Olesja Mueller wrote:

Oh, can I just quote your response in the email to her?)) Soul soothing words:)

Sure!

RRCPhoto wrote:

We're not talking about "paid" work..this is TFP..the concept of pay / return for value consideration is why this is a long thread

THANK YOU!
Lets please get back on the subject.
As i said before, if its paid work, then the model can have a coke and a smile and $+fU
its its TFP, an agreement must be made, other wise the model will ask for more than you might be willing to give.

RRCPhoto wrote:
Time for model (real time):  3 hours - actual model time: 2.5 hours (they aren't modelling if we changes looks, locations, etc)

Changing looks IS work for a model.  And if you have no MUA or stylist, that's also additional work for the model.  My average prep time for a shoot is about 2 hours (and it's only that low becuase I do so much nude work). 

And when I get a full set of proofs or contact (which is pretty much every time I do TFP), that's another couple of hours spent making my own selections for retouching.

Yeah, those numbers are a little off.

Ryoga Vee wrote:
[lots and lots of "interesting" comments SNIPPED]
whew.... ok, im done

I believe you're right. You're done.

Well done. Burnt to a crisp done. Charcoal-and-ash done.

Scattered throughout just this one post--ignoring all the others which were similar--you've made it clear you don't respect anyone other than yourself.

David Holloway (and others) said it quite clearly, and rather than be original (I'm a technician, after all), I'll just borrow his words:

David Holloway wrote:
As for staying clear of certain photographers, I am sure you did a pretty good job of keeping alot of photographers away from you.

Ryoga Vee wrote:
The only thing I’m discussing in the mentality of some of the peoples post as if they have the final decision of what the model will or won’t receive in a TFP scenario. And I've already stated how I feel.

In one way of looking at it, they do. If you don't like their terms, find another photographer, or see if they'll negotiate. If they won't change them, you either accept them or you don't shoot with them.

In other way of looking at it, you do. If they don't like your terms, they have to find another model, or see if you'll negotiate. If you won't change yours, they'll either accept your terms, or they won't shoot with you.

In TFP/CD/Trades, the model and photographer BOTH have full veto power over whether a shoot involving both will take place. Neither can 'force' the other to perform.

Ryoga Vee wrote:
I personally feel that if it’s TFP, I’m entitled to everything shot. [...]This matter should be common sense.

If that's a requirement, most photographers would simply eliminate you from consideration.

theda wrote:
Changing looks IS work for a model.  And if you have no MUA or stylist, that's also additional work for the model.  My average prep time for a shoot is about 2 hours (and it's only that low becuase I do so much nude work). 

And when I get a full set of proofs or contact (which is pretty much every time I do TFP), that's another couple of hours spent making my own selections for retouching.

Yeah, those numbers are a little off.

You're right, forgot model prep.

Again, we're going by assumptions and averages - for instance, if I know my usual prep is around 3 to 5 hours before a shoot.  That's not what this was really trying to do.  I also go to the shooting location and study the light conditions the day prior if possible.  not included in that either.

Looking through photos...true.  so to be fair we'll say around 3/4's of that of the photographer's time.  you have smaller images, faster to scan through, not dealing with raw, etc... and for the average model?  I'd probably say they just look through the 20 or 30 that I select in the "best of" folder and call it a day.

I also only included 1.5 hours of touchup for me, it's usually it's around 6 hours dependant upon how many photos I'm touching up.

Again, it was not taking a look at the "high end" of either scale, however, picking a middle ground in the equation.

Regardless, the point of all that was to demonstrate that this 50/50 perception doesn't really wash. 

Even if I added in your #'s which would I would imagine be alot higher than alot. - we're at 2 hours prep, 3 hours shoot, 2 hours image review - 7 hours. 

Now to be fair , I'll use my average times.  prep 4 hours, shoot 3 hours, 1st post processing 1 hour, selection / image touchups .. 3 hours .. model selection touchups .. 3 hours - distribution / shipping cd & prints - 1 hour. - 15 hours

Plug in the rest of the numbers... 9 per hundred.

Not including:  I have the larger risk of anything breaking, have to have the liability insurance, etc,etc....

this was really in response to a few people saying that this is entirely 50/50.  It's a good exercise, because perhaps then it assists with sometimes the frustrations of models when we get swamped, why we can't get out the pictures as fast as even we want to.

Good catch in the prep

Kevin Connery wrote:

Ryoga Vee wrote:
The only thing I’m discussing in the mentality of some of the peoples post as if they have the final decision of what the model will or won’t receive in a TFP scenario. And I've already stated how I feel.

In one way of looking at it, they do. If you don't like their terms, find another photographer, or see if they'll negotiate. If they won't change them, you either accept them or you don't shoot with them.

In other way of looking at it, you do. If they don't like your terms, they have to find another model, or see if you'll negotiate. If you won't change yours, they'll either accept your terms, or they won't shoot with you.

In TFP/CD/Trades, the model and photographer BOTH have full veto power over whether a shoot involving both will take place. Neither can 'force' the other to perform.


If that's a requirement, most photographers would simply eliminate you from consideration.

Here's a plan..you don't like the photographer's terms for TFP..pay him.  end of problem.

Illustrated Imagery wrote:
Then how is running a batch Action in PhotoShop going to do you any good? You've got to convert them first!

theda wrote:
I didn't specify photoshop, but don't tricked out versions of PS have the capability to convert RAW data anyway?

"tricked out" isn't even needed; it's been built-in since the version that shipped in 2003, and was available as an added-cost add-on in 2002.

RRCPhoto wrote:
Edit:  the program is included with PhotoShop, but is outside of the normal operational capacities (ie: batch) to photoshop.

That is not correct.

Illustrated Imagery wrote:
think CS1 & CS2 come with the conversion program. Earlier versions I think it was a plugin option???

I do not use it so I may be wrong.

Illustrated Imagery wrote:
To run a batch action on Raw images in place of editing them is rediculouis advice. First you can not edit RAW Images in PhotoShop because PhotoShop can not READ a RAW file until it has been converted or processed. So it would do the model no good to have them if they can not convert them.

Any more stupid questions.

Just one.

Stupid question: Do you realize that Photoshop will convert raw files automatically in batch, and that you don't have to manually convert the files before running a simple batch process?

Answer: As noted above, this has been built-in to the product for the last 2 versions.

Why am I bringing this up? Well, because it's what I do. I run through the raw files, eliminate bad ones, then run a batch to create the proofs for the model(s) to review. I don't "convert or process" them separately; they go from raw files to watermarked, sized, and sharpened JPEGs with one batch action.

The extra time it takes for me to do this is essentially nil: I have to do that first-cut review anyhow. All it takes is a bit of computer time while I doing other work: narrowing down edits, or retouching other images, or whatever. (It does take a few extra minutes to generate and upload the webpage for the model, but I've budgeted that in as part of the process, just as I've budgeted in the time it'll take to create a set, or get licenses for locations, or whatever.)

Of course, you could also use CaptureOne to batch process, or Lightroom, or Aperture, or any number of other decent tools to do the same thing.

But that's my approach. The models can see the decent shots from the session (with a large watermark now, since too many earlier unretouched images were distributed before I did this), and they can select which ones they want, typically one or two images per look.

They do not "get all the images", though they can review most of them.

EXCEPTION: When the images from the shoot are known to be heavily modified--when I'm shooting for "starting point" graphics--the rules are different. That's not my typical session, though, and I make it very clear in writing how things will work.

Illustrated Imagery wrote:
And with digital, next year your camera and computer will be obsolete.

Yes, they will only work as well as they did when you bought them.

Models will also be one year older.

RRCPhoto wrote:
You're right, forgot model prep.

Again, we're going by assumptions and averages - for instance, if I know my usual prep is around 3 to 5 hours before a shoot.  That's not what this was really trying to do.  I also go to the shooting location and study the light conditions the day prior if possible.  not included in that either.

Looking through photos...true.  so to be fair we'll say around 3/4's of that of the photographer's time.  you have smaller images, faster to scan through, not dealing with raw, etc... and for the average model?  I'd probably say they just look through the 20 or 30 that I select in the "best of" folder and call it a day.

blah blah blah.....

First let me say that I agree with your assessment for the most part. I'm just offering a little suggestion to help cut your RAW previewing time down a little.

Using Nikonview, (Canon probably has something similar) I can create a thumbnail gallery from my raw images with the click of the mouse. While Nikonview is doing its job I go do something productive like make a sandwich or get a blow job, or eat a sandwich while getting a blow job (try it, you'll like it), or something. When I come back, I upload the gallery and preview the photos on the web, selecting the RAW files to open and work on based on what I see in my new handy dandy gallery. It's a lot quicker than opening each RAW file individually and then deciding yay or nay. Especially since I only have 128 MB of RAM in my machine. Don't fucking laugh at me!

I was just kidding about the blah blah blah part too.

EDIT: Looks like Kevin said essentially the same thing while I was typing this.

Dave Wright Photo wrote:
Sarah,

Are you afraid to leave your house because you might get hit by a car, and afraid to shower because you might slip and crack your head?

Love,
Dave

Funny you should ask, in fact I have been having these nightmares.....     

Love,
Sarah

PS Thanks for the completely irrelevant and insignificant post, I believe it was appreciated by many, including me.

Olesja Mueller wrote:
I did a fashion TFCD shoot with a model, and now she wants to get all the pix from it to see if she can find something else for her book than what I have already picked and retouched (about 25 shots, some of them you can see in my port at the top). She says it's OK that they are not retouched, she just wants to see some more poses, etc. I think it's not OK, as the light was far from perfect (outdoors hoot) and I had to do quite a bit of levels, curves, contrast, etc. to make it look good.
I care about my reputation as a photog and I am not crazy about the idea. However, she is really bugging me now:)))) What would you do?

HELP!)

Short answer, don't.

John Jebbia wrote:
Using Nikonview, (Canon probably has something similar) I can create a thumbnail gallery from my raw images with the click of the mouse. While Nikonview is doing its job I go do something productive like make a sandwich or get a blow job, or eat a sandwich while getting a blow job (try it, you'll like it), or something. When I come back, I upload the gallery and preview the photos on the web, selecting the RAW files to open and work on based on what I see in my new handy dandy gallery. It's a lot quicker than opening each RAW file individually and then deciding yay or nay. Especially since I only have 128 MB of RAM in my machine. Don't fucking laugh at me!

hehe.  no comment on the 128Mb's...my gawd..I have tiffs larger than that .. I'm thinking that i need to upgrade from 2GB to handle the larger HDR images....

I do...Canon has DPP which (even according to a Nikon user is far more powerful and flexible than the nikon software)..a straight forward batch process to low res jpg's for model's contact sheets in a select-all - batch convert .. wait for 20 minutes for it convert all the raws.  Selection should take longer.  If I have 50 images of the same look - I want to make sure I pick the 5 or so best from each look that both the model and myself will like.  I spend some time on that, because I feel it helps both the model and myself.  If the model is here beside me, we go through the images together (if she's inexperienced...I tell her why and why not a specific photo).

With canon..flip through the raws, attach a tag 1 to "my keeprs" .. attach tag 2 to "the overall keepers" .. batch process first all images, select tag 1 images, convert to 16 bit TIFFS for editing.  select tag 2 images and convert to jpg's for review by model.

However, it still takes time on my "business" workstation.  I'm either working on the model's images or I'd be working with one of my other businesses.  Time is money.