Charles F. Kettering wrote:
Keep on going and the chances are you will stumble on something, perhaps when you are least expecting it. I have never heard of anyone stumbling on something sitting down.

Art requires practice.

Chip Morton wrote:
Dave,
I'm borrowing those words. Mind?

Have at em!  Make them better if you can. 

I love your portfolio by the way.  Great stuff, it resonates with me.

Jay Dezelic wrote:
I'm inspired.  I think I will go chnage the world today.

Damn, I spent all day yesterday getting it the way I wanted it.

Alan from Aavian Prod wrote:
I am missing your point.  Are you saying that I should stop getting paid for my work and spend my time practicing?

If you are able to push your craft forward with your paid work then I'd say no you don't need to spend time practicing.  In my experience however my clients are not looking for me to be experimental or particularly innovative - they have seen what I have done and they want some of that for their project.

Soooooooo I choose to devote some of my SPARE time to TFWhatever in order to fill out niches of my portfolio, experiment and work on personal projects.

Make sense to you?  I think you could have come up with an answer to your own question if you didn't want to rattle some cages.

Photofurnace wrote:
Make sense to you?  I think you could have come up with an answer to your own question if you didn't want to rattle some cages.

Actually, I wanted to rattle some cages, in a gentle way.

There is nothing wrong with TFP and for those who want to do it, I am all in favor of it.  Done properly, both parties benefit and you can work on your skills.

But the point of your post was to find a way to chastise those who don't do TFP.  For me it has nothing to do with money.  The fact is that if a model asks me to shoot her, and I have time, I will always do it to be nice.  Bear in mind though, if I am shooting her because she asked, I am shooting what she wants.

In terms of my craft, I have plenty of opportunities to improve my skills.  Often times clients come up with concepts that challenge my abilities.  I also shoot a lot of stock.  Most of it is sold to a group of repeat clients that buy particular things.

I will often shoot what I call "safe stock" meaning things I know I can sell.  Afterwards, I shoot things that I want, either to experiment, to try new techniques or simply to take a chance on a concept.  The point though is that I do this on my dime.  For me, I prefer to pay models, not do TFP.  I pay them even when I am working for my own benefit without a specific client.  I do that because when I am paying, I have no artistic obligations to the model.  I may give them a few prints, but I have control over what I am doing.

I rattled your cage for a reason.  There are basically three concepts for photography.  A photographer (either directly or as a surrogate through his client) pays talent to shoot.  There is TFP.  Finally, there are photographers that want to be paid for their services.  Your remarks are directed at the former or the latter.

For those of us who pay, it is a cost of doing business.  For me this is a business.  So while I am happy to shoot a model for free if I have time, for my purposes, I do and always will pay models for their time.

For those photographers that wish to be paid to shoot a model's book, what you are suggesting is that they forgo their fee.  That may be appropriate at some times, but ... then you get into the slippery slope of why did you charge this girl and do the other for free?  That is a personal decision.

There are many ways to hone your skills without doing TFP.  If one chooses to do TFP, that is fine, proper and I have no problems with that.  But to frame a thread berating those, who are successful with other modus operandi, that is off the mark.

So while I understand your point, I will continue my policy.  If a model is shooting for me, she will get paid.  If I am asked to shoot a model, and decide that I will do it, then it is a favor and I expect nothing in return.

Good shooting and thank you for starting the thread.

Photofurnace wrote:
Well I'm not the originator of the post so I should probably do more shutting up but thats not my style!

I really appreciated your comments.  They were right on the money and much more clear than what I was trying to say.  Of course I was saying from the perspective of someone one does things "the other way."

Anyway, well said.

You're right and I apologize.  I thought you were the OP.  I have no problems with the thread.  I just wanted to make a point.

Thanks for the reply.

Amanda Jeanne wrote:
I think its pretty crazy when models expect to get paid by a photographer to shoot them.

Does that mean I should stop paying models?

I think what you really mean to say that you don't expect to be paid by photographers who aren't either getting paid themselves or are otherwise going to make money off of the images.

I suppose I could stop paying my models and make more money, but somehow that does not seem fair.

Photofurnace wrote:
Models are not the source of money.
Photographers are not the source of money.
Clients are the source of money!  (Occasionally the photographer is the client and occasionally the model is the client but that has nothing to do with TFWhatever).

This is my own policy based on my own experiences, markets and working situation.  It isn't a model for everyone and I really don't care if anyone likes it or not.  It makes sense for me.

Thank you for posting this - I hope more people on here pay attention to what you're saying.

Photofurnace wrote:
Damned right.

This is my own policy for TFWhatever:

I don't charge models to shoot with me (neither do I shoot with models who I don't feel have the potential to add to my portfolio).

I don't pay models to shoot with me (unless I intend the images to be a direct source of income).

Models are not the source of money.
Photographers are not the source of money.
Clients are the source of money!  (Occasionally the photographer is the client and occasionally the model is the client but that has nothing to do with TFWhatever).

This is my own policy based on my own experiences, markets and working situation.  It isn't a model for everyone and I really don't care if anyone likes it or not.  It makes sense for me.

Why can't a model be a client?  If they offer money would you turn it down?

DigitalCMH wrote:
Why can't a model be a client?  If they offer money would you turn it down?

You really are missing the point.  Of COURSE I wouldn't turn down money!  Well actually I might but its not bloody likely!

DigitalCMH wrote:
Why can't a model be a client?  If they offer money would you turn it down?

There are plenty of photographers in L.A. and NYC (plus lesser numbers in some other markets) that make their entire living shooting headshots or portfolios.

There is nothing wrong with a model hiring a photographer, and at the agency level, it isn't uncommon at all.

The problem is that on the web, TFP is the norm, but not money.

Amanda Jeanne wrote:
I think its pretty crazy when models expect to get paid by a photographer to shoot them. Lots of agencies out there - when you start they say "okay great, now all you need to do is pay a small fee (which is usually several hundred dollars) to get some headshots done". As far as models without agencies, they always used to have to find a local photographer that would give them a decent price for prints. I feel damn lucky to get prints for free.

As far as paid work goes, its when I'm doing work for a company (L'Oreal, Redken, etc). In that case both me AND the photographer get paid by the company for our work and time. I wouldn't ever approach the photographer asking for my pay check. Unfortunately, in cases like this I never get any copies of my photos, but I guess its understandable.

Now these are spoken words from a REAL model

A. H A M I L T O N wrote:
Seriously, why should it bother you?

Because I see people who say that on their profiles and their work is uninspired drivel. As Dickens wrote and Marley stated, "humanity is my business." I don't like seeing people do things just to get by, contributing little and demanding much. I feel as a culture if we let people live in that way then we are contributing to the errosion of our society as a whole. It's a community site and I want to see commitment to passion in the work displayed.

Amanda Jeanne wrote:
haha no, don't stop paying your models - I don't think they would appreciate my input here.

I guess I thought (but didn't type out) that generally these types of girls I've met are the ones who contact photographers themselves, as well. I think in order to get paid for work, you need a bit of experience behind you but that's just my opinion. I know girls who are actresses and need headshots and ask me which photographers will pay THEM to get their headshots. I guess it's worth a try...

Obviously I would love to get paid for any and all work, but I'm not about to start contacting people on this site with my rates.

Whats that?-cups hand to ear-
Did I hear you say you are moving to California? Sacramento to be specific

Ched wrote:

Art requires practice.

you're making an assumption that people are not working at paid jobs and rather sitting around....most people that wont do unpaid testing I assume have real paid work...

When one works full time in the business for pay would that be considered constant practice or would they still need to do TFP in your opinion?

Ched wrote:
Art requires practice.

I thought it just had to be black and white to be art. Will you guys quit changing the rules on me just when I think I understand everything?!?

GWC!

Ched wrote:
Because I see people who say that on their profiles and their work is uninspired drivel.

But not all apparently?  So there are some people who say that you don't feel that way about?

Certainly your qualified to judge the community as a whole then?

I don't do TFP, I guess I fit into your qualifications then, but what the hey.

/shrug

You live in one of the top 10 cities in the freaking WORLD for photographic opportunity.  Artistic, fashion, editorial, whatever you want, country, if not the world is literally right at your feet.

Yet you come here and complain that some diva doesn't want to work with you because you won't pay her?  Presented with that dilemma you have a few choices.  1) Pay her and get the person you want to complete your groovy dream.  2) Move on and find the next person who feels differently.  Or 3)  Complain about it here.

Two of the above three accomplish the artistic purpose you prescribe to, one does not.  Why choose that one?

Andy

Ched wrote:

Because I see people who say that on their profiles and their work is uninspired drivel. As Dickens wrote and Marley stated, "humanity is my business." I don't like seeing people do things just to get by, contributing little and demanding much. I feel as a culture if we let people live in that way then we are contributing to the errosion of our society as a whole. It's a community site and I want to see commitment to passion in the work displayed.

I guess I don't understand.  The majority of the people on these forums are involved in photography not as their vocation, but either as a hobby or an avocation.

For you, photography is about taking pictures, not making a living.  Those with uninspiring pictures aren't making a living either.  Their level of satisfaction is something else.

You shouldn't let it bother you.  People approach photography for different reasons.  I don't need to do TFP to learn how to use a camera.

Ched wrote:

Art requires practice.

Amen, hallelujah and pass the chicken!!!

Ched wrote:
Art requires practice.

Art requires some portions of intellect but above all it requires heart, soul and a strong urge to change things and to say something to others.

House of Indulgence wrote:
I have TFP'd my @ss off in 2005. I as booked almost every weekend with models. I learned more that I ever have. But at this point I am concentrating on more paid  work. Some of the TFP was for magazine submissions and tearsheets. But I want cash now.

I will still do TFP but I want to do it with my ideas and with what I want to experiment with. Not shooting girls who think it would be neat to dress a certain way or thhin it would be coll to have a certain outfit on. Each shoot needs a purpose and an outcome. Not just shooting TFP cuz it is fun.

Too many models want TFP to get quantity of shots. Thhey don't care about the quality. To me it is quality to strengthen the portfolio or to try a new thing.

So YES to TFP. But only to LIMITED TFP. The difference is huge.

Very good post.

Alan from Aavian Prod wrote:

There are plenty of photographers in L.A. and NYC (plus lesser numbers in some other markets) that make their entire living shooting headshots or portfolios.

There is nothing wrong with a model hiring a photographer, and at the agency level, it isn't uncommon at all.

The problem is that on the web, TFP is the norm, but not money.

I'm getting tired of all the threads people start bitching about TFP.  Honestly, what OTHER people do is really no one else's businesses.  But some people here, not necessarily in this thread but in the past, always sound so angry.  Like other people are ruining the industry.  It's not being ruined, it's changing.  Just like auto-workers getting replaced by machinery.  You either adapt to it or not.  Whining won't get you anywhere.  Alan, you seem to have most the wisdom around here and it's great that you share it.  Hopefully those that don't understand will finally understand.  But there will be those that...well, they are always looking for their cheese.

Nikki S. wrote:
i like it when the model has bad TFP photos or better yet webcam pics and say "no tfp, only accepting paid assignments".

I see this all the time.  It makes me laugh.