Wilde One wrote:
I'm just about to order prints to be sent to the model of a TFP shoot.

The way I cropped them they would come out 8x12.

Is that acceptable, or is 9x12 a must for a model portfolio?

(in this case I'd need to crop).

By the way: do you prefer metallic or matte paper?

Thanks!

8x12 will not work for a model.  He/she needs 9x12 unless there is something unique about the market he/she is in and models tote 8x12 books.  Failing that, she needs 9x12.  Models don't care about the paper.  They do care about the print.  If the print looks better on matte, use that.  If it looks better on metallic, use it.  If it looks better on lustre......... you get the idea.

Wilde One wrote:
Is that acceptable, or is 9x12 a must for a model portfolio?

No, it's not a must.

Why do photographers make things so difficult? I ask a very simple question - "What size do you need for your portfolio?" Is that so hard? Then I print to the size they require.

Last week, one model showed up with a book from Look in SF. It was 8.5X11. All previous Look portfolios were 9X12. I simply asked the booker. They are transitioning to the 8.5X11 size and as of that date, about half had the old size and the rest the new size. I will give the model whatever size they have.

Isn't it easier to ask the model?

Digitoxin wrote:
8x12 will not work for a model.  He/she needs 9x12 unless there is something unique about the market he/she is in and models tote 8x12 books.  Failing that, she needs 9x12.  Models don't care about the paper.  They do care about the print.  If the print looks better on matte, use that.  If it looks better on metallic, use it.  If it looks better on lustre......... you get the idea.

L O N D O N Brown wrote:
There are tons of threads on this already...I know I started one. But the standard for model's books are 9 by 12.......

Thanks. 9x12 it will be.

There are some models who have different sized portfolios, but this is a model rather at the beginning of her career and I want her to have standard sized images.

Scott Aitken wrote:
Why ask us?

Traditionally, 9x12 is the most common size for models. But I've seen 8x10, 8.5x11, 8x12 too on occasion.

So just ask the model what size she/he wants.

Right. I called her. 9x12.

I'll be asking every model from now on, just in case one of them uses a different size.

Thanks for your input.

Leonard Gee Photography wrote:
Last week, one model showed up with a book from Look in SF. It was 8.5X11. All previous Look portfolios were 9X12. I simply asked the booker. They are transitioning to the 8.5X11 size and as of that date, about half had the old size and the rest the new size. I will give the model whatever size they have.

Isn't it easier to ask the model?

Leonard:  Why is that?  Did the booker say?

I am curious because I am beginning to see agency girls in this town (not a big market by any means) toting around 8.5 x 11" COMP Cards (printed on regular paper but bearing 4 images, her stats, and the agency logo -- a "top" agency name everyone would know).  I also know a model that just got back from China (Beijing and Hong Kong).  Her Beijing agency created "normal" comps but the Hong Kong agency created them on 8x11" standard paper (and folded them over to create a "comp"). 

I am wondering if the 8.5x11" size that Look wants to use has something to do with wanting to shift to a "standard paper" size?  Thoughts????

Digitoxin wrote:
Leonard:  Why is that?  Did the booker say?
................................
I am wondering if the 8.5x11" size that Look wants to use has something to do with wanting to shift to a "standard paper" size?  Thoughts????

No idea. I generally don't question those things. It's like fashion. Late 60's it was all 11X14 for the working pro models. Started changing to 9X12 in the 90's. Now Europe has transitioned to smaller sizes and the US is just getting around to it.

There are pros and cons either way. The larger size allows big tearsheets (newspaper), but harder to always keep with the model for the short notice go-sees. Try going on the NY subway at rush hour with model bag and book. The smaller one is easier to have at hand but the large tears have to be scanned and printed down to size and the prints are easier to output without finding a large format printer as more photographers hand out CD/DVDs.

Magic Image Photography wrote:
Why are you waisting your time on giveing models prints an Edited Cd should be enough

Why are you wasting time giving model's CDs? So they can print out their pictures on "free with CPU purchase" printers with one clogged nozzle and no yellow ink on crappy Staples paper?

Giving them a hand made print that's tweaked for the right color with the best d-max possible, clean neutral whites and accurate color is what the art director will see when they are on go-sees. That's the impression the clients and model agency will have of me when they see it.

Kita St Cyr wrote:
Mine is 11X14.

mine too... but I am not in an agency, I just like pretty pictures

Sean Dackermann  wrote:
I don't want to sound dumb..but with the dslrs of now, wouldn't you have to crop an image to make that 9x12 size since they are designed to shoot 4x6 ratios and for "pro" ratio 5x4? or does this use the 3x4 ratio that can be adjusted on some dslrs to use? This is completely new to me, I figured 8x12s would be the standard myself, but I'd like to learn.


Sean

What is the ratio for 35mm film?

Now that you have answered that question, what difference does it make what the sensor size is?  Clients (in this case, models) need the size that they need.  They do not, and should not, care about your sensor.  That's your problem.

For actor headshots, would you give them something besides 8x10 because, well, it's easier for you?

Digitoxin wrote:
Leonard:  Why is that?  Did the booker say?
................................
I am wondering if the 8.5x11" size that Look wants to use has something to do with wanting to shift to a "standard paper" size?  Thoughts????

Leonard Gee Photography wrote:
No idea. I generally don't question those things. It's like fashion. Late 60's it was all 11X14 for the working pro models. Started changing to 9X12 in the 90's. Now Europe has transitioned to smaller sizes and the US is just getting around to it.

There are pros and cons either way. The larger size allows big tearsheets (newspaper), but harder to always keep with the model for the short notice go-sees. Try going on the NY subway at rush hour with model bag and book. The smaller one is easier to have at hand but the large tears have to be scanned and printed down to size and the prints are easier to output without finding a large format printer as more photographers hand out CD/DVDs.

Yes, I understand.  I was just curious if the world of "inexpensive digital printing" was beginning to take hold at some domestic agencies -- i.e. is it a trend or is it just a "stop gap."
As mentioned, I know that some agencies in China, "comp cards" are printed on paper and done right at the agency's office.  Not a great print or card but it works for their market.  And, it has the benefit of being very inexpensive  and able to change out the images quickly.

Sean Dackermann  wrote:
I don't want to sound dumb..but with the dslrs of now, wouldn't you have to crop an image to make that 9x12 size since they are designed to shoot 4x6 ratios and for "pro" ratio 5x4? or does this use the 3x4 ratio that can be adjusted on some dslrs to use? This is completely new to me, I figured 8x12s would be the standard myself, but I'd like to learn.


Sean

As mentioned, portfolio sizes for models are currently 9x12 (in many markets) but can be different and are NOT necessarily sized around the aspect ratio of the camera any individual photographer is using (how could they be?).

It is therefore important to know the size of the model's book (and, currently, if in doubt, either ask the agency or deliver 9x12)

L O N D O N Brown wrote:
There are tons of threads on this already...I know I started one. But the standard for model's books are 9 by 12.......




*edited*