Laura UnBound wrote:

I'm sorry are you really quibbling over this because you don't think the adjectives of creepy, inappropriate, or shitty cannot ever be used interchangeably to describe a person's bad behaviour? Because you wouldn't consider someone being creepy to be at the same time shitty?

ok.

Not quibbling over the adjectives.

I think flaking and blaming the photographer is passive aggressive. No quibble there.

As I understood you, some photographer's deserved a flake because, as you said, "they f*cked it up" by being creepy and making the model uncomfortable.

That is bull, no quibble. If a photographer f*ck it up by being creepy, then the model could still, "cancel."
Jen

Jen B wrote:
Not quibbling over the adjectives.

I think flaking and blaming the photographer is passive aggressive. No quibble there.

As I understood you, some photographer's deserved a flake because, as you said, "they f*cked it up" by being creepy and making the model uncomfortable.

That is bull, no quibble. If a photographer f*ck it up by being creepy, then the model could still, "cancel."
Jen

After several models shared with me the barrage of nasty messages from photographers after the model politely cancelled the proposed shoot, and after seeing forum posts about photographers doing the same in this forum, I can understand why a model might choose simply to break off communication. Not everyone takes rejection well.

Red Sky Photography wrote:
After several models shared with me the barrage of nasty messages from photographers after the model politely cancelled the proposed shoot, and after seeing forum posts about photographers doing the same in this forum, I can understand why a model might choose simply to break off communication. Not everyone takes rejection well.

So are you saying the models got a negative response when the "politely cancelled" as opposed to simply "flaking. I would think that the response from either method of disengagement would be the same based on the type of photographer that would respond so. At least with a cancellation notice, there actions could be considered less justified.

E Thompson Photography wrote:
So are you saying the models got a negative response when the "politely cancelled" as opposed to simply "flaking. I would think that the response from either method of disengagement would be the same based on the type of photographer that would respond so. At least with a cancellation notice, there actions could be considered less justified.

When dealing with people that you do not know yet, if they offend you with inappropriate behavior, your respose is to give them another chance to offend you again?

I cut them off right then and there, whether online or in person. It may be "Flaking" to them, too bad so sad call Dad.
To me, it's them being an asshole and getting removed from my life immediately and if possible, permanently.

No apologies, no "passive-aggressive" nonsense, just getting rid of an asshole.

How hard is it to be polite, stay on the topic at hand (in this case, engaging a model for a photo shoot) and respect other people's boundaries? I don't change the subject on my dentist or my mechanic, this is no different. They provide a service, I engage them for that service, period. If I called my dentist and they started creeping on me, I would hang up the phone and find another dentist, done.

It really is simple.

Abbitt Photography wrote:

Outing isn't allowed here on MM.  If anyone is keeping a blacklist or database of models in my area who are flaky, I'm certainly unaware of it.  I think when a model flakes on a photographer, the vast majority of other photographers won't know about it, so the impact on that model if any is usually very minor if at all.

This is why we check references. Obviously outing is a no-no but one can give a good or bad reference when asked privately, with explanation of course, then cross reference just to make sure.

Red Sky Photography wrote:
After several models shared with me the barrage of nasty messages from photographers after the model politely cancelled the proposed shoot, and after seeing forum posts about photographers doing the same in this forum, I can understand why a model might choose simply to break off communication. Not everyone takes rejection well.

And this is why we need to advocate Communication and covering your tracks; by that I mean if a model "politely cancels" on a photographer, make sure the "message/text" conversation (phone conversations would be trickier to prove) is saved for when the "creepy" photographer gets pissed and decides to smear your name. That way you have proof otherwise when someone questions booking you.
I've seen this happen and the model who didn't save the exchange is at the mercy of bad publicity because that popular (yet creepy) photographer said she is a total flake and a risk.
Document your exchanges people.

63fotos wrote:

then why did they agree to do the shoot?

The photographer likely did it after the original agreement to shoot I believe was the point she was making. Perhaps its the location choice, perhaps its the time frame, perhaps its the photographer being over eager for the shoot. Perhaps real life happened and it has nothing to do with the photographer. I know a model who quit all outdoor work because she didn't want to risk any sort of exposure to bacteria (from ticks or mosquitoes), or injuries (she has a genetic disorder that leads to surprise dislocations) or weather that might be more likely to be encountered in that environment and add complications to   her pregnancy (she had a history of failures in that regard).

Shadow Dancer wrote:
When dealing with people that you do not know yet, if they offend you with inappropriate behavior, your respose is to give them another chance to offend you again?

I cut them off right then and there, whether online or in person. It may be "Flaking" to them, too bad so sad call Dad.
To me, it's them being an asshole and getting removed from my life immediately and if possible, permanently.

No apologies, no "passive-aggressive" nonsense, just getting rid of an asshole.

How hard is it to be polite, stay on the topic at hand (in this case, engaging a model for a photo shoot) and respect other people's boundaries? I don't change the subject on my dentist or my mechanic, this is no different. They provide a service, I engage them for that service, period. If I called my dentist and they started creeping on me, I would hang up the phone and find another dentist, done.

It really is simple.

Wow...I really feel sorry for your negative experiences. I've never had a model "creep" on me. I can understand that can be very traumatizing. I hope you "CAM" them. I, however, have had models "flake", after having set date, time, location, an exchange of mood boards, ideas and expectations, all having been agreed to with a communications trail. I also let them know that I realize the life happens and let me know if they can't make it or will be arriving late. For me, most do so, It's the polite thing to do. Those that don't, I don't concern myself with again.

E Thompson Photography wrote:

Wow...I really feel sorry for your negative experiences. I've never had a model "creep" on me. I can understand that can be very traumatizing. I hope you "CAM" them. I, however, have had models "flake", after having set date, time, location, an exchange of mood boards, ideas and expectations, all having been agreed to with a communications trail. I also let them know that I realize the life happens and let me know if they can't make it or will be arriving late. For me, most do so, It's the polite thing to do. Those that don't, I don't concern myself with again.

Thanks, I am done here. Apparently what I post is incomprehensible.

Red Sky Photography wrote:

After several models shared with me the barrage of nasty messages from photographers after the model politely cancelled the proposed shoot, and after seeing forum posts about photographers doing the same in this forum, I can understand why a model might choose simply to break off communication. Not everyone takes rejection well.

I've experienced the "prolonged"cancel conversation enough to know that I have to use my words like an adult when I cancel and be clear. Even a polite or vague cancel is still a cancel. Ceasing communication after that cancel, vague or otherwise, isn't a flake.

When I first started there were a couple of times that I did not handle the rejection side very well myself, (and had to learn that someone's lack of interest to shoot is really their prerogative and no negotiating or hopeful wishing by me was going to make what I wanted happen.) When a model or photographer doesn't fit the interest of what the other wants to shoot, (or quite frankly the expectations for what each other is looking for, (then using our words like grown ups is in order.) If the other person loses their composure beyond the normal, then, it is no longer our responsibility to go down the rabbit hole of engagement with them.

Pestering someone into a shoot isn't good, especially if said pesterer is a presumed or legit creep.
Hiding behind the consequences of dealing with a pesterer in the past, (creep or otherwise,) as an excuse to flake is really juvenile and, still, passive aggressive.

Right?
Jen

kickfight wrote:
What's important to understand is that for a substantial number of models, agreeing to do a shoot is actually not a "commitment". Not even close. Many models do this VERY casually, as an occasionally fun or interesting thing to do, and/or for some extra cash here and there, and the motivation to show up for a given shoot may literally not last overnight. Other more interesting or fun or lucrative stuff may take much higher priority from one day to the next. And yeah, they are likely not going to take the time to contact someone to let them know they're blowing them off, because they are under no obligation to do so. Again, to them, this is casual stuff, and they don't need some random pissed-off guy yelling at them over it.

On the other hand, some photographers do become VERY immersed in their interest, and they put a lot of time, toil, and treasure into it. They expect everyone else to take their interest as seriously as they do. The disparity between the casual engagement of a particular model and the deep immersion of a particular photographer will unfortunately lead to frustration and disappointment. It's OK to feel frustrated and disappointed when dangling from the losing end of that disparity. But it's sometimes useful to remember that neither side of that disparity is "wrong". From one perspective, this is important and serious. From the other perspective, this is trivial and entirely optional. Each perspective is 100% correct in its respective context.

As someone who has been creating content with models as a lucrative side business for nearly 20 years, my suggestion is to not take flaking personally, because it is simply one of the unavoidable liabilities of the work. There are literally thousands of very reliable, very committed models on MM in most areas who take modeling seriously and will not just blow you off. Working with them on a regular basis makes the rare and occasional frustration and disappointment totally worth it.

Hi,
I had four models very casually agree to a casting call I put on a local forum in Phoenix, (as a photographer.) Their agreement to the shoot was no more involved than a, "Great!," or "I'm in."

Even though I was at the shoot location at the time, and ready to go, I wasn't really too surprised when none showed up. The only one who remained actively committed to the shoot had followed up by text and I contacted her to let her know the shoot turned out to be a bust for the concept and asked if I could keep her in mind for my next shoot.

I don't consider them as legit flakes at all. My shoot was just a bust.
Jen

Jen B wrote:
I had four models very casually agree to a casting call I put on a local forum in Phoenix, (as a photographer.) Their agreement to the shoot was no more involved than a, "Great!," or "I'm in."

Even though I was at the shoot location at the time, and ready to go, I wasn't really too surprised when none showed up. The only one who remained actively committed to the shoot had followed up by text and I contacted her to let her know the shoot turned out to be a bust for the concept and asked if I could keep her in mind for my next shoot.

I don't consider them as legit flakes at all. My shoot was just a bust.
Jen

That makes zero sense to me.

They agreed to the shoot.

You were at the location at the appointed time and ready to go, which suggests that one or more models didn't call or text to tell you they weren't coming.

None showed up and your description of the situation suggests you had expected all four.  (That's a fourfold flakeout.)

But you say "one remained actively committed to the shoot?" (Not showing up is a strange way indeed to show active commitment.)

You say it was a bust for the concept. (I'd say it was a bust because the models didn't show up.)

Jen B wrote:
Pestering someone into a shoot isn't good, especially if said pesterer is a presumed or legit creep.
Hiding behind the consequences of dealing with a pesterer in the past, (creep or otherwise,) as an excuse to flake is really juvenile and, still, passive aggressive.

Right?
Jen

Sorry I wasn't clear. Having dealt with the consequences of scheduling with people who turned out to be creeps in the past, and having them harass you and people you know, cutting off communication is often the best solution.

Many people in many professions have to deal with people who flake on appointments. It often causes loss of income. It's a fact that some people do what they want with no regard for the consequences of their actions to others. You may think it is just rude, others think it is the best solution to a deteriorating exchange.

Jen B wrote:
Hi,
I had four models very casually agree to a casting call I put on a local forum in Phoenix, (as a photographer.) Their agreement to the shoot was no more involved than a, "Great!," or "I'm in."

Even though I was at the shoot location at the time, and ready to go, I wasn't really too surprised when none showed up. The only one who remained actively committed to the shoot had followed up by text and I contacted her to let her know the shoot turned out to be a bust for the concept and asked if I could keep her in mind for my next shoot.

I don't consider them as legit flakes at all. My shoot was just a bust.
Jen

The bolded part indicates that you have the right attitude when it comes to identifying things correctly, in their proper and unique context. Yes, your shoot was, as you put it so well, indeed "just a bust". It happens, and it sucks, but you probably already know ---because you've been on both sides of the camera and have a far greater perspective on things--- that there are shoots that are going to be booms, where everything comes together to not only meet but exceed your expectations. We accept the busted shoots for the exceptions that they are, and we move forward to make the booms happen, because when they happen, we're reminded that all the effort is absolutely worth it.

Good on you for keeping it real and not allowing yourself to succumb to simplistic childish blaming, or silly flimsy projection. You owned that busted shoot, like a boss, and you deserve to be commended for being the stand-up person that you clearly are. Huge kudos, Jen. Stick to those principles... they are becoming a rare thing in these days of deflection and denial and despair.

Orca Bay Images wrote:
But you say "one remained actively committed to the shoot?" (Not showing up is a strange way indeed to show active commitment.)

Hi,
One of the models checked in with me prior to the shoot and then again to say she was on the way about 30 minutes prior to the start. The shoot was supposed to start at 5 pm. At 5:05 I texted this model and let her know no one else had showed up  or got in touch since agreeing. Then I asked her if we could just reschedule a different concept, with her alone, at another time, (since the concept for the group needed, a group.)
Jen
p.s. apologies for my bad wording and sentence structure, (omissions of key words and things important. )

kickfight wrote:

The bolded part indicates that you have the right attitude when it comes to identifying things correctly, in their proper and unique context. Yes, your shoot was, as you put it so well, indeed "just a bust". It happens, and it sucks, but you probably already know ---because you've been on both sides of the camera and have a far greater perspective on things--- that there are shoots that are going to be booms, where everything comes together to not only meet but exceed your expectations. We accept the busted shoots for the exceptions that they are, and we move forward to make the booms happen, because when they happen, we're reminded that all the effort is absolutely worth it.

Good on you for keeping it real and not allowing yourself to succumb to simplistic childish blaming, or silly flimsy projection. You owned that busted shoot, like a boss, and you deserve to be commended for being the stand-up person that you clearly are. Huge kudos, Jen. Stick to those principles... they are becoming a rare thing in these days of deflection and denial and despair.

THANK you!!

Kickfight, that was such an awesome thing to say. Wow, really nice. Your post helps lock that into perspective even more. I hadn't thought about the booms in such a good way before but, NOW I will. Balance.

Jen

Photo Jen B wrote:

THANK you!!

Kickfight, that was such an awesome thing to say. Wow, really nice. Your post helps lock that into perspective even more. I hadn't thought about the booms in such a good way before but, NOW I will. Balance.

Jen

I also agree with his comments!     

Red Sky Photography wrote:
Sorry I wasn't clear. Having dealt with the consequences of scheduling with people who turned out to be creeps in the past, and having them harass you and people you know, cutting off communication is often the best solution.

Many people in many professions have to deal with people who flake on appointments. It often causes loss of income. It's a fact that some people do what they want with no regard for the consequences of their actions to others. You may think it is just rude, others think it is the best solution to a deteriorating exchange.

Hi,

I realize you are taking a third side car conversation here, (not the flaking models, and not about models feeling uncomfortable because a creepy photographer f*cked it up, thereby standing up the photographer.)

If I understand you right, you are saying you have hired models who were creeps and harassed you, people you knew and required absolute disengagement.

Focusing on someone, (model to photographer or photographer to model or anyone to another,) with such intensity that they are stalking and harassing seems much further than this thread was going. I get your point though, A personality disordered person can be very intense and push buttons, {think Fatal Attraction.) A socially awkward person might seem a little peculiar but I feel they are two hugely different thing. As a person who has consistent socially awkward moments I tend to suspect this in others earlier, (but, like most I also have some absurd situations I've learned from and do not want to repeat.)

However, total no contact usually comes after asking said person to quit and telling them you do not want this behavior anymore, (edit: and them completely disregarding your request.)

Flaking or standing up intentionally rather than communicate a cancellation doesn't seem to fit the context here. It seems more like payback and drama.
Jen

Robert Stites wrote:
It would be interesting to hear from models why some don't feel the need to live up to their commitments to be at an agreed photo shoot.

Simple.  Her grandma died.  Again.

Laura UnBound wrote:
Some models don't show up to shoots booked with people who have done something to make them feel uncomfortable or otherwise like attending the shoot would not be in their best interest.

Models are just as capable of making photographers feel uncomfortable. Please don't make this one sided.

Robert Stites wrote:
It would be interesting to hear from models why some don't feel the need to live up to their commitments to be at an agreed photo shoot. I have been burned by several models over the years and, apart from the frustration, there is the cost of the studio or location and everything else that goes with setting up a shoot. Any comments will be welcome.

The models that are actually active on this site are not going to be the ones that flake. You're barking up the wrong tree. The flakes will never reply to you.

Robert Stites wrote:
It would be interesting to hear from models why some don't feel the need to live up to their commitments to be at an agreed photo shoot. I have been burned by several models over the years and, apart from the frustration, there is the cost of the studio or location and everything else that goes with setting up a shoot. Any comments will be welcome.

I think the only models who could answer that would be the models that don't show up.

Edit to add: Although they may try to turn the blame on you and really, what worth is the word of someone who didn't keep theirs, (or communicate it ahead of time,) anyway?

Tony Lawrence wrote:
One of the things that troubles me about these kinds of threads is the subtle attacks on photographers.   As in we must have done something to turn the model off and that's why she/he flaked.   In most cases this isn't so.   The key is to not take it personally.   Don't spend money on props, etc. for unknown to you models.   Don't rent studio space or hire make-up artists.   Don't take off work or cancel plans to shoot.   Never, ever step a foot out of your door without a confirmation text or call from the model.   Get their cell number also.   Take note of their profile.   Have they been in months or years yet only have selfies.   Read their profiles carefully.   When they reply is it mostly a few words.

In other words    Listen to the clues.

Very good advice!

Eddy Torigoe wrote:

Models are just as capable of making photographers feel uncomfortable. Please don't make this one sided.

You're right, when I try to cast models for a shoot as a photographer, I get a lot of male models who want to show me their erect dicks. That does make me, the photographer, uncomfortable

Abbitt Photography wrote:
While, most models may not cancel or flake because of shopping as this model did,  it really comes down to two things:

1  Something else become their new priority, and that many be any number of things. 
2.  A lack of consequences for not following through.


I work with college age students all the time, and I don't see nearly the flaky behavior I do from independent models.  The difference of course is consequence.  If a student skips a class or doesn't show up for a work shift, there will be repercussions they don't like.   The same is not true of freelance modeling.  A model can no-show on you and most photographers will never know so it won't negatively impact her ability to book future shoots.  Of course, if the model isn't serious about modeling, then even that doesn't matter.   In contrast, if an agency model doesn't show, there will be consequences.

This.

Photo Jen B wrote:

Oh please, I don't buy it.

The model could just as easily tell the photographer who 'f*cked" it up by making the model uncomfortable, that they are cancelling the shoot. Instead of passive-aggressively flaking on them. However if they are so uncomfortable. Bottom line, they flaked.

A flake is a flake, a cancel for another reason is not.
Jen

Best summation ever, Jen!