Model
TheArchon
Posts: 183
Pemberton, New Jersey, US
I joined this site, because I was led to believe that here, a model could post a profile with a portfolio, and have the possibility of finding work.
TFP...TFCD...Great to build a portfolio, and as it happens; something I will accept, because it is something I need. Once that is obtained, is there ANY chance I will find gainful ($) work as a model if all I accept after that is the green stuff? I'm beginning to think that I will not.
I am freelance. I prefer to be paid. What for? My time? No. Not for my time. I prefer to be paid to allow images of me to be posted, photoshopped, sold, bought, used, and re-used any way that the paying photographer see fit. Many photographers I've looked at here, seem to think that they are doing models a supreme colossal mega favor by shooting them, and that they are above paying their models $ for service rendered. Yes, it is a privelege to work with good photographers.
But what makes a good photographer is being able to sell their art, after paying their model the fee to BE ALLOWED to sell the images. TFP is a good idea, but it won't pay my rent.
If I put "will only accept monetary compensation" on my profile, how many of you photographers would make it past that, and even bother to have a look at the pics I've posted? I'm willing to bet that not many of you would.
Model
e-string
Posts: 24002
Kansas City, Missouri, US
A photographer doesn't have to pay a model in order to be able to sell the images. The photographer owns the images (and can do just about anything with them) unless there is a part of the release that says otherwise, and that is VERY rare. Just thought I'd clear that up.
I mostly do paid work, but I don't say in my profile that it's all I'll do, because that would probably get me less offers and because every once in a while, a special case comes along. It helps to show that you're open-minded and that you realize you could benefit from the occasional TFP shoot with a very talented photographer who will get you something your portfolio needs.
Photographer
Michael J
Posts: 474
Rustburg, Virginia, US
e-string wrote:
I mostly do paid work, but I don't say in my profile that it's all I'll do, because that would probably get me less offers and because every once in a while, a special case comes along. It helps to show that you're open-minded and that you realize you could benefit from the occasional TFP shoot with a very talented photographer who will get you something your portfolio needs. I don't know about other photographers here, but if something was sold from a TFCD shoot that I had done, I would be the first one to contact the model and offer her compensation/cut of what was gained from that. It is only fair for both of us to share in what was brought in from the creativity that we were both a part of.
Photographer
CLT
Posts: 12979
Winchester, Virginia, US
TheArchon wrote:
But what makes a good photographer is being able to sell their art. Bold statement. But I do not agree. Talent in photography has little to do with skill in marketing. Making and selling are seperate arenas. True artists don't sell their works.
And to answer your question, if I see "paid assignment only", I might still look at your portfolio, just to see if you're worth it. But I more likely, I'd just go for that Back button on my browser.
Photographer
f4 Photo
Posts: 96
Morristown, New Jersey, US
e-string wrote:
A photographer doesn't have to pay a model in order to be able to sell the images. The photographer owns the images (and can do just about anything with them) unless there is a part of the release that says otherwise, and that is VERY rare. That's absolutely not true. Without a release the photographer cannot legally sell any image for commercial use (or even give them away for commercial use).
The images could be used for editorial purposes (though any magazine editor with more than one brain cell will ask for a release anyway). They could be used for art display (though that has been challenged in court more than once). They could be used in the photograper's personal portfolio.
The photographer does indeed own the copyright on the images, but that does NOT give him (or her) the right to do anything he or she wants with them.
Without a written release, the model has NO rights to the images. None. She can probably get away with using them in her print portfolio, but technically she can't even use them in her online portfolio (see DMCA - Digital Millemium Copyright Act).
Can you make money as a model from work you get on the Internet? Sure. It's possible. Can you make a living? That's less likely. Will you get rich? Almost certainly not.
For the average model who gets work off the internet, it's probably better to really enjoy what you do and think of it as more of a hobby than a career. Judging by the number of "no shows" and "flake out" complains you see, that appears to be the attitude of most internet models anyway.
Model
Tiia Secor
Posts: 190
Salt Lake City, Utah, US
Photographer
Mark
Posts: 2978
New York, New York, US
Unfortunately you have a terrible portfolio and have little to offer in the way of a fashion/commercial model IMHO.
Dont expect much or any paid work and just enjoy your time working with some photographers.
Mark
Model
TheArchon
Posts: 183
Pemberton, New Jersey, US
I see both points. Perhaps I can clarify:
My own profile says that I am flexible enough to accept ANY arrangement. The variable factor would be the idea of the shoot, itself. The larger majority of "professional" photographers do what they do to make money. My own preference is to be paid in lump sum, rather than "you'll get paid if it sells"
If a photographer pays me $(X-amount), then triples that number in sales of the pictures, I'm happy with that. If the amount that I would have recieved exceeds the amount I asked for up front, so be it. I am happy for the photographer. He made his money from it, and I still got paid. I am not saying I always get paid. I've done shoots at no charge whatsoever, and accepted one single print as a memento of the shoot, at the photographer's insistance. True; photographers do, to a certain degree, retain ownership of the prints. My standing is that once I'm paid, you can do whatever you want with them. In the unlikely event that a photographer makes millions off of my prints, I wouldn't come knocking on his/her door saying "where's the rest of my money?". If I don't get paid in some way for images of me, then the one who decides where, when and how those images are used is ME. Ownership? Fine. The photographer owns them. Don't sell them, unless the right to do so was bought from me with some medium of compensation. That's all I'm trying to say.
Photographer
Vito
Posts: 4582
Brooklyn, New York, US
f4 Photo wrote:
That's absolutely not true. Without a release the photographer cannot legally sell any image for commercial use (or even give them away for commercial use).
The images could be used for editorial purposes (though any magazine editor with more than one brain cell will ask for a release anyway). They could be used for art display (though that has been challenged in court more than once). They could be used in the photograper's personal portfolio.
The photographer does indeed own the copyright on the images, but that does NOT give him (or her) the right to do anything he or she wants with them.
Without a written release, the model has NO rights to the images. None. She can probably get away with using them in her print portfolio, but technically she can't even use them in her online portfolio (see DMCA - Digital Millemium Copyright Act). A photographer WITHOUT a release can also have a gallery showing AND sell the images. He can also use the images in a booklet advertising the gallery showing.
Photographer
commart
Posts: 6078
Hagerstown, Maryland, US
But what makes a good photographer is being able to sell their art, after paying their model the fee to BE ALLOWED to sell the images. TFP is a good idea, but it won't pay my rent. This may be more a demand and marketing issue than merely "supply and demand" as is the case so often with women and male glamour shooters. It really takes a third party--not a photographer but an advertiser, designer, publication, or producer of some stripe--to put you in business.
Model
TheArchon
Posts: 183
Pemberton, New Jersey, US
Mark wrote:
Unfortunately you have a terrible portfolio and have little to offer in the way of a fashion/commercial model IMHO.
Dont expect much or any paid work and just enjoy your time working with some photographers.
Mark Disagreeing with my point of view is one thing. You are entitled to that. Insulting me simply due to a portfolio that is as yet being fully put together is another.
If you are so great, then that kind of self-righteous crap should be beneath you, but you have clearly demonstrated your own shortcomings as a human being. Best of luck to you, you apparently need to feel good about yourself by putting others down.
Photographer
Robert Randall
Posts: 13890
Chicago, Illinois, US
Your post is so ridiculous it is laughable. You're complaining about the inability to make money and you don't have any of the tools in place by which you can make money. It's akin to a freshman in high school complaining that Harvard won't grant her a diploma for the silly little reason that she hasn't attended Harvard yet and doesn't have the grades to gain admittance to Harvard. Learn your chosen craft, pay some dues, then complain.
Photographer
James Jackson Fashion
Posts: 11132
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US
TheArchon wrote:
TFP...TFCD...Great to build a portfolio, and as it happens; something I will accept, because it is something I need. Once that is obtained, is there ANY chance I will find gainful ($) work as a model if all I accept after that is the green stuff? I'm beginning to think that I will not. Heh.... extension of the earlier conversation, eh?
Well here's how I view this site (even with my recent discovery of a much greater hobby section than I had previously assumed existed): This is a great site to network, get your name out there, discover techniques, pick up new bits of knowledge here and there, and learn...but for making money? I think there's a very very small percentage that actually make money off being on this site and others like it... most of those are female figure models.
As I've said (and now I'm starting to feel like a broken record, sorry): If you want to be a model and make money you have to figure out what you're going to market yourself as. As with any business you have to sell yourself to your clients, and in your case you need to figure out who those are as well.
So, the general basic model questions apply:
- What kind of modeling do you aspire to?
- What kind of modeling do you qualify for?
- What kind of portfolio do you have?
- What kind of work are you not willing to do (and perhaps more importantly why, but you can keep that internal)?
They're big questions...they have a lot of implications on your future as a model, and they also affect your use of this site and what you try to do while you're here.
Will you become a well paid international male supermodel by just being here? No, not by just being here...
Model
TheArchon
Posts: 183
Pemberton, New Jersey, US
Bob Randall Photography wrote:
Your post is so ridiculous it is laughable. You're complaining about the inability to make money and you don't have any of the tools in place by which you can make money. It's akin to a freshman in high school complaining that Harvard won't grant her a diploma for the silly little reason that she hasn't attended Harvard yet and doesn't have the grades to gain admittance to Harvard. Learn your chosen craft, pay some dues, then complain. No, I wasn't "complaining" about not making money. I make the money, it is just something that can't be done, HERE. I was stating that the vast majority of photographers don't want to pay their models because they believe that they shouldn't have to.
Model
TheArchon
Posts: 183
Pemberton, New Jersey, US
Mark wrote:
Unfortunately you have a terrible portfolio and have little to offer in the way of a fashion/commercial model IMHO.
Dont expect much or any paid work and just enjoy your time working with some photographers.
Mark Oh, and one other thing, Marky boy: You haven't seen my complete portfolio.
Just because this may be YOUR only network site, do not make the mistake of thinking that this is mine.
Photographer
Outlaw Photography
Posts: 354
Withee, Wisconsin, US
The legal concept of a release is for the fisherman (example) that blunders into one of my landscapes or tourism shots. Or the one time shot that captures a tourist doing something that was seen as interesting.
Models should not work on releases under any circumstance. They should work under contracts.
Contracts define the ownership of the photos (the photographer) and what he and the model can do with the photos. Contracts cover all known things that are to happen at the shoot, what is to happen after, who profits if anyone, etc.
This is why I started doing model seminars. So models and photographers would start following some of the most simple basic laws. Photography and modeling are businesses. If someone offers a model a release, she should know not to work there as it is not a professional situation.
Photographer
DRowan
Posts: 89
Port Orange, Florida, US
commart wrote:
This may be more a demand and marketing issue than merely "supply and demand" as is the case so often with women and male glamour shooters. It really takes a third party--not a photographer but an advertiser, designer, publication, or producer of some stripe--to put you in business. You got that right! Where this idea of the Photographer is the Client (who pays) is the result of the digital age making it simple for joe-schmoe to get a camera at Best Buy & call himslf a photographer.
It's a very different thing when someone takes the time (& expense) to really learn their craft, invest in thousands of dollars worth of gear (cameras, lenses, studio equipment, expensive software + learning to get the most from it, editing time, etc, etc). Who's really worth paying now?
Model
Kizzy
Posts: 12249
Tulsa, Oklahoma, US
All of the paid jobs I have done have come from OMP and it took me a year and a half of doing TFP shoots to start getting paid. That is, except for stock photography, which I have gotten paid for since the beginning. Matter of fact, I drove 10,000 miles last year paying my dues.
Photographer
James Jackson Fashion
Posts: 11132
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US
TheArchon wrote:
I was stating that the vast majority of photographers don't want to pay their models because they believe that they shouldn't have to. Ok, as a photographer who *doesn't pay* models I'll chime in on that issue too.
I honestly don't understand why I should/would pay a model out of my pocket.
If I'm doing something for myself it's for an artistic purpose and I have no intention on making money on it...in fact, of everything I've ever shown/printed for art shows I've *lost* way more than I could ever make on them. Photography *is not* that popular a medium of art.
If I'm doing something for myself and it's not for an artistic idea, then it's for my portfolio, and again...just improving my portfolio, I'm going to give my models just as much benefit by having them at my shoot as I'm going to get by them being there... Giving them portfolio work from me *is* fair compensation for their time... Even over paid $5,000/day rate models know this.
On the other hand, if there is a CLIENT...the client pays. If that client is the model (to improve their portfolio when I have no need of adding them to mine), or the client is a person commissioning a work (asking me to use my talents to communicate something they can not), or the client is some fashion magazine/catalog (asking to have my work so they can sell theirs)... well then the client pays.
Not that pay doesn't ever come out of my hands, but guaranteed if it's coming from me I'm just a conduit from the client to the model.
Photographer
f4 Photo
Posts: 96
Morristown, New Jersey, US
Outlaw Photography wrote:
If someone offers a model a release, she should know not to work there as it is not a professional situation. That's totally ridiculous. A release IS a contract. It spells out exactly what can and cannot be done with the images. If you don't understand that you shouldn't be giving advice on the subject to anyone.
See http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_a … /12-c.html
Model
TheArchon
Posts: 183
Pemberton, New Jersey, US
OK...I will concede to this, at least: I over stated my point.
But the heart of the matter has apparently been missed by everyone.
Photographer
Outlaw Photography
Posts: 354
Withee, Wisconsin, US
f4 Photo wrote:
That's totally ridiculous. A release IS a contract. It spells out exactly what can and cannot be done with the images. If you don't understand that you shouldn't be giving advice on the subject to anyone. Actually, if you want to do your homework, you will find there is a substantial difference between a release and a contract. The word release itself means giving permission for someone to do something. If there is pay involved, you need a contract as both parties are businesses, no one is giving anyone anything.
Model
TheArchon
Posts: 183
Pemberton, New Jersey, US
OK...I will concede to this, at least: I over stated my point.
But the heart of the matter has apparently been missed by everyone.
Photographer
Boho Hobo
Posts: 25351
Santa Barbara, California, US
TheArchon wrote:
But what makes a good photographer is being able to sell their art, What makes a photographer being able to live nicely is the ability to either sell their art or their services. but that doesn't always mean the photographer is good or that all good photographers must be pursuing their passion for money.
TheArchon wrote:
TFP is a good idea, but it won't pay my rent. Right. So, you might want to consider another way to get your rent paid.
TheArchon wrote:
If I put "will only accept monetary compensation" on my profile, how many of you photographers would make it past that, and even bother to have a look at the pics I've posted? I'm willing to bet that not many of you would. Well, why would they? How do you see your images being used? If you can come up with an angle that makes you needed then you can pay your rent by modeling. Otherwise.....
Photographer
C R Photography
Posts: 3594
Pleasanton, California, US
TheArchon wrote:
If I put "will only accept monetary compensation" on my profile, how many of you photographers would make it past that, and even bother to have a look at the pics I've posted? I'm willing to bet that not many of you would. Well, ya read my mind!â¦..especially after looking at your portfolio 
Photographer
f4 Photo
Posts: 96
Morristown, New Jersey, US
Outlaw Photography wrote:
Actually, if you want to do your homework, you will find there is a substantial difference between a release and a contract. Not if the release is properly worded (see above reference). A standard model release is (if properly worded) a binding and legally valid contract. No exchange of money need occur for the contract to be valid. A contact is a contract no matter what you call it. It's a binding agreement between two parties with some sort of valuable exchange between them. That's exactly what a release is. The model gets "A" and the photographer gets "B".
As I said, if you don't understand this stuff, you really shouldn't be offering advice.
If a model puts "Paid Assignments Only" in their portfolio, then unless I have someone paying me to find and shoot a model for them, I wouldn't contact the model. I don't pay models unless someone is paying me. If that's not the case then I work on a exchange of services basis which should (and does) provide value for both me and the model. We both get portfolio images we can use for self promotion. The hop eis that down the line those poetfolio images might be useful in obtaining paying work.
Photographer
Robert Randall
Posts: 13890
Chicago, Illinois, US
f4 Photo wrote:
Not if the release is properly worded (see above reference). A standard model release is (if properly worded) a binding and legally valid contract. No exchange of money need occur for the contract to be valid. A contact is a contract no matter what you call it. It's a binding agreement between two parties with some sort of valuable exchange between them. That's exactly what a release is. The model gets "A" and the photographer gets "B".
As I said, if you don't understand this stuff, you really shouldn't be offering advice. What does A stand for?
Photographer
f4 Photo
Posts: 96
Morristown, New Jersey, US
Bob Randall Photography wrote:
What does A stand for? Whatever is in the release. The use of the images for the purposes specified. Usually self promotion in a standard TFCD release. That's "valuable consideration" in legal terms. The model gets something of value.
Photographer
Robert Randall
Posts: 13890
Chicago, Illinois, US
f4 Photo wrote:
Whatever is in the release. The use of the images for the purposes specified. Usually self promotion in a standard TFCD release. That's "valuable consideration" in legal terms. The model gets something of value. Can A ever be disproved of having any inherent value?
Photographer
Robert Randall
Posts: 13890
Chicago, Illinois, US
f4 Photo wrote:
Whatever is in the release. The use of the images for the purposes specified. Usually self promotion in a standard TFCD release. That's "valuable consideration" in legal terms. The model gets something of value. Can A ever be disproved of having any inherent value?
Photographer
Outlaw Photography
Posts: 354
Withee, Wisconsin, US
f4 Photo wrote:
Not if the release is properly worded (see above reference). A standard model release is (if properly worded) a binding and legally valid contract. No exchange of money need occur for the contract to be valid. A contact is a contract no matter what you call it. It's a binding agreement between two parties with some sort of valuable exchange between them. That's exactly what a release is. The model gets "A" and the photographer gets "B".
As I said, if you don't understand this stuff, you really shouldn't be offering advice. A release means releasing of rights to another for whatever purpose. It is an agreement and can be enforced as a contract. Professionals work on negotiated contracts, thus, they give away no rights or anything else. Thus, you now know one way to tell a pro from the rest.
The fact you work on releases tells me alot about you. In MN, any verbal agreement that can be completed within the period of 12 months or less is legally a contract. It is not a release, it is a contract.  There is a right place and a wrong place for a release.
Photographer
f4 Photo
Posts: 96
Morristown, New Jersey, US
Bob Randall Photography wrote:
Can A ever be disproved of having any inherent value? Not if the release is properly worded. See the link I posted above. Quoting from that document:
"A contract is legally binding only if each party obtains something of value (referred to as "consideration") in return for performance of obligations. For this reason, releases traditionally stipulated payment of a nominal amount such as one dollar. However, most courts now take a modern approach to contract law and accept the fact that consideration can be implied and an actual payment is not mandatory. Each release in this chapter establishes that the contract has met the consideration requirement by beginning with the statement, "For consideration which I acknowledge...." However, to fortify this position, you may wish to make a payment --even if nominal-- to the person signing the release and indicate the amount of the payment somewhere in the release."
You can pay the model $1 if that makes you feel better.
Photographer
f4 Photo
Posts: 96
Morristown, New Jersey, US
Outlaw Photography wrote:
The fact you work on releases tells me alot about you. The fact that you don't understand that a release is a contract tells me a lot about you.
A suppose the ASMP is unprofessional too?
http://www.asmp.org/commerce/legal/releases/
Photographer
James Jackson Fashion
Posts: 11132
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US
TheArchon wrote:
OK...I will concede to this, at least: I over stated my point.
But the heart of the matter has apparently been missed by everyone. OK, so let's try to get to the heart of the matter. What is it?
Photographer
00siris
Posts: 19182
New York, New York, US
TheArchon wrote:
I joined this site, because I was led to believe that here, a model could post a profile with a portfolio, and have the possibility of finding work.
TFP...TFCD...Great to build a portfolio, and as it happens; something I will accept, because it is something I need. Once that is obtained, is there ANY chance I will find gainful ($) work as a model if all I accept after that is the green stuff? I'm beginning to think that I will not.
I am freelance. I prefer to be paid. What for? My time? No. Not for my time. I prefer to be paid to allow images of me to be posted, photoshopped, sold, bought, used, and re-used any way that the paying photographer see fit. Many photographers I've looked at here, seem to think that they are doing models a supreme colossal mega favor by shooting them, and that they are above paying their models $ for service rendered. Yes, it is a privelege to work with good photographers.
But what makes a good photographer is being able to sell their art, after paying their model the fee to BE ALLOWED to sell the images. TFP is a good idea, but it won't pay my rent.
If I put "will only accept monetary compensation" on my profile, how many of you photographers would make it past that, and even bother to have a look at the pics I've posted? I'm willing to bet that not many of you would. Do you know of any photographers that pay super models to shoot them or do they both get paid by the same source?
Photographer
Outlaw Photography
Posts: 354
Withee, Wisconsin, US
f4 Photo wrote:
The fact that you don't understand that a release is a contract tells me a lot about you Ask Niki Taylor to work on a release. *LOL*
Photographer
f4 Photo
Posts: 96
Morristown, New Jersey, US
I don't work with models (or photographers) who don't understand releases.
Photographer
Roger Miller
Posts: 6
Bremerton, Washington, US
You don't understand how the modeling and photography business works. The big money comes from corporate marketing departments and ad agencies. The ad agency contracts with the photographer and the photographer (sometimes the ad agency) hires the model. The budgets are big and everyone gets paid a lot of money. Models for such an ad campaign would never be hired from an Internet site like this one. The photographer (or ad agency) would use the services of a modeling agency. So, if you want to work on these types of projects, get signed by a modeling agency. If you can't find one that will sign you, it means they don't think you are good enough to be a model and they don't think they could find work for you, so they won't sign you.
Professional photographers can also make money selling their work to smaller buyers, but the money is "small" as well. A cover photo for a national magazine might sell for $70. The average income per stock photo is about $1 per year. Photographers doing editorial or stock photography often use unpaid models (TFP) because they can't stay in business if they pay the model more than they can make in sales. About 70 percent of the photographer's income goes for overhead expenses, so there isn't much left over for hiring models.
Then there's the amateur photographer, which is what you'll typically find on this site. We, by an large, have no income whatsoever from our work, so there's no way we would consider paying a model. We shoot because we enjoy it and a TFP model will get some good photos that she would have had to pay many hundreds of dollars for is she'd gone to a professional photographer (who'll have to charge to stay in business). Also, the TFP models gets a much better deal out of the shoot than does the photographer. She invests a few hours of her time and that's it. The photographer spends 10 to 20 times as much time processing the images, archiving them, etc. And the photographer is likely to have a huge amount of money invested in equipment ($87,000 in my case).
If you want to work as a model, get signed by an agency. If that doesn't work out for you, get a list of ASMP photographers in your city from ASMP's web site and go visit the photographers and offer yourself as a model. If they like your look and have a project for you, they might help you break into the business. If you don't get a lot of work within 6 months, the marketplace is telling you that you don't have what it takes to be a model, so give it up. You're always welcome here for TFP shoots. Yes, I know there are a few (very few) people here who are earning money as models, but they could also get signed by an agency if they wanted to. The marketplace and the laws of economics will determine if you can earn a living as a model.
Photographer
Robert Randall
Posts: 13890
Chicago, Illinois, US
f4 Photo wrote:
You can pay the model $1 if that makes you feel better. What made you think that it would make me feel better?
Photographer
Meehan
Posts: 2463
Merrimack, New Hampshire, US
Bob Randall Photography wrote:
What made you think that it would make me feel better? How slowly are you going to pull this carrot on a string? Or Fish Hook.
|
There is a right place and a wrong place for a release.