W.G. Rowland wrote:
Translation:

I'm having trouble getting people to work with me.

Don't hate! Because of him, I crave Pepperidge Farm cookies!!!!

Mitsukai wrote:

He only wanted analingus. Leave the poor guy alone.

hahahaha

Double Eagle Studios wrote:
No Limits, that also means you right? Ok, Come out to Vegas, we will tie you to the Welcome to Las Vegas sign, nude & upside down and we take pictures of you. Oh, and we want to do it as a TFP shoot, no escorts, just you, well maybe the cops will come, we will be gone by then, they can untie you.

hahahahahah Riiiiiiiight!

I was going to volunteer for this shoot until you  got to the leaving me tied up to the sign part... I know, models and our god awful limits!!!

Mac Swift wrote:
Come up to my neck of the woods.  There seems to be no shortage of girls who will pose for a guy with your level of work.  They seem to have no limits.

Ouch!  But a pretty damn clever response.  haha!

I've always wondered, when out in the woods, how I would recognize whether I'm in the neck or not.  What if it's one of those big tough football player type woods where there really is no neck?

Tikeya wrote:
So if a model isn't willing to do erotic nude (some "photographers" think "erotic" means getting a naked girl to masturbate in every picture), then he/she will never be considered a true model?

Let me see if I can help.   Take the case where the job calls for the model to have sex with a giraffe while being tossed back and forth by trapeze artists.  The "true" model would be willing to work without a net.

Dave Krueger wrote:
Let me see if I can help.   Take the case where the job calls for the model to have sex with a giraffe while being tossed back and forth by trapeze artists.  The "true" model would be willing to work without a net.

Gotcha. 

Tikeya wrote:
So if a model isn't willing to do erotic nude (some "photographers" think "erotic" means getting a naked girl to masturbate in every picture), then he/she will never be considered a true model?

I think it is really unfair when photographers expect the model to do that in EVERY picture.

John

Dave Krueger wrote:
Let me see if I can help.   Take the case where the job calls for the model to have sex with a giraffe while being tossed back and forth by trapeze artists.  The "true" model would be willing to work without a net.

OK, lets have some volunteers.

Iona Lynn wrote:
Sorry but cacti in orfices is not my specialty....

He made you do that? God, all he made me do was....well nothing really. I did what I wanted to, but yeah, I have different limits with different photographers, and the ones that I want to do 'edgier' (for lack of a better word) work with, I contact. My commercial portfolio on omp shows what kind of limits I have for my commercial work. However, I am a very hard worker, and put 110% into all of my modeling work. So, if a photographer has a strange idea, I am not afraid to look ugly, etc. but no, cacti spreads and stuff like that isn't something I will do either.

jon mmmayhem wrote:
A True Model Should Wear No Limit Bling

You stole my chain!

stefanie0324 wrote:
I agree.  I will NEVER do lingerie unless Victoria's Secret knocks at my door.

EDIT:  With a fat paycheck.

This is not a limit this is a condition, which is very, very different.  Winston Churchill had a joke about this sort of thing.

Kayoua X Photography wrote:
I don't know models are open minded with me, I guess it's because I'm female.

Gender has nothing to do with it.  I think Don Nelson and myself are proof of that.

Sarah Ellis wrote:

You stole my chain!

i'm just trying to steal your True Model powers for myself.
can you blame me?

Jessalyn wrote:
and a true photographer has good pictures.

Oh snap!

But so true.

Sorry, OP, but I think you'll find that the "limits" a model has will vary according to the quality of the photographer. How many models on here say things like "I would never do nudes/lingerie... unless Victoria's Secret/Maxim/Playboy/(insert very famous fashion photographer here) asked me to"? For photographers whose work I thought was amazing, I've posed nude in public places, balanced barefoot on narrow, slippery ledges, waded into polluted swamps, trespassed on government property, been covered in prune juice, and more - all for TFP.
For a photographer of your quality, if I even agreed to a shoot at all, I would charge as much as I could get away with and make it very clear that there would be no "erotic" shots of any kind - even though I would happily do erotic nudes for, say, Melvin Moten. Why? Because I actually respect his work and know that it would improve my portfolio. The only reason any self-respecting model would work with you is to make money, and you probably couldn't afford what most of them would charge to do stuff that "pushes their limits." Sorry.

Catriona wrote:

Oh snap!

But so true.

Sorry, OP, but I think you'll find that the "limits" a model has will vary according to the quality of the photographer. How many models on here say things like "I would never do nudes/lingerie... unless Victoria's Secret/Maxim/Playboy/(insert very famous fashion photographer here) asked me to"? For photographers whose work I thought was amazing, I've posed nude in public places, balanced barefoot on narrow, slippery ledges, waded into polluted swamps, trespassed on government property, been covered in prune juice, and more - all for TFP.
For a photographer of your quality, if I even agreed to a shoot at all, I would charge as much as I could get away with and make it very clear that there would be no "erotic" shots of any kind - even though I would happily do erotic nudes for, say, Melvin Moten. Why? Because I actually respect his work and know that it would improve my portfolio. The only reason any self-respecting model would work with you is to make money, and you probably couldn't afford what most of them would charge to do stuff that "pushes their limits." Sorry.

Thank you most kindly for the compliment, but your statement is not a declaration of limits, but of conditions [which are not the same thing].  Somewhere along the line these two [very different] concepts have become intermingled, which is where the OP's conflict seems to begin.

Melvin Moten Jr wrote:
Thank you most kindly for the compliment, but your statement is not a declaration of limits, but of conditions [which are not the same thing].  Somewhere along the line these two [very different] concepts have become intermingled, which is where the OP's conflict seems to begin.

That is very true. So now I have to wonder, what exactly was he asking these models to do that they wouldn't because of their "limits"?
If he was simply approaching models that already state that they will not do nudes and asking them to do nudes, well, that's just dumb.
But if that's not it, then I have to wonder just what kind of shots he's hoping for...

charles e williams wrote:
Models limit there work so much now a days.  That its almost impossible to figure out whos the best to work with.

Please put your post in proper english. Please don't fragment your sentences and use the wrong spelling of words. Sorry, but this really frustrates me.

Jessalyn wrote:
and a true photographer has good pictures.

charles e williams wrote:
Models limit there work so much now a days.  That its almost impossible to figure out whos the best to work with.

1. Model type limit - Black models can't do dumb blonde pictures, 50 year old models can't do teen photos

2. Physical limit - Shot neck or short legged models find it hard to do high fashion

3. Mental limit - Personality of a model will make it impossible to fit certain roles

4. Artistic limit - If the model doesn't want to hang up side down naked on a sign, that's their decision and not the photographers business

Shape shifting models from Alpha Centari have very loose morals, heal immediately and have no problem fitting into any role you wish, but unfortunately, they don't work for photographers using on camera flash.