The Bald Photographer wrote:
Too late now, but GWC does to my mind have an association with 'beginner', sadly, even a legitimate one.

Would have been better as a CWC - Creep With Camera. Then it's just a definition of what makes someone a creep...

John
http://TheBaldPhotographer.com

That would have made it easier for everyone here

to determine the difference and meaning of GWC..

Goodness!

christopher mangulabnan wrote:
is there something wrong with a nude woman?

Isn't that either glam, artistic nudes, etc...

I guess so far a GWC, is a man using a camera to put the moves on his model...

So just hope that's not th case while shooting nude models..

eeek!

christopher mangulabnan wrote:
i got dance moves for that.  my camera would get in the way.  plus way too expensive to accidentally drop.

is there something wrong with a guy having a camera?

You tell me...

Dance moves eh???

Oh my!!

christopher mangulabnan wrote:
yes, i'd twirl you and show you my disco boogie.

can't they just make cameras that see thru clothes that way it's not a big deal for photographers to see girls naked and girls can keep their clothes on.

Don't men already imagine women naked.

Isn't that apart of your genetics.

No seriously.

It said that in my biology book.

Flip Ashley wrote:
Lots of GWCs out there,learn to identify and move on.

Everyone clearly has a different version of what they believe a GWC is.

Wow.

christopher mangulabnan wrote:
maybe they can just make see thru clothes more fashionable since women love wearing the latest fashions.  or they can fix my eyes so I can see thru clothes.

i think if men weren't frustrated losers we could see more naked women like those guys at topless beaches in europe.

Now I know where you're going next summer.



What are you, a comedian?

Hollywood Starlet wrote:
GWC = inappropriate sexual advances

I'm *dying* to hear about appropriate sexual advances. Please do tell!

BTW, I'd consider myself GWC, because I'm a guy and, well, I do indeed have a camera. Big one. With long lens. I also have a tripod, if it makes any difference, though I rarely use it.

Hollywood Starlet wrote:
GWC = inappropriate sexual advances

semyon wrote:
I'm *dying* to hear about appropriate sexual advances. Please do tell!

BTW, I'd consider myself GWC, because I'm a guy and, well, I do indeed have a camera. Big one. With long lens. I also have a tripod, if it makes any difference, though I rarely use it.

Based on some of the responses in this thread, that's a GWC.

::shrugs::

Is that definition of a GWC, wrong??

Seems to be common here.

I'm still learning.

dantuyhoa wrote:
Don't forget :

Guys  With Car !


I'm a no win case : Guy With Cookies!

Cookies??

I want some!!!

Chocolate chip?????????????



Gimme!

::snatches the cookies and jets::

bruce macevoy wrote:
there's a confusion here.

as a behavioral category a gwc is anybody using a camera whose net investment in the activity is pretty much ... pointing the camera. no business scramble for clients, no tormented hours trying to get the white balance just right, no interest in learning about lighting, no hunger for better equipment, no concern for reputation.

as an epithet of contempt, anybody who does anything that anybody else thinks isn't something that anybody should do, especially if they do it wielding a camera.

Now this is what I initially thought a GWC was...

It can be so confusing...

Goodness!

Chad Ruin wrote:
Just out of curiosity, is there a title for the model version of a GWC? In my experiance so far with MM, that's all I have been met with. Fakes and flakes who want me to churn out crap they can put on their myspace page. It is starting to get frustrating. If there is no name for them yet, I want to throw TWT in the hat... Tards With Tits:)

Oh my....

Maybe a GWP = Girl With Profile.

Hollywood Starlet wrote:



Don't men already imagine women naked.

Isn't that apart of your genetics.

No seriously.

It said that in my biology book.

Don't believe everything you read, be it in a text, blog or the Onion.

Hollywood Starlet wrote:



Oh my....

Maybe a GWP = Girl With Profile.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Nice!

Hollywood Starlet wrote:


Don't men already imagine women naked.

Isn't that apart of your genetics.

No seriously.

It said that in my biology book.

AUTONOMY wrote:
Don't believe everything you read, be it in a text, blog or the Onion.

I was joking...wait no, I read it in Cosmo..

hahahaha

Hollywood Starlet wrote:


Oh my....

Maybe a GWP = Girl With Profile.

Chad Ruin wrote:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Nice!

Right right!!

Hollywood Starlet wrote:
"What's with all the GWC's on OneModelPlace.com, lately?"

there are alot more on modelmayhem.  at least on onemodelplace you know they are serious because they have to pay for membership.

Hollywood Starlet wrote:
"What's with all the GWC's on OneModelPlace.com, lately?"

afterdarc studios wrote:
there are alot more on modelmayhem.  at least on onemodelplace you know they are serious because they have to pay for membership.

That was quoted from www.urbandictionary.com.

But there are more here?

Thanks for the insight.

Wow!!!

Hollywood Starlet wrote:
All photographers were once a GWC or FWC - Female.. minus perversion...

You gotta start somewhere, right?

I don't agree with this usage of the term. If that were the correct usage of the term, I would disagree with the condemnation heaped on GWCs. I don't believe that a novice is exactly that same as a GWC. I don't believe that being a novice makes someone a creep.

I consider a GWC to be someone who has little interest in photography; he is a photographer only to gain access to attractive models. He is a self-centered, undisciplined jerk.

Imagebuffet wrote:
I consider a GWC to be someone who has little interest in photography; he is a photographer only to gain access to attractive models. He is a self-centered, undisciplined jerk.

You quoted me from a comment I made early in the thread.

There are several definitions provided.

I'm learning.

Quote another definition lol



But the second part of your definition is common in this thread.

Hollywood Starlet wrote:



Don't men already imagine women naked.

Isn't that apart of your genetics.

No seriously.

It said that in my biology book.

I have never looked at a woman and imagined her naked. That might be because I lack imagination (though, my Mom always complained that I have too much imagination). As it happens, even when I see a woman naked, there is some sort of shield in my mind that keeps me from really appreciating that fact. I don't really understand that. On the one hand, a beautiful, sexy nude can take my breath away. OTOH, I can look at a nude woman all day and not really notice it. That's part of my fascination with nude modeling, I think.

Janice Marie Foote wrote:
I thought GWC meant "Guy With Cock"...

I tell ya, how many GWC's are there??!!

Hollywood Starlet wrote:

Creative Art and Light wrote:
I know I'm a newbie so I'm placing myself at risk of ridicule here, but I think that sometimes the term is used to loosely. There are guys out there who buy cameras just to photograph women. They range from perverts to Playboy photographers. However, I think your definition is probably the closest to how I perceive the term.

A couple of years ago I contacted a model to ask if she was interested in working on some photos for our portfolios. I don't know what I said wrong but I assure you all I made no sexual references, no insinuations that I was looking for a date, nor was I even wanting to do nudes or even swimwear. She emailed me back and said that I was just a GWC and to leave her alone. Not being very savvy, I didn't know what a GWC was so I asked the question on another popular forum. Man, did I open up a can of worms! I was roasted in there! I earned the GWC name and could not shake it. The only reason it stuck is because I had just quit my job as a photojournalist and wanted to branch into commercial photography. I had worked with three models and only had three photos posted at the time. So, because I did not have an extensive portfolio I was labeled a GWC. I had worked as a pro photographer for years but in another field.

So I think that we might ought to take it easy on the beginners and not throw that label out too quickly. Models should always be on guard to stay safe and if something does not feel right, don't shoot with a photog. But don't label him with that unless it is clear he deserves it.

Sorry for the rant, but I'm glad to see the issue discussed. Thanks for posting that.

Glenn C
All photographers were once a GWC or FWC - Female.. minus perversion...

You gotta start somewhere, right?

I think The Divine Emily Fine would openly debate you about the female minus perversion part!!!

Imagebuffet wrote:
I have never looked at a woman and imagined her naked. That might be because I lack imagination (though, my Mom always complained that I have too much imagination). As it happens, even when I see a woman naked, there is some sort of shield in my mind that keeps me from really appreciating that fact. I don't really understand that. On the one hand, a beautiful, sexy nude can take my breath away. OTOH, I can look at a nude woman all day and not really notice it. That's part of my fascination with nude modeling, I think.

Professional!!

Driven and focused???

That must be it.

Janice Marie Foote wrote:
I think The Divine Emily Fine would openly debate you about the female minus perversion part!!!

Page 1 Response

Hollywood Starlet wrote:
All photographers were once a GWC or FWC - Female.. minus perversion...

You gotta start somewhere, right?

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
Are you saying that FWC have no perversion? 

No, I meant for both, just making sure everyone knew what the "F" meant.

No confusions.