Chris Ambler wrote:
Yeah, it happened again.


Word to you "Internet managers:" Wise-up. You may be able to squeeze out a few bucks from random amateurs, but all you're doing is pissing off those of us who are trying to do professional work. And, in a case like this, where what's being offered is clearly of value to everyone, you're pissing away the chances of any "model" naive enough to put her fate in your hands.

Anytime I see there's a "manager" in a "model's" profile/page I pass it up because it tells me this is a "Wanna Be"...

I wonder how many "models" ever understand that these guys probably are the major reason they don't get anywhere....

As far as I am concerned, the word "Manager" is a red flag...=*^)

If they're good enough they'll be represented by a *reputable* agency...

Chris Ambler wrote:
So I'm just ranting here as a form of catharsis, even though I'm terribly tempted to email her again and copy her "manager" and explain, in painful detail, what an asshat he is for teaching her to do this, and how she's ruining any chance, however small, she may have had to make a name for herself in this market.

Word to you "Internet managers:" Wise-up. You may be able to squeeze out a few bucks from random amateurs, but all you're doing is pissing off those of us who are trying to do professional work. And, in a case like this, where what's being offered is clearly of value to everyone, you're pissing away the chances of any "model" naive enough to put her fate in your hands.

Chris:
I've seen your work here, and followed some of what you have done via LJ communities and OMP. Definately, HER loss. The managers are usually too stupid to realize their ignorance. If they did their homework, they would realize the chance they are missing. The email would make you feel better, but would fall on deaf ears.

Philip of Dallas wrote:
The success of a photo shoot is inversely proportional to the number of people involved.

Really? So I should fire my assistant and never have stylists on the set? :-)

(calm down, just kidding - I know what you meant)

Merlyn_Magic Photo wrote:

Chris:
I've seen your work here, and followed some of what you have done via LJ communities and OMP. Definately, HER loss. The managers are usually too stupid to realize their ignorance. If they did their homework, they would realize the chance they are missing. The email would make you feel better, but would fall on deaf ears.

IMO, and maybe it must be a east coast/west coast thing, cuz i certainly didnt really see anything in the OP's port that would lead me to beleive a model was 'missing any chances' by not working with them.

im just saying, i hear where the OP is coming from with respect to the problem, but a "Bob Coulter" he is not.

Chris Ambler wrote:
Craig, this is ongoing - the feature is going to release two sets per week, so there's no huge hurry. Yes, the shoot is clearly marked as trade. Everything that's been posted has referred models to http://hotshots.northwestvixens.com which makes it really clear, and when they sign up, they get an email that's quite detailed about it all. So there's no chance of any misunderstanding. As for the financial arrangements, it wouldn't be appropriate for me to talk about that. The idea was the station's - they had a problem with the previous attempt and I suggested how it could be done properly. Of course, the response was along the lines of, "Okay, smartass, if you can make it work, do it. What do you want?"

I thought about double-booking, but to be honest, I've had extremely few no-shows, and having both models show up at the same time would be embarrassing, at best.

I'm doing six shoots per weekend right now, fri/sat/sun, two each. Once I power through the initial set of signups, things will slow down a bit.

As for the models I know personally, many of them want to be featured and I've already got enough material, so we've decided to schedule new shoots in about a month when I get logo gear from the show.

It's all about new faces, though, as well as the usual ones. It's also about what Joe Sixpack is going to find appealing, so a lot of the local retro/pinup/alternative models aren't really interested or suitable.

I have no idea if I was talking to her or her "manager," to be truthful. In email, how can one be sure? My guess is that it was her, but that's just a guess.

Sorry Chris, your website does not make it very clear. I see where you don't charge them but I see nothing that would discourage somone asking you to cover expenses.   Please show me where you think that a trade deal is clear.

From your page:
We’re shooting classy, sexy glamour sets for KISW's The BJ Shea Morning Experience's  all-new Hot Shots feature. This is an ongoing project that we will be shooting all summer long, as we release two sets per week.

Selected sets will appear on the show's web site and will be limited to lingerie and sexy glamour with no nudity - think Maxim-style.

All selected sets will be featured on the Northwest Vixens site as well, and may contain a link and small banner to the model's online web site or portfolio. The best five-to-eight shots will appear on the BJ Shea web site with a link back to the NWV portfolio. In short, it's fantastic exposure and a lot of fun.

And if you're not a professional model, or even a hobbyist, all the better! You'll receive a copy of your best shots to show off your professional photo shoot. Our photographers regularly work with new models and will teach you everything you need to know - and the shoot is completely free.

Mike Cummings wrote:
Sorry Chris, your website does not make it very clear. I see where you don't charge them but I see nothing that would discourage somone asking you to cover expenses.   Please show me where you think that a trade deal is clear.

From that web site, perhaps - I make it clear that there is no cost involved. Once they express and interest, however, they get a somewhat lengthy email that explains the entire process, including wardrobe, makeup, genre limitations (e.g. no nudity allowed), and the fact that it's a trade shoot (and, for non-models, what that means).

It's pedantically covered.

In this case, the model even prefaced her email by saying that she knew it was a trade shoot, but was going to ask anyway, and then cancelled when I politely told her no.

If you're seriously curious, drop me an email and I'll send you the email the models get so you can see for yourself.

As for the person who felt the need to post and say that I'm not that great a photographer, I thank you for your honesty. I'm not even close to being a decent photographer, much less great. Yet I love what I do, I do reasonably well at it, and I go to sleep with a smile on my face every night. And that's all that matters.

Patrick Walberg wrote:
Chris, "Can I have some money!"

I'll pay you $1.98 to come up here to Seattle and wash my car :-)

Chris Ambler wrote:

From that web site, perhaps - I make it clear that there is no cost involved. Once they express and interest, however, they get a somewhat lengthy email that explains the entire process, including wardrobe, makeup, genre limitations (e.g. no nudity allowed), and the fact that it's a trade shoot (and, for non-models, what that means).

It's pedantically covered.

In this case, the model even prefaced her email by saying that she knew it was a trade shoot, but was going to ask anyway, and then cancelled when I politely told her no.

If you're seriously curious, drop me an email and I'll send you the email the models get so you can see for yourself.

As for the person who felt the need to post and say that I'm not that great a photographer, I thank you for your honesty. I'm not even close to being a decent photographer, much less great. Yet I love what I do, I do reasonably well at it, and I go to sleep with a smile on my face every night. And that's all that matters.

Shot you a PM.

Chris Ambler wrote:
As for the person who felt the need to post and say that I'm not that great a photographer, I thank you for your honesty. I'm not even close to being a decent photographer, much less great. Yet I love what I do, I do reasonably well at it, and I go to sleep with a smile on my face every night. And that's all that matters.

i didnt feel the 'need' to post that, but the point i wanted to make, it appeared that you were placing most of the blame for models asking for additional compensation instead of doing your gig TFP and 'for great exposure' on their 'alleged' managers/boyfriends' erroroneous manipulation. and how they were missing a great opportunity (i think someone else said that actually)

and i felt that was totally the wrong place to point the finger

i wanted to point out it was probably not the case, because i could very easily see a top hot model's girlfriend, mom, brother, another photog she worked with, a stranger walking on the street, saying the same thing after looking over the level of girls/work in your present portfolio.

it happens to all of us, its no big deal

recently during the 2006 Olympus NYC fashion week i asked penthouse pet of the year, tera patricks to consider walking the runway for a new designer friend of mine TFP/exposure, she said no, she wanted $10K plus expenses (suite at the mandarin oriental, first class r/t airfare, and a 24 hour limo available) that wasnt in his budget, had it been, his show would have been front page news that week.

in october of 2005, i asked pamela anderson lee to work on my 'Sin City' chopper motorcycle shoot TFP, she said no, but her people said she would do it for $65K, well that wasnt in the budget me and the fashion designer had come up with.

we didnt run around blaming their managers for their refusal to work TFP for myself or any of the designers, we realize we arent at that level yet

Leonard Gee Photography wrote:
Sometimes I suspect it's a scam - or reverse scam? Maybe brain malfunction?

I e-mail a model for trade, test, TFP. That was kind of plain and simple - included in subject line, and body. She agreed and I send her a confirmation that we will do a TFP. Again a reply, "Great, call me to schedule".

Called her, "Hi this is Leonard, I e-mail you about TFP, trade?" "Great", she said and we setup a date. I called her the day before, "Are we OK?". She says "Yah, how much are you paying for the session?"

One guess how many times I've use her, no fair cheating.

Maybe it’s because I’m a new photographer, but I’ve never had this happen to me.

Craig Thomson wrote:

Maybe it’s because I’m a new photographer, but I’ve never had this happen to me.

Just give me the word, and I can give you her contact info!

PLEASE NOTE: I am not a lawyer - this post is for information only. You may not construde this post as a recommendation or a warranty of performance or eligibility. If quoted, I will flatly deny it.

theda wrote:
Exposure usually isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

Still, she should have realized that long before she tried booking the shoot.

Well, it depends. For a lot of the locals who want to be involved in local promotions, exposure on the radio show's site is actually quite valuable. It leads to name recognition among show producers and can also lead to appearances at events. If that's where they want to be, it's invaluable.

If not, yes, it's reasonably worthless - it all depends on where they want to go.

Chris Ambler wrote:
Chili, I believe you are missing the point.

This isn't a case of a model turning down a trade shoot because there was no compensation.

This is a case of a model ASKING ME to be included in this shoot, acknowledging and agreeing that it was a trade shoot, planning and scheduling the trade shoot, and then, less than 24 hours before the scheduled date, informing me that she would need money or she would cancel.

I politely refused and she cancelled.

Your misinterpretation of the facts here is certainly my fault for not being clear enough. I'm hardly the person to insist that models should fall over themselves to shoot trade with me.

On the other hand, the exposure of this project for locals is quite considerable for those who don't have that kind of exposure yet, which appears to be evidenced by the fact that I have a backlog of 32 models wanting to shoot for the radio station's web site.

I must be damned lucky because, as you quite correctly pointed out, I'm surely not that good.

Again, thank you for your frank honesty.

you are correct, i may have missed the part about her first agreeing, then having a change of heart, that wouldnt be cool, and i'd be rather perturbed, my mistake

but again, for clarity sake, is the backlog of 32 models, actually 32 'aspiring' local wanna be girls? so to say they are all bonafide legit 'models' could be a stretch? right?

oh, i also wanted to clarify Pamela Anderson Lee's position, she's not a money hungry whore, she was actually going to do the Sin City shoot TFP on the condition we 'donated' one of the $65,000 custom choppers after the shoot to PETA for their annual hollywood auction, so her heart was in the right place, and i still luv pam.

im not making a judgement on your photographer abiltities/skills, it was more a judgement on your subjects and overall themes. a creative director, casting director and a stylist go a long way towards making a photographer look good

Chili wrote:

i didnt feel the 'need' to post that, but the point i wanted to make, it appeared that you were placing most of the blame for models asking for additional compensation instead of doing your gig TFP and 'for great exposure' on their 'alleged' managers/boyfriends' erroroneous manipulation. and how they were missing a great opportunity (i think someone else said that actually)

and i felt that was totally the wrong place to point the finger

i wanted to point out it was probably not the case, because i could very easily see a top hot model's girlfriend, mom, brother, another photog she worked with, a stranger walking on the street, saying the same thing after looking over the level of girls/work in your present portfolio.

it happens to all of us, its no big deal

recently during the 2006 Olympus NYC fashion week i asked penthouse pet of the year, tera patricks to consider walking the runway for a new designer friend of mine TFP/exposure, she said no, she wanted $10K plus expenses (suite at the mandarin oriental, first class r/t airfare, and a 24 hour limo available) that wasnt in his budget, had it been, his show would have been front page news that week.

in october of 2005, i asked pamela anderson lee to work on my 'Sin City' chopper motorcycle shoot TFP, she said no, but her people said she would do it for $65K, well that wasnt in the budget me and the fashion designer had come up with.

we didnt run around blaming their managers for their refusal to work TFP for myself or any of the designers, we realize we arent at that level yet

Yes, but Tera and Pamela are actresses first and foremost and have (real) agents and managers. Models, in general have agents. Most of the I-models that say they have managers really have b/fs, mom/dads, their 1st photographer as their manager.

Vito wrote:

Yes, but Tera and Pamela are actresses first and foremost and have (real) agents and managers. Models, in general have agents. Most of the I-models that say they have managers really have b/fs, mom/dads, their 1st photographer as their manager.

ah actually Tera was a model, for penthouse first, before she became an adult film actress, and her only manager is her husband LOL, adult film star 'spyder jonez', you might remember him from the early 90s, when he was 'evan seinfield' lead singer of biohazard. and having her B/F and now husband as her manager has really paid off, as he is a brillant negotiator, so there is hope to all of you other models out there who have B/F's as managers LOL