Photographer
Lumigraphics
Posts: 32780
Detroit, Michigan, US
Cuica Cafezinho wrote:
Wipe. Your. Nose. You. Go. First.
Photographer
Lumigraphics
Posts: 32780
Detroit, Michigan, US
Jessyka Ann wrote:
you would like that wouldnt you? *devilish grin* Yes. Now get on your bicycle and start riding this way first thing in the morning.
Photographer
K E E L I N G
Posts: 39894
Peoria, Illinois, US
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! Would you please make fun of my post count some more before you go to bed?
Photographer
Robert Randall
Posts: 13890
Chicago, Illinois, US
Cuica Cafezinho wrote:
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 I'm pretty certain I've never given anyone an unsolicited critique in a PM, but I wouldn't put it past myself to use a PM to threaten someone that can't seem to leave me alone.
I think that last sentence might be a fragment. We should ask Rose Colored Glasses Studio, she seems to want to jump on grammatical mistakes tonight.
I suggest at this point we both leave it alone, because the mods will simply ban the both of us, and how much fun would that be?
Photographer
Cherrystone
Posts: 37171
Columbus, Ohio, US
Ruben Grolet wrote:
Hey, I tried that but the model couldn't stop laughing.... Can you blame her?
Photographer
Patrick Walberg
Posts: 45206
San Juan Bautista, California, US
PBK Photography wrote:
Thank you. Another person who understands the op and answered. Well everyone is different, so it makes sense that there maybe as much diversity regarding tfp policy from the photographer and models too.
Model
Kess M
Posts: 8464
Brooklyn, New York, US
Chris Keeling wrote:
Take a wild guess between the two of you which one I'd prefer found another place to soar.  can i guess?
Model
Kess M
Posts: 8464
Brooklyn, New York, US
dp 
Photographer
Jfa
Posts: 210
Santa Barbara, California, US
Interesting post and very interesting responses
Photographer
M A R T I N
Posts: 3893
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Robert Randall wrote:
I don't assault amateurs, on the contrary, I like to help them whenever I can. Bob assaulted me with his huge... knowledge of retouching. And I liked it.
Photographer
Robert Randall
Posts: 13890
Chicago, Illinois, US
Myshkin wrote:
Bob assaulted me with his huge... knowledge of retouching. And I liked it. See!
Photographer
Digital Czar
Posts: 946
Oak Park, Illinois, US
Robert Randall wrote:
If you guys keep attacking him like this, he won't answer my questions, and I won't learn anything. And you shaking your head in disgust is nothing more than an affirmation of entitlement or a sense of superiority. the internet truly is a confusing dynamic. Bob, the internet isn't a "confusing dynamic," but it is more like the Old Wild West!
Photographer
Shutterbug5269
Posts: 16084
Herkimer, New York, US
PYPI FASHION wrote:
For shoots that do not require nudes, I do not require nudes.
For shoots that require nudes, I require nudes. Sounds quite reasonable to me...
Photographer
Robert Randall
Posts: 13890
Chicago, Illinois, US
Digital Czar wrote:
Bob, the internet isn't a "confusing dynamic," but it is more like the Old Wild West! Did you think my question was out of line? Personally, I've never felt I was all that capable, and I've suffered with self doubt my entire career. It's taken me over thirty years to get to the point where I think a few pieces of my work may be able to stand in the same line as Dennis Manarchy's work. I've turned over every rock I can find to see if there is a nugget of information or inspiration under it that will give me an understanding of why I suck so bad. I think I'm probably pretty typical. So how is it that this guy comes along and announces to the world that he is anything but typical.
Maybe if I find out, I won't suck as bad. It was just a question.
Photographer
Cre8tivNickname
Posts: 698
Winchester, Virginia, US
PYPI FASHION wrote:
For shoots that do not require nudes, I do not require nudes.
For shoots that require nudes, I require nudes. As it should be.
I have the luxury of only shooting what I want, when I want, with whom I want. Sometimes that's nudes... but I'll shoot a model who wants to do a creative, off-the-wall clothed shoot before I shoot someone who wants yet another pointless cookie-cutter nude, and I'd rather spend the day shooting landscapes or cityscapes than dealing with some vacuous airhead who wants to show me parts of her body that even her gynecologist hasn't seen.
Photographer
Moore Photo Graphix
Posts: 5288
Washington, District of Columbia, US
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! Is it me, or some folks not understand the concept of You Catch More Flies With Honey Than Vinegar? It seems too many people (models, photographers, etc.) believe TF* automatically means free work. Not so fast! As someone who has done TF* shoots in the past, I never forced anyone to do anything that they're not comfortable doing or discussed beforehand. It was able getting the model the images they need for port. The main objective for TF* is helping each other out, nude or non-nude. In other words, both sides need to benefit from the shoot. If I wanted nude images, I work with those who have no problem doing nude modeling. If I wanted clothed images, I look for those who can do clothed images. I follow the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) method when it comes to doing shoots. It all boils to down to working with those who add value to the portfolio. It's not rocket science! It making things less complicated than they have to be!
Photographer
Jerry Nemeth
Posts: 33355
Dearborn, Michigan, US
Cuica Cafezinho wrote:
Mr. Randall, surely you are not trolling. Again. Bob does not troll!!
Photographer
Moore Photo Graphix
Posts: 5288
Washington, District of Columbia, US
JT in VA wrote:
As it should be.
I have the luxury of only shooting what I want, when I want, with whom I want. Sometimes that's nudes... but I'll shoot a model who wants to do a creative, off-the-wall clothed shoot before I shoot someone who wants yet another pointless cookie-cutter nude, and I'd rather spend the day shooting landscapes or cityscapes than dealing with some vacuous airhead who wants to show me parts of her body that even her gynecologist hasn't seen. QFT!
Photographer
TheCinCity Project
Posts: 7611
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
PBK Photography wrote:
So everyone, what are your policies/practices?
Again as usual, please keep the smart ass remarks to yourself. Hmmm..had to go back and check if I have a 'policy'...seems I only have one stipulation...
I have a client who schedules quite complicated projects with me and it appears that I will not hire a model for these "Paid" shoots that I have not at least done a test-shoot with
....something about not putting my ass on the line for someone that I have not met yet...silly quirk of mine.
But, my models all seem to require at least a minimum of clothes....another silly thing I know.
BTW...if I give you information...I reserve the right to dish out 'smart ass remarks'...another silly quirk of mine.
Photographer
Jerry Nemeth
Posts: 33355
Dearborn, Michigan, US
Lumigraphics wrote:
Ditto. I think we all know the answer to this  Yes we do!
Artist/Painter
DGCasey
Posts: 3007
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
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? Yes, but you're only 17 years old, so it doesn't make any difference whether you would or wouldn't do it. It's not even an issue with you.
Photographer
Robert Randall
Posts: 13890
Chicago, Illinois, US
TheCinCity Project wrote:
Hmmm..had to go back and check if I have a 'policy'...seems I only have one stipulation...
I have a client who schedules quite complicated projects with me and it appears that I will not hire a model for these "Paid" shoots that I have not at least done a test-shoot with
....something about not putting my ass on the line for someone that I have not met yet...silly quirk of mine.
But, my models all seem to require at least a minimum of clothes....another silly thing I know.
BTW...if I give you information...I reserve the right to dish out 'smart ass remarks'...another silly quirk of mine. I hardly ever get to work with the models I shoot for my projects, prior to the shoot they are hired for. Sometimes I get to do live studio casting sessions, and i pick the talent from those.
What kind of clients are you talking about, and are the models you work with coming from MM, or land based agencies?
More questions!
Photographer
Darryl Varner
Posts: 725
Burlington, Iowa, US
A test is a test. I'm interested in whether the model and I can work together. The details of each shoot tend to work themselves out as we go along. I've had a few occasions where models started disrobing right off the bat. The first time that happened was quite a surprise. I've photographed other models who were clothed every time, even though we did multiple sessions. Although I sometimes have an agenda with regard to a test shoot, it's actually fairly rare. Once we're comfortable working together, generally the model and I will put our heads together and share ideas for sessions. Personally, I like it when models have creative input. Interestingly, I've found that by making nudity a non-issue, some models actually break the ice and ask whether I shoot nudes.
Artist/Painter
DGCasey
Posts: 3007
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
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 I pay. I am not a professional photog, so if a couple of shots come out that would look good in a model's portfolio, then that's just icing on the cake. I shoot nude models strictly for new reference photos for my work. Simple as that. And the model should be paid for her time in that instance.
Model
LA Woodward
Posts: 121
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
So, my opinion on this matter...
Nudity is irrelevant. Who pays who (if anyone pays) is determined based on skill, supply-demand, and quality of portfolios. If you (photographer) have a low quality portfolio with little diversity and have a hard time getting models to book with you, and I am in crazy demand by photographers and have lots of photos in my portolfio by photographers with much greater skill than you, then I'll quote you my rates. And vice versa.
My rates don't change on whether or not I'm naked, so why should yours? We're trading modeling skills and photography skills, for either cash or photos. If we're trading services for nudity, isn't that borderline prostitution?
Photographer
B R U N E S C I
Posts: 25319
Bath, England, United Kingdom
PYPI FASHION wrote:
For shoots that do not require nudes, I do not require nudes.
For shoots that require nudes, I require nudes. +1
However, I would add that for fashion work I tend to prefer to shoot with models who are comfortable at least topless, as faffing around worrying about "nip-slips" when trying to shoot a fashion set is really not acceptable these days when there is so much nudity in fashion magazines.
For beauty work though it really makes hardly any difference and if a model has something that will benefit my portfolio then I will shoot with her, whatever that may be.
Just my $0.02
Ciao
Stefano
www.stefanobrunesci.com
Photographer
AVD AlphaDuctions
Posts: 10747
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
For shoots that do not require nudes, I require nudes.
For shoots that require nudes, I do not require nudes.
Model
Yun Blair
Posts: 2
Nashville, Tennessee, US
There are plenty of models who will pose nude. So why push a model to do nudes or implied nudes if he/she does not want to do them? That is just creepy.
Photographer
PYPI FASHION
Posts: 36332
San Francisco, California, US
AVD AlphaDuctions wrote:
For shoots that do not require nudes, I require nudes.
For shoots that require nudes, I do not require nudes. Perv
Photographer
Chuckarelei
Posts: 11271
Seattle, Washington, US
LA Woodward wrote:
If we're trading services for nudity, isn't that borderline prostitution? That's what I thought too?
Photographer
Cherrystone
Posts: 37171
Columbus, Ohio, US
Yun Blair wrote:
There are plenty of models who will pose nude. So why push a model to do nudes or implied nudes if he/she does not want to do them? That is just creepy. I don't think that was what was being forwarded here......perhaps badly worded on the part of the OP
Photographer
JSVPhotography
Posts: 4897
Madison, Wisconsin, US
Man... another thread that somehow turns into a slap fest. Fairly predictable.
Back to the OP: No, I do not require nudity. Ever. I shoot a lot of nudes, ropework and other stuff.
If I can get a great image out of a TF shoot, no matter what kind of image it is, I'm good with that.
Photographer
Lumigraphics
Posts: 32780
Detroit, Michigan, US
Yun Blair wrote:
There are plenty of models who will pose nude. So why push a model to do nudes or implied nudes if he/she does not want to do them? That is just creepy. There is a difference between asking and pushing, to be sure. Lots of models say one thing and actually do another.
Photographer
Shutterbug5269
Posts: 16084
Herkimer, New York, US
Yun Blair wrote:
There are plenty of models who will pose nude. So why push a model to do nudes or implied nudes if he/she does not want to do them? That is just creepy. Finding models willing to pose nude is actually the easy part.
Finding models to pose for the other stuff has proven......difficult lately.
Artist/Painter
DGCasey
Posts: 3007
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
LA Woodward wrote:
If we're trading services for nudity, isn't that borderline prostitution? Chuckarelei wrote:
That's what I thought too? Well then, let's just go ahead and step over that line and call it what it is. Art.
Photographer
Mearle
Posts: 916
Olympia, Washington, US
I average 2-3 TFP nude shoots a week. Do I hate myself for enjoying my specialization?
Short answer. No.
Do my models hate me for shooting them nude?
No. They quite enjoy it actually.
I see no reason at all to ever change.
Photographer
Terry M Day Jr
Posts: 1814
Gwinner, North Dakota, US
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 Yes. As a portrait photographer with my own business, I don't need anything I get paid for.
If a model wants to work with me bad enough, she'll trust my judgment.
I don't do a lot of "nudes", but I do some. I do love implied and hints of nudity. Generally someone who wants to work with me will be asked to do implied at the least.
Photographer
WIP
Posts: 15973
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom
Fun City Photo wrote:
Lots of model get nude faster than I can set up the lights, after I tell them "feel free to do whatever you want". Lot of truth in it;
Test shot for lighting; asked a model to bring some outfits. She turned up with a small bag which had her makeup. So I'm thinking ok she'll model in the jeans and tshirt she turned up in.
I'm setting up lights next thing I see is her walk out of the changing room naked.
In conversation with another model she remaked ' you actually want me to bring clothes' !
Photographer
Doctor MD
Posts: 17
Glendale, Arizona, US
One of my rules .......... All You Need To Bring Is Lip Gloss ...........
|
can i guess?
