Deadly Design Make-up wrote:
Since when did hands become wardrobe?

Around the mid 1990's. Blame Janet. =p

But yeah, those digicam pics are usually from newbies. I had a bunch of pics from my $20 digital camera when I first started also. None of which included the hand and blanket wardrobe. But hey, if that's what they have, that's what type of work they'll end up with. That is, implied nudes.

Deadly Design Make-up wrote:
My favorite is when a models profile says NO NUDITY and they have like 10 nudeish shots in thier profile. I didnt know that hands stratigically placed made these images not nudes. Since when did hands become wardrobe?

Haha, that is too funny-I've seen that on several occassions as well.

Lovely Little Lady wrote:
I understand that modeling involves nudity as a form of art. I also know that some pictures are meant to portray the idea of sex. Fine, after all, we are humans. I don't mean to sound rude or disrespectful but it's something I always wonder...All model mayhem profiles are either accepted or denied...so why does model mayhem continue to accept profiles that include pictures that aren't appropriate? I constantly see profiles in which "models" take pictures of themselves using regular cameras. I know some people are just starting out, like i said before, I dont mean to sound rude or disrespectful, but Im sure some of you know what Im talking about...Some "models" tend to show more than necessary and it isn't art, it almost falls under pornagraphy.

Define "necessary" and define "art". Some people's art is other people's porn.

What Theda said. If you think it's porn, tell-a-mod. They are the final arbiters here.

Deadly Design Make-up wrote:
I didnt know that hands stratigically placed made these images not nudes. Since when did hands become wardrobe?

Maybe the hands are just used to cover the clothing.
Making the picture look nude when it isn't.

Lovely Little Lady wrote:
...it almost falls under pornagraphy.

"Almost?"

I think I need to try harder.

Sydrena wrote:
...some of the pictures on MM are very inapporpiate.

Thank you.  I try.

Lovely Little Lady wrote:
...All model mayhem profiles are either accepted or denied...so why does model mayhem continue to accept profiles that include pictures that aren't appropriate?

It's tough to legislate taste.

Deadly Design Make-up wrote:
My favorite is when a models profile says NO NUDITY and they have like 10 nudeish shots in thier profile. I didnt know that hands stratigically placed made these images not nudes. Since when did hands become wardrobe?

Wow ! Do you and my boyfriend know each other? He just said that to me last night!

Lovely Little Lady wrote:
I constantly see profiles in which "models" take pictures of themselves using regular cameras. I know some people are just starting out, like i said before, I dont mean to sound rude or disrespectful, but Im sure some of you know what Im talking about...Some "models" tend to show more than necessary and it isn't art, it almost falls under pornagraphy.

True, some people are just starting out. I still feel that if you have your profile up for over a month and you haven't booked at least one shoot, even with a "GWC," then your profile should be deleted. Hey, come back when you get at least a semblance of some real pics.

As far as pornography goes, it's all in the eye of the beholder.
To me, pornography that could be labelled extreme would involve penetration and pink, whereas to my aunt it could be a girl in a skimpy nighty.

Lovely Little Lady wrote:
I understand that modeling involves nudity as a form of art. I also know that some pictures are meant to portray the idea of sex. ...

...so why does model mayhem continue to accept profiles that include pictures that aren't appropriate?

These are good questions.  ModelMayhem is trying to be everything for everyone, of course.  If it were to limit itself only to "appropriate" photography and modeling, then the owner would have to decide to whom that "appropriate" would apply.  He might choose young models with conservative values like you, or he might choose the values of old horndogs like me and Melvin.  In either case he'd be limiting the appeal of the website, and that's a sure formula for failure.

What he has done is to allow a wide range of work to be used, with a good range of reflected values.  This lets me show my work (which is all about sexuality), and also lets you avoid looking at it.  I'm here to find models for my work, and in doing that wouldn't even consider asking you to model. 

The anarchy we have here, along with having the flexibility to let most people do or find what they want, has a downside as well.  You most likely already have had solicitaions for work that are inappropriate to both your age and to your values.  As unfortunate as that is, it is the "price of freedom," and you can (and should) simply delete those messages.

I think the question about models posting bad quality pictures has been answered.  As a photographer, I'm much more interested in what the model looks like than I am in what her photographs look like.  If her digicam snaps show a woman I'd like to work with I won't be critical of how the pictures were made.

-Don

Sita Mae Edwards wrote:
Given that you're 16, there's a lot on this site that's inappropriate for you.  I can see why you'd say that.

Call me cranky, but I find it far less approriate for the mods to allow minors to post on this site.  Nothing attracts predators [and keeps them coming back] like the idea of teens posting photos of themselves.

Sita Mae Edwards wrote:
As long as I can see what someone looks like, I could care less whether their images are super professional, and I'm the one potentially working with these people.  You're not going to be.  Why do you care?

I've said the same thing in several past threads.  In a lot of ways, I'd rather see an unadorned snapshot of a model than something that's been edited and doctored by an overambitious photographer [or sometimes the model herself].  Over the last few years the idea has taken hold that one can't be considered as a model unless one already has an extensive "professional" portfolio...Which just isn't the case, especially not in "the industry,"  where if one has the right look and is the right body type, an agency will take you on and run the entire portfolio building process themselves.  The whole "pre fab port" concept is the product of enterprising [hustling] photographers and wanabe models who like to have a lot of pictures of themselves around [not that there's anything wrong with that, but it has little to do with how things work in "the industry"].

Lovely Little Lady wrote:
I constantly see profiles in which "models" take pictures of themselves using regular cameras....

I use a regular camera, too.  And some people think my work is porn.   

-Dave