Photographer
Looknsee Photography
Posts: 26342
Portland, Oregon, US
(Apologies in advance)...
Who Pays: Model or Phogtographer? (Misspelling preserved).
Forgive me, but when I hear this question, I think...
... It's a newbie question,
... If asked by a photographer, it's because he thinks the photographer should
be paid by models (well, most of the time),
... Ditto from the model's perspective.
As I mentioned earlier, I think nothing dictates rates (and who pays whom) more than the local supply & demand of willing talent).
In addition, not all photographers are the same; not all models are the same; and every arrangement is its own unique negotiation. Thus, the question is not overly relevant.
Photographer
Know Idea
Posts: 3000
Los Angeles, California, US
SurrealPhoto wrote:
With shoots where neither party is compensated; who is expected to pay who and why?
Would be nice to here opinions on this one.
Thanks Whoever has the spare change floating around the floor or their car to buy a pizza with. Photo sessions can work up an appetite!!
Photographer
Abbitt Photography
Posts: 13564
Washington, Utah, US
Whoever hires someone pays the person they hire.
If a model hires a photographer, then he or she pays the photographer.
If a photographer hires a model, then he or she pays the model.
Photographer
barepixels
Posts: 3195
San Diego, California, US
I love it when models buy me dinner after the shoot
Photographer
SurrealPhoto
Posts: 19
Charlotte, North Carolina, US
Know Idea wrote:
Whoever has the spare change floating around the floor or their car to buy a pizza with. Photo sessions can work up an appetite!! Outstanding, thank you sincerely for a genuine belly laugh, I needed one today.
Model
P I X I E
Posts: 35440
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
I'm not typically looking to add bondage/fetish to my portfolio. So if you REALLY want to shoot that stuff with me, don't be put off if I send you my rates.
Bondage I *might* TF for, but it really depends if I like the photographer's style - if it could benefit me.
Photographer
Know Idea
Posts: 3000
Los Angeles, California, US
Know Idea wrote:
Whoever has the spare change floating around the floor or their car to buy a pizza with. Photo sessions can work up an appetite!! SurrealPhoto wrote:
Outstanding, thank you sincerely for a genuine belly laugh, I needed one today. At your service!!
Model
Julia Steel
Posts: 2474
Sylvania, Ohio, US
Chain Reaction wrote:
Well, hello there! How you doin'? Hey hey hey! xox
Photographer
FullMetalPhotographer
Posts: 2797
Fresno, California, US
SurrealPhoto wrote:
With shoots where neither party is compensated; who is expected to pay who and why?
Would be nice to here opinions on this one.
Thanks Simple who needs the images? Or is the shoot mutually beneficial for a TF.
Model
Elisa 1
Posts: 3344
Monmouth, Wales, United Kingdom
Fotografica Gregor wrote:
generally whoever is bringing more to the table gets paid - it's not a clear cut model pays photographer or vice versa -
but *here* in model mayhem, it is mostly about models getting paid - it's not the real world or real industry - this place is about the internet modeling phenomenon.... Models get paid in the real world too.
Unless of course they are testing non commercially or doing tfp for joint projects.
So for example I'd be okay with very arty bondage shoot that was for a gallery or something but it would be no use for my port personally. I had a Cardiff boutique email me about a job yesterday for example wanting to see my port. One way to GUARANTEE losing that job would be to show them bondage pics. So this kind of imagery is of limited use to REAL world models so they will want pay if they agree to it at all. Unless of course the model specialises in it or for example publishing a book about it etc in which case she'd probably be paying the photographer.
As Abbit says it's who is hiring who is paying unless agreed otherwise before.
Photographer
R Michael Walker
Posts: 11987
Costa Mesa, California, US
SurrealPhoto wrote:
With shoots where neither party is compensated; who is expected to pay who and why?
Would be nice to here opinions on this one.
Thanks Unless you can find models who feel your work is good for their book you pay.
Photographer
No One of Consequence
Posts: 2980
Winchester, Virginia, US
Looknsee Photography wrote:
I disagree. The photographer gets the copyright, and the copyright is not worthless. The copyright is only worth something if the photographer:
a) is producing salable work
b) has an established market for that work
The copyright on 99% of all photographs is worth $0.
Photographer
Looknsee Photography
Posts: 26342
Portland, Oregon, US
Looknsee Photography wrote:
I disagree. The photographer gets the copyright, and the copyright is not worthless. No One of Consequence wrote:
The copyright is only worth something if the photographer:
a) is producing salable work
b) has an established market for that work
The copyright on 99% of all photographs is worth $0. Sorry, but again, I disagree.
The owner of the copyright determines how & where the image can be used, regardless of the market and regardless of whether the usage of the image brings in revenue. I can't use your photo on my web site without your permission, period. The copyright doesn't exist only for art that earns money.
Photographer
No One of Consequence
Posts: 2980
Winchester, Virginia, US
Looknsee Photography wrote:
Sorry, but again, I disagree.
The owner of the copyright determines how & where the image can be used, regardless of the market and regardless of whether the usage of the image brings in revenue. I can't use your photo on my web site without your permission, period. The copyright doesn't exist only for art that earns money. Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it?
I didn't say the copyright doesn't exist without money.
I said that in 99% of the cases, the copyright cannot be considered compensation. Viewed as an economic asset the copyright actually has negative value because the (non-zero) cost of production exceeds it's (zero) lifetime earning potential. An asset with negative value is a liability, not compensation.
Photographer
Mark Salo
Posts: 11732
Olney, Maryland, US
SurrealPhoto wrote:
With shoots where neither party is compensated; who is expected to pay who and why? Another Italian Guy wrote:
If neither party is compensated, then nobody pays anybody, obviously.
Or were you asking a different question?
Just my $0.02 etc. etc. Francisco Castro wrote:
I think the OP is talking about photos that are not commissioned by a client for commercial purposes. I'm thinking also. I'm thinking that the OP should clarify.
Photographer
Photo Lolz
Posts: 525
New York, New York, US
If you're approaching them, then it's assumed you're in need of the photos and you're expected to pay.
When they approach you, then it's assumed that they're in need of photos and they are expected to pay.
If either one of you approaches and drops words like "trade" or "test," then no one pays regardless of who approached who first. Now that may not cover travel expenses and such, or clothing, etc., but that's usually negotiable.
In the end, you can decide who pays. You're party to the project. They are in the same boat. It's a song and dance to be honest.
Photographer
Looknsee Photography
Posts: 26342
Portland, Oregon, US
Looknsee Photography wrote:
Sorry, but again, I disagree.
The owner of the copyright determines how & where the image can be used, regardless of the market and regardless of whether the usage of the image brings in revenue. I can't use your photo on my web site without your permission, period. The copyright doesn't exist only for art that earns money. No One of Consequence wrote:
Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it? Fuck Screw you for this snarky, unproductive, disrespectful comment. Don't blame me for your lack of clarity.
=== The rest of my post is being deleted. I no longer want to talk with you. ===
|
