wanted.

MY complaint has been that NO ASPIRING models have thought they should pay.. AS I would expect to pay an established model should I choose to ask her to shoot with me.

I get asked all the time.. but never offered any compensation other than the "honor" of having their pretty face in my port.

If I started asking established models to work with me cuz I like their work, then I'd expect to have to compensate them accordingly. Tyra Banks would laugh even if I offered to pay her. And I laugh when susie-trailerpark tells me she wants to be a model, but doesn't wanna buck up to build her port.

Yes.. years of experience count.. as does the quality of the work.. as does the "look". From either the model or the photog.

This is Internet modeling. Most do it for free and know that they will never be anything else. It’s fun for them. And it gives photographers someone to shoot while doing lighting experiments. If you don’t shoot them for free someone else will. 90% of this site is a free-for-all. The other 10% are MUA’s lol.

Jack Blake wrote:
Is my photography that commonplace that they'd feel they shouldn't pay for it? (don't be afraid to say what you think, cuz I really don't base my opinion of my work on what others think of it)..

Bottom line, yes.

Your background is portraiture. Just because an image is professionally produced doesn't mean it can be professionally used, not if it can't fit into a specific usage - your portraits don't sell here so take that as a sign that you need to do things different. And you can't progress towards that if all you want to do is to charge people that you don't think can contribute to your portfolio.

Using exposure to convince models to chip in for your calendar shoot when you're hunting for a sponsor to get it printed in the first place is going to be an even tougher sell. You should rethink your business model on that one.

BlindMike wrote:

Bottom line, yes.

Your background is portraiture. Just because an image is professionally produced doesn't mean it can be professionally used, not if it can't fit into a specific usage - your portraits don't sell here so take that as a sign that you need to do things different. And you can't progress towards that if all you want to do is to charge people that you don't think can contribute to your portfolio.

Using exposure to convince models to chip in for your calendar shoot when you're hunting for a sponsor to get it printed in the first place is going to be an even tougher sell. You should rethink your business model on that one.

hehe.. I like Vance's answer better.. cuz then I can think that nobody is really gaining anything from this site other than some pretty faces and some pictures.. and a little fun.

I DO see what you mean.. and what I've BEEN trying to do with my work is expand from portraiture into a more commercially viable product. I guess I suck.

Jack Blake wrote:
Oh no... I intend to make a small profit. Capitalism is a wonderful thing, don't ya think?

In fact.. perhaps SnapOn tools or somethin'.. make a LOT of money!! what's wrong with that?? If I had pro models working for me, they're SURELY get a cut of the proceeds as well!!!! OF COURSE THEY WOULD!! LOL!

This ended up being a good thread.. I like it..

NO.. Not a couple hundred bucks for the "honor" of being in the calendar. A couple hundred bucks for:

A professional shoot with an established photographer.

Professionally done hair and makeup by a tremendously talented mua.

5-10 professionally worked pics for their portfolios to PRINT AND USE AS THEY PLEASE.

Exposure.

Experience.

And yes, they're paying a couple hundred bucks for MY TIME. 4 hrs of shooting and about 6 hrs of ps work.. 10 hrs of my time for $200.. $20 per hr.. freakin' cheap.

I see NO problem in charging aspiring models a fee to help build their ports and give them the opportunity to join in a project such as that. (shrug) is that wrong?? Seriously??

I'm really seriously asking.. cuz that's what I'm doing and I'd like to do this thing right.

There are 4 spots we've already filled with professional and established models. Those ladies ARE being compensated because their presence in the calendar gives it credibility. Of course I'd pay a pro!! What else??

I'm not sure if I see the problem or the argument.

10 hours of your time?  Time spent working on your project?  If you choose to work on photos beyond those required for the calendar, that should be considered additional compensation for the model -- she shouldn't be paying you for it!

If you want to help aspiring models build their portfolios, more power to you -- but if you like the way their photos turn out, and you want to include them in your calendar, then you should compensate them for that!

The problem is that you aren't doing these photo shoots for the models so you shouldn't be charging them.  It's the same as deciding that you're going to pick twelve girls from last years' shoots and make a calendar from them without compensating them! 

Think about how this is going to go over with this sponsor that you're looking for:  "Yeah, I've got a couple of really hot professional models for four of the months -- but I can't afford any more, so I'm going to fill in the rest with some wannabe chicks who are paying ME.  It'll be great!"

Bottom line is:

If the girls you're choosing are good enough to be in your calendar, they're good enough for you to pay them!

If they aren't good enough to pay, then find models who are, and pay them!

Jack Blake wrote:
When I was starting out as a photog, I was given opportunities to shoot.. but RARELY or NEVER with established models. Why should an inexperienced model benefit and PROFIT from MY years of experience with out paying?

ummm... because you thought she was good enough to use in your profit-seeking venture?

Jack Blake wrote:
My work brings them work. They'd profit from my work and I do it for free?

What's the difference?

The difference is that we aren't talking about whether you should ever shoot new models for free or not:  we're discussing whether you should pay them for a project on which you fully intend to profit!  (The answer is:  yes, you should.)

Jack Blake wrote:

Well.. we can take that a step further, as I've seen MANY ports on here taken by phones!!

"you don't need a photographer.. all you need is a tmobile acct!!! Camera is FREE!!"

Welcome to professional modeling at it's finest.

Oddly enough, some of my better self-portraits and random "I wanna take your picture" have been done on my 1.3mp cam phone than with my DSLR. Go figure.

Jack Blake wrote:
hehe.. I like Vance's answer better.. cuz then I can think that nobody is really gaining anything from this site other than some pretty faces and some pictures.. and a little fun.

I DO see what you mean.. and what I've BEEN trying to do with my work is expand from portraiture into a more commercially viable product. I guess I suck.

I wouldn't pay you at this point, but you don't suck.

  The thing is:  you shouldn't be charging models while you're trying to make a switch in your style!  That's when you ought to be doing TFP or paying models who are familiar with what you're trying to work towards....

Jack Blake wrote:
I've NEVER experienced so many wanting my photography for free.. or not at all. I KNOW I'm not the best photographer in the world, nor even on this site.. But I also know that I'm pretty freakin' good at what I do..

Maybe you are.  But you aren't very good at producing pictures that professional models need.  So why should they pay you?

Nothing on your port looks like an editorial fashion shot.  No "commercial fashion" or catalog shots.  Nothing that is lifestyle.  In short, no pictures that would be suitable for a fashion or commercial model's portfolio.  At best, shots that are good for models who want to attract other portrait-type photographers, all of whom also want the model to pay them. 

So where is the profit in a model paying you?  No return on investment.

Scott Harrill wrote:
As many have said - Welcome to the world of Internet Modelling. P T Barnum had a saying for it - There's a sucker born every minute! This site is about one thing - Gimme! Gimme! Gimme! And that is all it's about. Being professional or a good photographer is irrelevant here. It's all about one thing: "Show me the money!" Those with the pretty faces or figures demand it whether they have any abilities or not. Those that whip out the cash get to shoot with the wannabees here. Those that don't pay whine about the state of things. Sorry to burst your bubble. You're definitely looking in the wrong place. This is the flea market, not the mall!

Wow. 

If that's truly what you believe, then why are you here?


I thought this site was about networking.... 

There are a wide variety of people here for a wide variety of reasons:

Yes, there are plenty of wannabes mixed in among the actual models AND photographers.  Yes, they gum up the works and make it harder for the rest of us to conduct our business.

There are also a lot of models and photographers who AREN'T wannabes; maybe they aren't pros yet -- but for many, that's why they're here.  You know -- to find people to work with; people who can help them become better at what they do, either by teaching them something or just by working with them and giving them some of the experience they need....

Have you noticed that there are a lot of artists here?  Some of the people here just want to create beautiful images for their own sake -- again, I'm speaking of models AND photographers.

And there ARE also some actual pros here.  It may take a lot of browsing to find them, but they ARE here!

Carole Hayes wrote:

Jack Blake wrote:
Oh no... I intend to make a small profit. Capitalism is a wonderful thing, don't ya think?

In fact.. perhaps SnapOn tools or somethin'.. make a LOT of money!! what's wrong with that?? If I had pro models working for me, they're SURELY get a cut of the proceeds as well!!!! OF COURSE THEY WOULD!! LOL!

This ended up being a good thread.. I like it..

NO.. Not a couple hundred bucks for the "honor" of being in the calendar. A couple hundred bucks for:

A professional shoot with an established photographer.

Professionally done hair and makeup by a tremendously talented mua.

5-10 professionally worked pics for their portfolios to PRINT AND USE AS THEY PLEASE.

Exposure.

Experience.

And yes, they're paying a couple hundred bucks for MY TIME. 4 hrs of shooting and about 6 hrs of ps work.. 10 hrs of my time for $200.. $20 per hr.. freakin' cheap.

I see NO problem in charging aspiring models a fee to help build their ports and give them the opportunity to join in a project such as that. (shrug) is that wrong?? Seriously??

I'm really seriously asking.. cuz that's what I'm doing and I'd like to do this thing right.

There are 4 spots we've already filled with professional and established models. Those ladies ARE being compensated because their presence in the calendar gives it credibility. Of course I'd pay a pro!! What else??

I'm not sure if I see the problem or the argument.

10 hours of your time?  Time spent working on your project?  If you choose to work on photos beyond those required for the calendar, that should be considered additional compensation for the model -- she shouldn't be paying you for it!

If you want to help aspiring models build their portfolios, more power to you -- but if you like the way their photos turn out, and you want to include them in your calendar, then you should compensate them for that!

The problem is that you aren't doing these photo shoots for the models so you shouldn't be charging them.  It's the same as deciding that you're going to pick twelve girls from last years' shoots and make a calendar from them without compensating them! 

Think about how this is going to go over with this sponsor that you're looking for:  "Yeah, I've got a couple of really hot professional models for four of the months -- but I can't afford any more, so I'm going to fill in the rest with some wannabe chicks who are paying ME.  It'll be great!"

Bottom line is:

If the girls you're choosing are good enough to be in your calendar, they're good enough for you to pay them!

If they aren't good enough to pay, then find models who are, and pay them!

Jack Blake wrote:
When I was starting out as a photog, I was given opportunities to shoot.. but RARELY or NEVER with established models. Why should an inexperienced model benefit and PROFIT from MY years of experience with out paying?

ummm... because you thought she was good enough to use in your profit-seeking venture?



The difference is that we aren't talking about whether you should ever shoot new models for free or not:  we're discussing whether you should pay them for a project on which you fully intend to profit!  (The answer is:  yes, you should.)

Thank you Carole.. I coached my post as a rant, cuz that's how I was feeling at the moment I posted it.. But as I said in posts afterwards, I WAS really wondering if I was going about the whole thing wrong.

My first thought was that I could make a small profit on a project, while supplying aspiring models with the best work I could.. AND yes, I didn't want to foot the bill for the entire cost of the shoots, as I saw them as profitting from the venture as well through work they needed for their ports.

NOW I see that perhaps I need to canvas for sponsors after shooting a couple of the "months" so I have something to show them. I'm also thinking of not targeting aspiring models, I'll target pros that might want to share in the wealth, as little as it might be. I guess the idea is that I'll have to work out the details to bring to the table to offer them.

I STILL see no reason to build portfolios for nothing unless it brings me something that I want for mine. My time and energy is tight. I won't work just for the sake of others. Call me selfish, but I'm a capitalist in the end. My "favor" shoots are reserved for friends and loved ones.

Nor will I "take a chance" on someone that might end up stiff in front of the camera because of inexperience. I'm friggin' 50 this year, and my time is runnin' out!! lol!

As someone said in a previous post, I'm rethinking my business-model on this one. You're right, if I make a profit, PROFESSIONAL models that are involved should also profit. But not amatures.

Jack Blake wrote:
Or is it just that they want their cake and eat it too??

Pedantic quip: The actual adage is "You can't eat your cake and have it too". Obviously, people can have their cake and eat it as well...you just can't have it once you've already eaten it.

Carole Hayes wrote:

I wouldn't pay you at this point, but you don't suck.

  The thing is:  you shouldn't be charging models while you're trying to make a switch in your style!  That's when you ought to be doing TFP or paying models who are familiar with what you're trying to work towards....

gee thanks, I think..

I wouldn't pay you and you don't suck either. lol!!!

Nihilus wrote:

Pedantic quip: The actual adage is "You can't eat your cake and have it too". Obviously, people can have their cake and eat it as well...you just can't have it once you've already eaten it.

it's late and that made me dizzy.

T H Taylor wrote:
This is an amusing thread...
OP:
You have the right just as any model does on this site, to demand whatever compensation you feel you deserve for your product however, charging a model to be in a calendar is absurd.  I for one, find it rediculous to pay a model for a test but, it's even more insane to use a model for what is essentially a commercial project (In which you intend to make a profit) and then not compensate her/him on the front end (models don't want to deal with issues of sales and profit sharing... They want a cheque from you, a handshake and a cab to their next gig.).

If you actually get takers on this... you are a MUCH better salesman than I am.

Sincere wishes of good luck,
T.

I'm not sure that you had to coach that as if you were laughing at me, but ok..

that actually makes it all the easier. I get moneys from the sponsor, give the models a few bucks and I'm done with 'em.

I would have thought a real pro would have wanted both money up front for the shoot, and a share of any profit.. I certainly would.

Jack Blake wrote:
gee thanks, I think..

I wouldn't pay you and you don't suck either. lol!!!

awww....  I just got a warm fuzzy...!  : )

(You're welcome -- and I only phrased it that way because you had just said "I guess I suck.")

StudioMona wrote:
I think the advent of consumer digital cams had a lot to do with this.....

Not to mention that some of them are better graphic artists than they are photographers. If they spend more than 5 minutes in photoshop on an image in order to get it to look good, they're a graphic artist.

Jack Blake wrote:
ok... next.

I'm hoping for a minimum of a 2000 copy run on the calendar. (this is hypothetical)..

Knowing that this is open for negotiation, and knowing that it's going to depend on the experience of the model, what would be a proper "opening offer" of compensation for said professional models in such a project?

400 for a full day of shooting.

That is what I have been offered for calandar projetcs in the past...
Also 400 full day seems to be the market for full days paid work..

Rachel Beth wrote:
You are not the only one trying to make a living. If photographers charged models for modeling how would we get paid? If a shoot is there to benifit both the model and the photographer like a tfp/tfcd why should the photographer get paid if the model is devoting just as much time and effort to a shoot? In the end a model doesn't need a proffesional photographer to create a port. A model can build a port just as quickly with out a photographer. Just a thought.

Ah.. well this is the gist then..

A true pro photographer is not needed, as there are many men that get a camera in their hands, CALL themselves pros just so's to take pics of perty, half naked women, and hope they'll take off the other half. Or, all the model has to do is look pretty.. and use their camera phones.

I've been a photographer for 25 yrs, worked in graphics/darkrooms before computers were on desks, and before most of these models were twinkles in the eyes of their parents. I was doing in a darkroom what I now do on ps.

I say time and experience counts (literally.. as in $$), while you're saying it doesn't. Ok.

I agree that a pro model would want to be compensated. I'd said that in my opening post. I'd also said I was hoping to build a calendar, while making a few bucks.. (nothin' wrong with that)

MY point was NOT that I was expecting PROFESSIONAL MODELS to pay for the "honor" of being a part of the project. MY point was that their are MANY ladies on here that need professional work, and I was trying to offer it at a reasonable cost. While making a few bux.. and trying to pay my mu a touch so she's not emptying her mu bag all the time.

I'd admitted that perhaps I was just going about it the wrong way. I'm a professional and unafraid to admit to some ignorance.

I also admitted that I was rethinking my biz on this and that I'd make my profits from the sponsors rather than the models. Been wrong before, I'll be wrong again. NO big deal.

But what you're saying is that my years of experience mean nothing.. And that they can call mr trailor-park to do some pics for them. Who needs real photographers to build a good portfolio? hmmm..

Fine and well.. good luck on that one. Not sure if I understand why the models would have value while the photogs have none. But ok.

Rachel Beth wrote:
You are not the only one trying to make a living. If photographers charged models for modeling how would we get paid?

ermmmm Some models get paid by clients and not photographers and by thier agencies doing real work outside of just posing for photographers.

Nothing wrong with just posing for photographers and getting paid for it but just answering your question

Rachel Beth wrote:
You are not the only one trying to make a living. If photographers charged models for modeling how would we get paid? If a shoot is there to benifit both the model and the photographer like a tfp/tfcd why should the photographer get paid if the model is devoting just as much time and effort to a shoot? In the end a model doesn't need a proffesional photographer to create a port. A model can build a port just as quickly with out a photographer. Just a thought.

Rachel.. please don't think I'm picking on you, because I'm NOT.. and I do wish you the best of luck!!!

But I'm going to use this as an example of what I'm talking about..

You said you can build a port without a photog. Ok..

This is one of your pics of you laying on a couch.

https://www.modelmayhem.com/pic.php?pid=1814845

This is a professionally taken photograph from my portfolio.

https://www.modelmayhem.com/pic.php?pid=1669566

there's a difference.