Rick Fink wrote:
I really think that photogs should generally pay models for shoots!

I try to get paid work for a lot of the models I work with but keep running into the fact that many experienced photogs want to do trades or get paid themselves!

My feeling is that the model and I co-create the images but since I ask her to sign a release form she should get paid.

The reason I'm bringing this up is because I see talented models and photogs butting heads over should a nude shoot be paid or trade.

Then there's the implication that any photog worth his salt won't pay models and only the GWC's pay.

Even if it's a totally trade shoot I'll offer the model $25 for her signature on the release form.

My hero.

Kymberly Jane wrote:

My hero.

Stephen Markman wrote:
I'm NOT a pimp but I think you'd be surprised just how many men balk at paying for sex when I contact them to tell them that I have women who are willing to have sex with them for money.









MODS: No, I'm not advocating any illegal activity.  I'm making a point.

I TOLD you no one would pay to have sex with me, dammit!  There you go being all "I know better" again.

Boy, I oughta snuggle you senseless.

Stephen Markman wrote:
I'm NOT a pimp but I think you'd be surprised just how many men balk at paying for sex when I contact them to tell them that I have women who are willing to have sex with them for money.

MODS: No, I'm not advocating any illegal activity.  I'm making a point.

sex is NEVER involved when Im Hired to Shoot..

the Meir thought that those 2 can be considered together is inappropriate..and whomever thinks they can have sex with a model After Hiring them to shoot.. SHOULD NOT BE ON THIS SITE.

EDIT: i DO NOT hire photographers.. never had never will .. never needed to..

Kymberly Jane wrote:

sex is NEVER involved when Im Hired to Shoot..

the Meir thought that those 2 can be considered together is inappropriate..and whomever thinks they can have sex with a model After Hiring them to shoot.. SHOULD NOT BE ON THIS SITE.

Analogy FAIL.

Go to the back of the class.

Kymberly Jane wrote:

sex is NEVER involved when Im Hired to Shoot..

the Meir thought that those 2 can be considered together is inappropriate..and whomever thinks they can have sex with a model After Hiring them to shoot.. SHOULD NOT BE ON THIS SITE.

he was using it as a metaphor, or did you not learn that term in middle school?

Kymberly Jane wrote:

sex is NEVER involved when Im Hired to Shoot..

the Meir thought that those 2 can be considered together is inappropriate..and whomever thinks they can have sex with a model After Hiring them to shoot.. SHOULD NOT BE ON THIS SITE.

I do not think he is implying models have sex for money, he is making a comparison.

Kymberly Jane wrote:

sex is NEVER involved when Im Hired to Shoot..

the Meir thought that those 2 can be considered together is inappropriate..and whomever thinks they can have sex with a model After Hiring them to shoot.. SHOULD NOT BE ON THIS SITE.

I think you are missing Stephen's point...

Stephen Markman wrote:
I'm NOT a pimp but I think you'd be surprised just how many men balk at paying for sex when I contact them to tell them that I have women who are willing to have sex with them for money.









MODS: No, I'm not advocating any illegal activity.  I'm making a point.

I get it. You're joking. For a minute I thought you were trying make a valid point, but now I realize the joke is entirely on me. Good one. Really nice. The prostitution metaphor is excellent and in no way demeans the entire industry.

Stephen Markman wrote:

Analogy FAIL.

Go to the back of the class.

wow your helpful.. the fact i say I DO NOT have sex with photographers is a fail to you?...wow.. unbelievable.. why did i come into these forums .. always a waste of time.

Kymberly Jane wrote:

sex is NEVER involved when Im Hired to Shoot..

the Meir thought that those 2 can be considered together is inappropriate..and whomever thinks they can have sex with a model After Hiring them to shoot.. SHOULD NOT BE ON THIS SITE.

EDIT: i DO NOT hire photographers.. never had never will .. never needed to..

Then why should photographers hire models if they don't need to either.


I find a lot of hypocrisy in this thread.

Kymberly Jane wrote:

wow your helpful.. the fact i say I DO NOT have sex with photographers is a fail to you?...wow.. unbelievable.. why did i come into these forums .. always a waste of time.

im dumbfounded.. can people really be this stupid?

Eric Walton wrote:

I get it. You're joking. For a minute I thought you were trying make a valid point, but now I realize the joke is entirely on me. Good one. Really nice. The prostitution metaphor is excellent and in no way demeans the entire industry.

I sense you have no idea of the point Stephen was making.

Kymberly Jane wrote:

sex is NEVER involved when Im Hired to Shoot..

the Meir thought that those 2 can be considered together is inappropriate..and whomever thinks they can have sex with a model After Hiring them to shoot.. SHOULD NOT BE ON THIS SITE.

EDIT: i DO NOT hire photographers.. never had never will .. never needed to..

you people are unbelievable.. never going to forums again.. what a waste of time.

Jay Wellen wrote:

im dumbfounded.. can people really be this stupid?

apparently your allowed to insult me.. that IS allowed in this forum .

wow.. moderators .. just WOW.

Kymberly Jane wrote:

wow your helpful.. the fact i say I DO NOT have sex with photographers is a fail to you?...wow.. unbelievable.. why did i come into these forums .. always a waste of time.

Actually, it's fail because it has absolutely nothing to do with this thread and no one even suggested a model should have sex with a photographer in any of these 5 pages.

Jay Wellen wrote:

im dumbfounded.. can people really be this stupid?

Greg Kolack wrote:

I sense you have no idea of the point Stephen was making.

I think I get his point, but his way making it is more than a little crass, in my opinion.

Rick Fink wrote:
I really think that photogs should generally pay models for shoots!

I try to get paid work for a lot of the models I work with but keep running into the fact that many experienced photogs want to do trades or get paid themselves!

My feeling is that the model and I co-create the images but since I ask her to sign a release form she should get paid.

The reason I'm bringing this up is because I see talented models and photogs butting heads over should a nude shoot be paid or trade.

Then there's the implication that any photog worth his salt won't pay models and only the GWC's pay.

Even if it's a totally trade shoot I'll offer the model $25 for her signature on the release form.

Kymberly Jane wrote:
My hero.

Really?

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

Kymberly Jane wrote:

wow your helpful.. the fact i say I DO NOT have sex with photographers is a fail to you?...wow.. unbelievable.. why did i come into these forums .. always a waste of time.

No, the fact that you felt the NEED to say you don't have sex with photographers is a fail.  No one was insinuating you or anyone else did, so why the hell did you bring it up?

And trust me, nobody gives a shit whether you come into these forums or not.  You chose to.

Art of the nude wrote:

Rick Fink wrote:
I really think that photogs should generally pay models for shoots!

I try to get paid work for a lot of the models I work with but keep running into the fact that many experienced photogs want to do trades or get paid themselves!

My feeling is that the model and I co-create the images but since I ask her to sign a release form she should get paid.

The reason I'm bringing this up is because I see talented models and photogs butting heads over should a nude shoot be paid or trade.

Then there's the implication that any photog worth his salt won't pay models and only the GWC's pay.

Even if it's a totally trade shoot I'll offer the model $25 for her signature on the release form.

Really?

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

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

Like the avatar?

Greg Kolack wrote:
I sense you have no idea of the point Stephen was making.

Eric Walton wrote:
I think I get his point, but his way making it is more than a little crass, in my opinion.

The metaphor is fine.  The mistake is actually responding to the OP on page 5.  No one remembers what it was.

Rick Fink wrote:
I have a suggestion- If people come into this thread new and are not aware of everything that has gone on can we cut them some slack and not call them stupid?

No body called anyone stupid.  And Kymberly is not new, she's been here a long time and knows how to read a thread just like everyone else.

Do you see her cutting anyone any slack?  No, she's in full on attack mode, so why do you think she deserves it?

Kymberly Jane wrote:

wow your helpful.. the fact i say I DO NOT have sex with photographers is a fail to you?...wow.. unbelievable.. why did i come into these forums .. always a waste of time.

haha i've been dealing with the same thing... They are not interested in hearing our perspective on the matter even though this was originally posted in the model colloquy... We are just props to them so it seems... But i'm glad your in this forum i AGREE with you 100%

K E E L I N G wrote:

No body called anyone stupid.  And Kymberly is not new, she's been here a long time and knows how to read a thread just like everyone else.

Do you see her cutting anyone any slack?  No, she's in full on attack mode, so why do you think she deserves it?

The same reason this thread was started. Protecting the poor, abused models.

Art of the nude wrote:

Greg Kolack wrote:
I sense you have no idea of the point Stephen was making.

The metaphor is fine.  The mistake is actually responding to the OP on page 5.  No one remembers what it was.

Respectfully, no one remembers what what was?

Rick Fink wrote:
I have a suggestion- If people come into this thread new and are not aware of everything that has gone on can we cut them some slack and not call them stupid?

Rick, she might get some slack if this was a 25+ page thread... but it's 5 pages.  I read it in under 20 minutes, even with the pause to make my monster post on page 4.

She was the one who instantly went nuclear about how SHE doesn't have sex with photographers.  Stephen didn't even use the word models in his post, and she instantly took it to heart.

There's a saying that if you throw a rock into a pack of wolves, the one that yelps is the one you hit.  I didn't see anyone else freak out about "OMG I DON'T DO THAT!"  The fact that she immediately assumed Markman had referenced her with his post, and procveeded to get hostile and attack EVERYONE is... well, draw your own conclusions.

Angela Michelle Perez wrote:
I knew this thread was going to get good.

K E E L I N G wrote:

No body called anyone stupid.  And Kymberly is not new, she's been here a long time and knows how to read a thread just like everyone else.

Do you see her cutting anyone any slack?  No, she's in full on attack mode, so why do you think she deserves it?

Shaholly wrote:

haha i've been dealing with the same thing... They are not interested in hearing our perspective on the matter even though this was originally posted in the model colloquy... We are just props to them so it seems... But i'm glad your in this forum i AGREE with you 100%

Wait - so you are saying that Kymberly was justified in suggesting it was being inferred that models should have sex with photographers after a shoot even though no one at any point even came close to suggesting that?

And if you think photographers who don't pay models think of them just as props - you should talk to the dozens I have worked with. I think they would disagree with you. Like Rachel Jay, who has shot with me TFP numerous times.

Rick Fink wrote:
I really think that photogs should generally pay models for shoots!

I try to get paid work for a lot of the models I work with but keep running into the fact that many experienced photogs want to do trades or get paid themselves!

My feeling is that the model and I co-create the images but since I ask her to sign a release form she should get paid.

The reason I'm bringing this up is because I see talented models and photogs butting heads over should a nude shoot be paid or trade.

Then there's the implication that any photog worth his salt won't pay models and only the GWC's pay.

Even if it's a totally trade shoot I'll offer the model $25 for her signature on the release form.

I think whoever has the most to gain should be the one paying for the shoot.  If that's the model then so be it....but if it's the photographer then they should be the one getting paid.

As far as the release goes, I absolutely agree with you in principle.  The moment a release is signed the balance of the value of the shoot swings drastically in the photographer's favor considering the possiblity for future profit, so a model should always get paid when they are signing one.

Shaholly wrote:
haha i've been dealing with the same thing... They are not interested in hearing our perspective on the matter even though this was originally posted in the model colloquy... We are just props to them so it seems... But i'm glad your in this forum i AGREE with you 100%

Actually, we ARE just props.  We're part of the scene- lighting, angles, setting, mood, model.  Our job is to be the main focus of a complex image, and become whatever we need to become on set. 

I am not submissive, demure, shy or scared- but I sure as hell will be when asked to be on a bondage/DID set.  I am not serene, ethereal or remote- but if that's what an art nude calls for, I'm on the mark. 

We are there to do a JOB.  We are not special, shiny snowflakes, we are living, breathing furniture to be displayed in the light and setting chosen by the boss- which happens to be whoever is setting the shoot up and holding the payoff.

Simple, basic employment skills- you do the job you are hired to do.  Your real life starts outside the studio.

Rick Fink wrote:
I meant new to the thread.

And if we all bitch slap each other how are we going to convince anyone of our genius?

It doesn't matter if she just came into the thread - she made what many felt to be a stupid comment, which had nothing to do with anything said in this thread.

The Original Sin  wrote:
Actually, we ARE just props.  We're part of the scene- lighting, angles, setting, mood, model.  Our job is to be the main focus of a complex image, and become whatever we need to become on set. 

I am not submissive, demure, shy or scared- but I sure as hell will be when asked to be on a bondage/DID set.  I am not serene, ethereal or remote- but if that's what an art nude calls for, I'm on the mark. 

We are there to do a JOB.  We are not special, shiny snowflakes, we are living, breathing furniture to be displayed in the light and setting chosen by the boss- which happens to be whoever is setting the shoot up and holding the payoff.

Simple, basic employment skills- you do the job you are hired to do.  Your real life starts outside the studio.

First drink is on me when you come to Chicago...