carlyerin wrote:
James Jackson:

I really don't want this to be taken personally b/c i know it could easily be misconstrued as a personal attack

BUT: i've read all your replies and

you should just stop talking.

Wow... really?  And what do you base that learned opinion on?  If this is not a personal attack... then what exactly do you mean by your statement?

Doug Lester wrote:
Well said. There is too much talk on the forums about flaky models but too many forget photographers can be just as flaky. In brick and mortar modeling and photography there are severe penalties for not showing up. It's too bad something like tht can not be done for those working on the net. Perhaps one of these days those of us working on the net, both models and photographers,  can somehow develope a bit more maturity and responsibility.

wow. someone acutally "gets it" and yet we had to have pages more just to reitterrate this point.

the point: , and as many following hit on as well, is that this is a relatively "new" business/industry. At least in comparison to the agency based industry. And it does have some brilliance in it as Liz hit on, BUT AS AN INDUSTRY we need to start tweking and changing it to protect everyon- model and photographer alike.

So. What are we all going to do- argue in circles, or start protecting each other?

Liz Ashley wrote:
The difference between an agency girl and an internet model is that the agency girl gets the payment in advance and the girl is paid even if the shoot is cancelled. Of course, the agency benefits from this too as most agencies do take 50% of your earnings.

The above damages the credibility of an otherwise potentially useful post.

HungryEye wrote:
2.  Offering a blistering criticism of flaky photographers may have a backlash in terms of who will be willing to pay you for your services in the future.
    This aspect applies to everyone, in my opinion, photographers, models and stylists. Bursts of vitriol in a public forum can leave a bitter taste in mouth of potential clients, the majority of whom lurk in the background and read, without actively participating.

I'm just sayin'...

and i weighed this thought carefully.

but. I am a strong person, who stands up for the things i belive in, and this : my career, my passion- is one of those things. If I get backlash it will be from those that are unprofessional and who do not realize the impact that these types of situation can have on the industry as a whole.

If more people stood up for themselves and the people they care about and the things they are passionate about, then this mess would've been realized and resolved in a more timely and efficient manner than having to put your integrity out there for people to attack.

I'd rather lose all my bookings, change careers and move on than to stand around and remain silent. I'm not a sheep.

James Jackson wrote:

Wow... really?  And what do you base that learned opinion on?  If this is not a personal attack... then what exactly do you mean by your statement?

James, your responses don't fit in her world view.

James Jackson wrote:

Wow... really?  And what do you base that learned opinion on?  If this is not a personal attack... then what exactly do you mean by your statement?

I mean that every post you have responded to has been uneducated and I could spend ALL day replying to and quoting you, but I came to a decision that the best thing for you would be to stop digging the hole you are in. Many people have already discredited most of what you have to say and so in one sentence i was merely agreeing with that.

BUT: i really just had to say SOMETHING to you, b/c apparently what you say goes, and that's just not how this works. But that's NOT how it works. So maybe - just maybe, you should consider a poitn of view other than your own.

James Jackson wrote:
Wow... really?  And what do you base that learned opinion on?  If this is not a personal attack... then what exactly do you mean by your statement?

Mikel Featherston wrote:
James, your responses don't fit in her world view.

Oh I get it... what she's saying then is that even though I agree with her wholeheartedly up to the part about photographers not losing any money when they don't shoot, and even though I'm willing to try to help come by a solution to the situation, I'm an idiot and shouldn't talk.... got it.

James Jackson wrote:
Wow... really?  And what do you base that learned opinion on?  If this is not a personal attack... then what exactly do you mean by your statement?

Mikel Featherston wrote:
James, your responses don't fit in her world view.

James Jackson wrote:
Oh I get it... what she's saying then is that even though I agree with her wholeheartedly up to the part about photographers not losing any money when they don't shoot, and even though I'm willing to try to help come by a solution to the situation, I'm an idiot and shouldn't talk.... got it.

If you'd stopped after agreeing with her, she'd love you to death.

carlyerin wrote:
wow. someone acutally "gets it"

Personally, I got it sometime before you were born... condesension does not help your cause.

I applaud your determination to motivate all to 'clean up' their acts... It will be a very long fight -- I'm quite sure I will be gone long years before this sorts itself out. So long as the barriers to 'entry into the industry' are as low as they are -- and I don't see that changing (perhaps ever) as eliminating the barriers is what internet modelling (and the photographers that feed off it) is all about -- that battle will have to be waged anew every day.

The answer is, of course, personal responsibility in your own business methods (including throroughly checking out the photographer in question rather than just saying ok to the booking cause it's cash. Is this likely to eliminate most of the potential for paying work? perhaps... it is the hobbyist, wannabe, GWC, and student that are the primary markets for the services of internet models. Weeding out most of that to arrive at the real bonafide offers is part of your task. (as is weeding through the 'offers' from some 15,000,000 internet model profiles currently on the internet the responsibility of the photographers hoping to survive here.)

The complaints of flaking from either photographer or model is merely a confirmation that one's business practices and methods need to be reviewed and improved. That is on the individual... not 'the industry'.

Mikel Featherston wrote:

James Jackson wrote:
Wow... really?  And what do you base that learned opinion on?  If this is not a personal attack... then what exactly do you mean by your statement?

Mikel Featherston wrote:
James, your responses don't fit in her world view.

If you'd stopped after agreeing with her, she'd love you to death.

You know Mike....James and I just got off the phone with one another. I had the pleasure to speak with him and assure him there was no need to file "slander" charges against me. 
And here I plainly said that I did not want anything I said to be misconstrued as a personal attack...yet I feel as though you are trying to use what James has been saying against me to attack me without coming right out and atacking me with your own words.

*I never said you were and idiot, James.
*I never said that you don't incur costs. I plainly stated that I understand that photogs incur costs as far as MUA/location fees and or studio fees.

Mikel Featherston wrote:
James, your responses don't fit in her world view.

...

If you'd stopped after agreeing with her, she'd love you to death.

carlyerin wrote:
You know Mike....James and I just got off the phone with one another. I had the pleasure to speak with him and assure him there was no need to file "slander" charges against me. 
And here I plainly said that I did not want anything I said to be misconstrued as a personal attack...yet I feel as though you are trying to use what James has been saying against me to attack me without coming right out and atacking me with your own words.

*I never said you were and idiot, James.
*I never said that you don't incur costs. I plainly stated that I understand that photogs incur costs as far as MUA/location fees and or studio fees.

No, and as I understand from our phone conversation you were instead taking the mild correction of another industry professional to one of my comments as an admonishment of everything I say.  Now while that other industry professional and I have had words in the past I am not above agreeing that he can be right sometimes... and I've noted the way in which he *was* right in this thread.  I have no problems admitting when I'm wrong, and if I simply "stopped talking" as you suggest, I could never apologize for those times when I am.

But Mikel's quote is a prime example of how your words *were* construed, and no matter how you meant them, the intended meaning did not come out... instead the large majority of those reading here understood you to mean what Mikel and I said.  "James is an idiot, and he should not be talking because he is wrong even though he agrees with me."

I'm glad I had the few moments to rant at you on the phone, and I apologize for any bad taste it may have left you with.  I did not say anything I do not mean... that includes my opinion about that other industry professional who corrected me.  Your personal relationship with him does not change my feelings about how he interacts with me.

Now, as I said on the phone... I was simply making you aware of who I am and the truth of the matter before you continued down a path *towards* slander charges.

I thank you for your time.

Hamptons Glamour wrote:
Hey Bill,

I've done that a few times for Kerri already LOL, she may have told you the stories. Unfortunately, I can't be everywhere, plus I'm getting too old for that....Well, maybe not.

and i must agree . mike is one of the best freinds i ever have had  and i appreicate everything u ever did for me:) luv u!!!

Liz Ashley wrote:
Of course, the agency benefits from this too as most agencies do take 50% of your earnings.

Liz Ashley wrote:
1st of all, lol.. I do not make things up.. I am a 4.0 student who has better things to do with my time than make things up. I have consulted with agencies in the past in Houston who take 40- 50 % on a non-exclusive contract. Also, I have consulted with photographers in the business for 20 years in NYC who often work with agencies such as Elite, Ford and they confirm the 40 % and 50 % rate.

That's utter bullshit.

Agencies such as Elite and Ford take a 20% commission from the model's earnings, not 50% as you claim, whether it's non-exclusive or not.  They also receive a separate payment from the client for services rendered to the client, called an agency service charge, which is another 20%, but does not come from the model's earnings.  That is far from your claim that they take 50% of the model's earnings.

I don't care what your grade point is - that's just the way the industry works.  However, I will be happy to be proven wrong.  Please tell me any real agency in Houston, or any real agency in New York City, that takes a 50% commision as you claim.  I will call them up, let them know you said it, and report back what is said.  Or you can call them up and report back what is said.

You won't do it, of course, because what you said is not true.  You made it up.

Liz Ashley wrote:
2nd of all, I am not a narcassistic person.. I just wanted to point out my fellow models who are equally as talented who face the cancellations just as I do.

If you say so.  That would be very hard to tell from your insistence that I had to praise you if I had the temerity to praise anyone else.

You were not the OP in this thread.  You were not remonstrated with in this thread for posting (prior to me having to do it to you).  You and I have not worked together, so why and how should I make a rosy post about how well you work with me?   How in hell, when I'm posting about my personal experience, did it get to be about you?

And yet you said,

Liz Ashley wrote:
Nevermind mentioning that I am a professional too. I have been in this industry for almost 6 years now, and should be given the same respect as any other model.

Sounds pretty narcissistic to me.

Liz Ashley wrote:
3rd of all, WHO ARE YOU? Your website is private and only includes first name...???  Most photographers have their full name on their website and I have never heard of photographers working with agencies with the name "txphotog."

I'm not with an agency.  I'm retired.  That should be clear from my profile.

Liz Ashley wrote:
4th of all, how dare you insult me and say that I am all of these things when you have never met me..

Your posts speak for themselves, no special personal knowledge needed.

Liz Ashley wrote:
5th of all, I have worked with some of the best photographers out there and they can vouch for my character and my understanding of "it's not all about me." In fact, I am known for being very down to earth and easy to work with.

Again, if you say so.  I can confirm that not all people have the same rosy opinion of you.  Is this really a path you want to go down? 

I suggested earlier that you not make this personal, Liz.  If you insist, as you did, then that's what we will do.

Liz Ashley wrote:
6th of all, The agency girls have all my respect, however we {as "internet" models} do not get the respect we deserve. My whole point was that at least the agency models get paid sooner or later

No, that is not what you said.  This is what you said:

Liz Ashley wrote:
The difference between an agency girl and an internet model is that the agency girl gets the payment in advance

For a 4.0 student you don't seem to have gotten the notion that you can't say any old bullshit thing that you want and expect not to be contradicted because you really meant something very different.  Say what you mean and get it right, or don't be surprised when someone corrects you.  Worse, don't claim that the person who corrects you is a Bad Person simply because of the correction, as you did. That was truly vicious and uncalled for.

Liz Ashley wrote:
Also, I have had to wait for checks in the past from magazines and from corporations as well. I know the drill.

So why make that false claim if you know how it works?  What useful purpose is served by it?

oldguysrule wrote:
since i'm an old gasbag, with more credits than most of you will ever hope to achieve, i get to add the following...

this crapass internet shit sucks. it's amateur city. people spout utter garbage and call it fact. the masses hear what they want to hear, grab hold, and call it truth.

i cant tell "you" (this is the royal you not specific to anyone) that you're an ugly ol cunt and should probably just be thankful they didn't kill you at birth let alone call you a 'model' even though we ALL know it to be true, because that would be considered harsh.

ya know what? much like the fekking politics in this world... ya get what you ask for! if you are unhappy with the process, stop blowin smoke up the asses of those who wouldn't know reality if it hit them in the head (notice this applies to ALL categories of human here on this site and all in the 'real world' as well.)

i am deeply dismayed by the world that i see out there. the biggest generation of children ever... convinced that porn is nirvana. may they extend my morphine drip to include the rest of my days on this planet.

in short.... fuck you. respect yourself or don't thats your call. but STOP whining about your circumstances. For fucks sake, especially in light of where we are in this world... and in respect for the myriad that have died to protect/fight-for your inalienable right to fucking WHINEEEEEEEEEEEE... get the fuck over it. learn your industry. be realistic. respect yourself. don't lie. don't cheat. don't fuck below your station... man you guys break my heart.

Thanks for listening. I've scanned far to many photos today of beautiful women who earned the right to be in front of my lens. I only hope I did them justice.

LOL....and well said 

carlyerin wrote:
and so just to clarify- my cancellation policy is thus:
YOu can either
A) pay me a $50 deposit, which protects you from any cancellation fee the day of
OR
B)Pay my full fee if cancelled on day and and 50% anytime before then.

Guess which one the photographers choose.

take it or leave it- but I thought I"d put it out there.

lol...what happens if a company wants to hire, are you going to tell them this? If you do don't expect many to use you.

CareLyn Anita wrote:
Hi .....Um........ I am 4'11" have an mm page and am pretty dedicated.... I understand what you are saying but in the o.p. you said girls who are 5'1'' and have an mm page ,  i dont think size or height applies here , and i do beleive there are several types of models who take this quite seriously even if the are under 5'9''.... Thanks.

On another note flakes are every where in every industry , maybe they are intimidated by you height and beauty...

I too was curious why the OP decided to make a totally unnecessary reference to shorter girls with an MM page. Clearly, MM is not solely a "fashion" oriented site, which means that there are models of ALL shapes and sizes doing different types of modeling on this site.  Whther or not one thinks internet modeling is a joke or not is irrelevant as this site is a freaking INTERNET MODELING SITE.  To contend that one's height should dictate more respect regarding cancelations is just silly. I also want to add that some self claimed professional models that have posted in this thread are 5'3"--a mere 2 inches taller than the 5'1" that legitimizes being canceled on (apparently).

carlyerin wrote:
I know that this is still quoted on the forum...but please make note that Jose deleted his post saying the above, because I was in the process of trying to secure the location at the time he called Kerri. We were on the phone trying to book the "Obar" to shoot in and could not answer the other line...Neither one of us are flaky, we were just unable to answer the phone at the time.

I deleted my post cuz I was asked to.

I never called anyone flakey.  I just pointed out it was ironic- and it was.  From my perspective- I had an evening shoot with em.  Im a Dallas photographer.  I wasnt flaking.  And I had no idea what was up and it was already 2:30pm same day.  The irony being that instead of calling me to plan out the shoot tonight- I see this post about how all us Dallas photographers are flakes.

And yup- we shooting tomorrow.  If you see hot pics on our ports soon- you know all is well.  If you dont, well, then ... :-)

oldguysrule wrote:
...
noone deserves respect.
people EARN respect.

Deal with it!

I totally have to agree here.  Respect is earned.  Its the reason I am one way with models I have worked with and another way with models I have never worked with.

However, yeah- I do think it stinks that people flake on travelling models- thats no bueno.

I think the best approach is to assume that people are probably the lowest common denomintor until they prove themselves otherwise.  That doesnt mean dont be polite or civil- just be cautious and use preventative measures. 

I used to believe every struggling story I heard and flew models in all the time- until I ate my 2nd roundtrip airline ticket.  Everyone has abuse stories.  And we cant change other people- we can only change how we react to them and allow ouselves to be impacted by them.

kerri taylor wrote:
=Understand that when models are traveling they rely on a certain # of shoots to make the trip profitable.  After all, IF a bunch of people cancel.. You have AIRFARE, RENTAL CAR,  GAS, FOOD, EXPENSES, AND HOTEL TO WORRY ABOUT. So a modeling  trip  may even end up costing you money if you get cancellations.. /quote]

Kerri makes a really good point (as has Carly and Liz) about models traveling.  If models consistently get money-losing trips because of cancellations, then there won't be any more models traveling.  And as a couple of photographers said - that leaves us paying all the travel and taking all the risk.

By the way - I have shot with Carly and Liz (and hope to shoot with Kerri!) and will say that they are all very talented and behave professionally.  It's the kind of professional relationship that I value.

Bob

( ANT ) Mgaphoto wrote:

lol...what happens if a company wants to hire, are you going to tell them this? If you do don't expect many to use you.

typically....and i use this word lightly. . . my agency would handle that....

and odn't even try to go "oh well...." b/c YES i do realize i could be contacted personally by a corp company....but in that circumstance yes- i would request either a legal document or a retainer fee.

Robert Warren wrote:
By the way - I have shot with Carly and Liz (and hope to shoot with Kerri!) and will say that they are all very talented and behave professionally.  It's the kind of professional relationship that I value.

Bob

I agree!!

Liz Ashley wrote:
TO KERRI, CARLY ERIN, VALERIE, BETCEE MAY, CARLOTTA, AND ALL READING:
edit
I meant no harm to you Carly Erin, I have never expressed this before..Why would I now?

I just would like to say that I hope the models are able to come up with a system that will enable models to be profitable and have as much financial loss as possible.

I am sorry the thread turned into petty fights..

THE POINT IS: MODELS DESERVE RESPECT.

No matter what noone deserves what Kerri experienced.

Kudos to those who had enough guts to stand up and say something, even if it meant a personal attack...

Lets work together to change this....

Sincerely,
Liz Ashley

no offense what so ever liz. I agree with you 100%. As models if we all band together with the same code and policies then they'll have to take it or leave it.

carlyerin wrote:
i NEVER said DALLAS PHOTOGS ARE FLAKES. I said recently i'd had problems in Dallas and the biggest problem in AZ....

Jesus! Twist em a lil more folks. Why not- then we can turn what was  a simple account of recent activities into a public stoning!

I have't cusses on here yet....YET:
BUT FOR FUCKS SAKE.

and you wanna say that I"M whining? All I"m trying to do is raise awareness that as women who do nude modeling we deserve the SAME amount of respect....

AND I MEAN DESERVE...dont' get me started on how every human being deserves respect for that one reason alone. And THAT's what's wrong with people now-a-days. ..

I digress....and i mean deserv the same amount of professional respect as those who wash windows or flip burgers or drive trash trucks, but we don't even get that.

Unfortunately posts do get twisted on MM all the time Carly!!

Kristin Anne wrote:

I too was curious why the OP decided to make a totally unnecessary reference to shorter girls with an MM page. Clearly, MM is not solely a "fashion" oriented site, which means that there are models of ALL shapes and sizes doing different types of modeling on this site.  Whther or not one thinks internet modeling is a joke or not is irrelevant as this site is a freaking INTERNET MODELING SITE.  To contend that one's height should dictate more respect regarding cancelations is just silly. I also want to add that some self claimed professional models that have posted in this thread are 5'3"--a mere 2 inches taller than the 5'1" that legitimizes being canceled on (apparently).

uhm no. my reference were to the girls who assume that they are a model, as in fashion models, who think that the rules don't apply to them.

the girls that are shorter, are often times art or glamour models, but even typically glam models aren't shorter than 5'4''.....that's just "typically"

CareLyn Anita wrote:
Hi .....Um........ I am 4'11" have an mm page and am pretty dedicated.... I understand what you are saying but in the o.p. you said girls who are 5'1'' and have an mm page ,  i dont think size or height applies here , and i do beleive there are several types of models who take this quite seriously even if the are under 5'9''.... Thanks.

On another note flakes are every where in every industry , maybe they are intimidated by you height and beauty...

I don't think Carly was meaning shorter models can't be professional...but she is absoutle right about these flakey photographers...I made a trip to phx plenty notice...I had atleast four gigs ready to go for when I went up for two days. The very last min...a day before the shoot they cancelled, and just did not show up like they should have..They bitch about models not giving notice, they are no different!! Flakes are all over the place.