|
Forums >
General Industry >
"Let me build you a portfolio!"
So. I see this tossed around by SO many photographers, including newbies and those with work quality that belies their inexperience. "Portfolio building services available!" I believe that models end up not taking this seriously because so many photographers throw it out there and do so without really being able to say without a doubt what type and quality images will get you somewhere in a portfolio. I am curious to know exactly what "agency quality" images are. What type of images will "build a portfolio" that is worth having? What type of images are worth paying a photographer for? And what type of images are worth the TFP/CD if someone makes the offer? Just curious after reading through some profiles. Jan 16 07 11:40 am Link I think for the most part its more of a "ya know it when ya see it" kinda thing. I charge and I often help new models develop portfolios, most however are not aiming exclusivly for agency representation, some are more into having something of a high quality for the sake of networking themselves directly to other photogs, clients, etc and skipping the agency level all together (ususally cause they're too tattooed, or short) So it all depends on finding someone that fits what you want to do and has either done it, or you believe can help you do it. Then its worth the time, effort and cash. Its an investment and building a portfolio is a lot like building a resume in many ways, not every job on your resume is going to gaurentee your next one, but everything is good experience and often you learn new skills you can add to your repetoire. Hope that helps a bit. Jeff Jan 16 07 11:47 am Link There is no such thing! The reality is that good agencies do not need professional quality portfolios. If, after an interview they are interested, thay will coach you form there. If a model want's to maintain total independance then she/he will need one to market themselves. In that event, they deside what kind of work they want to do and build a portfolio accordingly. A "quality photographer" can then assist them with quality work to enhance the over look of their portfolio. Jan 16 07 11:51 am Link I wouldn't know. I guess I'm one of the few photographers who isn't afraid to say that I don't shoot portfolio shots for agency models. I suppose I could, but I have no desire to do that. I shoot what sells - Maxim-style for radio stations and my own projects. Note, though, that I do shoot agency models - just not for their portfolios. There's a difference. Jan 16 07 11:55 am Link I think "agency quality" is just a fib such as "gold toned jewelry" If a photogrpaher shoots and tests with agencys then he is an agency photogpraher if not... then he should leave the agency quality comments alone. Jan 16 07 11:57 am Link Parts of two comments from two (different) photographers posting to www.whoistesting,com in the UK "I went to see the mainboard at Storm yesterday and they were very helpful and suggested I needed styling with a more editorial edge. I had one story that they loved that featured chain mail and heavy-make up and all sorts of things I had assumed were straying too far from the commercial. I'd met a stylist recently who was insistent that I should move my book towards the commercial, but Storm insisted that commercial elements want to be allied with the cool and trendy so it's best to have things in your book with a very editorial feel. " "All the model agencies will be looking at your book from their perspective, which really comes down to getting some decent clear head, full length shots of their newer girls. They don't really want creative or diffused this or subtle that or anything really that artistic, God forbid the image focuses on the clothes and not their model!!" Jan 16 07 12:13 pm Link mmm.. Good comments! That was my sneaking suspicion, that it just didn't exist, at least not "as advertised." I would be frankly just as happy if photographers stopped offering this as I would if models would stop demanding payment. Jan 16 07 12:19 pm Link Your pictures are gorgeous and definitely professional looking. Very nice, classy, artistic nudes...really flattering poses and fitting facial expressions. But it doesn't sound as if you're asking about yourself, so I guess I'll respond with what I know... For top fashion agencies, after a certain age (18-19), your portfolio definitely does matter...you do need agency quality photos, because otherwise they think it'll take too much time to help you build your book. They want very young girls (13-16) and would only except older girls with visible talent and experience--with "agency-quality" pictures...pictures they could imagine in a magazine...that they can imagine making money from. And as far as TFPs go, I've actually only done TFP and paid work (where I get paid). Now, I'd only consider TFP-ing with someone if I think there's the potential for me to get at least 1 or 2 pictures totally different from what's already in my book. If I were to consider paying someone for pics, their work would have to be magazine quality...like straight out of Vogue. Jan 16 07 12:19 pm Link I am one of the photographers that says he will *help* build a model portfolio. The key word there is *help*. I don't think any one photographer can give a model a complete portfolio. No matter what we do, we all have our styles of shooting and those shots all look relatively the same with one model. A good portfolio is built upon the efforts of a number of good photographers, each with their own vision of the model in question. My style tends more towards the artsy although I have done tons of regular, straight on headshots, portraits, etc. As for agencies...who knows? I've worked with a couple agencies and the stuff they have hanging on the walls of their offices is worse than most GWC stuff I see on here (and other places). One agency kept telling me to get more "edgy" - whatever that means - and I came to realize that what they really wanted was for me to take the quality of my work down quite a few notches. Seriously. I'm not bragging here. When I started producing shitty pictures, they started getting very happy. I didn't want my name on those pictures. eeehh Anyway.... -R Jan 16 07 12:30 pm Link Rowen wrote: Haha, Rowen, I think I should probably start a whole nother thread on what the heck "edgy" means! It seems people toss out words often times that don't really mean much of anything after a while. Hence the source of my post anyway Jan 16 07 12:40 pm Link Well....I think we as a people - especially us here in the states - have gotten to the point of where Quality anything is out of style. We don't demand it and we don't expect it anymore. It's sad but oh so true. It doesn't matter if we are talking about poor pictures or cheap assed nails that break when you hammer on them once. The term "Customer Service" is an oxymoron and "Technical Assistance" is pretty much a joke these days too. So, I guess we should expect no less in this industry which is all about image and all about The Sell. Especially so since it's part of the industry that birthed the Two-Second-Soundbyte mentality that has propagated through our entire culture and brought down the high eschalons of Quality we used to not only expect but demand. Hmmm -R Jan 16 07 12:46 pm Link You're all too correct, Rowen... Sadly. Jan 16 07 01:07 pm Link Huh? What? Do models actually have to have PORTFOLIOS? I thought they just had to have all of their friends vote for them in modeling contests on myspace. Wow, actual portfolios. Who'd of thunk? Jan 16 07 01:11 pm Link Thankfully, Timm, there are those of us that actually do this as a job and not a hobby to get votes on hotornot.com Jan 16 07 01:42 pm Link Yes some of us do actually still have bound portfolios with 9 x 12 images in them... maybe even more than one of them for diffrent jobs. and tearsheets too!!  Jan 16 07 01:46 pm Link NC17 wrote: Models are hired for commercial print jobs because their portfolio has 'wowwed' the one with the money. Jan 16 07 01:56 pm Link Rowen wrote: You're in the wrong agencies-- maybe accidentilly wandered into JRP... Jan 16 07 02:00 pm Link Thank you, Daguerre for the very well written thoughtful post. That definately clarified my hunch that MOST of the photographers that offer portfolio building services definately aren't offering agency quality portoflios as a result. I know of very few that have images polished enough to be seen in a magazine or anywhere else. Jan 16 07 02:00 pm Link NC17 wrote: It could be semantics but I think any photographer that can offer images better (very subjective) than the model (usually no professional shots) already has posted could state he is helping the model develop her portfolio. The word "enhance" could also be inserted. Jan 16 07 02:04 pm Link NC17 wrote: Actually many of the photographers on MM do produce work that could be Jan 16 07 02:09 pm Link Daguerre wrote: Daguerre, Jan 16 07 02:14 pm Link NC17 wrote: I know. I am just being sarcastic (and voicing frustration to that certain segment of the "modeling community"). And bless you! Jan 16 07 02:17 pm Link Rowen wrote: It wouldn't surprise me at all to find agencies of that type of work. The GWC crap sells. Its eye candy on the internet usually, but it does sell... I suppose one has to be as picky with agencies as you are with photographers!! Jan 16 07 02:20 pm Link Timm wrote: Understood Jan 16 07 02:21 pm Link Tony Lawrence wrote: There are a very limited number of agency spots to be had. And so it is that those that 'wow' the agency the most generally get represented. Jan 16 07 02:37 pm Link NC17 wrote: BINGO! Jan 16 07 02:38 pm Link NC17 wrote: GWC imagery does not sell commercially where the big clients and the big money are concerned, unless the ad is being sarcastic. Most top tier agencies cater to the money, and therefore to clients that cater to the general population. Jan 16 07 02:41 pm Link NC17 wrote: That's equal to model with PAID ONLY PLEASE... and they have zero experience, zero shot in there port other than cell pictures... Jan 16 07 02:41 pm Link |
