Photographer
HerbP
Posts: 546
Winter Springs, Florida, US
OK, another one. The GWC finds a picture in a men's magazine that he really likes and spends much of the session with the model in a futile effort trying to duplicate the pose and lighting exactly without ever trying to do an original variation of the basic theme.
Photographer
N8R Photography
Posts: 144
San Francisco, California, US
Star wrote:
I HATE BELLOWS COMPENSATION! I always forget about reciprocity too if I am in the middle of a shoot. Hehe, yeah reciprocity's a bitch...Especially if you forgot your chart
Photographer
Jose Luis
Posts: 2890
Dallas, Texas, US
#38 You can name more famous Playmates than famous Photographers
#37 You refuse to let the model see all the images b/c you have to fix em all in photoshop first so she dont know how bad you really are and so you have time to save the oops shots to another secret, hidden folder.
#36 You do your photoshoots sitting down (why cant you stand up there, Woody?)
#35 You shoot 200+ images per look
#34 You have your calendar marked for when all your favorite MM Models turn 18
#33 Your portfolio features more models with hands covering their boobs than clothing their boobs
Photographer
La Seine by the Hudson
Posts: 8587
New York, New York, US
Jose- JoseOnline wrote:
#38 You can name more famous Playmates than famous Photographers
#37 You refuse to let the model see all the images b/c you have to fix em all in photoshop first so she dont know how bad you really are and so you have time to save the oops shots to another secret, hidden folder.
#36 You do your photoshoots sitting down (why cant you stand up there, Woody?)
#35 You shoot 200+ images per look
#34 You have your calendar marked for when all your favorite MM Models turn 18 Ok now that's just CREEEEEEPY!! *Feels the urgent need to de-louse*
Photographer
Jose Luis
Posts: 2890
Dallas, Texas, US
#32 You have the urgent need to contribute as much as possible to GWC bashing forums so the girls know that you really arent a GWC
#31 All of your shots are set in the same exact background (usually a corner of your home or a hotel room) with the same lighting and angle- only varying the girl, the color of her thong, and whether she has her hands covering her boobs, her hair covering her boobs, or she is turned away for a booty shot
Photographer
IllusionDigital
Posts: 578
San Francisco, California, US
You read this entire thread hoping beyond all hope that no one mentioned your name.
you "don't care about making money, you just like taking pictures"
you don't edit your photos because "you like a natural look"
your photos look like mine.
Photographer
udor
Posts: 25255
New York, New York, US
RudeFood wrote:
Aren't there any "old guys" around who remember the way it was, before instant gratification, and having to wait for your batteries to recycle before you could take another picture? It used to be only your flash you had problems with, now with e- batteries they're ready all the time, but it's waiting for your CAMERA to *ALLOW* you to take another photo. I do remember very well... but I am not too old of a guy... 
Photographer
udor
Posts: 25255
New York, New York, US
Scott Einuis wrote:
#55 Brings a condom to a shoot....just in case BRILLIANT!
And the only point that really fits the original definition of a GWC... 
But the other suggestions are funny too!
Photographer
GWC
Posts: 1407
Baltimore, Maryland, US
Far West Imaging wrote:
So far, being a GWC sounds like a whole lot more fun and is a lot easier than "real" photography. You dont know half of it dude!!!! Every night I am partying with the rich and famous and trying to sneak photos of them when they arent looking. The other day I got some really good shots of George Clooney doing blow with Rosie O'Donnel - they were both naked and were obviously more than just friends if you know what I mean - but his bodyguard took my camera and threw it in the swimming pool while they were dragging me outta there. It was a totally excellent composition too - a real symphony of line and light and all that fine art stuff.
The only problem with being me is all the wannabes who always want to learn my secret techniques without attending one of my exclusive workshops. Those guys really annoy me. They stand outside my door and are like "I'll let you do TFP with my sister if you'll let me watch" but I keep the straight and narrow because I am a total pro you know?
GWC!
Photographer
Incident Image
Posts: 342
Los Angeles, California, US
Jose - damn man, you are WAY too good at this! Everytime I think of one, I see you've already posted it! LOL
Photographer
GWC
Posts: 1407
Baltimore, Maryland, US
Jose- JoseOnline wrote:
#33 Your portfolio features more models with hands covering their boobs than clothing their boobs My hands or hers?
![https://img1.modelmayhem.com/051230/08/43b59c1d9b8b8_m.jpg]()
This is like a shot I did of me and Janet during our last TFP session. That was right before the WARDROBE FAILURE at the superbowl. I had nothing to do with that I swear. I think that little p*ssy Justin Timberlake was jealous of me and did that on purpose.
GWC!
Model
P.S.2.
Posts: 51
Vancouver, Washington, US
Photographer
GWC
Posts: 1407
Baltimore, Maryland, US
Post hidden on Oct 19, 2015 02:26 pm
Reason: other
Model
P.S.2.
Posts: 51
Vancouver, Washington, US
lol cute port
whats does it stand for
Photographer
Hugh Jorgen
Posts: 2850
Ashland, Oregon, US
You read all of these posts and you are still Grinning..
(:---------
Hj
Photographer
GWC
Posts: 1407
Baltimore, Maryland, US
Post hidden on Oct 19, 2015 02:27 pm
Reason: other
Photographer
Webspinner Studios
Posts: 6964
Ann Arbor, Michigan, US
~Krista~ wrote:
It's in the FAQ's ma'm
Photographer
CameraSight
Posts: 1126
Roselle Park, New Jersey, US
Photos2amaze wrote:
78. You stare at the model like a tiger on a deer
77. Your camera has optical AND digital zooms
76. You have 17 models under your management and you personally go on all their shoots, to make sure that no other manager steals the property.
75. "just stand right there by that tree"
74. " I used to shoot fashion and super bowls back in the 1980's with my 6x6" >>>74. " I used to shoot fashion and super bowls back in the 1980's with my 6x6"
Photographer
Christopher Hartman
Posts: 54196
Buena Park, California, US
adrienne of Zswana wrote:
Doesnât have model release, claims itâs âunnecessaryâ? But it isn't.
Model
gsvb
Posts: 190
New York, New York, US
Ironic that some of the sites greatest GWC'S are so prominent in this thread !
Photographer
Stephen Dawson
Posts: 29259
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
gsvb wrote:
Ironic that some of the sites greatest GWC'S are so prominent in this thread ! Sorry for being late.
Artist/Painter
any artist
Posts: 107
Chicago, Illinois, US
#30 - your modelmayhem.com browse/search criteria is the exact same as your match.com criteria. like whoa.
Photographer
Daniel Norton
Posts: 1745
New York, New York, US
RudeFood wrote:
Ok,
While I can understand some of this, the driving part would piss you off, maybe. But, I learned early on, for shooting, (this was 10 years ago, 15 maybe) that 1-hour labs often had *better* developing and fresher chemicals than "pro" labs, especially for print film. *AND*, since negatives scanned just as nicely into PCD's, which was the "state of the art" back then, *and* models wanted pics to bring home, a 1-hour lab with double prints was a *great* deal. And if you had a relationship with the lab even better.
Shooting slides was great for publications, but if your goal was the web, slides were actually a pain. Slide scanners were slow and expensive. Print scanners were very good, and the GIF format was only 256 colors anyway. JPG was just starting out, and most people weren't running 32m color monitors.
I've been shooting for web-release for a long, long time, but only switched to digital cameras in the last few months, and I'm having real issues with them. They are *not* as good as film cameras in 99% of what I want them to do, other than they are *cheap* by comparison, and IMHO so are the results.
So, before knocking some of this, think about the history, and how 1-hour labs, if any survive outside of walmart, used to be part and parcel of the photographer's bag of tools. Especially if you were testing something out, you could shoot a roll, get it developed while you were grabbing a snack, and see if the whole idea worked before you invested hundreds of dollars in film and processing in the idea.
Not everything is about digital.
Aren't there any "old guys" around who remember the way it was, before instant gratification, and having to wait for your batteries to recycle before you could take another picture? It used to be only your flash you had problems with, now with e- batteries they're ready all the time, but it's waiting for your CAMERA to *ALLOW* you to take another photo. I don't think she's bashing one hour labs as much as the fact that he had one model drive him to drop off film for another.
Also what you are saying about fresh chemicals is less true now that many pros have started shooting c41 as their primary emulsions.
Photographer
Daniel Norton
Posts: 1745
New York, New York, US
Daniela V wrote:
43. You go to workshops with an instamatic. I was actually thinking about doing this
Photographer
Wayne Higgins
Posts: 34
Patrick Shipstad wrote:
You pose your models with a Roman pillar and an old bed sheet hung up with tape.
Your props choices are swords, a fake rose, a hard hat and tool belt, a ladder, caution tape, and a rubber snake.
You bring over the halogen torch lamp for a fill light to your home depot key light.
go for it! :-P So now what am I gonna do with the other 500 ft of caution tape!
Photographer
- null -
Posts: 4576
#29 - Your studio is in your garage. #28 - You're drivers license has my name on it. #27 - ![https://images.amazon.com/images/P/1552979563.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg]()
Photographer
Kentsoul
Posts: 9739
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, US
#101 - You're so insecure about your skillset becoming outdated and irrelevant that you keep making threads to insult people who don't particularly care what acronym you use on them.
Photographer
Expressions in OKC
Posts: 84
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, US
#26 -- Your commentary on the MODEL'S ports are peppered with unconscionable remarks like 'magnificent rack' or 'beautiful box' or 'nice ass' -- it never occurs to you to speak about the image itself (i.e. model & photographer together)
#25 -- You have no PHOTOGRAPHERS on your friends list
Photographer
The Suburban Hippie Pho
Posts: 606
Hampstead, Maryland, US
mrclay2000 wrote:
#26 -- Your commentary on the MODEL'S ports are peppered with unconscionable remarks like 'magnificent rack' or 'beautiful box' or 'nice ass' -- it never occurs to you to speak about the image itself (i.e. model & photographer together)
#25 -- You have no PHOTOGRAPHERS on your friends list HAAAA!!! LOL
Photographer
Patrick Shipstad
Posts: 4630
Burbank, California, US
Wayne Higgins wrote:
So now what am I gonna do with the other 500 ft of caution tape! Oops.. sorry Wayne! ;-) I'm sure I got called on a couple points myself! :-P
Photographer
Kdakmmt
Posts: 25
Fairbanks, Alaska, US
RudeFood wrote:
Ok,
While I can understand some of this, the driving part would piss you off, maybe. But, I learned early on, for shooting, (this was 10 years ago, 15 maybe) that 1-hour labs often had *better* developing and fresher chemicals than "pro" labs, especially for print film. *AND*, since negatives scanned just as nicely into PCD's, which was the "state of the art" back then, *and* models wanted pics to bring home, a 1-hour lab with double prints was a *great* deal. And if you had a relationship with the lab even better.
Shooting slides was great for publications, but if your goal was the web, slides were actually a pain. Slide scanners were slow and expensive. Print scanners were very good, and the GIF format was only 256 colors anyway. JPG was just starting out, and most people weren't running 32m color monitors.
I've been shooting for web-release for a long, long time, but only switched to digital cameras in the last few months, and I'm having real issues with them. They are *not* as good as film cameras in 99% of what I want them to do, other than they are *cheap* by comparison, and IMHO so are the results.
So, before knocking some of this, think about the history, and how 1-hour labs, if any survive outside of walmart, used to be part and parcel of the photographer's bag of tools. Especially if you were testing something out, you could shoot a roll, get it developed while you were grabbing a snack, and see if the whole idea worked before you invested hundreds of dollars in film and processing in the idea.
Not everything is about digital.
Aren't there any "old guys" around who remember the way it was, before instant gratification, and having to wait for your batteries to recycle before you could take another picture? It used to be only your flash you had problems with, now with e- batteries they're ready all the time, but it's waiting for your CAMERA to *ALLOW* you to take another photo. heheh I still use a flash that has a slow recharge rate on a camera that doesnt have a autowinder... I even remember having to send off my film at the photomat and wait a week to get it back.
Photographer
Arizona Shoots
Posts: 28822
Phoenix, Arizona, US
#??? You say "Don't worry. I'll edit it out in Photoshop"
#???? You're 6'4", The model is 5'4" and you are too lazy to squat down so the camera is at the appropriate height for full length shots.
#????? Your logo/copyright on your photos is more impressive than the photo itself.
#?????? You show up for your shoot on the bus.
#??????? You crop your photos right at one of the model's joints (knee, elbow, etc)
Photographer
Arizona Shoots
Posts: 28822
Phoenix, Arizona, US
~Krista~ wrote:
58# You think there is nothing wrong with videotaping (without knowledge) underage models in the changing rooms. I know who this is... Isn't he in jail?
Photographer
Wayne Higgins
Posts: 34
Patrick Shipstad wrote:
Oops.. sorry Wayne! ;-) I'm sure I got called on a couple points myself! :-P No worrys Patrick! Ya gotta have a sense of humor!
Model
DawnElizabeth
Posts: 3907
Madison, Mississippi, US
I think there are two sets of 100 going on here...
Photographer
Isaac Photography
Posts: 393
Conyers, Georgia, US
You have a penis...and you own a camera.
Photographer
Burgos Photography
Posts: 641
Washington, District of Columbia, US
Isaac L wrote:
You have a large penis...and you own a camera. Yep...that's me!
;-)
Photographer
Hunter Photography
Posts: 131
Ishpeming, Michigan, US
Jose- JoseOnline wrote:
#61 Your photographer buddies told you to start shooting stories- so your stories always go like this- model in clothes, then model in lingeire, then model implied nude
#60 You insist on implieds to get those coveted oops shots
#59 You insist on a video camera taping of the shoot for your legal protection One of the girls I was working with had a guy contact her with demand #59. We had a good laugh over that.
Photographer
International Todd
Posts: 29
Beijing, Beijing, China
Where can I get the stuffed parrot, and the snake???
|
