Patrick Walberg wrote:

In general, my policy is just the opposite.  I pay for nudes, and I TFP the other stuff.   I would rarely TFP nudes.  Sometimes I get paid for the shoot, and that includes nudes too.  I make money off the nudes, I don't as much off the other stuff.

Thank you. Another person who understands the op and answered.

Marcia Wood wrote:
I don't shoot nudes.If you want to do tfp for nudes that is your business.I am not here to judge.If a photographer whose work I like refuses to shoot tfp me with me unless I am nude,I go out and find another photographer to shoot with.

Thanks for input.

As for models go, I think that has been the norm.

I believe the only ones who MAY actually "break down" would be a novice who was talked into it and didnt know any better.

Cuica Cafezinho wrote:

I've been wondering about that since I noticed your assault on us amateurs on Model Mayhem. Isn't there a big boy forum you can play in somewhere on the interwebz? A place full of your peers?  Instead of a place like MM where you soar like a turkey vulture, scooping up the chipmunks?

I don't assault amateurs, on the contrary, I like to help them whenever I can. However, some of those amateurs have very thin skin and they seem to have a difficult time with the truth. That, when combined with a questionable skill set and low self esteem, can make them somewhat argumentative and petty. Some of them just can't seem to let it go, and they stalk me all over the place, calling me names and making fun of me.

Turkey vulture... that's a new one.

PBK Photography wrote:

I set out to ask a simple question. Thats all. Nothing more, nothing less. Trust me, I have better things to do that to sit here and be attacked for asking a SIMPLE DAMN QUESTION!

Now, if it hits a little too close to home for ya, then quit trying to turn it back on me.

And yes, some of you DO live on these damn forums. How the  hell else do you have 10, 20 30k posts in 3 years? Thats about 30 a day!

See?  Combative   My post count is nothing compared to most of SF2 that have been there less than half as long as I have   It's easy to do.

But yeah... combative.

Compass Rose Studios wrote:

For somone who once felt compelled to correct me on my grammar:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

I bet you've been waiting years to pull that one out of your

PBK Photography wrote:

Thanks for input.

As for models go, I think that has been the norm.

I believe the only ones who MAY actually "break down" would be a novice who was talked into it and didnt know any better.

It's this shit that screams at me.

PBK Photography wrote:
Was reading another thread and this question came to mind...

Do you (photographers) require all (or a majority) of your TF* work to be some form of nude? Full, implied, topless included

Do you (models) give in to photographers (that you really want to shoot with) who will only shoot under those conditions?

Me- I used to require them during my first year or so but only with those who were comfy doing them. Not that it makes it excusable but we all make mistakes. Currently, I no longer require nudes to shoot a model TF* (I just require a one time sitting fee and will shoot models TF* for as long as we want to continue working together). I shoot some that are minors and I see no reason to not keep it a level playing field.

So everyone, what are your policies/practices?

Again as usual, please keep the smart ass remarks to your self. Just want to see where everyone stands on this issue.

Thanks!

Just out of curiousity.......you do understand that TF means they don't give you money, don't you?

PBK Photography wrote:
Do you (photographers) require all (or a majority) of your TF* work to be some form of nude? Full, implied, topless included

Yes.

I shoot art nudes. Trading for fashion only makes sense if you want more fashion photos. I don't.

Do you (models) give in to photographers (that you really want to shoot with) who will only shoot under those conditions?

I object to the wording (emphasis added). It suggests that nude models are somehow getting a bum deal (no pun intended), or that offering a model a clothed trade shoot is somehow automatically more valuable than offering a trade shoot for nudes.

Models trade for what they want in their own portfolio. It would make no sense to "give in" and shoot nudes if you didn't want nude photos in return.

Cuica Cafezinho wrote:

I've been wondering about that since I noticed your assault on us amateurs on Model Mayhem. Isn't there a big boy forum you can play in somewhere on the interwebz? A place full of your peers?  Instead of a place like MM where you soar like a turkey vulture, scooping up the chipmunks?

Take a wild guess between the two of you which one I'd prefer found another place to soar.

Robert Randall wrote:

I don't assault amateurs, on the contrary, I like to help them whenever I can. However, some of those amateurs have very thin skin and they seem to have a difficult time with the truth. That, when combined with a questionable skill set and low self esteem, can make them somewhat argumentative and petty. Some of them just can't seem to let it go, and they stalk me all over the place, calling me names and making fun of me.

Turkey vulture... that's a new one.

LOL. A very, thinly veiled, unsolicited critique / personal attack. Battin' a thousand KVG!

PBK Photography wrote:
Was reading another thread and this question came to mind...

Do you (photographers) require all (or a majority) of your TF* work to be some form of nude? Full, implied, topless included

Do you (models) give in to photographers (that you really want to shoot with) who will only shoot under those conditions?

Me- I used to require them during my first year or so but only with those who were comfy doing them. Not that it makes it excusable but we all make mistakes. Currently, I no longer require nudes to shoot a model TF* (I just require a one time sitting fee and will shoot models TF* for as long as we want to continue working together). I shoot some that are minors and I see no reason to not keep it a level playing field.

So everyone, what are your policies/practices?

Again as usual, please keep the smart ass remarks to your self. Just want to see where everyone stands on this issue.

Thanks!

You used to require nudes for TFCD and now you require a sitting fee? Uhh... that's not TFCD, that's a paid shoot.

And I tend to shoot at least some nudes with models who do nudes, and for whatever reason I have been shooting mostly with nude models. I only do trade if the model can clearly add to my port at this point.

Chris Keeling wrote:

Take a wild guess between the two of you which one I'd prefer found another place to soar.

I don't know. Explain?

Roxy Mae  NFB wrote:
lemme get this right in order to shoot on a tf* basis i would have had to shoot nude?(according to your old policy)....wow

hehe my thoughts too. but i've heard/seen that ALOT!! or if u want me to pay the model she have to be naked. that makes me wonder what these photogs are really thinking about. lol

Robert Randall wrote:
I bet you've been waiting years to pull that one out of your

Nope.  You've made other flubs before.  This one is just one of my pet peeves. 

Perhaps you assume too much.

Bodyshots Photography wrote:
Much of my work with models includes art nudes, so yes, I usually want models who are willing to do that, even if most of the images are not 18+  It may turn out even none are.

Most shoots may also require wearing something black, something white or going without sunglasses so I usually want models willing to do that as well.

Most models willing to do art nudes are also willing to wear clothes, so it's rare I need clothes only models.  When I work trade with someone who is not willing to do nudes, it's usually because they have a background in a certain activity I wish to shoot.

Thanks.

For the photographers who have bothered to answer this with inteligance (and I probably mispelled it but oh well), looks like nudes are either part of the trade or not. There really is nothing set in stone.

But in both cases, we are only hearing from a small portion but all in all, its probably a good representation.

Thank you all again for taking part.

I'm done for the night

Cuica Cafezinho wrote:

LOL. A very, thinly veiled, unsolicited critique / personal attack. Battin' a thousand KVG!

I have no idea what you are talking about. However, I don't think there should be a comma after the word very in the line just above.

PBK Photography wrote:
Me- I used to require them during my first year or so but only with those who were comfy doing them. Not that it makes it excusable but we all make mistakes. Currently, I no longer require nudes to shoot a model TF* (I just require a one time sitting fee and will shoot models TF* for as long as we want to continue working together). I shoot some that are minors and I see no reason to not keep it a level playing field.

...wait I just got this...so are you requesting that MINORS shoot nude? Or do pray tell I mis-read THAT because it is late and i am totally exhausted!

Compass Rose Studios wrote:

Nope.  You've made other flubs before.  This one is just one of my pet peeves. 

Perhaps you assume too much.

Perhaps.

Mizz Joa wrote:
I wouldn't give in to photographers if those were the conditions even if I really really wanted to work with them.
I think nude is beautiful but my family is super religious so . . .yeee, I'm the "rebel" because I party and have a belly ring . . like, wtf?

You are also 17.

Swank Photography wrote:
...wait I just got this...so are you requesting that MINORS shoot nude? Or do pray tell I mis-read THAT because it is late and i am totally exhausted!

wow...minors huh? Does this mean you dont know when your crossing the line?

(to the op)

Lumigraphics wrote:

You are also 17.

yeah seems like when 18 hits nudity is in lmao!

PBK Photography wrote:

Thanks.

For the photographers who have bothered to answer this with inteligance (and I probably mispelled it but oh well), looks like nudes are either part of the trade or not. There really is nothing set in stone.

But in both cases, we are only hearing from a small portion but all in all, its probably a good representation.

Thank you all again for taking part.

I'm done for the night

You haven't answered my question. While my question has nothing to do with nude modeling, it was born out of a curiosity inspired by your op. I'm truly curious why you think you and your photographic approach are unique.

Robert Randall wrote:

I have no idea what you are talking about. However, I don't think there should be a comma after the word very in the line just above.

That comma is arguable. Should the mods question what I'm talking about, I have your PM and links to show them. But, they have more history on you beating on amateurs than I do.

What do you think about that comma before about?

OK, I'm out! :-D

Robert Randall wrote:

You haven't answered my question. While my question has nothing to do with nude modeling, it was born out of a curiosity inspired by your op. I'm truly curious why you think you and your photographic approach are unique.

most ops have 'select reading'

Lumigraphics wrote:

You used to require nudes for TFCD and now you require a sitting fee? Uhh... that's not TFCD, that's a paid shoot.

I worded it incorrectly. My bad.

Jessyka Ann wrote:
"hey! lets shoot together! I love your work!"

"sure! but you need to do a nude shoot right away"


*scratches head*

I want to do a nude shoot with YOU right away

But then, I'm different

Lumigraphics wrote:

I want to do a nude shoot with YOU right away

But then, I'm different

you would like that wouldnt you? *devilish grin*

Swank Photography wrote:

...wait I just got this...so are you requesting that MINORS shoot nude? Or do pray tell I mis-read THAT because it is late and i am totally exhausted!

You misread it.

Because I shoot minors who cannot disrobe, I see no reason to tell the 18 y/o she has to due to her age. So the field is level and they rules are the same. Just because you legally can, doesnt mean I'm going to take advantage of it

Cuica Cafezinho wrote:

I've been wondering about that since I noticed your assault on us amateurs on Model Mayhem. Isn't there a big boy forum you can play in somewhere on the interwebz? A place full of your peers?  Instead of a place like MM where you soar like a turkey vulture, scooping up the chipmunks?

PBK Photography wrote:
Me- I used to require them during my first year or so but only with those who were comfy doing them. Not that it makes it excusable but we all make mistakes. Currently, I no longer require nudes to shoot a model TF* (I just require a one time sitting fee and will shoot models TF* for as long as we want to continue working together). I shoot some that are minors and I see no reason to not keep it a level playing field.

OP...its NOT okay to shoot minors nekkid...Your reasoning, as stated above, is not excusable by any means. Its disgusting.


EDIT: just read your response. sorry

Lumigraphics wrote:

Don't start Mr.!!

:-)

Jessyka Ann wrote:

most ops have 'select reading'

Most OPs prefer to stay within the the original posts

PBK Photography wrote:

Most OPs prefer to stay within the the original posts

shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh NO! *stomps feet*

they have select reading!

*sticks out tongue*

Chris Keeling wrote:

Take a wild guess between the two of you which one I'd prefer found another place to soar.

Ditto. I think we all know the answer to this

PBK Photography wrote:

You misread it.

Because I shoot minors who cannot disrobe, I see no reason to tell the 18 y/o she has to due to her age. So the field is level and they rules are the same. Just because you legally can, doesnt mean I'm going to take advantage of it

Ok thank you for clearing that up for me

As i stated before...I do not ask models to pose nude on tfp...overall i don't ask them to pose nude in the first place.

But that's just me.

Lumigraphics wrote:

Ditto. I think we all know the answer to this

Wipe. Your. Nose.

Jessyka Ann wrote:

yeah seems like when 18 hits nudity is in lmao!

And then when you are 45 and fat its back out

PBK Photography wrote:
Ok, I'm done!

Out of 3 pages, there were like 10 legit replies to the OP.

Some of you really need to ... nope, not gonna say it cause you'll find some way to get pleasure out it.

Gnite Folks!

welcome to the MAAAYYYHHHEEEEMMMM!