Miss Anna Evans wrote:
I love how many photographers are advocating not paying models. Really.

A fence has two sides!

Miss Anna Evans wrote:

His portfolio currently doesn't warrant TFwhatever, in my opinion. Why tell him to go find a possibly free, definitely inexperienced model who won't know how to work with whatever lights he's using, guaranteeing that his images will suck?

Anyway, it sucks for people to come into the model forum and insist that we should all work for free.

If he can't get TFP his next choice will be to pay.  My experience shows that there is always someone out there to practice on (they just won't look or model like yourself).  The images are almost guaranteed to suck your first time out so the model doesn't really matter.  The first few shoots for a new shooter is about getting your bearings and game plan down.  By telling him to get a Porsche for his first time driving a car is only shooting yourself in the foot.

Miss Anna Evans wrote:
I love how many photographers are advocating not paying models. Really.

I can't afford you.

My shots wrote:
I just put a thread asking if models fees were set in stone. I'm  interested in doing some topless and nudes photos, in good taste. What would most models charge to do these photos? I would like to see the dollar amount. I'm new at this and want to know.

Yes, TF* is possible.  But I know the difference between "trade" and "free" because I place value on my images.

$25-$100 seems to be pretty typical.  Some models need a reality check on their rates.  Others have portfolios that lead me to believe they are very much worth their asking rate.  Check references, check out their work in the photographer ports as well.  Some are a ripoff for $25/hr, and some may be a bargain @ $100.

Often (and especially this time of year) these rates may be very negotiable, depending on who you're talking to, who YOU are, and many other factors.

Shon D. VA wrote:

I can't afford you.

I'm too short for you!

JLC Images wrote:
The images are almost guaranteed to suck your first time out so the model doesn't really matter.

Say what?!?



My first ever shooting a model.  The model mattered a lot.  I had no idea what I was doing.  I didn't even know how to properly expose an image at this point.  But Becca was on top of her game and with very little need for direction allowed me to look a lot better than I really was at the time.

JLC Images wrote:

If he can't get TFP his next choice will be to pay.  My experience shows that there is always someone out there to practice on (they just won't look or model like yourself).  The images are almost guaranteed to suck your first time out so the model doesn't really matter.  The first few shoots for a new shooter is about getting your bearings and game plan down.  By telling him to get a Porsche for his first time driving a car is only shooting yourself in the foot.

Lol...I'm so not a Porsche. If he ran to the nearest agency and booked their most popular model, or hired someone like Kumi, then he'd have his ass a Porsche. I'm just some girl who talks a lot and poses really well.

Miss Anna Evans wrote:

His portfolio currently doesn't warrant TFwhatever, in my opinion. Why tell him to go find a possibly free, definitely inexperienced model who won't know how to work with whatever lights he's using, guaranteeing that his images will suck?

Anyway, it sucks for people to come into the model forum and insist that we should all work for free.

Not sure, I saw anyone "Insisting". His portfolio is exactly why TFCD is part of the process, Photographers use TFCD to learn,experiment and do better. Paying a seasoned model, teaches him nothing! He needs to learn, how to work with models, not have models teach him how they work. Paying a model does not guarantee great modeling, paying someone just to take their top off, is bad for photography! Paying a model for her "Skills" is a whole different story.  Skills are what make models money, not their "Boobs." That's no different than a guy buying a really expensive camera, with no knowledge or talent on how to use it, but charges to take pictures.
Paying Models should always be about skill level, not "Jubblies"

Magnus Hedemark wrote:
Say what?!?



My first ever shooting a model.  The model mattered a lot.  I had no idea what I was doing.  I didn't even know how to properly expose an image at this point.  But Becca was on top of her game and with very little need for direction allowed me to look a lot better than I really was at the time.

#1 This isn't a nude image
#2 I am wording in a diplomatic way to not to break the no critiquing rule and it being misunderstood by the OP

Miss Anna Evans wrote:
I love how many photographers are advocating not paying models. Really.

I'm not advocating anything other than intelligent business practices. The ONLY way hiring someone is worth a dime is if their work product brings me MORE money than I spend.

If the pictures I take of you won't make me back the fees I pay, I can't pay you. That simple.

I think models would be very well served if they got actively involved in marketing images. Find me a buyer and I'll happily pay you. As it is, you want your money upfront and want me to assume ALL the risk of making money on the transaction.

DDCStudios wrote:

Not sure, I saw anyone "Insisting". His portfolio is exactly why TFCD is part of the process, Photographers use TFCD to learn,experiment and do better. Paying a seasoned model, teaches him nothing! He needs to learn, how to work with models, not have models teach him how they work. Paying a model does not guarantee great modeling, paying someone just to take their top off, is bad for photography! Paying a model for her "Skills" is a whole different story.  Skills are what make models money, not their "Boobs." That's no different than a guy buying a really expensive camera, with no knowledge or talent on how to use it, but charges to take pictures.
Paying Models should always be about skill level, not "Jubblies"

Where on earth did I say models should be paid for having a great rack? Shit, I don't even charge based on how naked I am. Most of the experienced models I know do not.

Miss Anna Evans wrote:

Lol...I'm so not a Porsche. If he ran to the nearest agency and booked their most popular model, or hired someone like Kumi, then he'd have his ass a Porsche. I'm just some girl who talks a lot and poses really well.

You may not consider yourself a Porsche, but the payments are pretty close.  While I would agree that a great model can help a new shooter, but more than likely he would benefit from the money he spends on you at a later date when he knows what he is doing more.

My shots wrote:
I just put a thread asking if models fees were set in stone. I'm  interested in doing some topless and nudes photos, in good taste. What would most models charge to do these photos? I would like to see the dollar amount. I'm new at this and want to know.

If a model doesn't charge to pose with her clothes on, there is no reason for her to charge for nude.. unless she thinks nude is "dirty", and she thinks she should get paid to "show the goods"

Miss Anna Evans wrote:

Where on earth did I say models should be paid for having a great rack? Shit, I don't even charge based on how naked I am. Most of the experienced models I know do not.

I often get paid to keep my clothes in during a shoot...go figure.

Lumigraphics wrote:

I'm not advocating anything other than intelligent business practices. The ONLY way hiring someone is worth a dime is if their work product brings me MORE money than I spend.

If the pictures I take of you won't make me back the fees I pay, I can't pay you. That simple.

I think models would be very well served if they got actively involved in marketing images. Find me a buyer and I'll happily pay you. As it is, you want your money upfront and want me to assume ALL the risk of making money on the transaction.

Now THIS (last paragraph) is a GREAT idea!!!

Hurricane Rebecca  wrote:
Paying a skilled model is a GREAT way for a photographer to learn and improve (e.g. focusing on the photography and not having to pose a model, getting inspiration and ideas from her posing).  The Porsche analogy doesn't bear any weight.

Having a good model does not help with
-making exposures at the right time
-Lighting
-In-focus shots

A good model can help with many things, but at the beginning lvl I believe it to be a waste.

Miss Anna Evans wrote:
I love how many photographers are advocating not paying models. Really.

Its not that we don't pay models for nude shoots, its that unless WE GET PAID from an agency, client, what have you to pay the model, it makes no sence to pay a model out of pocket the rates most ask for ( $100 an hour plus ). There are lots of up & coming models that will pose nude FREE, so why pay YOU.....

I had a model ask for $200 an hour with a 2 hour minimum ! What ?? I didn't ask for a call girl, I asked for a MODEL !

Let me add this: Not one girl in my port was paid...except my dog, but hey, kibbles & bits are cheap ;-)

Lumigraphics wrote:

I'm not advocating anything other than intelligent business practices. The ONLY way hiring someone is worth a dime is if their work product brings me MORE money than I spend.

If the pictures I take of you won't make me back the fees I pay, I can't pay you. That simple.

I think models would be very well served if they got actively involved in marketing images. Find me a buyer and I'll happily pay you. As it is, you want your money upfront and want me to assume ALL the risk of making money on the transaction.

Bingo!!!

JLC Images wrote:

Having a good model does not help with
-making exposures at the right time
-Lighting
-In-focus shots

A good model can help with many things, but at the beginning lvl I believe it to be a waste.

I disagree based on the fact that the photographer doesn't have to worry about focus, exposure, lighting AND posing someone who doesn't know what she's doing.  It gives them time to concentrate on capturing something that isn't highly flawed in the first place.

Starr Images wrote:

Its not that we don't pay models for nude shoots, its that unless WE GET PAID from an agency, client, what have you to pay the model, it makes no sence to pay a model out of pocket the rates most ask for ( $100 an hour plus ). There are lots of up & coming models that will pose nude FREE, so why pay YOU.....

I had a model ask for $200 an hour with a 2 hour minimum ! What ?? I didn't ask for a call girl, I asked for a MODEL !

Let me add this: Not one girl in my port was paid...except my dog, but hey, kibbles & bits are cheap ;-)

The financial situations of my clients are none of my concern.

JLC Images wrote:

Having a good model does not help with
-making exposures at the right time
-Lighting
-In-focus shots

A good model can help with many things, but at the beginning lvl I believe it to be a waste.

No but the amount if energy you can use up just trying to get an inexperienced model into a good pose can really distract you.

I don't think anyone is talking about using the best, only someone who knows what they are doing.

Hurricane Rebecca  wrote:

I disagree based on the fact that the photographer doesn't have to worry about focus, exposure, lighting AND posing someone who doesn't know what she's doing.  It gives them time to concentrate on capturing something that isn't highly flawed in the first place.

I realize you are trying to make a point about paying models and how a great model can help a photograph.  I am not arguing this.  I am arguing at the lvl we are speaking of in this thread it to be a waste.

-Would you buy top quality skis to go out on your first try?
-Do you give a 13 year old girl top quality make-up?
-Do you give a new driver a Porsche?
-Do you buy a Hassleblad as your first camera ever?

Miss Anna Evans wrote:

The financial situations of my clients are none of my concern.

Should be. If they don't have money then you don't have money.

JLC Images wrote:

You may not consider yourself a Porsche, but the payments are pretty close.  While I would agree that a great model can help a new shooter, but more than likely he would benefit from the money he spends on you at a later date when he knows what he is doing more.

We will have to agree to disagree...I'm pretty cheap as far as experienced freelance models go, and damn cheap compared to an agency girl.

JLC Images wrote:

#1 This isn't a nude image
#2 I am wording in a diplomatic way to not to break the no critiquing rule and it being misunderstood by the OP

It doesn't matter that she's wearing a bikini top.  It still illustrates the point that a good model can be of great benefit for a beginning photographer!  This doesn't change for nude shoots.

RGK Photography wrote:

No but the amount if energy you can use up just trying to get an inexperienced model into a good pose can really distract you.

I don't think anyone is talking about using the best, only someone who knows what they are doing.

The photographer needs to know what he is doing first to be able to capture the excellence of a model.

RGK Photography wrote:

Should be. If they don't have money then you don't have money.

No, it shouldn't be. I work with entirely too many people to worry about other people's cash flow. I worry about my own.

My shots wrote:
I just put a thread asking if models fees were set in stone. I'm  interested in doing some topless and nudes photos, in good taste. What would most models charge to do these photos? I would like to see the dollar amount. I'm new at this and want to know.

I'd say pay what you can afford - think about what you want to get out of it first though.  At this point (based on your port) you are not really offering much to a model, so their time could be more important than yours.  If you are going to pay hourly, use digital.  Film is too expensive to play with.

RGK Photography wrote:

Should be. If they don't have money then you don't have money.

Not necessarily so.  The fact the economy is in the dumper has not slowed down my work load and the same goes to many of the models that I work with.

JLC Images wrote:

The photographer needs to know what he is doing first to be able to capture the excellence of a model.

Ok we are not talking about someone who is picking up a camera for the first, or second time. You don't seem to be willing or able to get passed this, so I am out.

Have fun.

Miss Anna Evans wrote:

The financial situations of my clients are none of my concern.

But Anna, I'm saying they should be. If everyone is broke, nobody can hire you. You'll make more money if you can help create a market.

That's like a GM employee saying "the financial situation of the car industry isn't my problem." Um...

As it is, I think you do terrific work. The ONLY way I would pay you a dime is if there was a market- paysite, workshop, collector, w/e. That's how agency modeling in the real world works BTW- models don't get paid unless there is a paying client. Don't you think that agencies are worried about the current economy? If businesses don't advertise, nobody hires models.

Miss Anna Evans wrote:
The financial situations of my clients are none of my concern.

Nice and cold.

I used to buy models breakfast/lunch whatever as well as pay some for shoots I never used, trying to be helpful because they were down, etc...  Silly me, thanks for the wake up call.  I'll be sure to stop that.

JLC Images wrote:
The photographer needs to know what he is doing first to be able to capture the excellence of a model.

My first model and 3rd novice shoot...I had no idea what I was doing and everything was in automatic...

Lumigraphics wrote:

But Anna, I'm saying they should be. If everyone is broke, nobody can hire you. You'll make more money if you can help create a market.

That's like a GM employee saying "the financial situation of the car industry isn't my problem." Um...

As it is, I think you do terrific work. The ONLY way I would pay you a dime is if there was a market- paysite, workshop, collector, w/e. That's how agency modeling in the real world works BTW- models don't get paid unless there is a paying client. Don't you think that agencies are worried about the current economy? If businesses don't advertise, nobody hires models.

I agree, however - the reality is that top models and photographers with business savvy are still getting plenty of work!

Magnus Hedemark wrote:

It doesn't matter that she's wearing a bikini top.  It still illustrates the point that a good model can be of great benefit for a beginning photographer!  This doesn't change for nude shoots.

PM sent