ANTHONY NESTE wrote:
it's all what you consider a small amount...we all don't have a sugar daddy like you..lol

I dunno- lets say $300.

For that rate you can hire most nude models for a few hours.  Most non nude models on MM would happy to shoot alot longer for that much.  Some photographers beat their chest and balk at the notion of paying a model.  I dunno, its just money.

Lets say I really wanna work with someone, I would have no problem flying her in.  Thats usually about $300.  So why would I have a problem paying her?  I mean obviously if she wants to work with me for free or I have a client we can both get paid even more money than awesome- but it doesnt always work out that way.

As an example, I shoot glam and glam nude professionally.  When it comes to fashion or beauty- Im an amateur.  Alot of agency girls wont even give me the time of day cuz I shoot Playboy and Hustler to pay the bills.

If I found a quality girl would give me a chance- I dont see the problem with paying her- I mean- I cant help her as much as she can help me.  And fashion and beauty is an area Id like to develop one day to diversify.

I just dont understand the ego thing.  Its only money.  Why be proud you dont have to pay?  If anything- be proud that you can pay.

You dont see people at luxury car dealerships sulking cuz they had to pay for their luxury cars.  If anything, they are happy that they can.

Greg Kolack wrote:

I will consider it, but just so you know, I never bite TF. I insist on getting paid.

LMAO

Jose Luis wrote:
I dunno- lets say $300.

For that rate you can hire most nude models for a few hours.  Most non nude models on MM would happy to shoot alot longer for that much.  Some photographers beat their chest and balk at the notion of paying a model.  I dunno, its just money.

Lets say I really wanna work with someone, I would have no problem flying her in.  Thats usually about $300.  So why would I have a problem paying her?  I mean obviously if she wants to work with me for free or I have a client we can both get paid even more money than awesome- but it doesnt always work out that way.

As an example, I shoot glam and glam nude professionally.  When it comes to fashion or beauty- Im an amateur.  Alot of agency girls wont even give me the time of day cuz I shoot Playboy and Hustler to pay the bills.

If I found a quality girl would give me a chance- I dont see the problem with paying her- I mean- I cant help her as much as she can help me.  And fashion and beauty is an area Id like to develop one day to diversify.

I just dont understand the ego thing.  Its only money.  Why be proud you dont have to pay?  If anything- be proud that you can pay.

You dont see people at luxury car dealerships sulking cuz they had to pay for their luxury cars.  If anything, they are happy that they can.

Well said.

Greg Kolack wrote:

I will consider it, but just so you know, I never bite TF. I insist on getting paid.

Oh Greg you never cease to make me laugh

Rick Fink wrote:
Back to basics!

A model and a photog work together.

One gets paid. One gets ownership.

Discuss.

Basics

A model and a photog work together.

One gets paid. One gets a modeling portfolio to market themselves.

Discuss?

Roy Hubbard wrote:

Basics

A model and a photog work together.

One gets paid. One gets a modeling portfolio to market themselves.

Discuss?

Good point.

Erlinda wrote:

I don't understand your logic Why are you attacking someone that is pretty much saying "two each their own"? Bitter much?

Does seem like she has some kind of grudge, doesn't it?

Rick Fink wrote:
Back to basics!

A llama and a photog work together.

One gets paid. One gets ownership.

Discuss.

You are forgetting that a llama can pay and get ownership.

Erlinda wrote:

+1 no matter how good and well established a model is she still, ones in awhile needs to test so she can have updated photos in her portfolio. Clearly they shoot with much more well know photographers but at the end of the day, they test and they don't get paid nor pay

la la la do do do weeeeeeee!

Well.... I'm a loser what do, I know and worse a former Texan.
Insult me, cool.   Insult my former home and its on!   
I've met several Super Models back in the day.   All were so nice and
Iman shot with a guy I know.   He wasn't some name.   Just a fun
dude who was friendly.  He's dead now.  She didn't ask for a dime.  I
spoke to Cindy Crawford once.   So sweet and smart.   


Models Test all the time.   Man she has the knife out for me.
She must know my ex-wife.

Ex Voto  Studio wrote:

You are forgetting that a model can pay and get ownership.

Good point.

Greg Kolack wrote:
I will consider it, but just so you know, I never bite TF. I insist on getting paid.

Erlinda wrote:
LMAO

Artemis Bare wrote:
Oh Greg you never cease to make me laugh

I do my best.

Sometimes the only way to respond to attacks, trolling, and idiocy is with humor.

Greg Kolack wrote:

Does seem like she has some kind of grudge, doesn't it?

Just seem like there is a chip on her shoulder... I wish it fall off LOL

Rick Fink wrote:
Back to basics!

A model and a photog work together.

One gets paid. One gets ownership.

Discuss.

Your attempt to make this "basic" ignores reality.

First of all, there are very FEW instances in shoots set up between model & photographer (sans actual paying client) where ownership is even an ISSUE.

That leaves the issue of payment.

You say that all models should be paid-- and imply that payment should always be monetary.  Some say that models ARE paid, in images, in many cases.

Whatever it takes to get the right model for the right shoot.  If you NEED to pay money, so be it: pay.  If someone doesn't need to pay money, then why the hell should they, just to satisfy YOUR warped perception of "chivalry?"

I'm far from the best photographer on this site.  Hell, I'm far from the best photographer in my group of photography friends.  Yet, I have models, every day, writing me, asking me to shoot them on a TF* basis, because they feel I can add to their portfolio.

If I'm interested in shooting them, I agree.

Why the hell would I counter a TF* offer by insisting on paying them money?

Your logic (or lack thereof) kinda confuses me.

Erlinda wrote:

Just seem like there is a chip on her shoulder... I wish it fall off LOL

Be careful you may put one on the other shoulder.

Jose Luis wrote:
I dunno- lets say $300.

For that rate you can hire most nude models for a few hours.  Most non nude models on MM would happy to shoot alot longer for that much.  Some photographers beat their chest and balk at the notion of paying a model.  I dunno, its just money.

Lets say I really wanna work with someone, I would have no problem flying her in.  Thats usually about $300.  So why would I have a problem paying her?  I mean obviously if she wants to work with me for free or I have a client we can both get paid even more money than awesome- but it doesnt always work out that way.

As an example, I shoot glam and glam nude professionally.  When it comes to fashion or beauty- Im an amateur.  Alot of agency girls wont even give me the time of day cuz I shoot Playboy and Hustler to pay the bills.

If I found a quality girl would give me a chance- I dont see the problem with paying her- I mean- I cant help her as much as she can help me.  And fashion and beauty is an area Id like to develop one day to diversify.

I just dont understand the ego thing.  Its only money.  Why be proud you dont have to pay?  If anything- be proud that you can pay.

You dont see people at luxury car dealerships sulking cuz they had to pay for their luxury cars.  If anything, they are happy that they can.

*ahem* Allow me to reintroduce myself...

But seriously, well put.

Erlinda wrote:

Just seem like there is a chip on her shoulder... I wish it fall off LOL

Or get bitten off... 

ToXiC-TeArS wrote:
Personally I think experienced models should be payed, inexperienced ones should either pay or do TF work until they build their portofolio. Just my personal opinion, no need to flip out if you disagree.

I only do TF work if I think it will really benefit my portofolio or if its a concept I really want to try

Hold on.  Let me get this straight: new photographers should pay.  New models should pay OR do TF*? 

You leave no room in your equation for new photographers doing TF*?

What an interesting take on equality you have.

Tony Lawrence wrote:

Well.... I'm a loser what do, I know and worse a former Texan.
Insult me, cool.   Insult my former home and its on!   
I've met several Super Models back in the day.   All were so nice and
Iman shot with a guy I know.   He wasn't some name.   Just a fun
dude who was friendly.  He's dead now.  She didn't ask for a dime.  I
spoke to Cindy Crawford once.   So sweet and smart.   


Models Test all the time.   Man she has the knife out for me.
She must know my ex-wife.

I moved to Paris and I have become good friends with a few models that are big and work like crazy.... And they test often, whenever there photos look old or their look changes they test for free cause they need the photos....

I'd love to meet Cindy Crawford... My husband met Iman, naomi campbell etc and they were very nice people

Stephen Markman wrote:

No.  Apparently, any reference to recreational alcohol consumption makes you a GWC.  You may have a Pepsi or a Vitamin Water.

Hey, I'm just pissed you made me drink in your apartment instead of taking me out! Damn GWC.......

ToXiC-TeArS wrote:
Personally I think experienced models should be payed, inexperienced ones should either pay or do TF work until they build their portofolio. Just my personal opinion, no need to flip out if you disagree.

I only do TF work if I think it will really benefit my portofolio or if its a concept I really want to try

What about experienced photographers?

I don't think I should be paid simply because I've paid my dues to someone else.

c_h_r_i_s wrote:

Be careful you may put one on the other shoulder.

AHAHAHAHAHAHA I have no interest in silliness over the internet... I was just asking a simple question and making an observation

Greg Kolack wrote:

Or get bitten off... 

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA too funny!

B R E N N A N wrote:

Hey, I'm just pissed you made me drink in your apartment instead of taking me out! Damn GWC.......

Well, if you like, I can put you in touch with the "source" of Iona's information gossip.  And then we can clarify, the next time you're in NYC, whether I should be taking you out on the town or just chilling at my place and shooting.

Either way, I always enjoy your company and always enjoy shooting you.

Erlinda wrote:
I moved to Paris and I have become good friends with a few llamas that are big and work like crazy.... And they test often, whenever there photos look old or their look changes they test for free cause they need the photos....

I'd love to meet Cindy Crawford... My husband met Iman, naomi campbell etc and they were very nice people

Iman is STUNNING.   I have never seen a women so beautiful.
You're in Paris.   Look up Ernest Collins.   He's living there now.
Former Chicago guy.   Fantastic shooter.

Stephen Markman wrote:

Well, if you like, I can put you in touch with the "source" of Iona's information gossip.  And then we can clarify, the next time you're in NYC, whether I should be taking you out on the town or just chilling at my place and shooting.

Either way, I always enjoy your company and always enjoy shooting you.

Check the credits on my other profile. lol

Jose Luis wrote:
I dunno- lets say $300.

For that rate you can hire most nude models for a few hours.  Most non nude models on MM would happy to shoot alot longer for that much.  Some photographers beat their chest and balk at the notion of paying a model.  I dunno, its just money.

Lets say I really wanna work with someone, I would have no problem flying her in.  Thats usually about $300.  So why would I have a problem paying her?  I mean obviously if she wants to work with me for free or I have a client we can both get paid even more money than awesome- but it doesnt always work out that way.

As an example, I shoot glam and glam nude professionally.  When it comes to fashion or beauty- Im an amateur.  Alot of agency girls wont even give me the time of day cuz I shoot Playboy and Hustler to pay the bills.

If I found a quality girl would give me a chance- I dont see the problem with paying her- I mean- I cant help her as much as she can help me.  And fashion and beauty is an area Id like to develop one day to diversify.

I just dont understand the ego thing.  Its only money.  Why be proud you dont have to pay?  If anything- be proud that you can pay.

You dont see people at luxury car dealerships sulking cuz they had to pay for their luxury cars.  If anything, they are happy that they can.

I pay models... Not with cash but with photos... Sure you may not say that's any good but they aren't complaining

Sorry Jose, I aint ballin' like you

B R E N N A N wrote:

Check the credits on my other profile. lol

'Tis all true, m'lady.  Now, where's that dragon?!?!

ACPhotography wrote:
Why do these threads happen every few weeks????

Because no-one actually works with anyone here, it's just a models vs photographers forum! Great shame really, if the models and photographers here actually removed whatever bug they have up their asses then we'd all be doing what we joined up to do - shoot photos!

Tony Lawrence wrote:

Iman is STUNNING.   I have never seen a women so beautiful.
You're in Paris.   Look up Ernest Collins.   He's living there now.
Former Chicago guy.   Fantastic shooter.

I'd love to shoot her.... Faack what an honour that would be

It seems like his website doesn't really work

Erlinda wrote:

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA too funny!

Nice to find someone who has the same immature sense of humor as me. 

Arun Phillips wrote:

Because no-one actually works with anyone here, it's just a models vs photographers forum! Great shame really, if the models and photographers here actually removed whatever bug they have up their asses then we'd all be doing what we joined up to do - shoot photos!

Actually, I have worked with a great number of models here. I don't have any bug up my ass about models. I support them in whatever success they have and however they choose to work.

And all I ask is to get the same in return. Don't decide for me how I should be working.

Art of the nude wrote:
Really?

How long would you shoot, with a release, for $25?

The Original Sin  wrote:
I shot for 9 hours in exchange for pics, HMS, and a coca-cola.  And I signed a full commercial release.

Like the avatar?

But you didn't rant that you never do trades, and brand the OP your "hero." 

And, what's HMS?

Edit; wrong profile.  I'm also "Art of the Nude."