ravens laughter wrote:
well...
this is the thing, what ever she did... you reacted to it badly. And where as you can be upset at her for not wishing to shoot with you (which is really what i think it boils down to) but nothing will get resolved from that. Insted I think that you should focus on the email that you said that you sent her, and see how you can respond better next time. Insulting someone for what they feel is never a proper way of getting them to feel something different.

I am sure that the model was purely relieved that she told you no after she read that email.

I haven't heard back from her yet.  Maybe I was a little hard but I have no patience for people that have a lack of common sense.  I don't think she doesn't want to shoot with me as we have shot together several times.  Who knows.  I think she is jealous of me shooting other models as she has displayed some of that behavior through comments she has made in the past.  I am not her personal photographer and my portfolio is mine.  It comes down to the fact that she is using work to show off her work and then complaing that people will get the wrong idea of her from MY work.  Get your own damn portfolio and never mind what people think about my work.  If however you don't want your pictures on my site with nude work just say so.  I have no problem with that and but this horse shit of being misjudged by my other work when she clearly has no work of that kind of herself is just plain absurd and reeks of a lack of common sense which I have a violent distaste for.

model7299 wrote:
I think she's concerned with being associated with a photographer who shoots nudes.  Personally, I prefer not to shoot with a photographer who has shot "adult" or "erotic" shots, because I don't want to be affiliated with that.  If he shoots artistic nudes, I don't really have a problem with it.

All of which is legit. 

But she probably should have done her homework prior to shooting with him multiple times, instead of coming to him after the fact and requesting that he change his entire portfolio to accommodate her comfort level.

model7299 wrote:
I think she's concerned with being associated with a photographer who shoots nudes.  Personally, I prefer not to shoot with a photographer who has shot "adult" or "erotic" shots, because I don't want to be affiliated with that.  If he shoots artistic nudes, I don't really have a problem with it.

So I guess if Steven Meisel wanted you for a shoot, you'd say "no"?  Or did Madonna's Sex book suddenly become "artistic nudes" while I wasn't looking?

lotusphoto wrote:
i just looked at the page,

photo.net is for photographers, and it's your page, so you can do what you want...

she could ask that you remove her pictures, she may not want to be in the middle of all those women.. you have the copyright so you can do what you want, but it is her face at a certain level..

i see you at a breakout moment, when i had that many pictures i just got my own website, left photo.net behind...

Yes...I am there I just need to figure out a way to do it nice and simple so it is easy to update.  I don't have hours to update and manage a website.

Thanks for the replies so far but let's not lose sight of the question here.  I didn't ask wether I handled the email appropriately I asked wether ot not I was correct in assuming that my work is my work and a model isn't judged guilty by association.  How utterly absurd.

Mac Swift wrote:

i figured that, or something like it..

yes and no, oddly when i first looked at your page i saw tons of nudes, i though, damn i'm moving to alberta, then next time i looked i saw pretty much what you have said the body of work is... i can she why she was concerned about being typecast.

what you are asking is, howmany guys would look at the portfolio and say

'all nude women, i guess she'll do nudes too..'

i had one woman pose nude for me, she didnt do it, but wanted to experiment, before she posed she said, you wont publish these will you? i just want to try something' okay

afterwards she said, 'these are interesting, but you wont publish them, right?' yup

later on i had a model want to shoot with me, it turned out she was a friend of the first model.. she asked the first model what i was like to shoot with, then emailed me back and said she changed her mind because she didnt want to do nudes..

???

anyways, i zapped all the pics, easiest thing to do.., people like to relax, so i guess being relaxing is a good strategy

keeping a website uptodate is easier than you think

mine took 4 hours to build, and any gallery i update is just a few mins

model7299 wrote:
I think she's concerned with being associated with a photographer who shoots nudes.  Personally, I prefer not to shoot with a photographer who has shot "adult" or "erotic" shots, because I don't want to be affiliated with that.  If he shoots artistic nudes, I don't really have a problem with it.

I've read some of your posts and while I'm certain you are a intellegent person
you seem to be lacking in some of the basic information about modeling.
Test shoots don't require releases and some of the best and well known fashion
shooters have shot adult or erotic themed work.  Models can always choose who
they shoot with and how they shoot.

Tony Lawrence wrote:

I've read some of your posts and while I'm certain you are a intellegent person
you seem to be lacking in some of the basic information about modeling.
Test shoots don't require releases and some of the best and well known fashion
shooters have shot adult or erotic themed work.  Models can always choose who
they shoot with and how they shoot.

I understand this, so she is at a loss here anyway.  I was merely trying to state what I think the model may have been thinking.  I do think that she was wrong in the way that she approached the photographer with the issue and that she really shouldn't be complaining if it is on HIS site.  If she doesn't want to be associated with naked women, she could easily make a portfolio of her own.  It's her laziness that brings her to a loss, not the photographer's work.  Not to mention the way that she wrote to the OP was unprofessional to begin with (grammatically speaking).  She could have appeared to be much more professional if she had taken her time with her e-mail.

Shyly wrote:
But she probably should have done her homework prior to shooting with him multiple times, instead of coming to him after the fact and requesting that he change his entire portfolio to accommodate her comfort level.

This is true and she had no right to ask him to accommodate to her in this situation.  It is his portfolio, and if she wants to show her pictures to anyone else, she should have her own portfolio of work.

Melvin Moten Jr wrote:
So I guess if Steven Meisel wanted you for a shoot, you'd say "no"?  Or did Madonna's Sex book suddenly become "artistic nudes" while I wasn't looking?

I'm going to admit to a little ignorance, Melvin.  I am familiar with Meisel's fashion work (who isn't?) but not with his "adult or erotic" work.  You have a source?

Melvin Moten Jr wrote:
So I guess if Steven Meisel wanted you for a shoot, you'd say "no"?  Or did Madonna's Sex book suddenly become "artistic nudes" while I wasn't looking?

I apologize, I should've been more specific.  The experience of the photographer shooting the nudes would make a big difference.  I would not even consider shooting with a photographer who had no experience with nudes or very little experience with photography to begin with.  If I like a photographer's work then I don't think I'd have a problem shooting nude.  I should've expressed this before and more clearly.

TXPhotog wrote:

I'm going to admit to a little ignorance, Melvin.  I am familiar with Meisel's fashion work (who isn't?) but not with his "adult or erotic" work.  You have a source?

But of course...I pride myself on knowing all the best dirty pictures:

http://www.beautifulmadonna.com/madonnasex/

...and while I'm at it, I'll just toss in Ellen Von Unwerth too:

http://www.staleywise.com/collection/vo … venge.html

Melvin Moten Jr wrote:
So I guess if Steven Meisel wanted you for a shoot, you'd say "no"?  Or did Madonna's Sex book suddenly become "artistic nudes" while I wasn't looking?

model7299 wrote:
I apologize, I should've been more specific.  The experience of the photographer shooting the nudes would make a big difference.  I would not even consider shooting with a photographer who had no experience with nudes or very little experience with photography to begin with.  If I like a photographer's work then I don't think I'd have a problem shooting nude.  I should've expressed this before and more clearly.

Honestly, I'm more confused now than before.  So, if a really, really, famous photographer who'd done "adult" work wanted to work with you, that would be okay?

model7299 wrote:
Not a famous photographer, but one with experience and who produces great images.  I would specific about the photographer, but I didn't say he had to be famous.

So you really don't have a problem being "associated" with a photographer who's done "adult" or "erotic" work as long as they're good...contrary to you original statement...Is that it?

Mac Swift wrote:
Thanks for the replies so far but let's not lose sight of the question here.

the question was "am i wrong?"  the model immediately said, "i'm not sure..." to which your response became a diatribe which was probably misunderstood through e-mail communication. 

based on the "i'm not sure..." as written to you, you probably made some assumptions, perhaps even incorrectly, just as when she read your reply she probably did the same.

so in answering the pertinent question per the post title, "am i wrong" the point made directed to your response, not to what the model wrote, was not uncovering what the model was unsure of in her initial mailing.

but the greater point goes to communication.  pick up the damn phone and talk about it so you fully understand what the other party means.  written words often do not tell the full story and that is what is most important to find out.  without having that conversation first, to uncover the exact uncertainty, there is no way to make a judgment whether you were right, or wrong. 

until you do that there is no answer.  and, you may just find the model wasn't able to express herself effectively and her intended e-mail was entirely different than the perception given.

communicate, people.  it solves a lot of problems.  even those perceived that might not be problems at all.

--face reality

Melvin Moten Jr wrote:
...and while I'm at it, I'll just toss in Ellen Von Unwerth too:

http://www.staleywise.com/collection/vo … venge.html

Weird... never thought of it as mainstream until I saw this link. Also, I discovered something about photographic quality when I saw this link. A lot of the images have a snap shot quality to them that is nullified by the caliber of post production. (I'm not referring to wet vs. pixels) Thats not something that would necessarily be apparent in a viewing of a single print.

Thanks.

FaceReality wrote:
the question was "am i wrong?"  the model immediately said, "i'm not sure..." to which your response became a diatribe which was probably misunderstood through e-mail communication. 

based on the "i'm not sure..." as written to you, you probably made some assumptions, perhaps even incorrectly, just as when she read your reply she probably did the same.

so in answering the pertinent question per the post title, "am i wrong" the point made directed to your response, not to what the model wrote, was not uncovering what the model was unsure of in her initial mailing.

but the greater point goes to communication.  pick up the damn phone and talk about it so you fully understand what the other party means.  written words often do not tell the full story and that is what is most important to find out.  without having that conversation first, to uncover the exact uncertainty, there is no way to make a judgment whether you were right, or wrong. 

until you do that there is no answer.  and, you may just find the model wasn't able to express herself effectively and her intended e-mail was entirely different than the perception given.

communicate, people.  it solves a lot of problems.  even those perceived that might not be problems at all.

--face reality

Smart guy you are.  I guess I am just a little miffed as of late with people and the massive stick they have in their collective ass when in comes to nudity.  Ultimately you are correct.  The mentality of those that think because I have nude work in my site every one of my models must pose nude is mind numbingly absurd.  IF THEY SHOT NUDES THEY'D BE ON MY SITE NUDE!!!!!!!!  I will email her again after my nude shoot this afternoon :-)

Mac Swift wrote:
The mentality of those that think because I have nude work in my site every one of my models must pose nude is mind numbingly absurd.

to that i will agree and say you are not wrong in thinking such.

--face reality

Mac Swift wrote:

Smart guy you are.  I guess I am just a little miffed as of late with people and the massive stick they have in their collective ass when in comes to nudity.  Ultimately you are correct.  The mentality of those that think because I have nude work in my site every one of my models must pose nude is mind numbingly absurd.  IF THEY SHOT NUDES THEY'D BE ON MY SITE NUDE!!!!!!!!  I will email her again after my nude shoot this afternoon :-)

you should never assume that somone who is looking at a nude woman is going to think

Mac Swift wrote:
A photographer's portfolio is just that--the photographer's.

You said it right there. Instead of using your site to show "her" portfolio, she should build her own. Simple as that. If she must use yours, maybe she could, in advance, mention that it's a photogs site and not to udge her by your work.

It's still silly to refer people to a site, other than her own, to show off what she's done.

ravens laughter wrote:
well...
this is the thing, what ever she did... you reacted to it badly. And where as you can be upset at her for not wishing to shoot with you (which is really what i think it boils down to) but nothing will get resolved from that. Insted I think that you should focus on the email that you said that you sent her, and see how you can respond better next time. Insulting someone for what they feel is never a proper way of getting them to feel something different.

I am sure that the model was purely relieved that she told you no after she read that email.

I didn't see the part where she said no.  And I don't think his response was too harsh.  He was rude or insulting.  I think he put it in proper context and hopefully she'll learn from it and create her OWN portfolio rather than relying on him to show off her work.

Doug Lester wrote:
I'm afraid I would not have been able to write a coherent reply to her, I would have been laughing too hard.

This is for models who are bothered by the idea of shooting with a photographer who has shot nudes and/or porn. Don't be concerned, it isn't contageous! Your clothing will not suddenly fall off and you will not beging to do things to yourself on camera. Well, not most of the time anyway.

Ha!  Too funny.  No shit, eh?  I guess I need to have a disclaimer like everything else in the world "The photographs, opinions and views expressed by this photographer are in not in any endorsed by individual models..." or some crap like that.

Mac Swift wrote:
So...I get an email yesterday (see below) from a girl I have shot before.  She doesn't have an online gallery of her own save for 4 images on OMP.  She uses my portfolio on photo.net to show people her images.  So here is the email she sent me and my reply:

"hey mac
its ****** i have something i am a little consernd about. Im just not sure about the web site now. before there a few tasteful nudes but now its overwhelming and it seems like thats all you do. I got a model to look at the site at my pics and she said i have to be very carful about things like for the reason that that is the way i will be portrayed. so if we could talk about that and find a solution that would be great. I would like to do the christmas shoot with Chyanne as long as its innocent cause i need more fun and smilly pics. not so serious. Thanx and soory if this upsets you but you have to see it from my point of veiw."

My reply:

"Hmm...nudes are not all I shoot.  Out of the 34 folders on my portfolio 12 of them exhibit nude work--that is 35%.  That hardly qualifies as "That's all I do."  It would seem as though that is what YOU and your "model" friend are focusing on.  How can you be betrayed as shooting nudes when you don't have any images of you being nude?  That is absolutely absurd.  That is MY portfolio...not YOURS.  Your portfolio won't show nudes because you don't shoot nudes.  Anyone looking to see what work you have done and are capable of will look at YOUR portfolio not MINE.  Would you take my portfolio to show another photographer?  No.  That "model" you talked to quite simply has her head way up her ass.  A photographer's portfolio is just that--the photographer's.  A particular model is not judged by  the photos a particular photographer may have done of other people.  Could you imagine if all models were judged by the other work the photographer has done??  If you are saying that you are offended by my nude work and would like your pictures removed from my portfolio then that is fine.  It is a terrible shame but I will remove them.  But saying that YOU will be judged by MY work is just immature, short-sighted and ridiculous.  Do you really think I am worried about being judged by what you do with another photographer simply because I have shot you?   Sounds a little silly doesn't it?  I am a little shocked that you think all I shoot are nudes when clearly the numbers I pointed out indicate otherwise.  If I have made you feel uncomfortable in any of our shoots I apologize as that was most certainly not my intent."

So, am I wrong here?  She has no right showing people MY work and then complaining about it.  You want to show your work then pony up some money and get a proper online portfolio of YOUR own.  In fact, potential photographers, clients, etc should never even see my work.  It's none  of their business.  This model friend should never have seen my portfolio if she was concerned about showing her work because she would have shown HER portfolio.  If the model said "Oh, here is some more of the work this photographer has done" then fine.  But using MY portfolio as hers and then saying that she will be judged by the work on MY site is completely out of line.  No?

Mac,

I can only assume you did have her sign a model release form (granted I did not read this entire thread before responding so if someone else already asked and you answered I will find out shortly after posting this....lol). Outside of that it IS your portfolio and you have the right to post any of your works into YOUR portfolio. She should have her OWN portfolio.
I personally could not call myself a model and not have my own portfolio to show.
If I were the photog requesting to see her portfolio and she in return give me your portfolio....I would not work with her. To me it states she does not care enough about her own modeling career to take the time to establish this. IF this were someone in the industry she would get laughed out of the building (no I don't know this first hand...I am making an ass out of myself by assuming this).

Meela

Larry Brown Camera wrote:
Okay....here's the deal. Reality check--- Most models are quite young and lack the experience and maturity that most photographers may have.

I don't like this statement.  I'll tell you why.  Age should never be an excuse for one's behavior in an industry/environment where no one cares and all of one's counterparts are also the same age.  What I mean is, if most models are young and don't have the same experience or maturity of the photographers that they are working with, then why should some models get a young pass and not all?  Why shouldn't every photographer have to coddle and baby all of us?  Because if one's age is the only reason such behavior is acceptable, it should be commonplace and expected.  But it's not.  Well, it is, but it shouldn't be.  Anyway.  So while the OP's reaction was a little excessive, the model's request was dumb.  Not because she's young, but because she is dumb.  Why on earth doesn't she have her own work exhibited somewhere separate from this photographer's?  Sorry for the tangent.

Melissa Lynnette wrote:
Not because she's young, but because she is dumb.

Sorry, I can't resist:

When I was moving in to Texas I ordered some furniture the day I closed on the house, even though all my stuff was in New York.  The TV came the day before I was to get on the plane back to NYC.  There being nothing else to do in the middle of the day in an empty house, I watched it.  Judge Judy came on, and the show was one that was a major "surprise, gotcha" show, and "continued tomorrow".  I really wanted to see that continuation, but I had to be on an airplane, and didn't have a VCR in Texas at the time.  Just a table, two chairs and a TV.

But . . . Judge Judy does reruns.  I was so hooked on seeing that second part of the case that I started taping the damned show and watching it, hoping it would come back on.  (I'm ashamed of myself for even admitting it ).

So why am I telling you this?  One of the recurrent themes of Judge Judy is that young people (in her mind, apparently up to early 20s, and certainly late teens) are stupid.  That's why we don't allow them to drink.  Her continuing statement is that it is only with age and experience that we move from automatic stupidity to whatever it is we are going to be.

I would agree with you that there certainly are exceptions, including some magnificent ones.  But are we really going to argue with Judge Judy?