Photographer
Vibe N Vision
Posts: 268
Los Angeles, California, US
Hamza wrote:
Don't ever assume that! Professional photographers are just like any other man, always looking to get laid. So we do what we do professionally, I'd bet my left arm that 99.99% of professional photographers would not turn down a good piece of ass from a model... Obviously, hence the sarcasm if not self evident...
Photographer
Le Beck Photography
Posts: 4114
Los Angeles, California, US
Picture This wrote:
So if I buy myself a set of surgical instruments can I be a surgeon?
Don't knock it. One of the very best Plastic Surgeons in New York City was found a few years ago to never have attended Medical school!! She was widely regarded in the plastics community there to be among the very most skilled! It happens.
Photographer
Admiral Frog
Posts: 29088
Roswell, Georgia, US
Here is a different spin, what about all the models that try to seduce me, Would I be labeled a GWC if I sleep with them, or would I be labeled just for my utter lack of photography skills?
Photographer
Hamza
Posts: 7791
New York, New York, US
Frog516 wrote:
Here is a different spin, what about all the models that try to seduce me, Would I be labeled a GWC if I sleep with them, or would I be labeled just for my utter lack of photography skills? Zorba the Greek once said, "If a woman invites you to her bed, and you do not listen, God will not be happy".
Photographer
All Kinds of Photos
Posts: 428
Frog516 wrote:
Here is a different spin, what about all the models that try to seduce me, Would I be labeled a GWC if I sleep with them, or would I be labeled just for my utter lack of photography skills? Yawn....
Photographer
All Kinds of Photos
Posts: 428
I realize I am pretty new here but it must be more common than I thought that lots and lots of models get it on with the photographers. I've noticed this other threads also.
Photographer
Admiral Frog
Posts: 29088
Roswell, Georgia, US
Hamza wrote:
Zorba the Greek once said, "If a woman invites you to her bed, and you do not listen, God will not be happy". I like that quote
Photographer
Admiral Frog
Posts: 29088
Roswell, Georgia, US
Doug Sampson wrote:
Yawn.... you tired or something, maybe you should take a nap.
Photographer
udor
Posts: 25255
New York, New York, US
Hamza wrote:
Don't ever assume that! Professional photographers are just like any other man, always looking to get laid. So we do what we do professionally, I'd bet my left arm that 99.99% of professional photographers would not turn down a good piece of ass from a model... Absolutely Hamza;
If I get approached by a hot woman after the shoot, hell yeah!
But the difference is that first there is business, portfolio shoot, commercial assignment or fashionshow or whatever... there chemistry between the two humans can develop... HOWEVER... what makes the GWC is that his intention from the beginning is to get a model and hoping that he will get laid, or see some ass etc. and that's the GWC's entire purpose of the "shoot".
Photographer
Hamza
Posts: 7791
New York, New York, US
UdoR wrote:
Hamza wrote:
Don't ever assume that! Professional photographers are just like any other man, always looking to get laid. So we do what we do professionally, I'd bet my left arm that 99.99% of professional photographers would not turn down a good piece of ass from a model... Absolutely Hamza;
If I get approached by a hot woman after the shoot, hell yeah!
But the difference is that first there is business, portfolio shoot, commercial assignment or fashionshow or whatever... there chemistry between the two humans can develop... HOWEVER... what makes the GWC is that his intention from the beginning is to get a model and hoping that he will get laid, or see some ass etc. and that's the GWC's entire purpose of the "shoot". But Udo, subconsciously every man is trying to get laid all the time, it's in our nature as men. The fact that we repress those feeling while working does not change the fact that as men we are ALWAYS thinking about getting laid. We can't help it, it's the way we're made.
I mean it's because of the chicks you and I got into this business in the first place, who are we trying to kid? I will freely admit that fact. Let's see, shoot hot women or products in a studio, umm... easy decision!
Photographer
udor
Posts: 25255
New York, New York, US
Hamza wrote:
I mean it's because of the chicks you and I got into this business in the first place, who are we trying to kid? I will freely admit that fact. Let's see, shoot hot women or products in a studio, umm... easy decision! No it's not that easy... whatever pays more...
I get easily bored by "just another hot model". I work with far too many to be much impressed. That's why models have to pay me to shoot, except for the absolute rare occasion that I would work with a "famous" model or someone whose look I really like.
If I have to shoot jewelry in a light tent, and it pays my bills... or if I have to shoot paintings for an international art catalogue, or doing a portrait of an important person in world history (e.g. Lech Walensa or maybe Henry Kissinger or the president of the United States) in all of that list... photographing hot women comes last in terms of excitement in photography... for me that is.
Oh... and I did NOT get into this business for the girls at all, I got into it because I am a photojournalist at heart (had my first assignment when I was 21) and grew up in that media environment. I even started photography before I was interested in girls.
Because I started to cover fashionshows, I got involved in the production of shows and that part of the industry...
I rather shoot for the Daily News or other media outlets and getting my money from that than shooting models for their portfolio. That I am good at doing it is just a "byproduct" of my creativity.
Photographer
BlackWatch
Posts: 3825
Cleveland, Ohio, US
Picture This wrote:
So if I buy myself a set of surgical instruments can I be a surgeon?
You can buy one of those camera scopes for scoping colons and still be a GWC!
Photographer
Luminos
Posts: 6065
Columbia, Maryland, US
Vito wrote:
This quote is generally attributed to Winston Churchill. Actually, it was an old, old, old George Burns quote.
Photographer
Admiral Frog
Posts: 29088
Roswell, Georgia, US
Luminos wrote:
Actually, it was an old, old, old George Burns quote. I thought it was WC Fields
Photographer
Doug Jantz
Posts: 4025
Tulsa, Oklahoma, US
e-string wrote:
MM's definition is "only interested in photography to get hot ladies to get nekkid for him." Other people add that they're trying to get dates or sex.
I would also add that there's an additional/alternate definition that it's someone whose pictures look like bad snapshots.
Yeah, it does apply to a lot of MM photographers. But there are plenty who are serious about what they do, too. I am sure there are PLENTY who started like this. What guy doesn't like to see naked girls??? HUH?? And just because some of us get paid does NOT mena we don't like seeing the girl naked. You can rationalize all you want, we are just getting to take pics of her naked. It is all semantics to make us look more 'professional.'
Photographer
Luminos
Posts: 6065
Columbia, Maryland, US
Frog516 wrote:
I thought it was WC Fields It predates Fields movies, so it goes back to Vaudeville. Whether Burns really said it first or not I couldn't say. Given it is a joke about the oldest profession, I suspect it has been reinvented many times.
Photographer
Admiral Frog
Posts: 29088
Roswell, Georgia, US
Luminos wrote:
It predates Fields movies, so it goes back to Vaudeville. Whether Burns really said it first or not I couldn't say. Given it is a joke about the oldest profession, I suspect it has been reinvented many times. damnit now I have to do some useless research to try and find this out.
Photographer
Doug Jantz
Posts: 4025
Tulsa, Oklahoma, US
UdoR wrote:
No it's not that easy... whatever pays more...
I get easily bored by "just another hot model"... I work with too many to be much impressed. That's why models have to pay me to shoot, except for the absolute rare occasion that I work with a "famous" model or someone whose look I really like and that may enhance my own portfolio.
If I have to shoot jewelry in a light tent, and it pays my bills... or if I have to shoot paintings for an international art catalogue, or doing a portrait of an important person in world history (e.g. Lech Walensa or maybe Henry Kissinger or the president of the United States) in all of that list... photographing hot women comes last in terms of excitement in photography... for me that is.
Oh... and I did NOT get into this business for the girls at all, I got into it because I am a photojournalist at heart (had my first assignment when I was 21) and grew up in that media environment. I even started photography before I was interested in girls.
Because I started to cover fashionshows, I got involved in the production of shows and part of the industry... but it's there as one of several income streams I have.
I rather shoot for the Daily News or other media outlets and getting my money from that than shooting models for their portfolio. That I am good at doing it is just a "byproduct" of my creativity. Interesting. I have always liked girls as my mom tells everyone, the stage that boys go through hating girls? She says I skipped it. I was even shooting girls at church camp in 6th grade and still have the pics to prove it! LOL
Photographer
Shoreline Studio
Posts: 302
Sandusky, Ohio, US
If someone could arrange for me to be wealthy for a while - prob take a couple years at least to be sure - I will be glad to be a GWC, do shoots like the OP noted, follow my instincts and report back to you all.
You can even look at the pictures and comment, if you like.
Photographer
Luminos
Posts: 6065
Columbia, Maryland, US
Face it folks.
Until you make the majority of your income from photographing the models, or have been featured by independent reviewers in a magazine or gallery, you are just a GWC to somebody.
I have a basement full of cameras, Nikon F, F2, FM+MD12 (2), F65, F70, F90, Nikonos, and a full studio lighting outfit that's about 30 years old. But since I no longer shoot regularly, I don't claim anything by "hobbiest."
Now I'm coming up to speed on Digital (and tripping from time to time.)
And some people will see that as GWC.
And I understand that.
Photographer
Admiral Frog
Posts: 29088
Roswell, Georgia, US
I personally think the term GWC is the problem, Guy with camera, doesn't sound all that bad if you don't know the "actual" definition of it. Maybe we should just call those guys who are inappropriate with the way they handle models, what they really are? I vote for the term "Douchebags" it is one of my favorite words to use.
Whether they have a camera or not they will still probably be a douchebag. Its like a guy who buy a Ferrari to get laid. Would you call him a GWC (guy with car)? No you would just call him a douchebag.
Photographer
David Scott
Posts: 5617
Marion, Iowa, US
Doug Sampson wrote:
True or false?
I know of a man that flies models to NY, puts them up in a hotel with all expenses plus pays them their model rates just because he enjoys it. Yes he does nudes.
I will bet he will never be accused of being a GWC and I'll bet most models would jump at the chance. "It is impossible for a wealthy man to be a GWC. True or False?"
Answer: False.
Next!
Photographer
udor
Posts: 25255
New York, New York, US
Frog516 wrote:
No you would just call him a douchebag. Douchecamerabag? 
Photographer
Mikell
Posts: 26698
San Francisco, California, US
Model
e-string
Posts: 24002
Kansas City, Missouri, US
Doug Jantz wrote:
I am sure there are PLENTY who started like this. What guy doesn't like to see naked girls??? HUH?? And just because some of us get paid does NOT mena we don't like seeing the girl naked. You can rationalize all you want, we are just getting to take pics of her naked. It is all semantics to make us look more 'professional.' Like I already said, there's a big difference between enjoying photographing nude women, and having your entire goal be to get women nude in front of your camera (and possibly have something happen as well).
Photographer
HarveyT
Posts: 491
Sacramento, California, US
Is it impossible for a wealthy man to be an asshole? a pervert? etc?
Photographer
stan wigmore photograph
Posts: 2397
Long Beach, California, US
Doug Sampson wrote:
True or false?
I know of a man that flies models to NY, puts them up in a hotel with all expenses plus pays them their model rates just because he enjoys it. Yes he does nudes.
I will bet he will never be accused of being a GWC and I'll bet most models would jump at the chance. so what?Does he treat them in a proffessional manner and with respect.Does he take good photos.Do his checks bounce?Nothing different between him any number of "pro's" who do the same ,except to make a living, because they like the opposite gender
Photographer
Luminos
Posts: 6065
Columbia, Maryland, US
HarveyT wrote:
Is it impossible for a wealthy man to be an asshole? a pervert? etc? Like the GWC label, these are subjective words, and someone will always or sometimes see them that way. Sometimes, everyone will.
Photographer
stan wigmore photograph
Posts: 2397
Long Beach, California, US
e-string wrote:
Like I already said, there's a big difference between enjoying photographing nude women, and having your entire goal be to get women nude in front of your camera (and possibly have something happen as well). I agree with both comments,many of us started because we just like girls,but somewhere along the way something happens that makes the photography more important and satisfy then just seeing someone naked.When I was young I used to love going to nude/topless bars,what guy wouldn't,Now it bores me to death
Photographer
HarveyT
Posts: 491
Sacramento, California, US
Luminos wrote:
Like the GWC label, these are subjective words, and someone will always or sometimes see them that way. Sometimes, everyone will. Is it impossible for a wealthy man to be a generous and friendly person?
It isn't so much the semantics, but the actions of an individual that define them. Just as in any group of people there are good and bad subjectively.
Photographer
Kentsoul
Posts: 9739
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, US
e-string wrote:
True. But the only guy I've ever seen use it was definitely a GWC. Which goes back to my original point: Who is and isn't a GWC is really just a matter of opinion, just a handy way of saying "guys who shoot girlie pictures that I happen not to like."
I spent two years assisting for a well-respected fashion photographer here in Pittsburgh who tried to nail every girl who got in front of his camera...including my girlfriend...Was he a GWC?
Model
e-string
Posts: 24002
Kansas City, Missouri, US
Melvin Moten Jr wrote:
Which goes back to my original point: Who is and isn't a GWC is really just a matter of opinion, just a handy way of saying "guys who shoot girlie pictures that I happen not to like."
I spent two years assisting for a well-respected fashion photographer here in Pittsburgh who tried to nail every girl who got in front of his camera...including my girlfriend...Was he a GWC? According to MM's definition, yes he was. No question about it. Talent has nothing to do with it.
Photographer
Sophistocles
Posts: 21320
Seattle, Washington, US
Vito wrote:
This quote is generally attributed to Winston Churchill. Quite apocryphal.
It's also attributed to Oscar Wilde and George Bernard Shaw, but there is no documentation to pin it to any of the three, or anyone else, for that matter.
Photographer
Sophistocles
Posts: 21320
Seattle, Washington, US
Luminos wrote:
It predates Fields movies, so it goes back to Vaudeville. Whether Burns really said it first or not I couldn't say. Given it is a joke about the oldest profession, I suspect it has been reinvented many times. The oldest profession? It's a joke about farmers?!
Photographer
Kentsoul
Posts: 9739
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, US
e-string wrote:
According to MM's definition, yes he was. No question about it. Talent has nothing to do with it. So...according to MM he was a GWC because he was trying to "get some" -- and I'm a GWC because I don't do this for money...so who isn't a GWC in the end? Is a lesbian who photographs nudes still a GWC? A gay man who photographs male nudes?
Basically anyone who enjoys looking at someone in a nude/erotic context [and don't even start that "there's no sexuality in fashion" nonsense] is a GWC...according to the strict interpretation of the term.
Photographer
ATMPhotos
Posts: 1565
Brooklyn, New York, US
Melvin Moten Jr wrote:
So...according to MM he was a GWC because he was trying to "get some" -- and I'm a GWC because I don't do this for money...so who isn't a GWC in the end? Is a lesbian who photographs nudes still a GWC? A gay man who photographs male nudes?
Basically anyone who enjoys looking at someone in a nude/erotic context [and don't even start that "there's no sexuality in fashion" nonsense] is a GWC...according to the strict interpretation of the term. So much for the utility of subjective, perjorative terms that can be thrown around as people see fit.
Photographer
Doug Jantz
Posts: 4025
Tulsa, Oklahoma, US
e-string wrote:
Like I already said, there's a big difference between enjoying photographing nude women, and having your entire goal be to get women nude in front of your camera (and possibly have something happen as well). So, you are saying the Playboy photographers are GWC's??? That IS their goal. AND they enjoy it. See, it is all a matter of opinion and the ones who came up with this term were trying to cover their own asses. "See, we are different than those guys!" Give me a break.
Photographer
Ransomaniac
Posts: 12588
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
Melvin Moten Jr wrote:
Which goes back to my original point: Who is and isn't a GWC is really just a matter of opinion, just a handy way of saying "guys who shoot girlie pictures that I happen not to like." Basically.
Photographer
Chili
Posts: 5146
Brooklyn, New York, US
Creative Image wrote:
What would it be if a really rich guy flew a model to New York, paid her well, shot her nude, came on to her, and produced REALLY great images?
OMG, I think I just described a bunch of famous NYC shooters.
Ron hey now, stop talkin bout me
oh wait?
you said came onto her, for a minute i thought you said came on her
never mind
Photographer
Chili
Posts: 5146
Brooklyn, New York, US
Hamza wrote:
Don't ever assume that! Professional photographers are just like any other man, always looking to get laid. So we do what we do professionally, I'd bet my left arm that 99.99% of professional photographers would not turn down a good piece of ass from a model... im going to have to disagree
plenty of photographers would turn down a hot sexy model's offer of sex for a great many reasons
and as udo said, its the original intent, if you're selecting your TFP models based on your own personal gratification, fetish or fantasy then you're a GWC, regardless of income.
|
