|
Forums >
General Industry >
Marketability After You Take your Clothing Off?
Some model blatantly attacked me out of the blue this morning because I say in my bio that Im new to modeling and I dont do nudes. Go figure! I dont want to do them! If someone wont take my picture or hire me or cast me or whatever, because I dont do nudes, then so be it!  Oct 31 06 12:42 pm Link especially if it's Foley.... Mos Photography wrote: Oct 31 06 12:44 pm Link Funny how it's okay to do nudes, but NOT okay NOT to....lol....interesting to say the least. YourJessicaLynn wrote: Oct 31 06 12:46 pm Link Face Arts wrote: Face Arts wrote: Hello? Oct 31 06 12:53 pm Link Face Arts...just threw you an email about Nashville on you MM site. Take a look if you have time. Don Oct 31 06 01:08 pm Link YourJessicaLynn wrote: Jessica...I just visited you MM site and I heartly feel that by "Not posing Nude" you have deprived the men of this world a truly, memorable, earth-shattering experience which will haunt us for eternity and cause us to lay awake nights wondering, dreaming of the treasures you possess, which you have decided by your virturious nature, not to bestow upon us..... Oct 31 06 01:15 pm Link Face Arts wrote: This is funny. Oct 31 06 01:21 pm Link Face Arts wrote: Lets face it 99.9999% of wannabes aren't going to ever see beyond the waiting room of one of the top agencies you mention. They will represent themselves [e.g. on the internet], get a sluggo to represent them [also probably on the internet] or be represented, AT BEST, by some minor agency in Sheepshit, Ohio that nobody ever heard of. X West Media wrote: You don't have to actually move to Europe, just have the work published in Europe. Oct 31 06 01:25 pm Link Enough said...I think this Thread is Dead! Oct 31 06 01:49 pm Link SO, basically it is okay to post ONLY if doing a background check on a replier. I see. Taking this all into consideration, your background included as a high level published photographer.... posing nude on the net is still okay for agencies and models to do prior to signing with an agency? lll wrote: Oct 31 06 01:50 pm Link Face Arts wrote: One of the problems with threads like this is that people aren't honest in their responses. They twist things into something else entirely to try to win an argument, instead of dealing with the real situation as presented. Case in point: here is the original post: =CY MAGIC= wrote: Your restatement of that is quite different: Face Arts wrote: The question wasn't just about "posing nude". The question included a wide variety of possible types of nudes, and certainly not the blanket endorsement you want do deride. The question had nothing to do with "nude on the net". All of that you changed to suit your purposes, and turn the conversation into something very different from what was really said. Face Arts wrote: Being "OK to post" is not the issue. The issue is making statements and judgments about a person, and posting them, without making any attempt, even a cursory attempt, to see if the statements are reasonable. It certainly is not required to "do a background check" (again, your misstatement of the situation), but at least reading their profile would be good if you are going to make statements about them, not just "making posts." Common courtesy, not to mention common sense, seems to demand it. Oct 31 06 02:08 pm Link Eric S. wrote: Every young starlet thinks they're going to be the next Meryl Streep or the next Angelina Jolie or the next Scarlet Johannsen or the next Naomi Watts or whatever. Oct 31 06 02:13 pm Link You do like to argue with a sign post, as they say in Big D. I will say this much for you, you are very good at twisting an inocuous thread into something malicious. I assure you there is no malicious malcontent meant on my side. I'm reiterating what I believe to be true and factual from my point of view. My original response to the OP stands as my final response. TXPhotog wrote: Face Arts wrote: One of the problems with threads like this is that people aren't honest in their responses. They twist things into something else entirely to try to win an argument, instead of dealing with the real situation as presented. Case in point: here is the original post: =CY MAGIC= wrote: Your restatement of that is quite different: Face Arts wrote: The question wasn't just about "posing nude". The question included a wide variety of possible types of nudes, and certainly not the blanket endorsement you want do deride. The question had nothing to do with "nude on the net". All of that you changed to suit your purposes, and turn the conversation into something very different from what was really said. Oct 31 06 02:16 pm Link Gashley Darcane did her first (and to my knowledge, only) nude shoot with me last year. She's getting more gigs than ever and the pics are going to be in a mainstream horror mag, if there is such a thing. M Oct 31 06 02:19 pm Link Face Arts wrote: "Factual" implies facts, not opinions. Facts come from somewhere and reflect reality, they are not made up, and they are not the product of individual biases of the person posting. We know you have a problem with nudity. Fair enough. But it is not "true and factual" to claim that your personal biases have any meaning in the industry. It's just what you want to believe. Oct 31 06 02:26 pm Link I think it's important not to put words in my mouth or assumptions will run rampant. I have no problem with nudity at all...that assumption is silly. To be honest, I'm sitting here typing nude as it is. I do have a problem with elitists. It's not important really in the long run, my opinion is just that. I still hold forth that a new person to the industry (model/actress/talent), who is eager to build their portfolio take into consideration that what goes online (mostly, my emphasis) and who you shoot with is very important. Primarily, because what is online is generally FOREVER. TXPhotog wrote: Oct 31 06 02:44 pm Link Face Arts wrote: Uh, yeah . . . . from your MM profile: Face Arts wrote: Then there is this: Face Arts wrote: I agree. But that's not what you have been saying. Oct 31 06 02:51 pm Link Your Jessica Rabbit.. Um sorry no model "attacked you" out of the blue...for not doing nudes. Nudes were not even mentioned... You sure have an active imagination...(or possibly Alzheimers!!!) Your fantasy world may be better suited to Myspace where you can pretend to be anything you want daily: astronaut, a club owner or a "model" for a day! The question that WAS posed to you (as your bio has changed 10 times today) concerned your modeling "experience". You originally stated that you had no experience AND have NO time to TFP but....AFTET your 4 recent TFP photoshoots (that you evidently MUST have made time for...) You are NOW ONLY interested in PAID work..giggle giggle......... The question that was put to you: How can someone with little/no modeling experience whatsoever (who doesn't even know their own correct stats) DEMAND......... PAID work only....? ...WTF?............laughing.... It remains to be seen how long an amateur with your abusive attitude and very high bullshit factor remain a member here... The next line in your newest bio will probably be for an escort/assistant to accompany you on all your PAID photo shoots.. (that you have time for) Which will then be wonderful "chipper" material! Oct 31 06 03:02 pm Link I truly appreciate all the imput given concerning my topic. It is a query I have wondered as young lawyer who is interested in MANY areas of the entertainment industry and who has also dabbled in posing for a few pictures for personal enjoyment herself. I do believe that the answer to my question is probably not a black and white rule. I would figure that each model of "starlet" quality would be reviewed as a total package. (Correct me if you think otherwise!) Some personalities will be revered for their involvement with the risque, while some will not. It depends on the grace, dignity, mystique, etc. at which the nudity is attempted AND the success of such (ie. did she carry it off? Yes? They they love her!). A truly captivating starlet and smart business(wo)man would probably always insist on things that would only advance her image, anyhow. I am sure that their are some that would not wish to work with a model who had pushed their decent boundaries for fear that her marketability was tainted, but probably less care than more. It is an interesting personal property/contracts issue to ponder, nonetheless. I think the discussion/research could go on for quite a while. Thank you to everyone for their shared thoughts/experiences. Oct 31 06 03:07 pm Link Look, I don't post YOUR profile here. That's a tad odd. And furthermore, *I* don't need nudes for my makeup artist portfolio. Who's going to look at the face?? Come on... ! Now, get over yourself, please. And, no I won't go out with you. TXPhotog wrote: Face Arts wrote: Uh, yeah . . . . from your MM profile: Face Arts wrote: Then there is this: Oct 31 06 03:18 pm Link Face Arts wrote: Yes, I suppose it is strange that you see something odd about posting from someone's public MM profile when that profile contradicts their claims about themselves. Face Arts wrote: Other makeup artists routinely accept jobs that have nothing to do with their portfolios. That's what paid jobs are all about. You make it clear that you prefer paid jobs: "Very limited TFP or unpaid tests. I offer 1/2 day & full day rates." Do you really limit the jobs you will accept being paid on to those which will be good for your portfolio? If so, THAT is odd! Face Arts wrote: I'm devastated. Now whatever am I going to do with my Saturday nights? Oct 31 06 03:30 pm Link Okay, for fashion models, as long as you get shot by a good photographer and don't do porn until after you are famous (like Kate Moss and Terry Richardson), you should be okay. Even if you get caught snorting white substances, as long as you are already famous, may get you MORE work. If you are an actress, like some friends of mine, posing for nerve.com and other sites like that hasn't seemed to hurt her credibility, as long as she doesn't do explicit porn. She also does commercial modeling, but keeps her commercial modeling and nude modeling seperately, going under an alias for that kind of work. However, she doesn't really do it anymore because she is spending all her time making a movie right now. As an art model, if you DON't get nude, your marketabilty significantly decreases. Oct 31 06 03:30 pm Link =CY MAGIC= wrote: Dabble away. The world needs more lawyers with nothing to hide as long as you aren't worried about not having super moralists for clients. LOL Oct 31 06 03:32 pm Link . Oct 31 06 03:45 pm Link Face Arts wrote: This is merely a sidenote but... Oct 31 06 04:17 pm Link =CY MAGIC= wrote: Would you mind SHARING a few of those pictures with us today...huh...please Oct 31 06 07:07 pm Link Face Arts wrote: So Tila Tequlia was in PB and BECAUSE of the Inet. Had to name fashion models wiothouit nude images about. Actresses too. Even Sandra Bullo9ck did a nude love scen in her first film (Fire On the Amazon). As for to cheesey as someone else mentioned, What about the fVanessa Williams....her girl on girl shot Seemed to help her career. Oct 31 06 07:12 pm Link Rhetorical question: If the major agencies don't condone nudes, why do they have rates for them? That's right. Rates. I've got an Elite annual facebook floating around somewhere that tells you what extra percentage you'll pay for nudes of their models. Same thing applies for the other agencies. Doesn't mean all their models will pose nude, just that for the ones who do, there's extra pay involved. Anyway, this thread has more misconceptions and assumptions than I thought was possible for such a simple question. As usual, the correct answer is "it depends." It depends on the location, on the agency and on the clients the agency has. And it depends on the nudes. Being centerfold in Hustler doesn't really help your chances of being a fashion model. Oct 31 06 07:18 pm Link I just finished browsing Italian and France Models and photographers MM sites and guess what...THEY WERE ALL NAKED!!! Yep...all of them. And they were frolicking and smiling and having a good old time....hell I think the MUA and Stylists were even naked too! OH God...please let me live in a society where no one gives a SHIT about someone being naked and please deliver me from these ultra-consevative, blue-nosed Bastards who think nudity is a sin, yet portraying killing on TV and video games and killing people in an unjust war is okay! If we had more nudity in this world I think everyone would be a lot happier and do a lot less killing! Oct 31 06 07:27 pm Link Some models have no marketability to damage outside of doing nudes and doing nudes is the only market they have. Some models have done nude, started out doing nudes, and are famous for doing nudes. Pamela Anderson for one. She holds the record for the most covers on playboy. Carmen Electra would be a nobody but for her nudes, but what a good looking nude she is. Some models do nudes late in their career.....Cyndi Crawford. Some models did nude early....Madonna and Cameron Diaz. Some models did nude, then became Miss America, then got dethroned, then became a singer and then became an actress...... Some models do nudes and then get nowhere and then claims it's the nudes fault. Some models won't do nude and claim they didn't get the job becuase they won't do nudes. Basically, for every version, there is an example. Most people pick the one that supports the way they want to do things. Playboy doesn't want to use girls that already have nudes out only because it cuts down the monopoly they want over you if you become a famous nude. The bottom line is do what you want at the time. Mark Oct 31 06 07:29 pm Link Gunfitr wrote: Errrr . . . . not that I disagree with your point, but Cindy Crawford did nudes quite early. Fashion nudes. It was Playboy that she did relatively late in her career. Oct 31 06 08:50 pm Link TXPhotog wrote: Nope. Hollywood doesn't look kindly on young actors with naked pix floating around. I've had to pull photographs a couple of times when a model picked up a soap opera (or in one case got into FHM). However, once the actor makes it, then old naked pix surfacing doesn't hurt her at all. Oct 31 06 08:56 pm Link Has anyone mentioned the most recent news of Cameron? She posed, not completely nude, but in fishnet stalkings and topeless, very early in her career, yet her career, as we all know has flourised from the runway to the big screen. Then her photographer surfaced and went to jail for blackmail. Not sure if this makes a point but thought it might have some use here. Oct 31 06 09:20 pm Link X West Media wrote: Like with Paris Hilton... Oct 31 06 09:24 pm Link some people are so quick to pretend to know what they're talking about. i'm surprised TX is even wasting his time here. Oct 31 06 09:31 pm Link Not taking sides in the general argument, but someone earlier said that Marilyn Chambers did porn and was then pictured on the boxes of Ivory Snow. My recollection is that it happened the other way around -- first the Ivory Snow gig, then the porn. Oct 31 06 09:43 pm Link TXPhotog wrote: Go out with me instead TX.. Oct 31 06 09:46 pm Link Iona Lynn wrote: I don't think TX really needs to work on his book... Oct 31 06 09:54 pm Link Crap I was refering to the MUA who didn't think nudes were usefull for a mua's book... I'd love too...but... I hate crowds they scare me....I get violent...or horny....& more violent....Next year if I have a really big escort...and a chipper... I have a shoot tomorow Oct 31 06 10:02 pm Link I just cleared my Saturdays. All of them. Oct 31 06 10:07 pm Link |
