|
Forums >
General Industry >
All Agency-affiliated/employed Model Managers. SOUND OFF
I would like to hear from actual Agency affiliated, or Agency employed Model Managers. There is a lot of debating, discussion and arguing going on in many forums about the topic of "Internet Model Manager". The participants in these discussions are mostly photographers claiming to know more than the other about the subject. Many of the issues raised are motivated by the questionable practices some Photographers posing as Managers have and how it's affected another Photographer. Many of these claims are probably true, because I too have run into a couple of Photographers posing as Managers attempting to obtain a booking/management fee from me and other Photographers. Until, I did my own research, I thought this was a fairly obscured, but common practice. Apparently, it is not even legal. So, how about de-lurking and chiming in for once? We would all like to read your thoughts on what standard Model Management practices are for the large to small agencies, to freelancers. We don't need to know tips and techniques that make you in particular successful at what you do. That's entirely your option. What is your role and bounds in the Agency and what do you do specifically for models? Those are things many would like to understand. Because this topic encompasses the Internet as a virtual landscape for operations, I would like to see participation from the younger Managers in particular. Tell us how the Internet has been incorporated into your job besides e-mail. Retirees are welcome to chime in as well. Tell us, what are the tenets of a Model Manager? Let's get a healthy discussion going here and demystify it for all to benefit from. I believe this will be helpful in particular to all Models. The ultimate goal here is to expose a standard that so far on the Internet, is somewhat obscured. Why a standard? As I wrote previously, there have been many complaints about Managers. A published standard would get everyone serious about their endeavors on the same page. Consider this a weeding out process for the shady types, the poseurs. The ball is in your court. Thank you in advance for your participation. P.S. You may want to check this thread as a frame of reference Jul 05 05 04:08 pm Link Should be a short thread. Jul 05 05 04:14 pm Link Posted by Glamour Studio /Gary: Sure is starting to look that way. *grin* Jul 05 05 04:46 pm Link I really don't have much to contribute. I have management asperations. I have helped quite a few ladies in their quest but I still feel people are putting the cart before the horse here with the net. IMO the power movers are net users not always net savvy so the more traditional communcation methods are still in play at a high % BUT the junoir tier ARE net savvy and as both the providers and consumers of talent have that changing of the gaurd we will see more websites like Qmodels.com. The days of the hard copy headsheet are numbered I think on to the password protected web ports In my POV.. before I can get that management license.. The manager needs to have a paid work niche that will attract the model. On the flipside one has to be attracting models that understand their personal skill set and are willing to increase it. I'll keep thinking maybe I will be able to dig up something else sensible to say. Jul 05 05 05:02 pm Link As a former agency division head it worked like this (note: not all agencies work the same): ---Individuals submitted pictures / comp for representation; ---If not interested nothing happened (xmas filed) unless the person submitting provided a SASE for picture return; ---Upon being selected they were notified to come in for a meeting; ---They were told representation required geographic (market and surrounding area) exclusivity; ---Upon their acceptance a listing of qualified photographers was provided for them to contact for at minimum a usable headshot; ---Contact, photography payment, scheduling was left up to that individual...it showed if they were serious; ---Standard Procedure for headshots and individual portfolio work: Photographer would deliver a contact sheet to the agency for reviewing with the model; ---If a comp was provided and the model was accepted the agency requested a stack to get to clients. An agency sticker was placed on the comp for booking information; ---New and updated comps were continuously delivered to clients. The agency front line relationships were with Ad Agencies and Corporate Marketing/Creative department heads. Photographers, although important to have strong relationships, were not considered "front line" clients (most of those we worked with referred clients to the agency for bookings to avoid being in competition); ---Upon Model Request: Those on roster would be "pulled" by bookers per stats requested by clients and rates provided; ---Upon client interest a go-see might be arranged for portfolio viewing and assignment overview, or; ---Client booked model; ---Model completed assignment and client signed voucher; ---Voucher turned in to booker; booker approved and submitted to accounting, accounting sent bill, client paid bill, model received check (after the client paid) less agency commission; ---Next assignment... Bottom line...if a photographer chooses to "manage" models they then become agency competitors. An agency with an ever expanding and rotating roster will refer far more work than a few non-affiliated models seeking stardom. Jul 05 05 05:18 pm Link Joe, I want to clarify a little bit based on what you asked, since you asked it. "Manager" on OMP simply means, from their standpoint that you manage their portfolio, not necessarily really manage the model. If that's all you're doing and you do it from a standpoint to help them out great. Just so everyone is on the same page before reading this, some definitions: An agency is a person or organization that "obtains or attempts to obtain employment of artists." A manager is generally someone who gives career advice to a model, in exchange for a percentage fee, and in most cases markets that model to AGENCIES with whom that manager has relationships. A manager who is trying to get actual jobs for a model is acting as an agency whether they realize it or not. All of the states with major markets (New York, California, Texas and Florida) require that agencies be licensed by the state. All of these states have online resources where you can view whether or not an agency has a license. It is ILLEGAL to operate an agency (even in the guise of a manager) in any of these states. Texas and New York require that managers also be licensed. California and Florida do not. I'm not sure about the other states but in Texas you are required to have a surety bond in order to obtain a license. The amount is 10,000 and that bond will be held to pay if you lose a case in court brought about by the state for failure to operate under the state's guidelines. To see if an agency that contacts you (or manager in New York and Texas) is licensed, and therefore legal you can go to: California: http://www.dir.ca.gov/databases/dlselr/Talag.html Texas: http://www.license.state.tx.us/talent/talent.htm New York: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dca/html/034.html Florida: http://www.myflorida.com/dbpr/pro/talen … odes.shtml Good, bad, or indifferent the Internet has created a very large group of avid hobbiest that don't quite operate in the same way that traditional modeling does. There are a ton of amateur photographers who shoot online "portfolios" for models. While some of them are quite talented, they really lack the sort of direction necessary to actualy MARKET that model. They simply don't know what it is the agencies, casting & art directors, and production managers want to see. It's a cycle of ignorance perpetuating ignorance, and I don't place blame on anyone because most of the time it isn't intentional. A photographer signs up for OMP, Model Mayhem, Musecube, One Talent Source, etc (I'm not picking on any particular entity here, just posting a very broad generalization) and over time gets better and better, gets recognition from the online community (which has now become nothing more than 99% other amateurs) and then starts charging a fee for their services. At this point they have never had anyone in the business review their work and so while they may have progressed to a certain level of artistic and technical merit, they really STILL don't know what is expected of a model's portfolio and most don't know or even care what agencies want to see in a model and that they don't even need portfolios to get signed. Now, to flip back to the other side of the fence for a minute...this is all ok. Given ONE VERY BIG ASSUMPTION. Everyone involved in this sort of transaction NEEDS to know that that is the reality of the business they are in. However, since this hobbiest community has gotten so large, there is often a considerable amount of people who simply don't understand the modeling industry and mistake the hobbiest community for it. The reason I say there isn't a problem with this is that, for a hobbiest, the community is quite entertaining. Amateur models who have reached a certain level of Internet fame can charge a few hundred dollars per shoot and maybe even shoot once or twice a week. Mostly it's newer photographers who just need a warm body and are working on their online portfolio and sometimes it's small businesses who need a promotional type model who doesn't necessarily need to meet fashion or commercial print measurement requirements. The problem comes in when you have managers, photographers, models, or even modeling portfolio sites who in order to increase their profits perpetuate the false illusion that this is what a potential model NEEDS to do to get the exposure they need to become a model and eventually end up on the cover of . Agencies do not need and often do not even want "professional" photographs from potential talent. In almost every case they will have their submission guidelines listed on their website. If you want to verify that you can check the websites of Elite, Ford, Click, IMG, Next, DNA, or Kim Dawson. There are, at any given time, probablly less than 10 photographers in the entire world whos work is so "in demand" that they can shoot whatever the hell they want and get away with it. You won't find these people on OMP, Model Mayhem, Models.com, or Musecube...sorry. So that being said, before you pay ANYONE any money you should find out who has looked at their work. If their answer is anything other than giving you a list of agencies they've worked with or commercial tearsheets they probably (and maybe not even really their fault) do not actually know what you need for your book. If they do list agency references CALL THEM AND VERIFY. Is there a viable exception? Absolutely. If you BOTH know that you want pictures for an Internet Portfolio and you both understand that the number of real castings that come from these sites is very, very nominal, then great, bring a buddy in case the situation turns ugly and have fun, get some great pictures and go about your business. Andy Hamilton Photographer Oh, and lastly Joe...agencies don't "employ" model managers, really ever. Agencies generally get 20% commission off of any work they book for their talent. A manager generally gets 5%. The two are totally independent of each other. So, I hope what I said was of some value to you even though no one really meets the criteria of people you wanted to hear from. Hopefully by posting references to government run websites you'll see that I'm not just pulling this information out of thin air. Jul 05 05 05:26 pm Link Is 'BayArea Talent' legit? Just had a wonderful experience with them. Looks like kind of a wierd model collector deal. This gets more ridiculous every day. Jul 05 05 06:13 pm Link Posted by area291: Interesting. Is this the 10,000 foot view? Anyhow, thanks for sharing this outline. Please don't take the following personal, or sarcastic... Jul 05 05 08:05 pm Link Mr. Hamilton. Thanks for chiming in. Posted by A. H A M I L T O N: I believe that's where all the bone of contention comes from. The fields that allow a model to list a Photographer as a Manager/Agent. (I'm almost sorry it exists). Basically, I help when they ask, but not just in portfolio management. Here's one recent case. Model ordered business cards from [um-hm] back in January, hasn't received it yet, but wants to add a picture. Since she's in the slums of Paris and can't get to a reliable Internet connection, she's asked me to intervene and coordinate her request with [um-hm]. Clearly, that's "Office Manager" function with the Model being the boss, not the client. More examples. Model has "I'm fun-filled blah blah blah" type of descriptions on their main page. Since I have "Manager Access" to their ports, I can replace the description with something more eloquent (with their permission). Clearly, that action makes me "Model Manager" with Model as the client and not the boss, because I took the initiative. Posted by A. H A M I L T O N: No, I believe you, because I've done my reading last year on California's laws regarding Talent Agents and Agencies. Jul 05 05 08:29 pm Link Posted by Joe K. Perez: Posted by area291: Interesting. Is this the 10,000 foot view? Anyhow, thanks for sharing this outline. Please don't take the following personal, or sarcastic... That very same thought struck me as well, Joe. That industry overview sounded realistic and harsh at the same time. Jul 05 05 08:32 pm Link Entertainment is a harsh biz. Only place where you can be turned down for work due to "physical" beauty or lack there of Jul 05 05 09:20 pm Link Great observations... First, to JvR, yes it is harsh. Which will also help explain some of Joe's questions. ....."There is nothing in the list that emphasizes developing the model's skills, much less, managing her portfolio. There has to be a person at the Agency doing that. Who is this person?"..... A couple of different answers on that. Agency size has a lot to do with whether people function on singular or multi-function roles. Division Heads and bookers can work one in the same, or they can be totally separate personnel. Ideally each works hand in hand with the other in choosing those on the roster (the larger the agency the more the roles are separate). Neither work to develop model skills, each work to help build the strongest portfolio for the model...based on agency clientele. Model Training: Most of it is on the job. Agencies are more like employment agencies than they are schools. They don't have the time, other than preparing the basic "how to's" to spend teaching. It isn't practical nor in most cases it isn't necessary. Much of the training and skills is provided through direction on the set by photographers and creative directors. The primary difference between what happens on the street and that at the Internet level is communication and (keyword) purpose. Once the "purpose" of the shoot is "communicated" it is up to the model to convey the message. Those that do, and do it well, are models. Those not smart enough or can't focus are not. That is why it is so tough beyond just the physical requirements, as client level work is NOT about the model, it is about model skills by those with attributes. If the particular project is highly detailed, may require unusual props, make-up, locations, then part of that communication is provided during the go-see. The go-see is sometimes similar to an interview as much as it is about book viewing. I might also add that because of the intelligence required, the ability to embellish a product or service and the ability to communicate with clients, are the reasons models are paid a healthy hourly or day rate. It is never just about "pay me (x) per hour to take my picture" a common misconception and most often ill-placed worth on themselves by Internet based models. Most haven't, or can't prove their abilities to make the same bank. In fact, 9 out of 10 times a photographer pays more than $20 per hour (sans nude projects) they are better off making an agency contact for the project. Agencies like nothing more than new clients. Equal money spent for freelance will not book a ton more work down the road like a good agency contact...and giving them bookings is a great way to build the relationship. Jul 05 05 10:55 pm Link Posted by area291: That is just about the way it works...I worked for an agency - very large one at that - in Burbank and that was basically how the operation when on the stills side of the house...The only difference was that accounting cut checks every two weeks, so no matter, if you were working for them as a actor, voice over, childern dept. or stills, you got paid and the agency would go after the client if they did not pay. Jul 06 05 12:14 am Link Posted by Mike Brouwer: I've had my eye on them too and I agree, looks like a cookie cutter collector to me Jul 06 05 12:19 am Link This looks like a good place for the newmodels.com link. Jul 06 05 12:29 am Link First, Area291 (and why don't people use their names? This always confuses me.) has explained precisely how every major commercial agency works (or should work). There really isn't any "model development" done by the agency unless someone takes a personal interest in a model (and I'll leave you to figure that out). Editorial Fashion Agencies (the title is redundant, editorial is the operative term) do work a little differently within the new face division. This is where the confusion comes from. Understand, there is really a very limited number of true editorial agencies, and in this country they are almost exclusively located in New York. This is a no brainer, how many major editorial assignments are booked out of any other city? Yes I know, Biggie Famous Agency has an office in (name the city), but those offices are really commercial offices. They push the one or two real potential editorial models they might actually find on to the New York office for development. In New York they do "develop" models, however in the US today most agencies, even the bigs, rely primarily on models developed in Europe. Vogue had one cover in 2003 which featured actual models (as opposed to "celebrities" - gag me with a spoon), and that was the September issue. Nine "hot new faces" were on the cover (Gisele was on the cover, so I'll pass on "new", thank you). Not one (read this carefully) not one was an American. So much for new face development. For the vast majority of models it is important to understand how a commercial agency works, how to prepare yourself for them, and what requirements they expect you to meet. Reread Mr.(?) Area291 post earlier in this thread and you have a heads up on most people approaching the business. In fact his(?) follow up comments are also accurate and quite helpful. Wanna be "developed"? Be 16, 5'10, thin (momma wants to take you to the doctor thin), beautiful and unique (beauty alone is commercial), be prepared to "home school", and finally be willing to run away to join the circus for the unusually small chance you might actually grab the gold ring which is high end fashion. For everyone else, read area291 and make due as best you can. John PS: For those interested, the models on the above mentioned American Vogue cover were: Gisele Bundchen (Brazil), Daria Werbowy (Ukraine), Karolina Kurkova (Czech), Gemma Ward (Australia), Hanna Soukupova (Czech), Isabeli Fontana (Brazil), Natalia Vodianova (Russia), Liya Kebede (Ethiopia), and Karen Elson (Great Britain). PPS: Mr. Hamilton, US Agencies typically make 40% from a booking (not 20%), although they sometimes settle for less. Really, ask Area291. Also, in Florida anyone can ask someone to manage (advise) them, and they can agree to pay that person. Managing may, or may not, include seeking offers of employment. In Florida, a manager (advisor) may not seek offers of employment for the model unless they are licensed: (1) "Talent agency" means any person who, for compensation, engages in the occupation or business of procuring or attempting to procure engagements for an artist." -- John Fisher 900 West Avenue, Suite 423 Miami Beach, Florida 33139 305 244-8477 http://www.johnfisher.com Jul 06 05 12:49 am Link Geez John, it's about time you started posting. Jul 06 05 12:58 am Link Posted by Glamour Studio /Gary: I second that Gary. And, for area291, Doug and Hamilton as well. Jul 06 05 02:43 am Link John, Area291 and A. Hamilton, Thank you very much for responding to this post. IMO, I have never come across anything, anywhere on the Internet, on Usenet, OMP, or on MM, that rivals what you have written. You presented it in an entirely different way (10,000 ft view?), that's very revealing and highly educational to the ENTIRE community. It's one thing to say, "Let's get on the same page", and quite another thing to actually do it as a community everywhere. I have a very strong suspicion that people are walking away with something tangible, yet elusive from this thread, but with a lot more food for thought than before. I'd like to highlight a paragraph that area291 wrote: Model Training: Most of it is on the job. Agencies are more like employment agencies than they are schools. They don't have the time, other than preparing the basic "how to's" to spend teaching. It isn't practical nor in most cases it isn't necessary. Also, a paragraph by A. Hamilton: Good, bad, or indifferent the Internet has created a very large group of avid hobbiest that don't quite operate in the same way that traditional modeling does. There are a ton of amateur photographers who shoot online "portfolios" for models. While some of them are quite talented, they really lack the sort of direction necessary to actualy MARKET that model. They simply don't know what it is the agencies, casting & art directors, and production managers want to see. Lastly, a PPS to A. Hamilton from John Fisher: PPS: Mr. Hamilton, US Agencies typically make 40% from a booking (not 20%), although they sometimes settle for less. Really, ask Area291. Also, in Florida anyone can ask someone to manage (advise) them, and they can agree to pay that person. Managing may, or may not, include seeking offers of employment. In Florida, a manager (advisor) may not seek offers of employment for the model unless they are licensed: (1) "Talent agency" means any person who, for compensation, engages in the occupation or business of procuring or attempting to procure engagements for an artist." Gentlemen, I believe we have a great opportunity here to begin to get people on the same page. This is what I take away from those three quoted paragraphs: 1) That every experienced Photographer with a presence on the Internet and a background with the agencies agree that a large percentage of Portfolio hosting communities are comprised of hobbiests, talented amateurs and extremely talented amateurs who don't have the benefit of Agency guidance and direction. Is it safe to say hobbyists are a large majority on the Internet. Many of them are aspiring to be successful Freelancers, or Commercial Pros. 2) Same communities also have their share of Photographers who pose, or aspire to be Model Managers. Many of them unsure what is the dividing line between Manager and Agent. Many of them are not even aware, or experienced with the business end of it. Many are operating in ignorance of the laws, without guidance, or in worse case, operating unscrupulously. Your posts have given me new inspiration. I believe with just a little bit of effort, many in the freelance division of the community, working in tandem with the Agencies, can develop a connection with agencies all over the world and fill the huge gaping hole in the Model Development and Management area. As Mr. Hamilton pointed out, the two worlds (brick-n-mortar versus freelance, i.e. hobbiest community), are out-of-sync, i.e. two wheels on a bicycle (the Internet) rotating in opposite directions. Developing the right kind of link between the Agency and Freelance world, just might make things work cohesively. What's it going to look like with the two worlds in sync? How are we going to get them in sync? Do we want to get them in sync? What are the pros and cons? I hope that over time, many more of us can begin to flush out the answers to these questions. I believe they are important. Where are the influential people, the decision makers that sit on a governance committee for the Industry? Is there such a thing? Shouldn't they be the ones deciding on and implementing a direction for the entire world community of Models and Photographers? Maybe, if one existed, maybe they should. However, I suspect their discussions to be even more high level than the ones we're conducting down here. So, what's our role in all this? What can we do? What do people normally do when they find themselves sitting on opposite sides of the bay? BUILD BRIDGES. So, let's go build us some bridges ya'll. You up to it? Jul 06 05 02:44 am Link Posted by John Fisher: He was talking about 20% of the modeling fee, and John is saying 40% because he's adding the 20% they also tack on to the client and getting 40, but that's not the right math. It's sort of semantic in a way I guess, but in reality they set rates according to the usage and type of shots, and whatever the modeling fee ends up being according to the hourly rate or however they've figured it according to usage, they take 20% of that figure from the model, but they also charge the client a 20% fee of whatever that final figure was. Jul 06 05 05:28 am Link Yep, I'm up to it. Let's go!  Z Posted by Joe K. Perez: Jul 06 05 07:09 am Link Posted by Joe K. Perez: but... ugh... sigh... I don't have the engergy I guess... start by defining what you think you mean and what you hope to achieve... There are still things you're not grasping... how can you build a better moustrap when you don't understand the workings of the old one or what it's purpose is? What isn't working about the old one or what about it needs improving? Jul 06 05 07:24 am Link Joe, While I understand where you're coming from, I'm not sure bridges need to be built. Those models and photographers who want to play in the moneyed crowd will have to learn those ropes or be plain lucky, same as with any other business. I also fail to see why agencies, the real ones, would want to build bridges, unless they're not busy enough or not making enough money because they lack the models. I do think there is a role for developing models, but I'm not sure there is a business there, since models typically have little money until they are successful. Jul 06 05 08:35 am Link In NJ, To be a Talent Agency or a Talent Manager, you need to be licensed, and bonded. However, the term manager is arbitrary. If I collect Money from the Client then pay the model, I am a Talent Manager. If the model collects the money and pays me on her own, I am a Personal Manager (no need for license) If the model gives me limited POA to manage her career, including the collection of money, I also do not need a license. Just some food for thought there. Jul 06 05 08:52 am Link Thank you, John (et al) for giving confirmation to what I wrote. The modeling industry is not that much different from other business disciplines, many of the decisions and procedures are based on logic in order to keep the doors open. What many do not understand on entry, is this is first and foremost a business. But it is also a business entertained by many hobbyists. The hobbyist motives are entirely different, thus decisions, following procedures and motivations are often not predicated on logic. The most glaring differences that come to mind are the act of barter for development and "management" of individuals not qualified to do so. Barter is far too often seen as a means to an end...do enough TFP and expect payment based on those dues, which is contrary to actual client work giving rise to professional level acceptance. Management is a total and distinct business discipline. Logic dictates it is far too difficult to become an expert in the areas of photography AND model management without one taking a hit. Given the falloff choice, which will the photographer choose? In trying to provide an answer to the following questions by Joe: -------------- What's it going to look like with the two worlds in sync? How are we going to get them in sync? Do we want to get them in sync? What are the pros and cons? -------------- There really are no "across the board" answers, it is up to each individual. As the motivations are entirely different for those entering the industry on a professional or hobbyist level, rules and standards that apply to one have no meaning for the other. Not to re-route the discussion to these areas, but things like TFP, freely handing over full hi-res files and shooting without purpose other than emotional feelings brought by working with pretty subjects are not a twain shall meet in the hobbyist vs. professional world landscapes. The only true answer is being beholden to oneself by working toward fulfilling personal motivation. If that is professional, do the things required. If it's being a hobbyist do entirely what you want. But the important thing to keep in mind is, by straddling the fence it places one in the uncomfortable position of conflict between procedure and logic. It also defines the difference between work and play... Jul 06 05 08:59 am Link Since not many Models have chimed in on any of the threads in volving this matter. It seams to me they are sitting back and reading with interest whats being talked about. Perhaps affraid to not wanting to be out casted or affraid to say How wonderfull their manager is. Or is Not. I myself will say this on this topic. Model baby sitters Especially the ones on omp. And I am now seeing it here as well. Need to find a differant hobby. Collecting models to manage for the most part is an Ego booster nothing more. Reading Omp's or any other websites casting calls and calling a model and tell her. Hi Honey I think I have a job that might be good for you. What do you think? Does Nothing for the model. She can do the same thing herself. Except she don't have to call herself and ask what she thinks. FYI omp's casting calls are 85-95 % outdated by the time they send them out. Meaning the job allready has been filled. I am not slamming omp just stating facts. I know REAL casting agencys in LA. Who get calls on a daily basis from movie and advertizment companys in need of Models. IE REAL work. No I don't manage models. Do I try and help them YES. But I am realist I tell them WHERE to go look for work. I don't need Boost my ego and call them and puff them up for no reason. I got an email from a model and she said she wished to work with me. She had 2 useless photos on her port. She said if I wanted to work with her, contact her Manager. I send her an email back stating if your 24 years old and YOU contacted me but your telling me to contact your manager tells me that. A. Your Unsure about how the business operates. B. Your not really modeling C. You are not really up to the task of deciding what job is correct for you. So when your Looking to work with a photographer on your own free will, but then refer the person to your manager says alot about your unsureness on being a model. Contact when you gain some experiance. If the Models reading this and other threads need advise ask away. I will give a Straight answer and NO I don't need to be a model manager. In closing if your Manager is NOT making you $$$$$ then whats your point of having one? Secondly go find a BONDED REAL AGENCY one you can WALK in the front door to and say Hi my name is Jill. What kind of positions do you have that I may be good for. And prepair to get payed and get a 1099. Jul 06 05 09:29 am Link You guys have done an over all excellent job with this thread - it's very impressive. One of the most accurate informative threads I have seen! Jul 06 05 10:19 am Link What I find hilarious is that I mentioned John a couple of times in reference to some things (we go back a few years). Once was about his writings on the industry that I linked to. A couple of people here started slamming me saying his writings were stupid and his work sucked. Where are they now? Jul 06 05 11:09 am Link Gary, I have no idea who John is, but since he held confirmation to what I wrote as personal knowledge (rather than slamming me as some might think to do through their own speculation) I have taken note on what he writes is probably credible. The credibility is not just because he agreed with me but he seemed to understand an equal (and probably greater) familiarity of the industry. The "where are they now" folks are busy shooting one hit wonders like the Knaack, living off their one big shoot touting their only star model, mamamama myyyyyyyyyyy Sharona! Jul 06 05 11:29 am Link Posted by Joe K. Perez: Posted by Glamour Studio /Gary: I second that Gary. And, for area291, Doug and Hamilton as well. Dam! You mean my big mouth hasn't been active enough? Jul 06 05 12:45 pm Link Posted by Joe K. Perez: Just a couple of thoughts/comments....First, the part about the agencies not having time...That is so dam true!! You have no idea the flurry/fury in which these people are running around, answering two phones at once and five to ten lines waiting with people tapping their foot on the floor in aggravation, thinking they are more important than the other...It's a zoo! Second, as much as I like the idea of building a bridge with common sense ground rules and properly written/agreed upon "process and proceedures", it would be a unbelievable battle amongst the masses. Jul 06 05 12:59 pm Link Posted by Doug Harvey: Posted by Joe K. Perez: Just a couple of thoughts/comments....First, the part about the agencies not having time...That is so dam true!! You have no idea the flurry/fury in which these people are running around, answering two phones at once and five to ten lines waiting with people tapping their foot on the floor in aggravation, thinking they are more important than the other...It's a zoo! Second, as much as I like the idea of building a bridge with common sense ground rules and properly written/agreed upon "process and proceedures", it would be a unbelievable battle amongst the masses. Thanks to what's been written in this thread (and I hope there's more yet to come!), I've been putting a lot of thought on some new things I could try to to get going on my end. Things that I will want to keep you all abreast of. I hope this thread doesn't disappear into the ozone. Jul 06 05 02:54 pm Link Posted by Joe K. Perez: I'd like to recant what I wrote above. It's always worth it when one can help a friend out. I wrote that the other day when I had an exasperating split second moment. Jul 06 05 02:59 pm Link Cool, Zoe. *thumbs up* Posted by Zoe: Posted by Joe K. Perez: Jul 06 05 03:01 pm Link Posted by Aaron_H: Posted by Joe K. Perez: but... ugh... sigh... I don't have the engergy I guess... start by defining what you think you mean and what you hope to achieve... There are still things you're not grasping... how can you build a better moustrap when you don't understand the workings of the old one or what it's purpose is? What isn't working about the old one or what about it needs improving? I read you loud and clear Aaron. It's going to require some thinking, more clarification, timing, connecting with people and communicating results back here. Then, people will have to buy into it if they think it's a worthwhile cause. Jul 06 05 03:04 pm Link Posted by JvR: Reads you loud and clear. I have to venture out and try to connect with some key people at the agencies and try to convince them into some discussion about some possibilities. Maybe, they'll laugh, maybe, they won't. I won't know until I've tried. I want to use this thread as a printed frame of reference and give them a link to it as well. Maybe, something will "click" in their heads as well. Jul 06 05 03:11 pm Link Just wanted to let you know that I'm soaking in what you've written. Thanks. Posted by area291: Jul 06 05 03:13 pm Link thanks, Joe.  well, i *AM* an engineer, after all. but i work on weapons (aircraft) not targets (bridges). Z Jul 06 05 03:17 pm Link Joe...I would be happy to help in any way that I can, but I warn you, I am a real stickler for "process and proceedures". I know it stems from being a network engineer of 23 yrs, but in all the times that I have gone in to fight a battle of bastardized networks, all the top level management always gave me the green light on writting a process and proceedures manual and they (top level management) would enforce it. That never did sit well with the folks that were already there, but, it was my way of getting a company network fixed/updated and working corectly. Also, a thought came to my scattered brain about "Film Commisions". I belong to several of them and their primary mission is to bridge the gap between vendors, crew, talent, writters, location scouts, etc. and the bigger players in media districts...So just as a thought, if we, as a collective group, were to act in the same capacity, then I think we would not face the mass opposition of change. Jul 06 05 05:41 pm Link Hi Zoe,....I am an engineer also. I did speak earlier but eveidently it was not valid in any way shape or form for this thread but I still stand by my statements particularly the one about the change from net user to net savvy in the lead roles. Jul 06 05 07:16 pm Link |
