joeyk wrote:
The word Vampire comes to mind, sucking the lifeblood out of the victim and making her think she likes it.

Perfect! Lol...

joeyk wrote:
The word Vampire comes to mind, sucking the lifeblood out of the victim and making her think she likes it.

hehe cool very clear even my bad english allow me to understand purpose of them thank you very much

Rabbit86 wrote:
Just recieve email from person that offering hes agent/manager skills for me.

This sounds like the classic "Internet manager", known around here as a "sluggo".  They are widely and properly reviled, and almost never have any useful skills.  It's rare for one of them to actually do a model any good, and much more common for them to hurt a model's career.  Many, many photographers will not hire a model who uses an Internet Model manager.

I'm of mixed mind on "real world" managers.  They serve a useful purpose for some models (normally fashion-model types who are a long way from a fashion market, and sometimes for models with established, successful careers who need someone to look after the business aspects of their careers.)  But for most models it seems to me that "personal managers" are a waste, particularly for models who aren't going to get agencies.

Agencies are another matter.  (You should know that in New York City, "agencies" aren't agencies at all - they are managers - which adds to the confusiion.)  A good agency is almost a necessity for a model who wants a mainstream fashion or commercial modeling career.  But (except for a very few which specialize in glamour work) they generally are not helpful in finding work for glamour type models, or for nude work.

The most common pay for an agency is 20% of a model's fees (plus, often, another 20% that they get from the client).  Some agencies are limited by law to 10%, and some have other fees.  Managers can charge anything from 5% to 25% of a model's bookings, depending on what then can get away with.  Sometimes they can talk an agency into paying some or all of their fees from the agency cut - but that is becoming less common.

TXPhotog wrote:

This sounds like the classic "Internet manager", known around here as a "sluggo".  They are widely and properly reviled, and almost never have any useful skills.  It's rare for one of them to actually do a model any good, and much more common for them to hurt a model's career.  Many, many photographers will not hire a model who uses an Internet Model manager.

I'm of mixed mind on "real world" managers.  They serve a useful purpose for some models (normally fashion-model types who are a long way from a fashion market, and sometimes for models with established, successful careers who need someone to look after the business aspects of their careers.)  But for most models it seems to me that "personal managers" are a waste, particularly for models who aren't going to get agencies.

Agencies are another matter.  (You should know that in New York City, "agencies" aren't agencies at all - they are managers - which adds to the confusiion.)  A good agency is almost a necessity for a model who wants a mainstream fashion or commercial modeling career.  But (except for a very few which specialize in glamour work) they generally are not helpful in finding work for glamour type models, or for nude work.

The most common pay for an agency is 20% of a model's fees (plus, often, another 20% that they get from the client).  Some agencies are limited by law to 10%, and some have other fees.  Managers can charge anything from 5% to 25% of a model's bookings, depending on what then can get away with.  Sometimes they can talk an agency into paying some or all of their fees from the agency cut - but that is becoming less common.

TXTPhotog thank you VERY much for valuable repaly it give a lot to think about and clear a lot of things for me as rookie in this business.
Thank you again.