Sogno Dolce wrote:
well if somebody wants to see my tits, then they can pay to see them.  I don't charge for regular fashion or lingerie shoots. but if someone asked me to pose topless then I sure as hell aren't doing it for free!

Photographers. . .am I wrong about this:
If you model nude or topless, you aren't being paid to "bare your breasts, coochie or whatever" you're being paid to help the photog convey a "look" that happens to be clothesless/naked.  Your statement "if somebody wants to see my tits then they can pay to see them" comes across as somewhat pornographic and I don't view all nudes in that way. 

Some photogs have "studies" or themes that they shoot.  That theme may be a series of pictures of women running in the forest naked with trees, and the photog may call that Au Natural or something.  The models may be nude, but the photog is not paying to "see" them nude.  He is paying for their time as a model, and the wardrobe just happens to be air.  Does that make sense?  Photographers please correct me if I'm wrong.

Photogs shouldn't want to oogle at your boobies.  They should want to take your picture.  So are you asking if you should charge $80 an hour for a photog to look at your boobs?  Or are you asking if you should charge $80 an hour for a photog to photograph them, for professional reasons, topless?

Louis Braga wrote:
I usually pay my nude models  $4.25 plus tax/hr ...

I am SO there....

Jayne Jones wrote:

Photographers. . .am I wrong about this:
If you model nude or topless, you aren't being paid to "bare your breasts, coochie or whatever" you're being paid to help the photog convey a "look" that happens to be clothesless/naked.  Your statement "if somebody wants to see my tits then they can pay to see them" comes across as somewhat pornographic and I don't view all nudes in that way. 

Some photogs have "studies" or themes that they shoot.  That theme may be a series of pictures of women running in the forest naked with trees, and the photog may call that Au Natural or something.  The models may be nude, but the photog is not paying to "see" them nude.  He is paying for their time as a model, and the wardrobe just happens to be air.  Does that make sense?  Photographers please correct me if I'm wrong.

Photogs shouldn't want to oogle at your boobies.  They should want to take your picture.  So are you asking if you should charge $80 an hour for a photog to look at your boobs?  Or are you asking if you should charge $80 an hour for a photog to photograph them, for professional reasons, topless?

couldnt agree more

SLE Photography wrote:
Point being that people aren't likely to be willing to pay for them if they don't know their worth. *shrug*
I'm not asking to shoot them for free (or to shoot them at all), just saying if I wanted to I'd want to know it was worth my money.
More to the point, as Ken notes and I said earlier, your current work doesn't demonstrate worth at that level AND a lot of us have run in to women who say they'll pose, we book time, pay, and then they show up & freal.  You've not demonstrated ability to carry out the contracts.
For those of us who're here & serious, it's not about seeing your boobs free, either.  I have hundreds of photos of boobs, and can see plenty more online.  It's simply about knowing you can & will do the job and can provide the look we need.

thanks for your advice.  I hope I don't give off the impression that I'm not "serious" about modeling.  as a matter of fact I give 110% at all my shoots.  my port does kinda suck right now just cos I haven't been doing this for a while....but I'm trying
also, I just want to make it clear that the reason I asked to begin with was cos I've had numerous photogs ask me what my rates were for nude work, and I didn't know what a reasonable rate was to charge.  when people offer to pay me, I'd be stupid to turn it down!  I don't want to seem fake or anything but money is money is money and I'm in college so a little bit of extra cash sure comes in handy!

SLE Photography wrote:
Point being that people aren't likely to be willing to pay for them if they don't know their worth. *shrug*
I'm not asking to shoot them for free (or to shoot them at all), just saying if I wanted to I'd want to know it was worth my money.
More to the point, as Ken notes and I said earlier, your current work doesn't demonstrate worth at that level AND a lot of us have run in to women who say they'll pose, we book time, pay, and then they show up & freal.  You've not demonstrated ability to carry out the contracts.
For those of us who're here & serious, it's not about seeing your boobs free, either.  I have hundreds of photos of boobs, and can see plenty more online.  It's simply about knowing you can & will do the job and can provide the look we need.

thanks for your advice.  I hope I don't give off the impression that I'm not "serious" about modeling.  as a matter of fact I give 110% at all my shoots.  my port does kinda suck right now just cos I haven't been doing this for a while....but I'm trying

also, I just want to make it clear that the reason I asked to begin with was cos I've had numerous photogs ask me what my rates were for nude work, and I didn't know what a reasonable rate was to charge.  when people offer to pay me, I'd be stupid to turn it down!  I don't want to seem fake or anything but money is money is money and I'm in college so a little bit of extra cash sure comes in handy!

SLE Photography wrote:

Point being that people aren't likely to be willing to pay for them if they don't know their worth. *shrug*
I'm not asking to shoot them for free (or to shoot them at all), just saying if I wanted to I'd want to know it was worth my money.
More to the point, as Ken notes and I said earlier, your current work doesn't demonstrate worth at that level AND a lot of us have run in to women who say they'll pose, we book time, pay, and then they show up & freal.  You've not demonstrated ability to carry out the contracts.
For those of us who're here & serious, it's not about seeing your boobs free, either.  I have hundreds of photos of boobs, and can see plenty more online.  It's simply about knowing you can & will do the job and can provide the look we need.

thanks for your advice.  I hope I don't give off the impression that I'm not "serious" about modeling.  as a matter of fact I give 110% at all my shoots.  my port does kinda suck right now just cos I am just starting out....but I'm trying

also, I just want to make it clear that the reason I asked to begin with was cos I've had numerous photogs ask me what my rates were for nude work, and I didn't know what a reasonable rate was to charge.  when people offer to pay me, I'd be stupid to turn it down!  I don't want to seem fake or anything but money is money is money and I'm in college so a little bit of extra cash sure comes in handy!

Sogno Dolce wrote:
well if somebody wants to see my tits, then they can pay to see them.  I don't charge for regular fashion or lingerie shoots. but if someone asked me to pose topless then I sure as hell aren't doing it for free!

Well, if that's your philosphy on the matter, have you considered working peep shows?

Sogno Dolce wrote:
lastly, I just want to make it clear that the reason I asked to begin with was cos I've had numerous photogs ask me what my rates were for nude work, and I didn't know what a reasonable rate was to charge.

I'm quite surprised that you'd say "I will NOT pose nude for free" in your profile, but then not have an answer ready when people asked how much.  The very statement alone, invites the question.

Sogno Dolce wrote:
is charging 80/hour for partial nudity (breasts exposed only) too much?

So, for $40 will you pose with just one breast showing? lol!  Just kidding.

theda wrote:
Well, if that's your philosphy on the matter, have you considered working peep shows?

Awesome

Jayne Jones wrote:
Photographers. . .am I wrong about this:
If you model nude or topless, you aren't being paid to "bare your breasts, coochie or whatever" you're being paid to help the photog convey a "look" that happens to be clothesless/naked.  Your statement "if somebody wants to see my tits then they can pay to see them" comes across as somewhat pornographic and I don't view all nudes in that way. 

Some photogs have "studies" or themes that they shoot.  That theme may be a series of pictures of women running in the forest naked with trees, and the photog may call that Au Natural or something.  The models may be nude, but the photog is not paying to "see" them nude.  He is paying for their time as a model, and the wardrobe just happens to be air.  Does that make sense?  Photographers please correct me if I'm wrong.

Photogs shouldn't want to oogle at your boobies.  They should want to take your picture.  So are you asking if you should charge $80 an hour for a photog to look at your boobs?  Or are you asking if you should charge $80 an hour for a photog to photograph them, for professional reasons, topless?

Jayne, that's an interesting point.  I guess it depends on the photographer and the model.

On the one hand, there's a strictly market-oriented approach:  There are a bunch of guys out there who want to see exposed flesh, thus there is theoretically a larger market for that type of work, and a greater chance that a model can get paid for it.  I'll agree though with your implication that this pretty much thins out the serious art demand, since most artists simply can't afford to pay top dollar for nudes with any consistency, they'd only be shooting a few times a year if that's all they did.  Thus, this sort of model creates a self-fulfilling prophecy, she mostly attracts the kind of photographer who is willing to pay to play.  Is there anything wrong with that?  It depends on your perspective.  Some would say it's a strip-club mentality, others would say it's just economic reality.

Then there is the art photographer who tends to have long since moved beyond the frat-boy mentality.  You obviously already understand why seeing or not seeing something is not the end goal for this type of photographer, but a lot of people apparently don't understand.  I guess that's why there are a lot of different kinds of models, and a lot of different kinds of photographers.  I happen to prefer models who are serious creative partners, and not in it just for the money.

SLE Photography wrote:

For someone who, from her portfolio, looks to be just starting out & doesn't have a lot of good shots to show her work off, and nothing showcasing the relative worth of the breasts in question?
I'd say yes, it is too much.

Your rate should reflect your experience.

Ken Mierzwa wrote:
Jayne, that's an interesting point.  I guess it depends on the photographer and the model.

Ken:
But ultimately the photog is still not tossing dollars at the model saying "strip for me" right?  Ultimately, he's taking pictures. . .not paying to see boobies.

Jayne Jones wrote:
Ken:
But ultimately the photog is still not tossing dollars at the model saying "strip for me" right?  Ultimately, he's taking pictures. . .not paying to see boobies.

Might not be my case, but for the most part I would say it is so

Sogno Dolce wrote:

well if somebody wants to see my tits, then they can pay to see them.  I don't charge for regular fashion or lingerie shoots. but if someone asked me to pose topless then I sure as hell aren't doing it for free!

Does this sound as bad as it seems?

MarkMarek wrote:
Might not be my case

You are so bad!  It's kind of cute.  *lol*

Keyronn wrote:
Does this sound as bad as it seems?

theda nailed it above, though

Alan from Aavian Prod wrote:
My situation is a little different than a lot of you since I will make money off her images, but I always prefer to pay the model.  That way when she signs the release there are never future issues.  I have paid fairly for the right to exploit the images.

That is the best (part) post I have read yet, concerning this general issue of payment for models.

Sogno Dolce wrote:
as a matter of fact, no I have not considered working peep shows.  I seriously cannot believe you even had the nerve to bring that up.

Well, you had the nerve to assert that we should pay to see your tits, so why not pick a more logical profession?

theda wrote:

Well, you had the nerve to assert that we should pay to see your tits, so why not pick a more logical profession?

judging from your port, you seem to have no problem getting naked in front of the camera.  good for you.  I, on the other hand, find getting naked in front of a photographer who I'd probably just met a more intimate matter, which is why I choose to charge.  if they have a problem with paying me, then they can just choose not to use me.  quite simple really.

Jayne Jones wrote:
Photographers. . .am I wrong about this:
If you model nude or topless, you aren't being paid to "bare your breasts, coochie or whatever" you're being paid to help the photog convey a "look" that happens to be clothesless/naked.  Your statement "if somebody wants to see my tits then they can pay to see them" comes across as somewhat pornographic and I don't view all nudes in that way. 

Some photogs have "studies" or themes that they shoot.  That theme may be a series of pictures of women running in the forest naked with trees, and the photog may call that Au Natural or something.  The models may be nude, but the photog is not paying to "see" them nude.  He is paying for their time as a model, and the wardrobe just happens to be air.  Does that make sense?  Photographers please correct me if I'm wrong.

Photogs shouldn't want to oogle at your boobies.  They should want to take your picture.  So are you asking if you should charge $80 an hour for a photog to look at your boobs?  Or are you asking if you should charge $80 an hour for a photog to photograph them, for professional reasons, topless?

You're right on Jayne.

Sogno Dolce wrote:

judging from your port, you seem to have no problem getting naked in front of the camera.  good for you.  I, on the other hand, find getting naked in front of a photographer who I'd probably just met a more intimate matter, which is why I choose to charge.  if they have a problem with paying me, then they can just choose not to use me.  quite simple really.

So your charging for intimacy? That's not a step up the professional ladder.

It's not charging that I take issue with. It's the basic lack of understanding what you're charging for.

Sogno Dolce wrote:
thanks for your advice.  I hope I don't give off the impression that I'm not "serious" about modeling.  as a matter of fact I give 110% at all my shoots.  my port does kinda suck right now just cos I am just starting out....but I'm trying

also, I just want to make it clear that the reason I asked to begin with was cos I've had numerous photogs ask me what my rates were for nude work, and I didn't know what a reasonable rate was to charge.  when people offer to pay me, I'd be stupid to turn it down!  I don't want to seem fake or anything but money is money is money and I'm in college so a little bit of extra cash sure comes in handy!

You're welcome.  I figured you were sincere & looking for genuine advice.  That's why I gave it.  Setting rates is reasonable, I'm simply saying if you want the higher rates you need at least a couple of shots that show what you're offering and a better portfolio.  Maybe you do a few shoots TFP with good photographers, or a few shoots at lower rates to build up your portfolio in that area & in general.
Then, with your looks & willingness, you can probably hit the level you're seeking.
Right now, I'd go with what Scott said at the end of the last page about rates.

Keyronn wrote:
Your rate should reflect your experience.

Hence the "starting out" comments  :-)

Keyronn wrote:
Does this sound as bad as it seems?

Theda was exactly right about how it sounds.  I don't think a lot of models realize what it sounds like.

It's like the old joke...a man walks up to a beautiful woman on the street and says "You're the most fabulous woman I've ever seen...I'll give you a million dollars to sleep with me tonight."
The woman's flustered, but thinks fast and says "Well, normally, I mean, but, well, it's a lot of money and...Well, ok!"
The man replies "Great, would you do it for $50?"
She SLAPS him and says "Pervert, what kind of girl do you think I am??"
He rubs his cheek & smiles and says "Well we already established THAT, now we're just haggling over the price!"

Jayne Jones wrote:

Photographers. . .am I wrong about this:
If you model nude or topless, you aren't being paid to "bare your breasts, coochie or whatever" you're being paid to help the photog convey a "look" that happens to be clothesless/naked.  Your statement "if somebody wants to see my tits then they can pay to see them" comes across as somewhat pornographic and I don't view all nudes in that way. 

Some photogs have "studies" or themes that they shoot.  That theme may be a series of pictures of women running in the forest naked with trees, and the photog may call that Au Natural or something.  The models may be nude, but the photog is not paying to "see" them nude.  He is paying for their time as a model, and the wardrobe just happens to be air.  Does that make sense?  Photographers please correct me if I'm wrong.

Photogs shouldn't want to oogle at your boobies.  They should want to take your picture.  So are you asking if you should charge $80 an hour for a photog to look at your boobs?  Or are you asking if you should charge $80 an hour for a photog to photograph them, for professional reasons, topless?

Very good point; you expressed it well.

Alan from Aavian Prod wrote:
Well, sorry to throw water on the fire, I sent her a private message earlier offering her $1,500 plus expenses to come to California to shoot for three days.

I understand what a lot of you are saying and I also understand that a lot of you have budget issues.  So this isn't a knock.

If a model is being asked to shoot nude, I see no problem doing TFP if that is what she wants to do.  I also don't see a problem with her asking to be paid. 

Without offending any photographers here, we're not the ones being asked to get nekkid.

My situation is a little different than a lot of you since I will make money off her images, but I always prefer to pay the model.  That way when she signs the release there are never future issues.  I have paid fairly for the right to exploit the images.

So, from my point of view, if she wants to charge $80 an hour, that isn't an unusual rate.  That isn't to suggest that everyone is going to want to pay it.  But it isn't an inappropriate rate to ask for.

And hey, if you feel she's worth it & can make $ off the images, more power to you  :-)
It's the exception to the market rules for her, in all likelihood, but bully for her.  I'd imagine if you let her use some good images from the shoot she can get higher rates later.

theda wrote:

So your charging for intimacy? That's not a step up the professional ladder.

It's not charging that I take issue with. It's the basic lack of understanding what you're charging for.

Theda, I meant intimate as in private.  its not every day I take my clothes off for people.  please don't take what I say and blow it all out of proportion.  why are you trying to attack me?   did I do something to offend you?  If I did, I didn't mean to and I apologize.

Sogno Dolce wrote:
I, on the other hand, find getting naked in front of a photographer who I'd probably just met a more intimate matter, which is why I choose to charge.  if they have a problem with paying me, then they can just choose not to use me.  quite simple really.

Which is why a couple of us mentioned the concern of you not having images like that.  It's a pain to hire a model for a feee & have her show up & be uptight & uncomfortable.  You waste a lot of money on a session that goes nowhere.

LanaV wrote:
My charge for partial nude is $100 & full nude is $150. I have never had a problem receiving this. $80 is for swimsuit modeling.

Lana

But did you start out as those rates when you'd never done it, had no work to show, and were nervous about doing it?
And were you in a place where the marjet would bear those rates?
Those're the crucial points here.

Jayne Jones wrote:
A wise person, whom I can't recall to give proper credit to, once said:

Don't ask a question you don't want to know the answer to.  We're just giving our opinion.  I seriously doubt a model with the experience such as Theda has, is seriously trying to "attack" you.  If nothing else, she's probably just asserting her point. . .on a topic you introduced.

However, if the two of you would like to turn this into a cat fight. . .I only charge $20 to set it up on pay per view.  After that I take 20% of the total profits.

$20?????  I assume nobody is topless then