Dea and the Beast wrote:

Yes, hence my confusion..

Roman numerals would be I,II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X

AJCG Photography wrote:
I suppose if I am going to continue to use model mayhem, I need to screen grab the entire description of the model's specifications, send it to them, and ask them to confirm that every single detail is accurate.

They will still lie or accuse you of offending them, shaming them or discrimination.

Joe Tomasone wrote:
Well, let's flip this around a little..  As a moderator, I can assure you that photographers attack as well.   Generally this takes the form of a photographer whose offer to shoot is declined for whatever reason and an unhinged tirade about how fat and ugly the model is follows.   

So while models do absolutely go off at times, they are far from the only ones.   

To read flagged PMs that both models and photographers share with us is to lose faith in humanity sometimes.

Joe
As a moderator, you were quick to jump in and turn the focus away from the crazy model discussion, how about monitoring and correcting the situation when every topic becomes a political rant? There's a whole discussion topic dedicated to that, why don't you move the offending posts there. Most really don't care to hear it.

Lallure Photographic wrote:
Unfortunately, the girls have really gotten into tattoos, and seem to be blissfully ignorant of how that creates a problem in photography, to the point of having EXTENSIVE tattoos, that would look bad in anyone's photographs.

I really dislike them, as a photographer, and for me the only reason to shoot them, is to illustrate a book on the art of tattooing.  I tolerate one or two, if they do not have objectionable content. and I agree that gun tattoos, would be objectionable content, in a tattoo, in today's world. Just too controversial to deal with. I also hate the text tattoos that run around the body, as nothing about that, is artistic.

It seems models never get the message, that tattoos are NOT desirable in the modeling profession.

Rick

This entire thread became bizarre.  A photographer and a model get their signals crossed because she has tattoos and didn't have that information on her portfolio.  Then it's like an attack on tattooed models or something .. then it got twisted with politics before being buried. 

Tattoos were a huge fad for a long time.  Women seemed to be getting them on a regular basis to the point where I have found it difficult to find a model clean of any tattoos.  I personally know some excellent high fashion models walking the runways of New York Fashion Week and other big events who have tattoos. The few models I know who do not have tattoos are prized by me for art nudes.  Otherwise we just have to learn to use software to remove 'em, or live with it. 

One thing for sure, I'm starting to appreciate tattoos and imperfections as I see more and more AI being used to create complete portfolios of "models" that don't exist at all.   There are quite a number of FAKE profiles on Instagram with AI images created of people who do not exist.

AJCG Photography wrote:
So this week I sent a message to a model confirming a shoot we had planned for this Friday. I asked her to clarify whether she had any tattoos. Her profile said that she had no tattoos, but in looking at 1 particular photo it seemed her arm might be covering a very large tattoo of 2 pistols of all things. She asked if her having tattoos was a deal breaker for me and I said yes having a large prominent tattoo of that sort would indeed not be aligned with my vision for the shoot, and was unexpected since her profile indicated that she had no tattoos at all. She replied, and I quote [sic], "I can wish you ho eat shit and fuck off boring dumb ass." I took the high road in my response, but she ghosted and blocked me.

Yiiiikes. At least you got to save some time and sanity.