Adler Photographic wrote:
To trivialize or justify the horrible results as numbers of chance is useless and insensitive. It isn't necessary to take the otherside always. Yes debate is good but at times simply agreeing to further or promote a cause especially when it involves the safety and well being of others is best without argument for the sake of argument.

No, when things need to be trivialized, it should be.  Otherwise it leads to unjustified level of fear, which is fundamentally against living freely.  Safety is overrated.

And this is a "high risk" industry?  Give me a break.  It's more dangerous to be a bus driver.

lll wrote:

You just posted a random TV non-reality show that has absolutely no bearing on real-life, one that pits "internet photographers" at odd with "internet models", and now you tell people to "get along"?

Um NO~~~ This was a real show. CBS ivestigates. I watacehd it and ther were well over 20 models rapped the rest of them were no where to be found. (about 200)
Do you really think I would start a thread on reality t.v.?? Please!  I respect this site and the members of it more than that!

Sara Danielle Hines wrote:

It does happen and for you to say it does not makes you look silly. ~~~

In my case I have dealt with nothing but professional photographers. They have actually all became my friends. I talk and  actually hang with them on the regular, outside of modeling.  They have met my mom, my escort ( who by the way only came along because of my shoulder and the fact that I have fainted twice from the pain)

No photog I have worked with has had a problem with her coming. She helps out and give compliments the whole time. They have al become friends with her as well and  invite her to future shoots.
I believe most people on here mean well. I am just saying it’s a flag if someone does not want to shoot without a escort or an escort waiting outside.
There is no reason to deny that . In my opinion. If it were a High Model Agencies wanting a shoot I am sure they would not care if a family member sat close by or outside the room.
I know this has been beaten to death and did NOT intend  to start another thread on it. I just wanted people to read and see that there is a reasoning behind people(Photogs or Models) wanting someone to come along.

People are over analyzing this . Please don’t. Its simple and clear.

If you don’t want an escort the you may have to deal with not working with that model. Not a big deal, there are many who are willing.

Models there are many photogs who will allow escorts ( MIND YOU~ They have to be professional and help or just read in the corner with no disturbances)

Actually, nothing that Vanscottie has said is silly. It is a FACT that instances such as what you have seen on television recently do NOT happen EVERY DAY. Yes, they do happen some, but not every day. That, I do believe, is the point that Vanscottie was making.

You keep trying to talk about this subject as if you have been modeling for years, but I see that you just started earlier this year. Sure, you may have had some experience with photographers, and since you are still new to the industry, I can see where you may be worried at the moment. However, if and when you sign with an agency, do expect to not be taking your mother to the photoshoots with you, as it will not be accepted. You are a big girl, you should know how to pick out the bad seeds from the good. Most photo shoots, unless they are with complete amateur photographers, will often have a stylist, mua, assistant, or all three on set. In those cases, do you really feel that there is a need to take an escort in with you? I honestly don't.

As a model, I do take an escort to shoots that I know won't have anything other than the photographer. However, my escort stays out of the way...most times in a different area of the studio, or a different room. They do stay within earshot just in case, but I feel that there is no need to have my escort hoarding over my every waking move.

As a photographer, I don't mind if a model brings an escort, as long as such said escort doesn't feel the need to try and "instruct" the model during the shoot, as I have seen quite a few do. This is the very reason why moms, over-protective boyfriends/girlfriends, and sometimes dads are not the best choices to have as an escort.

I feel that for a model, if a photographer absolutely insists upon no escort for a shoot, and cannot provide decent references, then that model should know her answer as to if she should work with that person or not. If she still decides to work with that person, and she gets hurt, then it's her own foolishness and idiocracy that got her in the situation, I feel.

BeccaAnnPhotoGal wrote:
Actually, nothing that Vanscottie has said is silly. It is a FACT that instances such as what you have seen on television recently do NOT happen EVERY DAY. Yes, they do happen some, but not every day. That, I do believe, is the point that Vanscottie was making.

You keep trying to talk about this subject as if you have been modeling for years, but I see that you just started earlier this year. Sure, you may have had some experience with photographers, and since you are still new to the industry, I can see where you may be worried at the moment. However, if and when you sign with an agency, do expect to not be taking your mother to the photoshoots with you, as it will not be accepted. You are a big girl, you should know how to pick out the bad seeds from the good. Most photo shoots, unless they are with complete amateur photographers, will often have a stylist, mua, assistant, or all three on set. In those cases, do you really feel that there is a need to take an escort in with you? I honestly don't.

As a model, I do take an escort to shoots that I know won't have anything other than the photographer. However, my escort stays out of the way...most times in a different area of the studio, or a different room. They do stay within earshot just in case, but I feel that there is no need to have my escort hoarding over my every waking move.

As a photographer, I don't mind if a model brings an escort, as long as such said escort doesn't feel the need to try and "instruct" the model during the shoot, as I have seen quite a few do. This is the very reason why moms, over-protective boyfriends/girlfriends, and sometimes dads are not the best choices to have as an escort.

I feel that for a model, if a photographer absolutely insists upon no escort for a shoot, and cannot provide decent references, then that model should know her answer as to if she should work with that person or not. If she still decides to work with that person, and she gets hurt, then it's her own foolishness and idiocracy that got her in the
situation, I feel.

I understand you well. You need to get what I am saying. Yes I have only worked since May. I have had nothing but cool ass photogs.
Does that not say something?
I am have not had an escort till last month when my shoulder went out. When it did evrey photog that wanted to work with me were cool. Those that were not made it cool. Trust me some were really unhappy. But we worked it out.
Like I said~ If a photog want to work with a model they will work around requierments and vise versa. It does not need to be made into a big deal

lll wrote:

You just posted a random TV non-reality show that has absolutely no bearing on real-life, one that pits "internet photographers" at odd with "internet models", and now you tell people to "get along"?

Yes, things do happen, well, anything happens.  I could have been killed today on my motorcycle.  I could have fallen on the bathtub taking a shower.  I could have a heart attack during sex. 
. 

You had sex today

cool

whats it like???

Sara Danielle Hines wrote:
Um NO~~~ This was a real show. CBS ivestigates. I watacehd it and ther were well over 20 models rapped the rest of them were no where to be found. (about 200)
Do you really think I would start a thread on reality t.v.?? Please!  I respect this site and the members of it more than that!

I assume you mean raped, not rapped, although since I hate rap music rapped might be a worse fate. As for 200 missing models, unless their count originates from the 1960's onward that is total horseshit! 200 models just "went missing" yeah right, one girl goes missing on whatever the hell island that was and it's front page news for months, 200 models go missing and only CBS News mentions it, ummm yeah

vanscottie wrote:

I assume you mean raped, not rapped, although since I hate rap music rapped might be a worse fate. As for 200 missing models, unless their count originates from the 1960's onward that is total horseshit! 200 models just "went missing" yeah right, one girl goes missing on whatever the hell island that was and it's front page news for months, 200 models go missing and only CBS News mentions it, ummm yeah

This is what happens during sweeps...lol! Darn my having only AFN! I miss everything!

I still think that the networks exaggerate quite a bit on their stories. Sometimes, believing what goes on in the news, is like believing that Geraldo Rivera is the king of Mogadishu. Things get blown out of proportion on television...that is how they get their viewers.

I'm not saying that there may have been a few models who have either been abducted, or murdered, or whatever over the years. However, I feel that people will believe what they want to in regards to certain things they see or hear in the media. A lot of the times, a person will only get part of the actual story...the glorified part, in fact, is what tends to be broadcast.

So, I still have to agree with you  (Vanscottie) on your statement.

And, as much as I am trying to understand what the OP is trying to say...it's really hard to do when I have to spend so much time trying to read through all of the grammatical errors and broken sentences. I do understand that she wants to feel safe at a photo shoot.

My advice for those who are so paranoid about working with internet photographers, though: If you feel that you are going to get hurt by working with a photographer from the internet, then simply sign on with a legitimate modeling agency, and only work with the photographers that they suggest you work with. It's that simple. For those models who know how to distinguish between the creep photographers and the ones who actually take their job seriously, and realize when an escort is needed, and when it is not, then I say rock on!

Ok, I am done now. Blast me all you want...hehe!

vanscottie wrote:
I assume you mean raped, not rapped, although since I hate rap music rapped might be a worse fate. As for 200 missing models, unless their count originates from the 1960's onward that is total horseshit! 200 models just "went missing" yeah right, one girl goes missing on whatever the hell island that was and it's front page news for months, 200 models go missing and only CBS News mentions it, ummm yeah

Yes This was since the 1950's according to this one show.

Sara Danielle Hines wrote:

Yes This was since the 1950's according to this one show.

Since the 1950s!!?!?

Oh for pete's sake...You do realize you're talking about 200 people in over 50 years, don't you?

Stop watching so much network TV -- it really is rotting out your brain.

Brian Diaz wrote:

In 2 1-hour shows there are 36 minutes of commercials.

american TV, sell sell sell

Sara Danielle Hines wrote:

Um NO~~~ This was a real show. CBS ivestigates. I watacehd it and ther were well over 20 models rapped the rest of them were no where to be found. (about 200)
Do you really think I would start a thread on reality t.v.?? Please!  I respect this site and the members of it more than that!

Sara....how do I say this....kinder and gentler...

You would benefit greatly by deleloping the ability to critically analyze the "news" that is "reported" by corporate media.   The basis of corporate media, is to generate profit.  They do that by selling ad time, rates based on (simply) eyeballs.   Sweeps is a period where they count eyeballs.  More eyeballs means higher rates.  Higher rates means more profit.  Profit is what corporations want.  TV right now is a sweeps period, so this is the time networks flash sex, violence, first run episodes and movies etc.

"News" magazines have a heavy spin.   They're highly editorialized (Just look to story selection, visual editing and particularly narration) and very dumbed down so that they draw in the greatest number of viewers.  During this period of time you can expect to see sensationalized stories.   Americans tend to be fixated on sex and violence, so it's no surprise to me that right now antm, etcetc are doing these "women in peril" type stories.

Of course in the last what 50 years women are at risk of being raped (not rapped).  But you have to really put things into perspective.

Melvin Moten Jr wrote:
Since the 1950s!!?!?

Oh for pete's sake...You do realize you're talking about 200 people in over 50 years, don't you?

Stop watching so much network TV -- it really is rotting out your brain.

Yeah, that comes out to something like 4 per year. But I would suspect that is too high. If a model goes "missing" they are just like most other folks who go "missing." The missing person does it intentionally. They are escaping personal problems, real or imagined, that make them leave and never come home. They are not often murdered; dead bodies are large and noticeable. The Runaway Bride story, or something like it, is a far more common explanation than missing models being killed by a photographer. But the inuendo and fear mongering are intended to increase ratings, feeding off the popularity of ANTM.

Sara Danielle Hines wrote:

Um NO~~~ This was a real show. CBS ivestigates. I watacehd it and ther were well over 20 models rapped the rest of them were no where to be found. (about 200)
Do you really think I would start a thread on reality t.v.?? Please!  I respect this site and the members of it more than that!

Sara, here's some insight into how much CBS investigated that story. ANTM was a success of the otherwise low-rent UPN network.

Here's a link:
http://www.mediavillage.com/JMER_Archive/07-23-03ER.pdf

UPN went out of business about two months ago. UPN is now part of CW. CBS owns CW (along with WB). The CW shows are now a mixture of what used to be WB and UPN and of course some new ones. CBS has a financial interest in promoting the ANTM franchise, keeping the item in front of the viewers. There is no journalistic reason for CBS to "keep it real." There is every financial reason for CBS to misrepresent "the truth." Sorry to break this to you, but you need to hear it. Journalistic integrity for network shows like this is something like the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus.

dfstudios wrote:

Sara, here's some insight into how much CBS investigated that story. ANTM was a success of the otherwise low-rent UPN network.

Here's a link:
http://www.mediavillage.com/JMER_Archive/07-23-03ER.pdf

UPN went out of business about two months ago. UPN is now part of CW. CBS owns CW (along with WB). The CW shows are now a mixture of what used to be WB and UPN and of course some new ones. CBS has a financial interest in promoting the ANTM franchise, keeping the item in front of the viewers. There is no journalistic reason for CBS to "keep it real." There is every financial reason for CBS to misrepresent "the truth." Sorry to break this to you, but you need to hear it. Journalistic integrity for network shows like this is something like the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus.

Truly.  Edward R. Murrow is doing summersaults in his grave.

TXPhotog wrote:
While agreeing with all of the commentary above about the "news", I have to ask another question:

How many of those "models" were really models, and how many of those "photographers" were really photographers?

Someone sitting on a bar stool claiming to be a photographer has nothing to do with this industry, nor do such incidents say anything at all about the dangers that a real model might face when dealing with a real photographer. 

There are some situations that are inherently more risky than professional transactions:   leaving a bar with someone you just met, or going off with some guy in the mall because he asked you to (for any reason).  Answering blind ads on craigslist.  Whether the alleged reason for going to such things is claimed to be "photography" or anything else, such cases are distinctively different from shooting with a person who has a known web presence, an online portfolio and known personal contact data, and who is subject to insightful questioning by a knowledgeable model.

CBS, Tyra and all the other sellers of fear gloss over that for the sake of ratings, and people even praise them for "raising consciousness of the dangers".  It's crap, and should be treated like crap.

Exactly... Jeffery Dahmer paid young men $50 to come to his apartment and pose nude, where he killed the, got drunk, had sex with the corpse, and then ate some of them.

Its important to remember he was a serial killer, not a photographer.

bang bang photo wrote:
http://www.granneman.com/blog/2006/07/06/media-induced-fear-its-effects/

http://www.asu.edu/feature/includes/spr … heide.html

http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2 … ar-86.html

http://abs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/39/4/379

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c … D67647.DTL

http://www.aphroditewomenshealth.com/ne … news.shtml

http://web.takebackthemedia.com/geeklog … 6170842493

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/k … 2/00259784

http://www.stanford.edu/dept/news/pr/03/media723.html

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/ … es?pg=full

People should read some of those links to understand media and the business of media.

I am very familar with those topics!

Thanks Paul, for posting those links!

Daniela V wrote:
You mean that guy that sat next to me at the bar last night and wanted me to come back to his place so that he and his photographer friends could shoot me for $5000 in cash and I wouldn't even have to take my clothes of was.....


A FAKE?!?!?!?!

Shut. Up.

If you have ask, "Do you travel?" And the response is, "The check won't clear." That would have been me.

lll wrote:
And this is a "high risk" industry?  Give me a break.  It's more dangerous to be a bus driver.

With all due respect, Leo, I disagree with this completely.





I mean, do you know that models and their escorts rape and steal from photographers every day?!  Almost hourly.  It's a wild world out there, man...

Sara Danielle Hines wrote:

LOL!! So your saying its more likely for a model to attack a photog than vise versa?

Yes people take risks. If a model wants a tag along that does not disturb, so be it. Or have them wait outside. Whats the big deal? This is the internet and people are rapped killed and murderd every day from false people on it.
I read it every other day in the paper.

I did not want this to be anothe NO ESCORTS THREAD I was just making a point that people should realize why models are concerned.

well you know we photographers have 1000s$ of equipment and and what if slugo decided that he needs to sport his crack habit ?????

Adler Photographic wrote:
It is crazy for a photographer to insist and claim an escort will ruin the shoot.

Really?  You sure?  Gina Lee's photographer would probably disagree.

If you don't know the story, Gina's boyfriend suddenly attacked and punched the photographer in the face 4 times because the photographer said she looked "hot".  I would imagine that brought the shoot to a halt.  There is another photographer here (I forget who) who had an escort pull a gun on him.  That's bad for a shoot too.

Anjel Britt wrote:
quite
poor OGR

im actually going to visualise Amercia teaching young gals that

you can tell when somethings wrong
leave

you have value as a person
you do not need strangers to oggle you to tell you this

you have value as a sexual person
you do not need to flaunt yourself sexually ad infinitum to enjoy this

you have value as a feminine person
you dont have to take crap from men

you have value as an adult person and should learn to take care of yourslef

you need not take offence at others seeing them as a threat
you need not act like a bitch

do not expect others to do that either and if they do - so what

protect yourself without paranoia

you can tell  ...when somethings wrong ....leave

you have legs.
forget the sleazy pictures that will shock mom and dad just use them to kick him or RUN


;-)

But this requires a person to actually be a person, and that's too much of a hassle for most people.

Anjel Britt wrote:
its not like it hasnt been SAID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

honestly, if any more gals are so stupid they need to hear it AGAIN from you maybe they deserve a fright

i have fought off lots of men
i have a damn f**in killer KICK and a good line in exit strategies

experience is the best teacher.

Well I think she isn't posting this for the models, but more so for the photographers out there who like to pretend like there is no potential danger for models when they go on photo shoots.  In most cases it isn't if you're going on a photo shoot that was booked through a legit professional agency with a legit professional client in the actual industry. But for all the freelance work done on the side, models do stand a risk and potential danger to might end up meeting or working with someone who may be praying on pretty women.  Not all freelance photographers are dangerous criminals.  But there are a few that make the exception to be potential offenders.

Ron Casas wrote:
Funny thing happened last night, after the 48 hrs. show on that photog that killed countless women, it was time to hit the hay. I brought up the subject in bed with my wife who did not watch the show. I told her there is always a discussion going on, on the boards on this site about whether or not escorts should be at shoots. I am not kidding …
She said “ Oh yeah, YOU should have an escort with you on shoots with those girls you never know when one of them is going to accuse you of doing something to them”

It cracked me up, I guess it is all about perspective and who you are trying to protect…

I can see that side of point of view.  Photographers could also get robbed by a fake model or something.  There's risk factors for everyone.

Sara Danielle Hines wrote:
So with all these NO ESCORT threads I thought I would post this forum.

My dad is watching CBS right now and called to say to turn the channel . A  special on how models have been Raped, Battered, and Murdered was on.  It was called ”Exposed”.

There were many cases of missing models most not found. Ect. I watched part of it and got the point.
Some are just stupid ass girls who get approached in the mall by guys and leave with them. To no surprise they are attacked. Others are working with well know photogs and some were rapped others are now dead.
They even have some of the photogs that are convicted on this special. They have nothing of  importance to say other than the fact that, YES they committed the crime.
These Photogs were well know some not. Some models had worked with them MANY times before being attacked (that is with the well known ones).

I am one to ALWAYS check references . Sometime double or quadruple. Since I injured my arm I have had my MOM drive me to all shoots and hang out with the photogs I work with. She is very cool and all my photog s have come to be her friend. 

When I asked each of them if it was okay for her to come along NONE of them have had a problem with it. Maybe I have just been lucky?

I just think this whole NO ESCORT deal needs to stop. I understand that no professional photog wants a nucience around while they are working . That can be made perfectly clear before the shoot happens and if it gets out of hand you have the choice to dismiss them!

I see no reason for a photog to completely dismiss a model because they want to bring an escort. With the way this world is today, I would think photogs would find respect in models who ask’s for references , gives all phone # and addresses to a friend or family member of where they will be and also brings someone along with them. I don’t understand how any photog could find annoyance in this!

Question~ Say a model was to shoot with you and you denied an escort and said it was not professional ect. That real models don’t do that, Yadda Yadda.  Say she shot with you and all was good. Then say she had another photog contact her to shoot. Taking your advice she went willing with no escort. Then you open the paper the next day to see the Beautiful model you just shot weeks before DEAD or RAPPED or Whatever. Do you want that laying on your shoulders?

I KNOW~ That was a VERY dramatic      I’m just trying to prove a point. Its not like it couldn’t happen ya know.

I am blessed to work with fantastic amazing photogs!

I really appreciate you posting this thread, because for some reason a lot of photographers seem to be in denial about the potential dangers model face in the everyday business interactions of doing photo shoots.  I understand well why most photographers would prefer there be no escorts present, because they may feel their safety at a risk, or that the escort may interefere with the flow and energy of the shoot.  But in some instances it is necessary to bring an escort.  If you are a freelance model working with freelance photographers to build your portfolio, than I definitely recommend that the model should bring an escort, and that the photographer should be cautious as well.  But it is definitely more of a safety factor for female models doing freelance work and photo shoots versus a male photographer doing a freelance photo shoots and work.

By the way, I just wanted to tell you that you made a typo error.  It's not "Rapped", it's "Raped".  No offense or anything....I make typo erros pretty often myself from thinking too many random thoughts and typing fast all at once. lol  Thanks again for the thread.

Koray wrote:
any model can come to a photo shoot with me with an escort. can put a gun in my head...an army can wait in the room...I'd still shoot the same crappy pictures...does that make you safe now?

- people are killed in parks but I still see them there...
- people die in traffic but I still see them drive...
- people still skydive...
- people still hook up with strangers...
- there are germs everywhere...

should I keep going or will you ever realise that being born is accepting all th risks already...

Just being born means that we are gonna die, someday! live and let live is the best policy......

Farah Malika Images wrote:
Why do people keep insisting that anything on tv, news, reality shows, talk shows, whatever media is not worth considering as a possible decent source of information???
She posted about a story from the cbs news, and people still are in question of the issue about the safety of models and the possible need for escorts and to avoid scams?  WTH!  I've never seen so much denial on one site. LMAO

The OP didn't provide us with anything other than a statement that there was a TV show last night that she didn't even see.  One should do due diligence either way. I'm wondering why the OP didn't give us anything we can sink our teeth into. Because the show last night on 48hrs was irrelevant to what we talk about here and if anything argues against escorts because that guy killed an escort or two. For a real rapist or killer the escort just makes it a 2 for 1 special.

So the OP needs to provide us with a link so we can evaluate her fearmongering. I don't know why you people don't discuss this stuff over on the escort thread. But pony up a site so we can not just be asked to take your word for it.

KM von Seidl wrote:
Damn.  I'm liking you more and more every post I read of yours.

thanks! that makes one of you.

Digital Soup wrote:

Just being born means that we are gonna die, someday! live and let live is the best policy......

True...but I think most of us would just prefer that when we die one day that it will not be a horrific death if we can avoid it by using precaution while we're out living our lives.  LOL

Sara Danielle Hines wrote:
So with all these NO ESCORT threads I thought I would post this forum.

My dad is watching CBS right now and called to say to turn the channel . A  special on how models have been Raped, Battered, and Murdered was on.  It was called ”Exposed”.

... bla bla...
I KNOW~ That was a VERY dramatic      I’m just trying to prove a point. Its not like it couldn’t happen ya know.

It's not like it couldn't happen, huh?  What do you think the probability is?  You haven't "proved any point."  You've just tossed out another irrational argument with zero support. brother. Why don't you provide us with a link to the program info so we can evaluate this. Right now it looks like you're quite gullible and swallowing the program hook, line, and sinker. And you didn't even see it!!!