BCG wrote:
have spoken with a number of gals who were asked to do a tfp shoot and only got a few lousy prints out  of the deal...if the nature of the shoot is TFP, why should the gal not get a complete set of prints with high res Cd???

Because a lot of photographers are:

a] chintzy

b] lazy

c] insecure control freaks

d] jerks

e] dumb

f] *your answer here*

BCG wrote:
have spoken with a number of gals who were asked to do a tfp shoot and only got a few lousy prints out  of the deal...if the nature of the shoot is TFP, why should the gal not get a complete set of prints with high res Cd???

Cuz the photographer sucked. I only do TFP for myself since it's just a hobby for me.

BCG wrote:
have spoken with a number of gals who were asked to do a tfp shoot and only got a few lousy prints out  of the deal...if the nature of the shoot is TFP, why should the gal not get a complete set of prints with high res Cd???

Define "a complete set of prints" ...  one per outfit, 2 per outfit,  prints of every shoot you took??.   Same goes for the CD,  how many images on CD? how many retouched?

It's only a rip-off if you were promised more than was delivered,  the best way to avoid conflict,  as mentioned earlier on another one of this endless threads is to negotiate before the shoot,  who gets what, how many, in which form and in when.

And here we go again,  if the model is unhappy, the photographer sucks,  if the photographer is unhappy the model sucks.     Use your words people,  ask!!

Sorry,  I'm having one of those days.

MB

Berumen wrote:
It's only a rip-off if you were promised more than was delivered,  the best way to avoid conflict,  as mentioned earlier on another one of this endless threads is to negotiate before the shoot,  who gets what, how many, in which form and in when.

Great comment.  If a model wants prints of every shot, then s/he should ask for it before shooting begins.  Likewise, if a photographer agrees to do it, then s/he should clarify whether it's "straight from camera" or processed. 

I figure models want to pick and choose what goes in their portfolio which is why I don't waste time processing (or paying for prints for) 150-200 shots when many of them may be outtakes.

Edit: I should mention I rarely stick to JUST what was promised.  I usually go out of my way to ensure the model was happy simply because I want to keep a positive relationship for possible future endeavours.

BCG wrote:
why should the gal not get a complete set of prints with high res Cd???

i'm hoping this is sarcastic

Justin N Lane wrote:
You should be a control freak over your images as photographer, or any visual artist for that matter.  They're effectively all you've got.

5-6 final full res images or prints / the whole shoot low res for reference only.

The low-res option is fine, and is still a lot different than just showing the model a handfull of images the photographer deems "acceptible."  I don't bother making low-res versions of non-edited images, but that's just me.  I'm not ashamed to admit that models often see things on the disc that i totally missed.  I'm not above editing out things I think are truly awful before I even make the model's disc.

I just think it's nice to take into account that models are often looking for totally different things in an image than photographers...If someone is going to give up a day of their life [or more] to satisfy my creative jones, the least I can do is give 'em a little value for their time.

Star wrote:
Becuase every image I edit takes me anywhere from 10minutes to 1/2 hour, so if I give a model 6 images than I have actually given her my entire evening. I think that should be plenty. I also don't allow unedited images to go up anymore after some bad expieriences,

Star

agreed. a lot more time goes into post processing for good/meticulous images than people realize. besides, what can you do with 10-200 pictures of variations on the same look? you're only going to use one or two (the very best) per look in your portfolio, and the rest are just a waste of editing time. and for those who would argue that what they think is best and what the photographer thinks is best are different, you agreed to work with a photographer based on his/her portfolio, so you obviously liked what you saw, and should trust their judgment like the other models have.

Melvin Moten Jr wrote:

The low-res option is fine, and is still a lot different than just showing the model a handfull of images the photographer deems "acceptible."  I don't bother making low-res versions of non-edited images, but that's just me.  I'm not ashamed to admit that models often see things on the disc that i totally missed.  I'm not above editing out things I think are truly awful before I even make the model's disc.

I just think it's nice to take into account that models are often looking for totally different things in an image than photographers...If someone is going to give up a day of their life [or more] to satisfy my creative jones, the least I can do is give 'em a little value for their time.

I'm usually open to the people I'm working with (often not only models, but clothing designers, MUA's etc) needing different images, I just like to have final control.  I can only think of one or two instances where I didn't go ahead and give the shots the other parties were interested in.

Naomi Wasiatycz wrote:
What I got once, and I thought it was so perfect, is a CD of all the raw images plus 5 prints of the photographers choice, edited. Those five were also edited on the CD. It would've been nice to pick those shots with him but I didn't really care to at the time. I really liked that a lot.

Pretty much goes w/what I said... just a lot shorter, lol... I agree

BCG wrote:
why should the gal not get a complete set of prints with high res Cd???

1) because I shoot film... she can have a copy of the proof sheets if she asks

2) because my prints really do sell in galleries, so they have a tangible and documented value

3) because, as a wise friend of mine once said, the difference between a serious photographer and a hobbyist is that the hobbyist shows everyone ALL of their pictures.

Naomi Wasiatycz wrote:
What I got once, and I thought it was so perfect, is a CD of all the raw images plus 5 prints of the photographers choice, edited. Those five were also edited on the CD. It would've been nice to pick those shots with him but I didn't really care to at the time. I really liked that a lot.

This is similar to our policy. Raw images, finished set & web resizes on a disk. Plus prints of the finished shots. We also let the model/client get a look at them at the raw stage when possible, in case they have different ideas about what should be used for finished shots.

Ken Mierzwa wrote:

1) because I shoot film... she can have a copy of the proof sheets if she asks

2) because my prints really do sell in galleries, so they have a tangible and documented value

3) because, as a wise friend of mine once said, the difference between a serious photographer and a hobbyist is that the hobbyist shows everyone ALL of their pictures.

Really? So in a collaboration situation (very different than hiring a model to use for work you are selling) you don't think she has the right to see it and see how she did?

Ken Mierzwa wrote:
3) because, as a wise friend of mine once said, the difference between a serious photographer and a hobbyist is that the hobbyist shows everyone ALL of their pictures.

thank you!

Ken Mierzwa wrote:

1) because I shoot film... she can have a copy of the proof sheets if she asks

2) because my prints really do sell in galleries, so they have a tangible and documented value

3) because, as a wise friend of mine once said, the difference between a serious photographer and a hobbyist is that the hobbyist shows everyone ALL of their pictures.

But its not of just YOUR work, its of you AND the model... and a model has the right to view her own pictures, ESPECIALLY for a TFP... So you shoot film, u give her a proof sheet, and rights to be able to get prints for her port of the images SHE likes too...
and on your #3~its BOTH of your work so you should BOTH see it, its not "everyone", your self centered and greedy if you have a mind like that

David Moyle wrote:

Really? So in a collaboration situation (very different than hiring a model to use for work you are selling) you don't think she has the right to see it and see how she did?

EXACTLY... like I said: self centered and GREEDY

is tfp a rip off?!?

Only if one of the parties involved sucks at what they're supposed to be doing. Then it's a rip off/waste of time for the other parties.

BTW, I only give edited images and I have a target 2 week turnaround time for editing. Some photographers give the model a CD of all the unedited pictures in high res, I don't.

I give the model a selection of what I think were the best images shot. I literally throw out 1000 images for every shoot, and usually more like 1300. The model gets 15-30 edited images on a hidden web page. If they have a really strong look they get as many as 60 images, but that is rare.

Kemara wrote:

EXACTLY... like I said: self centered and GREEDY

Oh, dear Lord. I didn't say that.

I think what we have here is a difference of levels of accomplishment. If he pays a model, he has no obligation to show them anything. If he sells his art regularly, he may have no need for tfp/tfcd (testing in the brick and mortar world) and not completely understand it's need.

He still uses film, it's not as easy to develop them all and very costly. I was just inquiring to his thoughts.

A little common courtesy and respect people! Less fighting that way and more discussions.

Ched wrote:

Only if one of the parties involved sucks at what they're supposed to be doing. Then it's a rip off/waste of time for the other parties.

BTW, I only give edited images and I have a target 2 week turnaround time for editing. Some photographers give the model a CD of all the unedited pictures in high res, I don't.

I give the model a selection of what I think were the best images shot. I literally throw out 1000 images for every shoot, and usually more like 1300. The model gets 15-30 edited images on a hidden web page. If they have a really strong look they get as many as 60 images, but that is rare.

1,000 images!!

That's when digital is more expensive than film. Time is expensive too! I wouldn't have the patience!

David Moyle wrote:

Oh, dear Lord. I didn't say that.

huh? lol... i'm agreeing w/your comment... lol

Kemara wrote:

huh? lol... i'm agreeing w/your comment... lol

I know, but it doesn't mean he's greedy and self centered. Just maybe in a different place in his career.

David Moyle wrote:

I know, but it doesn't mean he's greedy and self centered. Just maybe in a different place in his career.

Well, in my opinion its self centered and greedy b/c TFP is a trade, its not just to benifit the photographer, and its not just to benifit the model...

jen starr wrote:
Personally,
I would never work for trade or for free.Unless the subject was INCREDIBLE!!!! and secondly if I ever did do tfp,The subject would get retouched final picks 1 or 2 from each set-up (high resolution).Prints cost money.Everyone involved can make thier own print.The payment for shooting or modeling etc.... is having the final shot or shots...Why should the photographer have to now go into pocket for prints?????We should all be resposible for our own book.

I do agree w/the whole prints aspect... but a lot of photographers I worked with have their own room to get the prints. If you have to pay for a store to print them, then yea, the model/photographer should be responsable for their own, but the model should still get a low res(at the least) CD of the shoot so he/she can decide which she wants edited, etc. for HER book.
~!*Kemara*!~