GMH Images wrote:
The moral of this story is TFP!
If you bake a cake with someone, take home half the cake.
If someone wants all the cake, charge them for the ingredients.
As long as cooks get all the cake, ingredient-owners sleep hungry!
But boy... do they have nice pics. Trouble is - the guy who took the picture - not only ate the cake.. but owns that picture too!

Wouldn't that be TFC then? TFP would clearly involve pie or pastries

GMH Images wrote:
The moral represents that most photogs forget the model is trying to earn a living, too.  You can't eat photos.  Maybe serious photogs need to evaluate how they are they helping the model, too.  It is a team effort and both should aim for the goal of both sides need to make some money.  I really think alot of photogs disrespect the model's goals and think the model is running a hobby.  Wow!  she got some the photogs great pics.  Now what?

if models are directing thier marketing towards photographers and not commerical clients, they truly dont have a clue how the industry works...

and i completely respect the models online..i would love to see them all get signed and get commerical work..but unfortunaltey, most dont have the real desire to make the effort required....so that makes them hobbiests..that are not trying to make a living from modeling.

GMH Images wrote:
Doug, you are partially correct.  But there are alot of hard working and serious models looking for a little direction.  Alot of photogs state they help models find work.  My experience has taught me this is not true most of the time.  If you say "help models", then one should do it.  My motto..."Say What You Mean and Mean What You Say".

Unfortunately there are plenty of GWC's who's idea of helping a model is to get them nekkid and take some pics, then send them to their "friend" who might have a project coming up...who will then try and get more nekkid pics and maybe some video, etc...

There were about 10 people coordinating to do this for a while last year in my area, and it's unfortunate but a little homework on the part of the model can go a long way towards staying away from that.

Doug Swinskey wrote:
the problem with this analogy is models cant truly deliver 50% of the elements required in creating an image.

not only do i have about 3 to 4 times the amount of time a model has involved, i also have studio rent, insurance and business expenses, equipment and maintenence expenses that far outweigh a model hiriing an MUA or buying new clothes.

so not only should they not be getting half the credit..they should be paying..for what they do get...

i have seen great photographers make average models look good..but i have yet to see a great model make an average photographer look good...

chicken or the egg doug... i realize you truly believe the world swirls around your expensive cameras, and hey thats ok if thats your driving force behind what you do... ..... but check your whoppin mercenary ego at the door for a few seconds and think where you would be without the beautiful models who work in the presence of the Great One... ya just some guy standin on the beach with an expensive camera photographing seagulls... .. zzzzzzzzzzz

its wonderful you make money shootin pics.....  its just annoying to me... photogs who belittle the contributions a model brings to a shoot, which i believe outweigh their  expensive cameras..... and supersize their photographic end and on top of that whimper about how they should be paid for every breath they take when holding a camera because they spent a lot of money on it...... get over yaself

Happy Holidays !

MikeyBoy wrote:
get over yaself

boy you have jumped, illogically, to a lot of assumptions...but  i'm glad you have me pegged..i am sure every model i have ever worked with would certaniley point out just how wrong an indivdual could be, by using your description of me, as an example...

you dont know me or nothing about me or my MO..
but as an artists first..i can tell you with first hand knowledge, not just something i've heard.

..its the photographers art...

maybe in time, you learn something along those lines...

and if anyone was "equipment -centric"..that might be you..read: "First Canon 5D pic uploaded to MM"..lets all try to keep up with mikey...

GMH Images wrote:
...But there are alot of hard working and serious models looking for a little direction.  Alot of photogs state they help models find work.  My experience has taught me this is not true most of the time.  If you say "help models", then one should do it.  My motto..."Say What You Mean and Mean What You Say".

This gets to the core of it.  Photographers who say they can help models for the most part cannot.  Even well-placed, widely-published photographers are going to be limited by the quality of the model and by market demand.

Patrick Demarchelier doesn't hang here and no one at a lower level can create a supermodel, if even he can these days.

The late great Helmut Newton worked with models who clamoured to him to test.  As far as I can tell not one of the girls who modeled for his personal work benefitted beyond getting a few polaroids and maybe being shown in some of his books.  He promised nothing, paid nothing and delivered maybe polaroids or tear sheets.  (His advertising work was different, of course.)

Back in the bad old days I was persuaded to "help" a 5'9" 18-yr-old from Texas get into fashion modeling.  I worked with her and her mother down in Houston and arranged, in a roundabout way and with a lot of help from friends, for her to do a high profile charity runway show in Boston for both the exposure and the round-trip ticket, then got her an appointment with a major fashion agency in New York - not a walk-in, but an appointment - on her way home.  We'd gotten her some decent test shoots and her book was pretty solid.

She did the Boston show (with at least one girl who is here), then both of them flew directly back to Texas from Boston and blew off the agency visit.  All of my credibility and connections were flushed down the toilet with that one decision.

Now I don't promise anything but the pictures.  If a model wants anything more, she can shoot with someone else. 

As far as I can tell there are about half a dozen photographers here who really do have connections that can get a model (real world) work, but even they won't promise a thing.  If they see the girl and think she's good enough then they may work on it, but they won't promise anything until they've got something to hand her.

All the rest are liars.

-D

Edit:  I removed the agency name as I'm not sure that was the one.  Long time back.  But I am sure my friends would  all claim as much credit or more for setting this girl up as I am due.

D. Brian Nelson wrote:
All the rest are liars.

-D

Amen to that. 

I've had beginner/wanna be models tell others of the same ilk "he's so negative...[photographer X] says he can make my career" and it always rankles me.  The bullshit artists out there amaze me...from the creepy GWC's with nefarious motives to the talented egomaniacs with a couple of minor publishing credits who suddenly become star-makers in their own PR...
Then again, a lot of the "models" I run into are more influenced by Britney/Christina/Jessica/Paris than anything else...and are far more interested in celebrity than modeling or fashion.

Vita Brevis wrote:
...from the creepy GWC's with nefarious motives to the talented egomaniacs with a couple of minor publishing credits ...

Hey!  I resent that!  I'm both of those.

-D

Doug Swinskey wrote:

if models are directing thier marketing towards photographers and not commerical clients, they truly dont have a clue how the industry works...

and i completely respect the models online..i would love to see them all get signed and get commerical work..but unfortunaltey, most dont have the real desire to make the effort required....so that makes them hobbiests..that are not trying to make a living from modeling.

Hear Hear...  When did photographers become clients?

MikeyBoy wrote:

chicken or the egg doug... i realize you truly believe the world swirls around your expensive cameras, and hey thats ok if thats your driving force behind what you do... ..... but check your whoppin mercenary ego at the door for a few seconds and think where you would be without the beautiful models who work in the presence of the Great One... ya just some guy standin on the beach with an expensive camera photographing seagulls... .. zzzzzzzzzzz

its wonderful you make money shootin pics.....  its just annoying to me... photogs who belittle the contributions a model brings to a shoot, which i believe outweigh their  expensive cameras..... and supersize their photographic end and on top of that whimper about how they should be paid for every breath they take when holding a camera because they spent a lot of money on it...... get over yaself

Happy Holidays !

You are out of line...the "self" that needs to be "gotten over" is your own.

bencook2 wrote:
Hear Hear...  When did photographers become clients?

Photographers (and other artists) have always hired models.  Did I miss something here?

-D

D. Brian Nelson wrote:

Hey!  I resent that!  I'm both of those.

-D

Aren't we all? But just being a werewolf doesn't neccesarily make you a bad person...

GMH Images wrote:
P.S.  Most releases are so restrictive on the model that he/she can't do a damn thing witht the pics.  I have written many contracts and most releases are one sided or just plain stupid.  Most photogs pull one from a book or the web and don't care or understand what they are presenting to the models.  Not every photog is trying to hurt the model, but when was the last time the release language was truly understood?  Do you all know what the release is really saying?  Probably not!  People, this is a business, not a game.

First, "REAL" releases have no business laying out usage rights for the model. That should be in a seperate licensing agreement between the photographer and the model. Most internet photographers have combined the two to save paperwork, but that is not what a release is for. No release is one sided. A release, to be a valid contract states that one person gets something for something they provide, in this case the photographer gets the right to the images (with all the legalese) in exchange for consideration. Consideration could be money, images or a combination of them both. Again, internet photographers have embelished here, laying out exactly what the will include, x amt of 8x10's, contact sheets, CDs, etc..., which is good, because then the model knows what to expect and being a contract, if the photographer does not live up to it, the contract is voided.

Vito wrote:
[smartass mode] You'd almost think you were trying to be analogeous to a TFP/CD shooting arrangement - - but it's not!  [/smartass mode]

Funny. I liked that.

Vito wrote:
A TFP/CD model on the other hand didn't have to lay out money (or services) for her "body/face/look". Clothes she comes with, she had, and if she went out and bought new clothes, she is keeping them.  Secondly, a TFP/CD model is bringing home, usually, more than one "snapshot". In most cases, she is getting a few prints or at least, something SHE NEEDS, images to get her more/real paying work.

In an ideal world. Yes. But this isn't an ideal world. And, at a certain point you don't need anymore marketing tools. You need involvement AFTER the fact. Especially when your photographer is the type to give you raw images and turns around and edits the photos into something much mor workable leaving you assed out.

me wrote:
On her website is this rough image that she barely knows how to resize and ohh wow te color is just... On his website is the same image, beautiful, flawless...

Having her naively thinking "I didn't know I had that beautiful skin. Such color. When were WE in Venice? etc. Ohh it's for sale? Let me buy it."

Bad business deal for the woman with the ingredients, yes. Also, bad deal  or the tfp model. In tfp, everything is always negotiable. But, that is between t e two parties only. If what you agree to and are willing to give is accepted then everything is fine. If not, thenbtat's your choice.

Money:
I for one know you're not going to make any monetary gains off my image unless I have a reasonable percentage. Otherwise, pay me for my time. Alot of photogs are egotistical enough to feel that a model should work with them for free and the photog gets to do whateverhe/she wants. No, tfp is a collaborative effort.

And, yes, Hell Yes, she invests in the sjoot a  well. Her time, her energy, her skills, her image.

Time-
Do you think her time isn't of value?

Energy -
While you're snapping away she has to pose, stay mentally comfortable (no matter how physically uncomfortable she is) She has to put up with some photogs uneasy touching, looks, statements and mistreatment. Hell, most photogs are trying to get the model as naked as possible.

Skills -
Do you ask how much training she may have done up to that point. Money she's spent to learn all this. Or previous tfp's that the picked a few things up from.
Hell, the gas for driving there. Not many photogs go to the model. She comes to them.

Image -
If her image isn't that important then stand in the mirror and phhotograph yourself. Ifvyou believe she's that worthless then
save her the energy and do it all yourself.
For this industry this model is always changing her look, st le, body,etc. She invests in skin care, hair, clothes. [Yes, she buys clothes and keeps them. You buy cameras and filmm right? And you keep them.] She incests in her hygiene...shower, brushing teeth, et. Be around some who doesn't and you'll understand te statement..."Never miss something 'till it's gone."
She invests in her diet and execise. That ALL is a requirement for her. It's NOT a requiremennt for you. Just as buying equipment is a requirement for you. Not for her. So, p
ease underrstand a model's investment before you say she invests nothing. Simply because you don't have to do what she does you can't relate. The same way as she can't relate to your work. That is why you have each other.

And, in the end...she has toTRUST you with her image. It's a hassle, time-consuming and expensive to deal with photogs who misapropriate your image. And, ithe end most times there's nothing much you c n do about it. And, even if you are copyright holder...what's done is done.

So, please understand that ALOT is required of the model, just as you. And, then she has to hope for a good product. And, ladtly, alrhough you may consider yours lf to be very logical  and just at your approach. Most photogs(sadly) just aren't. And, have NO intention of being that way.

MikeyBoy wrote:

chicken or the egg doug... i realize you truly believe the world swirls around your expensive cameras, and hey thats ok if thats your driving force behind what you do... ..... but check your whoppin mercenary ego at the door for a few seconds and think where you would be without the beautiful models who work in the presence of the Great One... ya just some guy standin on the beach with an expensive camera photographing seagulls... .. zzzzzzzzzzz

its wonderful you make money shootin pics.....  its just annoying to me... photogs who belittle the contributions a model brings to a shoot, which i believe outweigh their  expensive cameras..... and supersize their photographic end and on top of that whimper about how they should be paid for every breath they take when holding a camera because they spent a lot of money on it...... get over yaself

Happy Holidays !

studio36uk wrote:
Take a cardboard box and put frosting on it... it looks like a cake then, doesn't it?

Studio36

Ahhh yes!  But, try and eat it.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
TFP is about working together.
It really isn't a models problem how
much you've invested in equipment and
training.  It isn't yours to worry about
how much she's shot for TFP or invested
in clothing, etc.  Clients pay,
Not photographers.
Whats been said here is that lots of
great images have been produced by
testing.  Great shooters like Skrebneski and
and Newton and Avedon and Penn produced
fantastic work wich was published but not always
for commercial purposes  but for art.
It comes down to this.  If money for modeling
is your only focus.  Go to a modeling agency
be prepared to pay a few photographers.
After all you expect to always be paid for
services rendered.  Have the agents send you
to auditions and see what happens.
As a photographer the same.  Don't want
to do TFP.  Don't.  Its that simple.
I think most of the photographers here consider
themselves artists many have jobs that may pay well
but also have bills like models.
They can't afford to pay models hundreds of dollars
an hour.  Same for many models.
We both need each other.
Yes pros with great books don't truly need to
shoot with new people but testing is one of
the best ways to produce new and intresting work.

Hope I am not misuderstanding your point.  I agree with you until you lost me on a model should pay a photog that an agent sends her to.  Wrong!  The client pays the photog and model for the assignment.

GMH Images wrote:
Hope I am not misuderstanding your point.  I agree with you until you lost me on a model should pay a photog that an agent sends her to.  Wrong!  The client pays the photog and model for the assignment.

Actually, the booker will send the model to test photographers for portfolio pictures and the model will pay what the photographer charges for the service.  That is the way it's done.  This is now called "testing," a different meaning than it had in the Seventies.

The booker will also send the model out to go-sees and to assignments.  On a go-see the model will show up with her book, probably with other models, to be seen by an art director, photographer, or whatever.  Think of that as an audition.  There's no money going either way on a go-see. 

Assignments the model gets paid for.  That's when she's been selected to do the work.  That money can come from a photographer who's quoted the whole job to his client, including the model.  Or it can come from an ad agency with the model and shooter on separate cost lines.  Or it can come from a manufacturer that provides their own  photorgapher.  And so on.

-Don

GMH Images wrote:
The moral represents that most photogs forget the model is trying to earn a living, too.  You can't eat photos.  Maybe serious photogs need to evaluate how they are they helping the model, too.  It is a team effort and both should aim for the goal of both sides need to make some money.  I really think alot of photogs disrespect the model's goals and think the model is running a hobby.  Wow!  she got some the photogs great pics.  Now what?

Well frankly, until the model aquires the experience/ability to contribute to the production of commercially viable images, she shouldn't expect to be paid and it should be a hobby for her/him.

John

MikeyBoy wrote:
chicken or the egg doug... i realize you truly believe the world swirls around your expensive cameras, and hey thats ok if thats your driving force behind what you do... ..... but check your whoppin mercenary ego at the door for a few seconds and think where you would be without the beautiful models who work in the presence of the Great One... ya just some guy standin on the beach with an expensive camera photographing seagulls... .. zzzzzzzzzzz

its wonderful you make money shootin pics.....  its just annoying to me... photogs who belittle the contributions a model brings to a shoot, which i believe outweigh their  expensive cameras..... and supersize their photographic end and on top of that whimper about how they should be paid for every breath they take when holding a camera because they spent a lot of money on it...... get over yaself

Happy Holidays !

Dude, you need to step back and not judge people that you have no clue about. Doug is one of the most respectful, professional, passionate people I have ever met and he KNOWS the value of the model well and treats them VERY well.

I am just constantly amused at the extent of the disrespectfulness and unprofessionalism some of the members here display.

Kaire

MikeyBoy wrote:

chicken or the egg doug... i realize you truly believe the world swirls around your expensive cameras, and hey thats ok if thats your driving force behind what you do... ..... but check your whoppin mercenary ego at the door for a few seconds and think where you would be without the beautiful models who work in the presence of the Great One... ya just some guy standin on the beach with an expensive camera photographing seagulls... .. zzzzzzzzzzz

its wonderful you make money shootin pics.....  its just annoying to me... photogs who belittle the contributions a model brings to a shoot, which i believe outweigh their  expensive cameras..... and supersize their photographic end and on top of that whimper about how they should be paid for every breath they take when holding a camera because they spent a lot of money on it...... get over yaself

Happy Holidays !

I have to ask, would you call a restaurant owner mercenary because he asks that you pay for your meal simply because you've shown up to try his food? 

Some things in life cost money, plain and simple.  I don't think it's fair to villify someone simply because they attempt to make a living by taking pictures.  Models have an opportunity to take what they get from a tfp shoot (if it's only pictures) and use it as a valuable marketting tool to make more money down the line, if they choose not to do so why should the photographer have to suffer?  I don't think Doug was saying that he was promising the model the world, just that in reality not everything comes free, and that commensurate consideration should be given for the things that don't.  If you're well enough off that it's not an issue, good for you, some of us would prefer to make a living doing something we love, as opposed to slaving away at a job that makes us miserable.

Tim Downin wrote:

I have to ask, would you call a restaurant owner mercenary because he asks that you pay for your meal simply because you've shown up to try his food? 

Some things in life cost money, plain and simple.  I don't think it's fair to villify someone simply because they attempt to make a living by taking pictures.  Models have an opportunity to take what they get from a tfp shoot (if it's only pictures) and use it as a valuable marketting tool to make more money down the line, if they choose not to do so why should the photographer have to suffer?  I don't think Doug was saying that he was promising the model the world, just that in reality not everything comes free, and that commensurate consideration should be given for the things that don't.  If you're well enough off that it's not an issue, good for you, some of us would prefer to make a living doing something we love, as opposed to slaving away at a job that makes us miserable.

Yes, you should pay the restaurant for the meal.  But, the waitress, busboys, chef, etc. all contributed to the great meal.  And of course, you forgot about the supply chain...Where do you think the food and supplies came from for the restaurant to use?