Forums >
General Industry >
Nudes
"I am willing to get "nakkid" therefore I can call myself a model!" As a professional photographer this appears to be the new crop of models today. No, don't get me wrong...... nothing wrong with nude photography...... it's just that there are in face very few real models to choose from ......once we wade through all the nakkid bodies! Please show me what you can do with cloths....... ya know....they once called it "fashion" / am I getting old or what? (Real) Models and (Real) photographers any responce? Oct 01 06 05:56 pm Link I don't quite get your question / statement here. Are you saying models that pose nude aren't real models? Can you clarify your comment? Personally, I'll work with models clothed or not... And in fact I'd rather work with models that are comfortable with nudity. There's just more options with people like that. Oct 01 06 05:59 pm Link No......... I am not saying that models willing to pose nude are not models..... I am just saying that out of the total number of "so called models", so many want to "break into the field" when in fact all they have to offer is a nakkid body. Beyond that, there is very little in the way of real fashionable beauty for the photographer to work with. Ok so perhaps I am being a little critical, but I personally would like to work with a very attractive and glamourous modes..... wheather they are willing to pose nude or not! Oct 01 06 06:05 pm Link I think the original point was that doing nude work does not make a model a good model. Great models are easy to work with and you can get the image you are after quickly. Not so good models are generally harder to work with and take longer and need more direction to get to the desired image. I think this is the nature of the beast. Personally I can get to the images that I want/need with just about any model that I have worked with from brand new to very experienced. That being said, there are models that I just click with and we work together very quickly and there are models that I have really had a hard time communicating and working with. I think that is just about the same for any photog with experience working with people. Whatever Oct 01 06 06:06 pm Link Larry Brown Camera wrote: Well, suit yourself, no one has ever said you 'have to' photograph nudes. However it seems to me that this and your original post are more than a little condescending toward the models and photographers who choose to do nudes. For what it's worth, there are many areas of pro work which are not "fashion" and a couple of those include actual clothing. Oh, for what it's worth, before I retired, a couple of very legitimate agency bookers used to refer their pro models to me when they wanted discrete nudes for their books. Those were agency reped, working commercial and fashion models. So I guess there are actual models who choose to pose nude. Oct 01 06 06:13 pm Link If you look at things like views and comments... it is easy for new models to see that at least on MM or OMP, etc... what gets looked at is nudity. The more skin you show the more peeks you get. I don't think this is a good representation of the paid work out there, or the pics that will land the majority of paid work. I am just pointing out that if I were a new model and using MM to help me decide what my port should look like based on popularity... I would believe it had to be nudity. Oct 01 06 06:24 pm Link I think the point is that there are a lot of girls out there now who think that just because they're WILLING to get naked, they can be a model, regardless of appearance or talent or commitment etc. Every girl has boobies, but not every girl can be a model. However, this fact seems to be lost on most girls in the MySpace era. Just because you're willing to get naked, doesn't mean anyone necessarily *wants* to see you naked... Oct 01 06 06:27 pm Link StarlaMeris wrote: Oct 01 06 06:31 pm Link Larry Brown Camera wrote: We don't all shoot or model fashion here. The idea that the people that work with me aren't "real" models is both condesending and incorrect. Oct 01 06 06:33 pm Link Starla ....... got it ! ![]() It appears that some would rather pick a fight rather than pay attention! Thanks Starla! Oct 01 06 06:34 pm Link PS....... check out my port........ I do take nudes..... that doesn't negate the point I was trying to make however. Oct 01 06 06:36 pm Link Larry Brown Camera wrote: So are you wanting to begin a fashion portfolio? If so I'd suggest agency models. Help you get going in the right direction quickly. Oct 01 06 06:37 pm Link StarlaMeris wrote: If somebody wants a "girl" [sic] to model, they can, by definition be a model. Whether or not they can be a professional model is another matter that's not really relevant here. StarlaMeris wrote: Just because you may not want to photograph someone "naked" [sic] dosen't mean that nobody else wants to. I'll thank you in advance to stop trying to decide who I should and shouldn't work with. Oct 01 06 06:38 pm Link So your point is that you consider many people here too ugly to model.. What a lovely way to introduce yourself.. Oct 01 06 06:47 pm Link W.G. Rowland wrote: True, but on the other hand, I'm not ugly enough to be a photographer. Oct 01 06 06:52 pm Link StarlaMeris wrote: I want to photograph EVERYONE who wants to get naked. I can find beauty and art in everyone who is excited to work with me. Looks are VERY secondairy to attitude. Oct 01 06 06:53 pm Link Kevin Bargeron wrote: Well, if you're using me as a benchmark, none of you have any business being photographers.. Oct 01 06 06:55 pm Link I want nekkid cloths models to remove they cloth so picture to be on my eye then camera too! EDIT: NAKKID cloths to be on eye. Oct 01 06 06:57 pm Link Meehan wrote: I believe he was complaining about the "nakkid" models.. Oct 01 06 06:59 pm Link Melvin Moten Jr wrote: StarlaMeris wrote: If somebody wants a "girl" [sic] to model, they can, by definition be a model. Whether or not they can be a professional model is another matter that's not really relevant here. Wow, somebody's touchy. I just saw a bunch of people misinterpreting the OP's words and wanted to restate what he actually meant. The fact that I happen to agree in no way dictates what I think YOU should think. Oct 01 06 07:06 pm Link Old proverb says" think first then open mouth" First off before there was such a thing as a "real Fashion model",there were nude models as well as other models that would never make it on a runway today.Fashion is the new comer not the other way round.And so what if people who think they don't have what it takes to be a "real fashion model" want to do nude modeling ,why are you loosing sleep over it. second most of the people on MM and OMP seem to fall into that "I don't do nude " class not the other way round. Also, maybe the net is just reveling how large a slice of the modeling pie nude really is. And the crack about "real photographes" won't get you any new friends either Oct 01 06 07:08 pm Link Melvin Moten Jr wrote: And furthermore, why do so many artists get up in arms about the word NAKED? Naked=Nude=No Freaking Clothes. Calling it a "nude" doesn't make it any more tasteful than calling it "some picture of a chick who's naked". If the work is good, the work is good, it doesn't need a special term to make people think it's better than it is. It's the same thing as pretentious "filmmakers" getting up in arms when you call them "movies" instead of "films". Oct 01 06 07:11 pm Link Are ya all talking about me again?? You know I hate that type of gossip... Oct 01 06 07:17 pm Link Model is not as it was many years ago. Nudity in the media brought forth a big change in many ways . Maybe a woman/man who wants to stricly do nude is not always a model to some. You can do glamour nudity with some props and it still look good. Just takes a great photog and 'model' to pull off a great shoot. Oct 01 06 07:18 pm Link There are a lot of different people here with different outlooks and goals. Oct 01 06 07:28 pm Link StarlaMeris wrote: So who gets to decide when a nude [or clothed] image is "well done"? You? Me? Who? Basically you're talking about opinion, which can't be standardized. StarlaMeris wrote: I agree...Trying to make a distinction between who is and isn't a model purely on personal fiat is retarded. Oct 01 06 07:54 pm Link StarlaMeris wrote: The fact that so many people heard the same condesending tone in the OP's words should tell you something. Call me touchy, Sirley or late for dinner if you want, but working in the genre that I do has made me pretty attuned to high-minded moralizing. Oct 01 06 07:57 pm Link So... the model equivalent to a GWC (guy with camera) would be a CWB (chick with boobs)? Oct 01 06 08:00 pm Link There is no reason an art model who wishes to post on this site to do nude work must also qualify as a fashion or beauty model. It denigrates the models to suggest this. Most of the nude art models I've worked with are artists in their own right, whether visual or performing arts. Oct 01 06 08:14 pm Link Frank McAdam wrote: Exactly. Oct 01 06 08:38 pm Link Melvin Moten Jr wrote: Good lord. Where are you getting this stuff? Nothing you're accusing me of has anything to do with what I'm saying. Did I ever assert what makes a good photo? No, I didn't. And did I ever say that amateurs as models can't produce good work? No, certainly not. I've never worked with a pro model and have only worked with 3 that had any previous experience with the camera whatsoever. Amateurs can be an absolute joy to work with. Oct 01 06 08:44 pm Link Melvin Moten Jr wrote: Very true. There seems to be a rather high brow attitude when dealing with ANYTHING nude related on this site. people always make posts bitching and whining and complaining about it for whatever reason, rather than just doing the sensible thing and SHOOT WHAT THEY LIKE. Oct 01 06 08:46 pm Link Yes Larry Brown you are getting too old. Boy you people waste alot of energy discussing something that cannot please everyone likes --Who cares--- do what you like ---be you a model or photographer. Have fun Oct 01 06 08:52 pm Link Larry Brown Camera wrote: Well I for one love wading through nakkid bodies... Oct 01 06 09:03 pm Link what's the problem with someone trying their hand (or body) at something...if they don't take to it then they'll quit, if you agree to let someone take pictures of you or sketch you or plaster cast you you're a model, it's not all about the expectations of the fashion or fhm industries. i prefer fashion for the bulk of my work but do a lot of portraits of not typical people and love that as well. AND a lot of these girls you're speaking of, if they were to do some pictures with a photographer worth a shit could take a good enough "art" picture that you'd consider them worthy of the title, so again why fault them for trying? we're all trying. so relax, there will always be crappy pictures, just don't pay attention to them if you don't see anything. Oct 01 06 09:19 pm Link ...pause for a moment with this senseless topic and look at what God created - without fashion in mind ... just the universe : https://img4.modelmayhem.com/060917/12/ … a45d0f.jpg 18+ ...Clothing came later. Oh, and, Lisa is a talented model MM#5785 Oct 01 06 09:28 pm Link StarlaMeris wrote: I think the problem is that I [along with almost everyone else in the thread] understand you perfectly well. Oct 01 06 09:30 pm Link So I still don't understand what criteria the OP is using to define "real" models and photographers, and I'm curious to know. Is it shooting and qualifying to model for fashion only? Why is that all that's real? More models make a living in their 30's doing commercial modeling than 14 year olds do walking the runway. There are more photographers supporting themselves doing weddings and family portraits than there are Steven Miesels running around. There are more art models and photographers selling their work in galleries and seeing it hung in museums than any other kind of model and photographer. Nevermind all the great glamour, and beauty, and fetish work out there. What qualifies as "real," exactly? It all seems pretty real to me. Oct 01 06 11:00 pm Link Shyly wrote: Real is anything with clothes on. Cause clothing validates it. if you're naked then you're either an attention whore, have nothing better to offer other than your body, have no morals or a GWC trying to fuck everything that will get naked for your camera. Oct 01 06 11:03 pm Link Ransom J wrote: Ooooh...good sarcasm makes me hot. Oct 02 06 12:19 am Link |