|
Forums >
General Industry >
Model angencies: Should a model ever pay?
I'd love to hear what individuals (models/photogs/agents) think about the idea of a model paying to be represented. The agency that I shoot for enforces the idea that every model, no matter who they are, needs to pay the agency to do comp cards. That's where I come in, obviously, to be the photographer. Yet models think or are being told that they should never have to pay for shoots. One canceled a shoot because her parents gave her that idea and another, when I told her about my agency said "Oh, it's one of those where you PAY!?" and that shoot never happened. So who's right? Isn't a model agency supposed to get you work you could never get yourself so you PAY them to promote you? Don't they need PHOTOS on a COMP CARD to promote you to ad agencies, art directors and so on? On the other hand, if a model is so amazingly beautiful and talented shouldn't she/he be in such demand that she never needs representation and can do it all herself/himself? Since my income is from the agency, I want to know if what they say is true "every model needs to pay for comp cards" and subsequently the representation and promotion. Is it a fear that some models have that if they pay they aren't really a model? Help me out here. Thanks, David Nov 06 06 06:39 pm Link David Gabel Photography wrote: well, there are some agencies that require consistency in their presentation so they might require those on roster to order comps through them (also a marginal fee for headbook, roster poster, web site, etc.). it isn't unheard of, but many will not do a huge mark-up. that's where the rub can come in. Nov 06 06 07:12 pm Link Reputable agencies will not charge to get you work. They will not sign you if they don't think they can sell you. They may charge promotional fees and other expenses against your paychecks above the standard percentage, but that is normal. They should have a reciept or invoice to prove those expenses if you ask. Be wary of "administrative fees" that fluctuate. Nov 06 06 07:19 pm Link Face Reality has touched on it and we have others here who can speak to how agencies work but there are expenses a models must bear. Composite cards, photo shoots as well as make-up and other things. While going it on your own might work in some cases there are just so many things a model needs to know. Consider also if a model isn't paid for a job she would have to try and sue the client. A models career tends to be short and she needs to know her market and get going quickly. Which is why the TFP issue is often silly as models don't really have time to waste trying to get good work. She needs to get to the people that know her market and what the agency needs. There are lots of models who feel that because they are young, tall and pretty the world will give them a free ride. They are wrong. Nov 06 06 07:22 pm Link  A model should not pay for representation other than the agency commission deducted from the payments made by clients to the model. However, a model has to pay for the materials needed to promote them. A model represented by the major agencies will pay for their own comps, they pay for testing, they pay for their book, they pay for their prints, they pay for the living quarters, they pay for appearing in any agency promotional material (websites, promo books). Sometimes the agency cons some new photographer into doing a free test, and the model doesn't have to pay for that test (though the model may still have to pay for hair, makeup, styling and prints). Sometimes, the agency advances some of these expenses (testing, prints, comps, etc.), but it's a loan and the model is expected to pay the agency back. This from a standard agency contract: "I understand that I am obligated to pay for all expenses advanced to me by the agency. These expenses include, but are not limited to: airfare, composites, prints, testing fees, agency book page, head sheets, posters, and apartment rental. I also understand these expenses, whenever possible, will be deducted from monies advanced to me by the agency. Should my earnings not cover these expenses or if I leave the agency, I agree to repay the agency within an agreed upon time, for said expenses incurred on my behalf." All of this said: no agency should tell a model they have to shoot with a certain photographer, that only that photographer's images are acceptable. The agency should (and usually does) recommend a couple of photographers, particularly if they are advancing the fees for the test. The agency should not mark up the costs of testing, prints, or the printing of comp cards. The agency should not require classes that the model has to pay for as a requirement for representation. In short, an agency should make their income from the commissions it receives for placing the model with clients, not from services and products required by the model for self promotion. It's really not that complicated, a model is an independent contractor who is responsible for all the normal expenses that being a model requires. John -- John Fisher 900 West Avenue, Suite 423 Miami Beach, Florida 33139 305 534-9322 http://www.johnfisher.com Nov 06 06 07:38 pm Link As someone who both hires from agencies for commercial work, prepares portfolios and comp cards for my own agency and others and teaches modelling, I can give you another perspective. First, every legit. agency charges the model when they find him/her an assignment...it usually is in the form of a commission fee which is taken from the billing when it is collected from the client and the balance is credited to the model. Agencies also charge for additional expenses on behalf of the model, usually with the model's knowledge in advance, for which they must have receipts and are reimbursed by the model. Some agencies insist that all models on the roster have a book or portfolio. It may be hard copy or digital depending on how the agency does its marketing. Some agencies insist the models use 'their' photographer which might be a scam depending on a)what they charge and, b) if the photographer is any good at this type of photography. Regardless of whether the shots for the port. and comp card come from an agency photog. or a photog of the model's choosing, she always pays for them. Models pay us $1,000 for a portfolio...12 9x12s and a leather binder. She may also pay a small fee to have any significant number of images on the agency website...they are not in the business of laying out money on behalf of models. It is extremely rare for a serious model to make it based on her/his own self-promotion...and I mean serious commercial/fashion models, not internet models. and John Fisher has it absolutely correct..Thanks Nov 06 06 07:41 pm Link Only on the internet are models told they should nevere have to pay for anything, it just doesn't work that way in the 'real world' of brick and mortar modeling. I'm far from certain it really works that way for serious internet modeling. A model is not an employee, she or he is an indepenant copntractor. That means the mdoel is responsible for a number of things ranging from health insurance, a personal retirement plan, clothing and accesories, makeup and hair products, along with paying for test shoots unless she can wrangle a free one and comp cards. No, a model should run away from an agency wanting her to pay foor representation, but that's diffeent from paying for products intended to promote the model. Comp cards. portfolio development, placement in the agency head book, etc are all the responsibility of the model. "Isn't a model agency supposed to get you work you could never get yourself so you PAY them to promote you?" Yes and you pay the agency with a 20 or so percent commission for finding that work. "Don't they need PHOTOS on a COMP CARD to promote you to ad agencies, art directors and so on?" Yes, the model pays for them and both the agency and model use them. "On the other hand, if a model is so amazingly beautiful and talented shouldn't she/he be in such demand that she never needs representation and can do it all herself/himself?" NO. The agency can provide a number of modesl with whatever 'look' the client needs. The agency guarantees the model will actually appear at the shoot. If she does not, the agency ma be liable for the cost of the failed shoot. If the model fails to show up, the agency can have replacements at hand very quickly. Most clients are not willing to forgo those guarantees and conveniences to work with an independant model. "Since my income is from the agency, I want to know if what they say is true "every model needs to pay for comp cards" and subsequently the representation and promotion." It's a true and accurate statement. But ..... Like portfolios, the best comp cards are not shot by one photographer and certainly not in one session. A truely legitimate agency should have a list of photographers whose work the agency approves of and which the model can pick and choose, working out her own deal with the photographer. The agency should not be involved! In some states, it's illegal for an agency to have a photographer on staff to shoot comps or require the use of a particular photographer. Those are often, but not always, 'portfolio mills'. "Is it a fear that some models have that if they pay they aren't really a model?" Some seem to believe that a "free lunch" does in fact exist. Nov 06 06 07:42 pm Link Ched wrote: This is what the agent, my client, said they do. I also think this is fair on the agency's part and the model should accept it as the part they must pay for. This was the concept I was referring to. Thank you, Ched Nov 06 06 07:42 pm Link the only thing I might add is that some of the top/biggest agencies will pick up the test/compcard bills and just deduct it from what the model makes on her first job, that is, if they are confident that she'd make money... but then again, if it is a top agency, they usually only sign models that they are confident with : P Nov 06 06 07:46 pm Link Doug Lester wrote: Well, I see your perspective but right now, I am the only teen and adult model photographer they have. I do believe that they will take shots given them by the models but the truth is that they just set up their office here in my area. They are well established in Florida, but this is a new office here in PA so things are still getting set up. It is hoped to do all the looks at once for the card, but I think it is possible to get something nice in one session, especially when enough creativity is employed along with location, makeup, and wardrobe changes. Not the ideal in my mind but doable. If you factor in that some of the models might not have anything to give to the agency, then a session needs to be done like that, so the least amount of time is spent on shoots for the card and more time can be spent on getting that card out and around. Is that a fair assumption? Since I am the photog and I have the sincere desire to get away from "portfolio mills", I do all I can to get things looking like they are not a one day session. Nov 06 06 08:01 pm Link Nov 06 06 08:30 pm Link |
