W.G. Rowland wrote:
No, what I see repeatedly is people with either very mediocre ports or ports that show a very specific bent to their mindset coming in and starting rants that so and so has no business even thinking about getting in front of a camera because X, Y, and Z..
....

But I see people going nuts over blown smoke when what I most commonly see is a pool of mediocrity (c'mon there's some talents here, but most of us are average at best) trying to keep people from trying because they think they have a clue..

...

And the part that really bugs me is often they seem to feel a need to knock anyone else down for fear they might lose their ever so fragile footing..

Who gives a shit what joe mediocre thinks?

Seriously.

I'll speak from the artsy fartsy realm, having being doing crafts (I won't dare say art) for a number of years.  Despite what people think, unless one is a trustafarian, making a living trying to do "art" is not for the weak of heart.   It's not like you're selling something valuable in society...like gasoline or something.

If your vision or drive or passion (whatever you want to call it) is so weak that Joe "the aspiring hooters bar" photographer throwing a barb your way on a MM message board is going to throw you off your game, then you really might want to consider just keeping a private portfolio of all the gem photos you've taken..and showing them only to the best of friends.

But joe bob's nasty habit of throwing barbs is hardly what I'd consider to be "the truth."  It's just another example of what I'd consider drama.

W.G. Rowland wrote:
Oh, that and I like to start threads that rile people up..

We know that.  You do it well sometimes. 

TXPhotog wrote:

W.G. Rowland wrote:
The thing that keeps me from pulling the trigger (most of the time) on a scathing post or a gentle "I don't quite think you understand what you're getting into" is the fact that just about ever successful professional I've known has been constantly barraged with people who told them, they'd never make it.

A large part of the issue is "make it at what"?  And another large part is "what does it mean by 'make it'"?

In modeling there are some areas ("art" is forever being brought up) in which the requirements are so varied and diffuse that it's probably not possible to tell anyone that they can't "make it" as long as the criteria for "making it" are kept low enough.

In international-level editorial fashion, the requirements are quite strict.  Sure, there are people who don't meet those requirements who "make it" - but in all such cases it's because of some easily discernible factor (or more than one):  a powerful sponsor, lots of money, or so absolutely perfect in all other respects that a few inches in height can be overlooked.

What is meant by all the people who "made it" after being told that they couldn't is that there aren't any bright lines delimiting who can and who can't, but there certainly are strong indicators.  It's easy to judge that someone who doesn't meet some subjective (or even objective) criteria will not be successful, but be wrong if they are close on most or all of them, particularly if they are outstandingly good on some as well.

On the other hand, it's easy to also judge who isn't anywhere near the ballpark on any criteria that matter.  An example:  If I were to proclaim that I could run 26 miles in less than 2 1/2 hours, it would be easy for anyone looking at me to tell me "no, you can't.  Furthermore, you never will be able to, no matter what you do."  And they would be right, even though there are a few elite runners who can do it, and many others who might be able to, even though we could reasonably judge they could not.

When someone is obviously out of the ballpark:  short, heavy, not particularly pretty or beautiful, bad skin, too old, living in North Dakota and not willing to move, an attitude of "I'm going to make it because everyone tells me I ought to be a model" . . . they aren't going to become international, nor national, nor even regional fashion models.  If they do anything at all it will be to walk in a mall fashion show or similar event.  Which brings us back to "what does it mean to make it?"  That judgment can be made with 100% certainty in some cases, even though there are other cases in which it cannot.


You don't have to if you don't care what people do with the answer, or what it costs them.

And that's the problem:  the "what next?"  If you believe you can "make it", and really want to, and are told you can, you then go off to do the things it takes to "make it".  You spend money on a "portfolio".  You go to expensive modeling schools or conventions.  You fly to New York and go to open calls.  You put together comp cards.  All of this costs time, money and emotional investment.

Yes, it feels good to the person saying it to tell an aspirant, "You can have your dream if only you try hard enough."  Why wouldn't it feel good?  After all, the person giving that advice doesn't have to pay for the "what next" nor pick up the emotional pieces when the truth finally becomes evident.

I've been the in-person bearer of those bad tidings all too often.  My job required it.  I couldn't tell some obvious no-hope "model" to go off and do things to get qualified to "make it", because she'd be on my doorstep with an expensive portfolio a month later, and I'd still have to tell her no.  But when you've had that conversation with a few thousand of them, you kind of get pissed at the people who give them all that false hope, encourage them to chase what they can't have, and then sit back in their chair and think what a wonderful, kind thing they have done.

I was hoping you or OGR (miss him) or Bob or Udo would come in here and give me a shredding..

The distinction we're looking for (and the point I was hoping to get to) was good advice vs bad advice.. There's a sea of the latter, and not too much of the former..

Every model aspiring to the runway is not going to get there.. And that not only applies to the no chancers, but the ones who are close, who put in the time, who have the stats, who pound the pavement and fight their way up the ladder.  There simply isn't room at the top for everyone.  I kind of cringe every time I see someone pipe up in the forums that they're going to be America's Next Top Model, and hope that someone in a position like yours is going to come in and give them good counsel..

BUT!

When that counsel is diluted by a sea of people who like to crab.. Who give advice not because they know but because it puffs them up (like many of the, "I've been shooting high school yearbook pics for 10 years so I know it all" types..)  How are they going to discern the good advice from the bad?

I need some help. I've been asked by my favorite model, Christine, if I would be interested in taking her sorority photos. How can I turn this down?

I did some CYA though, I told her this would be my first time and a total experiment so if it doesn't work out, the sorority can't hate me.

Ok, enough of that chatter, here's what I got...

I have a single Alien Bees AB800 with the included umbrella.

Two Nikon SB-800s

All of this and my Nikon D200.


Oh yeah, **17** girls. Is this enough power to pull this off? Should I screw the lighting and insist on something outdoors?

This is a response I got!

rmstudio wrote:
Classic example.. People wanting something for next to nothing or nothing at all. This is why people pay a "trained" professional that is skilled and worked many years to aquire the "Know How" to do this type of job. Then some bright girl wants to get a large sority photo taken for free? and will most likely expect for it to be the same as something she see's hanging on the wall of her sister sority's wall. "Ya right" There is a reason why people get paid for a job. Because they earn it and work hard to get there. Turn the job down instead of sitting around asking for help from the very people you are taking this job from. You want a pros help but you dont want to pay him for the skills or info you are asking for. And at the same time your taking his bread and butter work from? Not to mention if you botch the job and make pros look bad in the process. Some people really need to look at what they are doing.

This clown acts as if I'm stealing an opportunity from him.  Truth is, someone asked me if I could do something.  I want to find out if I have the hardware to do it and if I do, then my next step is to figure out how to make it all work.

All I was looking for really was:

Yes you can do it.

or

No you can't do it.

I didn't ask or even want his silly little rant that had nothing do with the question. Yet, it was important to him to voice his opinion.  I see this on MM all the time.  People ignoring the questions and putting in their 2-cents that often is quite irrelevent to the topic.

It's about as useful as this:

OP: How do I melt American cheese?

Posterbater: I hate melted cheese.  American cheese is stupid anyhow.  Real cooks use Cheddar.

That response is worthless.

W.G. Rowland wrote:
When that counsel is diluted by a sea of people who like to crab.. Who give advice not because they know but because it puffs them up (like many of the, "I've been shooting high school yearbook pics for 10 years so I know it all" types..)  How are they going to discern the good advice from the bad?

It's easy.  The good advice is what you want to hear.

It's up to the listener to be honest enough with themselves to want to hear the truth, and to make the effort to learn how to distinguish it.

W.G. Rowland wrote:
When that counsel is diluted by a sea of people who like to crab.. Who give advice not because they know but because it puffs them up (like many of the, "I've been shooting high school yearbook pics for 10 years so I know it all" types..)  How are they going to discern the good advice from the bad?

That's the million dollar question, isn't it...?

KM von Seidl wrote:

W.G. Rowland wrote:
No, what I see repeatedly is people with either very mediocre ports or ports that show a very specific bent to their mindset coming in and starting rants that so and so has no business even thinking about getting in front of a camera because X, Y, and Z..
....

But I see people going nuts over blown smoke when what I most commonly see is a pool of mediocrity (c'mon there's some talents here, but most of us are average at best) trying to keep people from trying because they think they have a clue..

...

And the part that really bugs me is often they seem to feel a need to knock anyone else down for fear they might lose their ever so fragile footing..

Who gives a shit what joe mediocre thinks?

Seriously.

I'll speak from the artsy fartsy realm, having being doing crafts (I won't dare say art) for a number of years.  Despite what people think, unless one is a trustafarian, making a living trying to do "art" is not for the weak of heart.   It's not like you're selling something valuable in society...like gasoline or something.

If your vision or drive or passion (whatever you want to call it) is so weak that Joe "the aspiring hooters bar" photographer throwing a barb your way on a MM message board is going to throw you off your game, then you really might want to consider just keeping a private portfolio of all the gem photos you've taken..and showing them only to the best of friends.

But joe bob's nasty habit of throwing barbs is hardly what I'd consider to be "the truth."  It's just another example of what I'd consider drama.


We know that.  You do it well sometimes. 

Actually this thread has little to do with me.. Folks on MM have been way too positive for my own damn good..

And what Joe Average thinks unfortunately IS very much an issue when you're new, hopeful, and stepping into an arena where everyone talks like an authoritarian and you're required to discern credentials in braille.  Which is pretty much what a forum like MM feels like.

And I've seen professionals driven out by a bunch of mediocre people telling them their work sucks..

I don't care how famous you are.. People have feelings..

The question here is finding the balance between civility, honesty, and discerning useful from bullshit.

I'm all for civility, but I'm also a paycheck from carrying a cardboard sign on a street corner..  If anyone here has a shot at getting better, I'll stick to my Hallmark card dream that they learn to toughen up against the bullshit and stumble into the right advice..

bang bang photo wrote:
So how do you deal with the classic examples of "The Truth" gone wrong?

John Grisham has papered the wall of his office with rejection letters from knowledgeable, professional editors who "knew" he didn't have a chance in hell of becoming a successful author.

I think I know pure crap when I see it too -- but how can you be sure -- and what if you're wrong?

Heh, writing was exactly what I was thinking when I wrote this.. I've met more than a few successful authors.. And by god, the rejection walls.... (They all have em, or file cabinets, or shrines).. Are monumental.

DigitalCMH wrote:
I think what Rowland might be getting at is more directed towards...well, let me explain a situation I was in...

That, sir, was a damned fine example..

bang bang photo wrote:
So how do you deal with the classic examples of "The Truth" gone wrong?

John Grisham has papered the wall of his office with rejection letters from knowledgeable, professional editors who "knew" he didn't have a chance in hell of becoming a successful author.

I think I know pure crap when I see it too -- but how can you be sure -- and what if you're wrong?

W.G. Rowland wrote:
Heh, writing was exactly what I was thinking when I wrote this.. I've met more than a few successful authors.. And by god, the rejection walls.... (They all have em, or file cabinets, or shrines).. Are monumental.

Yeah but how many of these rejections were from joe mediocres just trying to take out their anger on authors.  Okay some might be but other editors are just trying to make decisions on what they think will sell.

And in any event, those authors even when faced with rejection slips didn't stop in the face of adversity. 


And how many authors have been successful by listening to mentoring or critiques.

You have to have a good set of stones or clitzpah or be so driven by your vision/obsession or just plain stubborn, to succeed at things, particularly things that are new or different.  And even then one's recognition might not even come in their lifetime.  Just the nature of the beast.

W.G. Rowland wrote:

That, sir, was a damned fine example..

Thank you!   or you're welcome!  One of those two...or both.

KM von Seidl wrote:

bang bang photo wrote:
So how do you deal with the classic examples of "The Truth" gone wrong?

John Grisham has papered the wall of his office with rejection letters from knowledgeable, professional editors who "knew" he didn't have a chance in hell of becoming a successful author.

I think I know pure crap when I see it too -- but how can you be sure -- and what if you're wrong?

Yeah but how many of these rejections were from joe mediocres just trying to take out their anger on authors.  Okay some might be but other editors are just trying to make decisions on what they think will sell.

And in any event, those authors even when faced with rejection slips didn't stop in the face of adversity. 


And how many authors have been successful by listening to mentoring or critiques.

You have to have a good set of stones or clitzpah or be so driven by your vision/obsession or just plain stubborn, to succeed at things, particularly things that are new or different.  And even then one's recognition might not even come in their lifetime.  Just the nature of the beast.

Agreed..  I occasionally, usually after seeing one or two dozen too many vent on unnamed wannabe threads, get an urge to try and find a way to make this nutty gathering of a quarter or so million people actually useful for those who are trying to make something of it..

The downside of being here an extended length of time is forgetting what it's like when you just step in off the boat and this whole clusterfuck is new to you..

It's nothing like how the industry, or ANY industry, works.. And yet, Tyler's gathered together a pretty impressive demographic.  There are contacts to be made.. Things to be learned.. And a sea of bullshit to wade through..

There's also a boatload of venomous snake oil salesmen out there who, to the untrained eye, can look just like the real thing..  Especially when most of the sheep have never even SEEN the real thing up close and personal.

Someone who has a bigger brain than I do once told me, find the market and work backwards..

MM is NOT the real world.. And yet Tyler's amassed himself a heck of a market..  I'm trying to figure out how best to work backwards for those who really want to try.

Bob Randall Photography wrote:
You got a problem with that.

You know.. I don't have a problem with that.

W.G. Rowland wrote:

You know.. I don't have a problem with that.

Then what exactly is the problem here.