Julie Montana wrote:
Thats always a hard subject. I believe each shoot will determine who is paid or if its a mutual agreement, maybe TFP is best. I am one who isnt in this to get rich, I do it for the love of the art. But I do know as well as anyone each party (photog& Model ) Put out alot of expense.
       I see both sides and I really know it takes two to make a great image. I do see how much work a photog has to do, so i respect that and understand all they do. Some models dont put out enough effort in my opinion as far as buying outfits, paying for travel ect. So in that case I really feel the photog has the upper hand. As I said I do it for the love of it and the joy it brings me. I put out 100 % in effort, outfits makeup and travel. So many are in this just for money, and thats
       great if they can do it. But for me the enjoyment from a shoot and the outcome are key. Julie

If more folks had Julie's attitude and approach to this thing we called "creative photography" we would probably all be a lot happier.  Words well spoken as always... good to see you on the forums.

Carl Nielsen wrote:
Photgraphers don't pay models. The Photographers client does.

Spoken like a commercial photographer, one who typically gets hired by a paying client before the exposures are made.

What about photographic artists, who create "art" that is to be sold in galleries?  There is no "client" that is hiring the photographer; there are only patrons after the fact.

What about stock photographers, who create images that are perhaps sold afterwards?

My rule of thumb is that the party who gets to retain the copyright probably should be compensating the other parties involved.

Looknsee Photography wrote:
My rule of thumb is that the party who gets to retain the copyright probably should be compensating the other parties involved.

The photographer almost always retains the copyright, in commercial, artistic, "testing", commissioned shoots, and TFPs.  That is true regardless of who is paying.  You can have that "rule of thumb" all you want, but the industry doesn't work that way.

Carl Nielsen wrote:
Photgraphers don't pay models. The Photographers client does.

I pay models for shoots when I want the look of that model in my portfolio. It's really a simple rule (at least for me).....pay for what you need.....get paid for what you don't.

Julie Montana wrote:
Thats always a hard subject. I believe each shoot will determine who is paid or if its a mutual agreement, maybe TFP is best. I am one who isnt in this to get rich, I do it for the love of the art. But I do know as well as anyone each party (photog& Model ) Put out alot of expense.
       I see both sides and I really know it takes two to make a great image. I do see how much work a photog has to do, so i respect that and understand all they do. Some models dont put out enough effort in my opinion as far as buying outfits, paying for travel ect. So in that case I really feel the photog has the upper hand. As I said I do it for the love of it and the joy it brings me. I put out 100 % in effort, outfits makeup and travel. So many are in this just for money, and thats
       great if they can do it. But for me the enjoyment from a shoot and the outcome are key. Julie

TXPhotog wrote:
The photographer almost always retains the copyright, in commercial, artistic, "testing", commissioned shoots, and TFPs.  That is true regardless of who is paying.  You can have that "rule of thumb" all you want, but the industry doesn't work that way.

First, your tone is inappropriate.

Second, my point is that not all photographers are participants in this "industry", as you seem to define it.  Some photographers are for hire & earn their living by being hired to produce photographs that meet their clients' needs.  In that case, it seems perfectly fine to me for that client to compensate the photographer, model, MUA, location, etc.  But other photographers are working artists, making images that satisfy their own personal vision.  Some of these artists can support themselves by selling prints at galleries or perhaps by licensing them after the fact.  These photographers seem to fall outside your definition of "the industry".  Are you suggesting that models who pose for these photographers don't deserve compensation?

Brian Diaz wrote:
The client pays.  Always.

Sometimes, the client is also the photographer.  Sometimes the client is also the model.

It depends on who needs the images most.



And it's "whom".

Nicely put, Brian! I've never seen it said more clearly and economically. I would have said exactly the same thing -- except I would have needed fourteen paragraphs to say it. . . .

Paul