KARIM wrote:
lol SO photoshop is a lot of money..he usually charges 800.00 for the shoot..I'm getting pics from a photog that I really like and can't wait to work with for 200.00..and I dont have to read a manual for photoshop just to make my pictures look nice because he will do it for me...Sounds ok to me.

Good luck.

KARIM wrote:
lol SO photoshop is a lot of money..he usually charges 800.00 for the shoot..I'm getting pics from a photog that I really like and can't wait to work with for 200.00..and I dont have to read a manual for photoshop just to make my pictures look nice because he will do it for me...Sounds ok to me.

Exactly and good for you for being willing to actually pay for what you deam good quality work instead of seein what you can get for free.

KARIM wrote:
lol SO photoshop is a lot of money..he usually charges 800.00 for the shoot..I'm getting pics from a photog that I really like and can't wait to work with for 200.00..and I dont have to read a manual for photoshop just to make my pictures look nice because he will do it for me...Sounds ok to me.

Thats it right there. If you will be happy, then it is worth what ever the price is. In the end the pics could lead to a job that pays 4 times as much, so it will come back to you in the end.

So, good job on finding such a great deal

Model Sarah wrote:
That is quite a low thing to say.

We both usually enjoy art and the work we do together. I consider it a gift when they give me these images.

But you charge for your services, right? Why can't a photographer do the same thing?

John Jebbia wrote:

But you charge for your services, right? Why can't a photographer do the same thing?

I think this has been discussed 454867487468489486 times in these forums.

Model Sarah wrote:

I think this has been discussed 454867487468489486 times in these forums.

And the concensus is that it is wrong?

Pat Thielen wrote:
Okay... here's the thing. It sound slike you like his work and want it in your portfolio. $200.00 is not a lot of miney to pay for good images and you shouldn't feel uptight about paying it. I'd think of it as $200.00 for a photo session and not even worry about the retouching... after all, he's giving you a 75% discount from his regualr rate, which isn't too bad in my opinion. If I were him I would have worded it differantly, but there you go.

  As for buying Photoshop and editing the images yourself, there's a couple issues involved with that. First off, Photoshop typically costs at least $600.00 and sometimes more. You can buy it cheaper with a student discount, but you're still going to spend a bunch of money on it. Secondly, unless you've had prior training and experience with Photoshop you won't get results anywhere near what the photographer can give you, especially if its his look you're after for your book. Also, most photographers don't want clients editing their photographs unless they tell you otherwise (there are copyright issues involved with this).

  As for paying $200.00 for editing; that's not an unreasonable amount. Some retouchers will charge $200.00 or more *per* image for editing. If the photogrpaher is someone you want to work with and you want his work in your book then you should by all means pay the $200.00 and get the images you want.

  Just 2 1/2 cents worth...

  -Pat-

I second the motion...

John Jebbia wrote:
Or better yet, find one who will pay you $200 instead and give you all of the photos on a CD.

That would just be silly then.  200 for a model that by the looks of it has very little experience and give them images.. no wonder its so hard to make any money.

Morphine Dream wrote:
That would just be silly then.  200 for a model that by the looks of it has very little experience and give them images.. no wonder its so hard to make any money.

In case it wasn't apparent, I was being sarcastic.

John Jebbia wrote:
Or better yet, find one who will pay you $200 instead and give you all of the photos on a CD.

Hmmm.. paying $200 and giving her photos... wow.. models have it easy.. I figured if she got paid, why would she get photos too???

Model Sarah wrote:

The guy is just trying to make money off of you.

Just get photoshop and do it yourself. It isnt hard

Actually if you have no experience with photoshop it can be very hard... depending on this photographers photos she might never get the right photoshopping done.

EMG STUDIOS wrote:
Hmmm.. paying $200 and giving her photos... wow.. models have it easy.. I figured if she got paid, why would she get photos too???

Jeeze! I was being sarcastic.

Glamour Boulevard wrote:

not really, editing is an expensive service. but think about it, he is charging her 200 bucks for the editing and the pics. not just for editing.he is just wording it smoothly, sheesh.She is getting pics, plus the editing. saying he is only charging her for the editing when she is also getting the pics is like you bought something for 4 bucks and you got the second one free. you didnt, you paid 2 bucks a piece for them.

exactly.. 200 for editing.. ok but she gets a photoshoot and images for the 200.. now depending on the skill of the guy it sounds like a pretty decent deal.  Most models i've come across do not have good photoshopping skills.  Besides editing is time consuming as well.. the photographers work isn't over when the shoot is over.

Not low at all. Just honest. Just because they paid you does not mean they know know what they are doing. I know of no professionals who care about their work that will give  any model raw images, no matter how good she is with photoshop. And because they paid you means nothing either. Any GWC with enough money and a little bit of talent can find a beauty to work with him eventually.So he tossed some money in with the images,,,,,its still a thing of they would do anything, even give you all the raw images PLUS money to work with you. You are fairly well known on this site and on OMP, so it would be in their best interest to do so to get on your good side and get recognition.

Glamour Boulevard wrote:

even when I was an amateur I never gave out the raw images. they must be saps or willing to do anything to work with you in hopes of getting you to do nudes for them, including comprising their work in the process. I wouldnt do that to work with any model.

I have to agree.. i handing out raw images is bad news, i don't do it either.

Morphine Dream wrote:

Actually if you have no experience with photoshop it can be very hard... depending on this photographers photos she might never get the right photoshopping done.

It is easy to get the hang of with the basics.

I know it took me a long time to get most of it down. I will never learn all of it.

Hell, I am betting the people that made it probably dont know 100% of it.

Model Sarah wrote:

Good luck.

OK... I don't get it. Is there something you know that we don't? I really don't understand how Karim is getting such a bad deal from this photographer; should she get more than 75% off his normal rates? And what about professional retouchers? Are they all a rip-off (better alert Vougue magazine then)? Should photographers not get paid? I really don't get why you're so against Karim paying a relatively small amount of money to a photographer for photographs she really wants in her book.

  Hmmm...

  -P-

Morphine Dream wrote:
exactly.. 200 for editing.. ok but she gets a photoshoot and images for the 200.. now depending on the skill of the guy it sounds like a pretty decent deal.

I agree, 100 bucks for the shoot, 100 for editing, thats about what it boils down to. great deal if he is as good as she feels he is, so hey

Glamour Boulevard wrote:
Not low at all. Just honest. Just because they paid you does not mean they know know what they are doing. I know of no professionals who care about their work that will give  any model raw images, no matter how good she is with photoshop. And because they paid you means nothing either. Any GWC with enough money and a little bit of talent can find a beauty to work with him eventually.So he tossed some money in with the images,,,,,its still a thing of they would do anything, even give you all the raw images PLUS money to work with you. You are fairly well known on this site and on OMP, so it would be in their best interest to do so to get on your good side and get recognition.

Right but you worded the previous post wrong.

Thank you for clarifying.

John Jebbia wrote:

Yeah, god forbid the photographers make any money here.

I usually agree with you Sarah. But I think you are way off on this one. Of course I do not know who the photographer is.

What???...Photographers actually get paid?  C-mon...Seriosly, I thought we were all in this to shoot pics of overly bitter models...For free!!

John Jebbia wrote:

In case it wasn't apparent, I was being sarcastic.

Ahh.. cut me some slack.. i havn't had my morning coffee.. my bad.

Model Sarah wrote:
Right but you worded the previous post wrong.

Thank you for clarifying.

How so? Unlike many I read what I say before I hit reply

John Jebbia wrote:

Jeeze! I was being sarcastic.

John you need a little disclaimer of some sort i think.. none of us are getting it this morning.

Pat Thielen wrote:

OK... I don't get it. Is there something you know that we don't? I really don't understand how Karim is getting such a bad deal from this photographer; should she get more than 75% off his normal rates? And what about professional retouchers? Are they all a rip-off (better alert Vougue magazine then)? Should photographers not get paid? I really don't get why you're so against Karim paying a relatively small amount of money to a photographer for photographs she really wants in her book.

  Hmmm...

  -P-

ugh..

I was just saying I hope this guy is good. Basically.

Dont put words in my mouth.

Model Sarah wrote:
Right but you worded the previous post wrong.

Thank you for clarifying.

Just so that we're on the same page here. Are you advising her not to pay a photographer for photos, or are you advising her not to pay a photographer for editing?

Glamour Boulevard wrote:

How so? Unlike many I read what I say before I hit reply

Well you made it seem like just because I do nude work they feel privledged to work with me. That isnt the case at all. I have worked my way up to the professional level I am at now.

I would say it is the 'content' of my work not the fact that I do nude.

Thats all.

John Jebbia wrote:

Just so that we're on the same page here. Are you advising her not to pay a photographer for photos, or are you advising her not to pay a photographer for editing?

Editing. Why didnt he just say that he would discount her for services??

I mean really thats what it boils down to.

Model Sarah wrote:

It is easy to get the hang of with the basics.

I know it took me a long time to get most of it down. I will never learn all of it.

Hell, I am betting the people that made it probably dont know 100% of it.

Of course, most people including myself have only a basic understanding.. i'm always trying to find out new things about the program.. the bloody thing is huge.  However, i know for my experience i've been shooting for a year and using photoshop for just as long and i'm only finally comfortable with my skills for doing basic touchups... she may some photoshop prodigy in the making but i bet she wouldn't want to wait a long time trying to learn PS to get the same image of this photog.  200 is a deal it sounds like.

Model Sarah wrote:

ugh..

I was just saying I hope this guy is good. Basically.

Dont put words in my mouth.

Right on; I hope he's good too. You just didn't come across as saying this in your posts.

Ed Remington wrote:

What???...Photographers actually get paid?  C-mon...Seriosly, I thought we were all in this to shoot pics of overly bitter models...For free!!

Dont forget paying all their travel expenses because everyone knows that photographers don't have any of their own.

Pat Thielen wrote:

Right on; I hope he's good too. You just didn't come across as saying this in your posts.

Hey I havent had my coffee yet

Pat Thielen wrote:
OK... I don't get it. Is there something you know that we don't? I really don't understand how Karim is getting such a bad deal from this photographer; should she get more than 75% off his normal rates? And what about professional retouchers? Are they all a rip-off (better alert Vougue magazine then)? Should photographers not get paid? I really don't get why you're so against Karim paying a relatively small amount of money to a photographer for photographs she really wants in her book.

It goes to the prevailing hobbyist attitude that entrance into the fields of modeling and photography is based on barter, not payment.  That mindset is so deeply entrenched people have lost all judgment in an ability to actually determine value.

KARIM wrote:
K well when I get the photos back You can all debate on whether it was worth it or not..lol

I did ask if 200.00 was too much for editing alone? But I am getting a whole shoot with wardrobe and Hair/makeup and pictures from a photog I like. I have heard incredible prices from other models that they payed about 1000.00 for a photo session with 4 outfits and they only got a about 3 pics of each outfit.

Since you are quite new and inexperienced and you think it will help you get paid work...I would say go for it.

The guy better be good

Model Sarah wrote:

Hey I havent had my coffee yet

Hey!!! That excuse is taken.. get one of your own

Model Sarah wrote:
Well you made it seem like just because I do nude work they feel privledged to work with me. That isnt the case at all. I have worked my way up to the professional level I am at now.

I would say it is the 'content' of my work not the fact that I do nude.

Thats all.

no, not because you do nude work, but because you are fairly well known on MM and OMP and probably a couple other big networking sites and those who work with you know this and are willing to give up cash and raw images to work with you to clim their own status ladder. it happens all the time.having nudies for their collection is just a side benifit.as for the content of your work and all, if the majority of your MM and OMP portfolios were not nude works I might agree. But the fact that an overwhelming majority of your online portfolios are nude works just gets some guys thinkin they have an overwhelming change of you getting naked for their lens.

Glamour Boulevard wrote:

no, not because you do nude work, but because you are fairly well known on MM and OMP and probably a couple other big networking sites and those who work with you know this and are willing to give up cash and raw images to work with you to clim their own status ladder.

Right.