Molly Black wrote:
There's professional makeup for covering up tattoos and scars so it's not an issue if you have a pro MUA on board.


I've got two different brands of it now since sometimes I want to cover mine up (though not often).

So ... no need to remove them or not get them. Just use a pro MUA.

When clients are paying, cost for removing tattoos and scars is always higher than not having to cover them up in the first place.  So when clients pay, and I have a choice between two equally talented models, I always opt for the model that will cost my client the least amount of money in make up work or post-production retouching.

Chrissytina wrote:
I must say this first.. I just got my first (of many, I wil add) tatoo, a few days ago.. and i love it.. now back to the subject at hand.. I do agree in a sense, that tatoo are sometimes, actually, often out of context for a picture/shoot.. but the way I look at it is this.. I got my tatoo for a reason, as have most people.. And that tat is a part of me.. is tells something about me.. a lil piece you never knew.. so in a sense.. it partly makes me who I am.. now call me crazy, but if a model is beautiful, they are beautiful.. and if a tat is part of a person, it*s just like their eyes or smile.. in a way, it makes them beautiful as well.. so you need to acept the person, tatoos n all b/c they are a part of them n you need to realize that even though it may **throw a picture off**, the picture wouldn*t be the same w/out that model.. n that model wouldn*t be the same w/out that tat!

That isn't how the industry works. If a tattoo is going to throw off a picture, the photographer will find a model without a tattoo. They won't accept you as you are. There are too many other models out there eagerly waiting to get that gig.

e-string wrote:

That isn't how the industry works. If a tattoo is going to throw off a picture, the photographer will find a model without a tattoo. They won't accept you as you are. There are too many other models out there eagerly waiting to get that gig.

Indeed. That's why once I've finished all my research and sat with my sketch for a while and I'm absolutely certain I'm ready, I plan to get my tattoo on the back of my neck. My hair will easily cover it when I need it to not be seen, but if I want to show it, I just have to pull my hair back. Unless a photographer wants a photo of my neck...problem solved

EL wrote:
Despite how good it looks, or how good it makes you feel ...
it's the custies in the industry that give the you the nood or the Flying F.
Cover up w makeup or 1 year laser removal is not a shoot option.
Shoot options need to be fast and cheap and therefore its most
often the model w no TaT.

I am more interested in the washable tat being put on a model
that is otherwise bear. Imagine this could even be a company logo
or a compliment to the photo.

Is there anyone out there with experience with these washable
"on in 10 min off in 10 minute" Tats ??

EL

um, have you twigged to the fact that a good number of models and photographers here could really care less about the 'industry'?

deAa wrote:
As someone who has lots of tattoos, I would say just this.

Who gives a flying fuck? I would assume your search parameters wouldn't include such difficulties like tattoos getting in the way.

I definately agree, I also have tattoos and if someone really wanted to use me for a shoot, all they need is a good MUA to cover them up.  If you don't want to use a model with tattoos, don't.  It's that simple.  Yes, they're permanent but it's the choice of each individual as to whether or not a tattoo(s) is right for them.

EL wrote:
I have a few pics in my port w Tatoos
but I am somewhat against them.
Often my clients object to them or
they are not the right type for the shot.
Once a Tat is on its on for good.
Maybe tats are only good for Model sites like this and SG.
A fake one is washable and always more versatile.
It can also be worn with differ outfits and looks.
And you always have the no Tatoo look.
Its real hard getting the perfect model AND the right Tat.

So how Good are the fake washable kind
and does it not make more sense ??
stylist's and MUA's speak up ...
Show me your washables and dont worry bout being
blacklisted by Mamai Ink and Navy Sailors.

https://modelmayhem.com/pic.php?pid=694149
(note this is a Real McCoy)

EL

Well said.
The East Indian Henna tattoos look very, very good and they wear off after a time.


Someone on one of the threads pointed out that just as you would not want to "permanently"  have a certain color nail polish, or a shade of lipstick, or a bracelet because it would not work with all the different looks that you may need. Why would you lock yourself into particular "tattoo"?

Yes, tattoos are not 100% permanent but as one of the comments on this thread stated 6 weeks of $500 removal sessions makes the removal not so easy or casual.

And yes, it can be covered up with makeup, but that too is an extra step, expense, time and you have to make sure it does not stain some fancy clothes you are wearing.  There is a big difference between having to cover up a small tattoo on the arm versus an arm or both arms, legs, shoulders etc.

E-String says it just right:

"That isn't how the industry works. If a tattoo is going to throw off a picture, the photographer will find a model without a tattoo. They won't accept you as you are. There are too many other models out there eagerly waiting to get that gig"

It's easier to go with a model who does not have tattoos its  less trouble, less extra work. Less maintenance.

Having or not having a tattoo in the field of modeling also says something about the model's practicality, maturity and common sense, as far as I am concerned. What happens when tattoos are no longer as fashionable as they are now?

I'm limiting this commentary to those models who are interested in a variety of modeling where tattoos may be a problem, and excluding those who only do specialized work where tattoos are not a problem at all.

If you love the idea of tattoos, great do them but try a non permanent version and live with it for a few months or a year. Change them at will without the pain or cost of permanent tatoo removal, give yourself the option to change your mind without a heavy cost.

There is an esthetic objection to tatoos. Someone else on another thread also put it sort of like this:

"A tattoo on beautiful skin is like Grafitti on the Mona Lisa"

Dan

Red Sky Photography wrote:
Simple for me too. You have tats... I pay extra.

Works both ways.

I don't believe that Red Sky pays extra for models with tats.  I note that there isn't a single tattoo on display in his portfolio.

Chrissytina wrote:
I must say this first.. I just got my first (of many, I wil add) tatoo, a few days ago.. and i love it.. now back to the subject at hand.. I do agree in a sense, that tatoo are sometimes, actually, often out of context for a picture/shoot.. but the way I look at it is this.. I got my tatoo for a reason, as have most people.. And that tat is a part of me.. is tells something about me.. a lil piece you never knew.. so in a sense.. it partly makes me who I am.. now call me crazy, but if a model is beautiful, they are beautiful.. and if a tat is part of a person, it*s just like their eyes or smile.. in a way, it makes them beautiful as well.. so you need to acept the person, tatoos n all b/c they are a part of them n you need to realize that even though it may **throw a picture off**, the picture wouldn*t be the same w/out that model.. n that model wouldn*t be the same w/out that tat!

No, but that doesn't negate the OP's point that for a lot of commercial modeling work the clients just don't want tattoos
Getting certain types of tats or tats in certain spots or multiple tats might be a deciding factor in what types of modeling you can, realistically, do.

Frank McAdam wrote:
Personally, I like tats.  If a model has one interestingly designed tat, I'll often include it in a fine arts shot because I think it makes the model more an individual, especially if I haven't shown her face in the pic.  On the other hand, full sleeves and huge tats that cover the body are just too overpowering, and I'll usually pass on models who have them.

In a fine art shot, sure
I like them there too
The OP was talking about commercial work tho