Experimental Photoworks wrote:
WG,

your above essay is not about modeling it is about life.


Hell I have been going to night clubs for over a decade and have seen the same scene you just described over and over again guys use just to get laid, then there are your real guy friends, then there are your "friends" who hope and pray you get drunk enough to have sex with them.

I have seen the same thing in all of my jobs, one boss hands out promises like candy, another is sleeping with half the crew, the old school manager is an ass but he is the only one who CAN promote you. but he won't because you are too young and headstrong and you need to mellow out....


I was witness to a very bad abusive situation a while back and after a friend an I  talked to the girl about her date and offered to help her out a bit she left.

My comment on the whole situation was this  "you know I think she is more dangerous then he is". he agreed with me she was the one who not only didn't stop him but accepted his behavior.

The girls who are prone to be targets will be targets if they are models or waitresses, or nurses, or anything....


We ca try but it is up to them.

Actually, I thought I was philosophizing on internet culture, but I like your analogy..

My only codicil is, put everyone in masks so no one knows who's talking to who..  Except maybe the most obscure inklings by the choice of mask..

That's the kind of club MM is..

I'm neither trying to defend the noobs or demonize the old hats (who, of course must be slumming to be caught dead at a club like this, anyway! *snerk*)..

Point is there often seems to be a certain lack of awareness that has more to do with how places like this evolve than anything else..

UdoR wrote:

That is an outstanding idea.

I will put it into the moderator forum for discussion!

It is a cool idea but i think that if there are "pre-apporved" pros there should be pros in EVERY  facet of the industry that there is to make money.  Seems like any time there is a "industry" question the only industries that are seriously talked about are fashion and commercial though there are working pro's in many levels of photography/ modeling.

How about pre approving some of the successful fashion photogs/ models as well as commercial, glamour, art, and so on.  That way all of the types of modeling/ photography are covered since we'd ALL like to know the best ways to make money in our particular genre.

Just thought I'd add that Udo.

KM von Seidl wrote:
Since MM has lots (probably most) of people in, working towards, aspiring to be in "the industry" i.e. making money off of photography in a commercial venue, and since there are a number of industry insiders like______  (fill in the blank with your faves)  why doesn't MM institute an "ask the pro" forum.  Where a group of pre=approved mods (a panel) can answer selected questions and give answer that aren't tainted by non-pros?  You can cover all the basic questions and have all the answers so that when newbies try and ask the question again you just send them to the "ask the pro" forum.


I think it would relieve a bit of the friction that arrives when non-pros say stuff wrong, and then pros react with irritation, rolling of eyes, and then the non-pro responds with animosity, and then a bitchfest happens.   Why not just draw lines in the sand an nip all of this in the bud....?

It's a good idea, but not without its problems. 

1.  Even the industry pros (real ones, with excellent credentials) often disagree.  Sometimes they acknowledge that there is valid reason for the disagreement, other times they do not.  An excellent example:  people who are primarily in the fashion community tend not to understand how commercial print works.  People who work with fashion agencies don't understand that there is a whole different world out there, with different norms and reasons for those norms.  Small market cities work differently than major markets.  People who haven't worked in both tend not to fully appreciate that - and the smaller markets are more relevant to most MM members.

2.  Most (not all, but most) of the models receiving advice are not of the type that is relevant to the experience of many industry pros.  I'll pick on the fashion people again, but it works both ways:  the advice that should be taken by a model depends on what she is, where she is (or is going to be) and what she wants to do and is capable of.  A great deal of the time, perfectly correct advice will not be useful to the reader.

3.  A high percentage of the membership is involved in things other than "the industry" (as "the industry" would define it).  Art and glamour require very different approaches than fashion and commercial.  Advice given from "industry pros" may well be totally wrong for most of the membership.  (Examples that come to mind are:  "experience", "portfolios", the value of TFPs, references, escorts . . . but there are lots of others.)

4.  If "the industry" is defined for purposes of that forum or certification to include art and glamour, by what criteria do we decide that someone is a credible spokesperson for their segment?  And all of the possible confilict above just got magnified greatly.

5.  Working industry pros are unlikely to give advice that breaks their rice bowls.  That is particularly true of "portfolio" or "test" photographers.

6.  The current rules of MM act to exclude people who are the most knowledgeable, so getting a spectrum of knowledgeable opinion isn't that easy.

7.  Most folks who have something to do with the industry feel they are a step or two higher in the knowledge pecking order than a rational external observer might decide.  Whoever does the "certification" will certainly create a lot of bad feelings, no matter how inclusive a line they draw.

WG Rowland wrote:
BTW.. Quick note before I take off for the bank:

I started this thread for the want-to-be models.. Not the ones who've worked, got an angle, and are making things go forward, but the ones who start a portfolio that states I'm 5'4" and I want to be the next supermodel.  In other words, the ones with high hopes and no clue..

They're too damned ripe for abuse, and there's too many people who want to abuse them.  From the true professional who's run out of patience, to the GWC who wants to leverage their naive' natures, and everyone inbetween..

These are the ones who, I think, read these forums most seriously.  Believe what they read.. And at that point I have to wonder.. How do you discern, well, ANYTHING from this mess?  Pro's who offer harsh, but honest advice sound like malcontents who just like fucking with people (and there's plenty of those here, too..), which goes contrary to hobbyists who may be more than happy to work with a person who doesn't fit the profile.. Might even be willing to pay while they're learning their chops..  And even worse, mixes in with flattery from jerks and pervs who's motives aren't very nice at all...

People get so wrapped up in who they are and the value of their words I wonder how many actually attempt to put themselves in the shoes of those they're talking to..

That's all..

I like pie.

You may be aiming this at the naive model, but let me tell you as a naive Photographer it is also a big help.  I don't know what the hell I'm doing.  I don't know anything about the industry.  All I know is i love making images.  whether I am drawing or painting or photographing, I love it.  I want to expand what i am doing and am fumbling toward that, but have no guide.  I don't really want to listen to industry insiders, because i don't really want to be part of the industry.  I want to make art.  I hope that in doing so, I can help a model by creating beautiful/interesting images for them to use in their portfolio, but mostly i want to line my own portfolio...  I don't even know what to do with my portfolio when it is lined (no jokes here about what a parrot does with a lined cage).  I want to be respectful of everyone i work with/talk to, and i want to have fun as well.  i do not want to take myself too seriously.

I want to learn,  feed me Seymore, feeeed me.

TXPhotog wrote:
It's a good idea, but not without its problems. 

1.  Even the industry pros (real ones, with excellent credentials) often disagree.  Sometimes they acknowledge that there is valid reason for the disagreement, other times they do not.  An excellent example:  people who are primarily in the fashion community tend not to understand how commercial print works.  People who work with fashion agencies don't understand that there is a whole different world out there, with different norms and reasons for those norms.  Small market cities work differently than major markets.  People who haven't worked in both tend not to fully appreciate that - and the smaller markets are more relevant to most MM members.

2.  Most (not all, but most) of the models receiving advice are not of the type that is relevant to the experience of many industry pros.  I'll pick on the fashion people again, but it works both ways:  the advice that should be taken by a model depends on what she is, where she is (or is going to be) and what she wants to do and is capable of.  A great deal of the time, perfectly correct advice will not be useful to the reader.

3.  A high percentage of the membership is involved in things other than "the industry" (as "the industry" would define it).  Art and glamour require very different approaches than fashion and commercial.  Advice given from "industry pros" may well be totally wrong for most of the membership.  (Examples that come to mind are:  "experience", "portfolios", the value of TFPs, references, escorts . . . but there are lots of others.)

4.  If "the industry" is defined for purposes of that forum or certification to include art and glamour, by what criteria do we decide that someone is a credible spokesperson for their segment?  And all of the possible confilict above just got magnified greatly.

5.  Working industry pros are unlikely to give advice that breaks their rice bowls.  That is particularly true of "portfolio" or "test" photographers.

6.  The current rules of MM act to exclude people who are the most knowledgeable, so getting a spectrum of knowledgeable opinion isn't that easy.

7.  Most folks who have something to do with the industry feel they are a step or two higher in the knowledge pecking order than a rational external observer might decide.  Whoever does the "certification" will certainly create a lot of bad feelings, no matter how inclusive a line they draw.

Lots of "industry" publications have panel discussions online or in print pubs.   They use rotating "experts" or have a solid core group with a few folks who rotate in and out on a periodic basis. I'm thinking of a cinemaphotography article I just read and you had 6 voices from differing segments of that industry and it was a good read on digital vs. film.

For the MM model to work, I'd highly suggest picking experts who have the ability to:

1. clearly communicate in the written format
2. be sincerely interested in helping educate
3. be interested in discussion and dialogue rather than bashing
4. be mindful of the networking intent/mission of MM

In other words, disagreement is fine and should be expected but it can be done in a manner that isn't a bunch of idiots tearing each other new assholes.  So, let's say for instance the discussion is of the ever repeating issue of test vs. tfp.   Commercial expert says "testing is x,y,z and tfp isn't even a word."  Glamour guy says "well, maybe not in your segment, and I understand it never existed until 5 years ago but now it's come to mean something and I use it alot and here's why." So then there is a discussion and not a fight.   The point is that you cut out the total bullshit artists and folks just looking to disrupt out of the equation and get elevated informational discussions rather than just drama and wars.

Nothing has to be written in stone, if an expert mod turns out to be a flaming idiot, let him/her go add someone else.   If the forum gets too focused on commercial and the small artist league feels left out, then MM managment should listen and add new voices.


It just seems to me that there is a possibility of valuable content and resources here and it seems to be getting lost lots of the time for a multitude of reasons...some of which go to structure of the site/forums.

KM von Seidl wrote:
It just seems to me that there is a possibility of valuable content and resources here and it seems to be getting lost lots of the time for a multitude of reasons...some of which go to structure of the site/forums.

I agree.  And I didn't mean my list of problems to be taken as fatal flaws - just considerations in designing the structure and content of the solution.

WG Rowland wrote:
In response to KM's suggestion..

Yes.. A forum where people are allowed to ask questions and tools like me are not allowed to answer is probably a good step on the path to MM being taken seriously..

(This should evoke a HUGE cheer from certain people, I'd imagine..)  =p

Hey,I wouldn't be allowed to answer either, but I wouldn't feel left out if there was an occasional art topic--with an artist panel--you know like "how to do gallery shows--real galleries vs. running your own".

Look, MM decided to limit sluggos and that was a good thing.  Those guys are at the other place.
If MM basically cut out the bullshit artists and drama queens, they'd gravitate to other sites as well.

Despite being an avowed amateur I do take photography seriously.   I don't have a problem with having a controlled forum where other people who took their work seriously could offer help to emerging talent without interference from trolls etc.

TXPhotog wrote:

I agree.  And I didn't mean my list of problems to be taken as fatal flaws - just considerations in designing the structure and content of the solution.

You should work with Udo on it!

KM von Seidl wrote:

Hey,I wouldn't be allowed to answer either, but I wouldn't feel left out if there was an occasional art topic--with an artist panel--you know like "how to do gallery shows--real galleries vs. running your own".

Look, MM decided to limit sluggos and that was a good thing.  Those guys are at the other place.
If MM basically cut out the bullshit artists and drama queens, they'd gravitate to other sites as well.

Despite being an avowed amateur I do take photography seriously.   I don't have a problem with having a controlled forum where other people who took their work seriously could offer help to emerging talent without interference from trolls etc.

I was being silly, but I DO actually agree with you..

Like TX I see the potential for problems.. But it's still a good idea.. 

And I would definitely be in there taking notes..

WG Rowland wrote:
In response to KM's suggestion..

Yes.. A forum where people are allowed to ask questions and tools like me are not allowed to answer is probably a good step on the path to MM being taken seriously..

(This should evoke a HUGE cheer from certain people, I'd imagine..)  =p

boo.

Iona Lynn wrote:
I think the art photogrphers and models need to have a place in the profesionals forum.
We have our experence and we have new commers everyday on this site.
I would have gotten no help from the agency advice in my modleing because that was not the route I wanted to take.

I listened to the art models/photograpers and learned all I could from them.

I like this idea and I know even though there may be several genres in the forum we can explain where we come from.

I agree. I get a little tired of all the advice I'm given being geared towards the concept that I'm in modeling to "make it," not to mention being put down and having my opinions dismissed because I'm not a "real" model anyway. I would really like it if there were some kind of forum here where it is acknowledged that art photography and modeling, while sometimes quite different from the mainstream, are their own category and deserve their own respect.

TXPhotog wrote:
MM has a similar problem. Lots of people feel that they, or others, "have six pockets". My view is that relatively few actually have that kind of value to a new member or inexperienced model or photographer.

Who is to choose, what are the criteria, and what is to be done about those who don't get chosen but feel they should be - or have a vocal cheering section that feels they should be?

It's a can of worms.

Let's say MM populace can submit burning questions they'd like to see "expert" opinions on.

The list goes something like this..."HOw can I become a bigtime fashion photographer and shoot editorials for vogue"  Well, then it would be fitting to have people who actually have shot for vogue, right?   There are a few on here, some kinda quiet too.  And who is to say that Uncle Udo or Master Mhana can't outreach to a couple big time shooters and ask them to participate?

Let's say the burning question is "How can I become a playboy photographer?"  Well then the expert panel shouldn't have the bridal, art or product photographers on it unless they've shot for Playboy.

"How do I become an art model and how much money can I make?"  Well then art models and not the agency models are on this panel.


"How do I set up a porn website?"  Then the successful porn guys/igrls with websites offshore are on the panel.

"How can I make money selling my one of a kind art photography works?"  Then people who actually make $$ selling through galleries or at art fairs with booths are on the panel.


The people who might get bent are those where there is lots of competition and chumming for models (like glammer)....but that happens anyway.....

MHana wrote:
I do not think it should be called ask the experts.

something pithy would be good

MHana wrote:
debates or articles with debate to follow.
It is basically what we have already with the forums already,
trying to link to the better conversations is an attempt to do this but
There are so many that the links often go to false information.

God love you and your links but lots of those discussions have a pearl in amongst a great deal of crap.  Who wants to wade through that?

Plus you have lists of 20 -40 links.  William Saffire's MEGO (my eyes glaze over) theory comes to mind, no one is going to plow through all the blue underlined lists, just to find one pearl.

MHana wrote:
Some kind of self control is needed by some of those who debate on issues such as copyright and releases is needed as an example.

Good luck, it's the internet.  Best to admit the beast it is and work within those realities.

MHana wrote:
On issues such as TFCD there really is no expert for it is a made up term.

No, there isn't.  But there are people who use the term and their heads haven't blown up yet.  You could actually have a discussion called "THOSE who successfully use TFP and haven't died yet."   

MHana wrote:
Some separate forum would be great for why post a long thread trying to help to have it disappear due to people bumping up the same old vane threads.

HUH?