Good Egg Productions wrote:

Well you can say THAT until you're blue in the face, but if we were to take a poll in 2006 and then another today, I'd bet the same VERY small percentage of people on this site are making their living by modeling/photgraphing.

Miller High Life says it's the "Champagne of beers".

Now that's funny.

But be careful withe analogies - someone might get offended.

Good Egg Productions wrote:
Miller High Life says it's the "Champagne of beers".

Since this thread is more about bitching & trashing, wasn't the motto originally "the champagne of bottle bears"?

I know that's a pointless & minor dig, but isn't that was this has become???

Rick Fink wrote:
I started this post on the Model page because I wanted models to know what they are getting paid for- a legal document that gives the photographer all the rights and ownership of images from your work together!

It's called copyright which will also have usage.
There have probably been 1,000 forums on this subject.
You must be new to MM.

Kymberly Jane wrote:

your insults just show how hateful you are towards women...why would we want to pose for someone who doesnt respect us?

Just because someone doesn't agree with you it doesn't mean they hate you or that they don't respect women. Why turn this into something it is not?

still-photography wrote:

Since this thread is more about bitching & trashing, wasn't the motto originally "the champagne of bottled bears"?

I know that's a pointless & minor dig, but isn't that was this has become???

Says it right on the bottle, right on their site.

http://www.millerhighlife.com/ageVerify.aspx

still-photography wrote:
Since this thread is more about bitching & trashing, wasn't the motto originally "the champagne of bottled bears"?

I know that's a pointless & minor dig, but isn't that was this has become???

Good Egg Productions wrote:
Says it right on the bottle, right on their site.

http://www.millerhighlife.com/ageVerify.aspx

OK, give me a minute to check some authoritative source like Wikipedia.  I'm sure it started out with bottle in the jingle...

Rick Fink wrote:
Pay your llamas!

There are two new bragging rights on MM. 

Only GWC pays your llamas!

Only newbie llamas pays photographer

still-photography wrote:

still-photography wrote:
Since this thread is more about bitching & trashing, wasn't the motto originally "the champagne of bottled bears"?

I know that's a pointless & minor dig, but isn't that was this has become???

OK, give me a minute to check some authoritative source like Wikipedia.  I'm sure it started out with bottle in the jingle...

You're probably right, but TODAY, Miller High Life is the "champagne of beers".  As accurate a statement as Model Mayhem is for professional models and model photographers.

Good Egg Productions wrote:

You're probably right, but TODAY, Miller High Life is the "champagne of beers".  As accurate a statement as Model Mayhem is for professional models and model photographers.

PashaPhoto wrote:
you see people, it's all your fault... if you all would've just paid op's models, this thread would never exist

Aoxomedia wrote:
I've just read all nine pages of this White knight / model accomplice thread in one sitting.

Do I get champagne or beer.

I got all the way through it.  So, I'm celebrating with a Miller Lite.  (can't spell "light" correctly, it seems)

still-photography wrote:

OK, give me a minute to check some authoritative source like Wikipedia.  I'm sure it started out with bottle in the jingle...

Good Egg Productions wrote:
You're probably right, but TODAY, Miller High Life is the "champagne of beers".  As accurate a statement as Model Mayhem is for professional models and model photographers.

Thanks, Wikipedia.  Sure enough, ...prevailing slogan on current packaging is "The Champagne of Beers", an adaptation of its long standing slogan "The Champagne of Bottle Beers".   Now what little smear of my gray matter has been holding that factoid until this fortuitous time?

As for the matter at hand, the pro segment is seriously in the minority, no argument there.  Even more difficult is the fact that there is very little common ground for the "types" of pro that exist here and in the world at large.  I have dreadfully little in common with shooters of real-estate, sports teams, seniors, dogs & ponies, naked exhibitionists, weddings, or a dozen other segments.  It's clear that models have multiple "types" as well.  How can anyone honestly declare that they know more because they are a "real" pro? 

OK, Ima gonna go nuke another bag of popcorn...

Aoxomedia wrote:
I've just read all nine pages of this White knight / model accomplice thread in one sitting.

Do I get champagne or beer.

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

Stephen Markman wrote:
Well, your omp profile (linked from your MM profile) seems to indicate that you may be having success as a paid llama for reasons other than those stated in this thread.

Your omp profile ALSO suggests that your righteous indignation here:

might have been a bit misplaced -or, at least, exaggerated.

Your entire post here is a bit misplaced -or, at least, exaggerated.

Angela Michelle Perez wrote:

From GWC or content shooters?

Who cares?

Tony Lawrence wrote:

What you do or don't do isn't representative of what most agency models
do.   I know many who Test ALL the time and not always with
big name shooters.   Years ago, Iman was in Chicago and worked
with a guy she liked.   He wasn't some big name dude nor did he
know any Art directors.  I'm thinking she might be a more well known name then
you.   Crazy because she and MOST fashion models do nudes.

What you do is your business of course and no TF or Tests is your
choice.   Not every shoot is about your 'book'  I know models who've
worked nude with Mario Testino.   Should they not have after all
Elite or Click couldn't use the images.   Again many real world agency
models some of the best and known around past and today shot nude
often with new photographers often for free.  Either you have a passion
for this or its only about the money.

OP, you have a right to do as you choose.   Where you go wrong is
when you decide how you work is how things should be.

Lol says the guy who trolls these damn forums and who's main photo hasn't changed in excess of 5+ years. You just want to argue, your wrong wrong wrong. And that's why your not in NYC or LA shooting top models, your stuck in Tex-ASS with the same damn photo I have seen for years, if you have enough time to post 'n here 11,000+ times you just look like a loser, beg them to reset your counter, but they probably won't.

Erlinda wrote:
This is the kind of threads you start to get when MM lets anyone that can hold a camera in here or anyone that can smile in front of one in here....  This is what happens when MM became less exclusive and more focused on the quantity instead of the quality...

MM welcome to your down fall?

Actually, the higher the number of people the more traffic, therefore the more ad revenue. Not to mention the increase in the number of paid memberships.

Since when was MM focused on quality? lol

   Jennifer  wrote:

Lol says the guy who trolls these damn forums and who's main photo hasn't changed in excess of 5+ years. You just want to argue, your wrong wrong wrong. And that's why your not in NYC or LA shooting top models, your stuck in Tex-ASS with the same damn photo I have seen for years, if you have enough time to post 'n here 11,000+ times you just look like a loser, beg them to reset your counter, but they probably won't.

Yes that was a personal attack, BITE ME!!

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

what amazes me as I finish off a bottle of Rioja ( aagh ) is how lightly the OP got off before the lock

EDIT. Compared to the opprobrium Tony Lawrence just received

   Jennifer  wrote:

Lol says the guy who trolls these damn forums and who's main photo hasn't changed in excess of 5+ years. You just want to argue, your wrong wrong wrong. And that's why your not in NYC or LA shooting top models, your stuck in Tex-ASS with the same damn photo I have seen for years, if you have enough time to post 'n here 11,000+ times you just look like a loser, beg them to reset your counter, but they probably won't.

how is he wrong?

Stephen Markman wrote:

Well, given that Conceptually Black doesn't fit any of my modeling needs, I think I'd be more inclined to grab a drink with him than shoot him.

But you are free to feel that makes me something less than serious about my photography. 

I will note that I probably shoot and update my portfolio more than most of the people I know on this site, but YMMV.

Edit: and since you and I have never met and my post to Conceptually Black hardly suggests what you are implying it suggests, I'd think you might want to stop listening to bitter rumors.  My life is far more boring than your "friends" may have led you to believe.

lol

Tony Lawrence wrote:
What you do or don't do isn't representative of what most agency llamas
do.   I know many who Test ALL the time and not always with
big name shooters.   Years ago, Iman was in Chicago and worked
with a guy she liked.   He wasn't some big name dude nor did he
know any Art directors.  I'm thinking she might be a more well known name then
you.   Crazy because she and MOST fashion llamas do nudes.

What you do is your business of course and no TF or Tests is your
choice.   Not every shoot is about your 'book'  I know llamas who've
worked nude with Mario Testino.   Should they not have after all
Elite or Click couldn't use the images.   Again many real world agency
models some of the best and known around past and today shot nude
often with new photographers often for free.  Either you have a passion
for this or its only about the money.

OP, you have a right to do as you choose.   Where you go wrong is
when you decide how you work is how things should be.

   Jennifer  wrote:
Lol says the guy who trolls these damn forums and who's main photo hasn't changed in excess of 5  years. You just want to argue, your wrong wrong wrong. And that's why your not in NYC or LA shooting top llamas, your stuck in Tex-ASS with the same damn photo I have seen for years, if you have enough time to post 'n here 11,000  times you just look like a loser, beg them to reset your counter, but they probably won't.

Tony is actually in Chicago.

I'm curious why you are attacking him - he defended your right to do what works best for you as an individual.

   Jennifer  wrote:

Lol says the guy who trolls these damn forums and who's main photo hasn't changed in excess of 5+ years. You just want to argue, your wrong wrong wrong. And that's why your not in NYC or LA shooting top models, your stuck in Tex-ASS with the same damn photo I have seen for years, if you have enough time to post 'n here 11,000+ times you just look like a loser, beg them to reset your counter, but they probably won't.

I say, I say, gott dayummm! Lol

   Jennifer  wrote:

Lol says the guy who trolls these damn forums and who's main photo hasn't changed in excess of 5+ years. You just want to argue, your wrong wrong wrong. And that's why your not in NYC or LA shooting top models, your stuck in Tex-ASS with the same damn photo I have seen for years, if you have enough time to post 'n here 11,000+ times you just look like a loser, beg them to reset your counter, but they probably won't.

You seem like a wonderful person.

Jose Luis wrote:
I pay models- sometimes for work- sometimes out of my pocket.  Whatever it takes.  For me its silly to let a small amount of money come between you and what you deem as necessary to advance your career or art.

-Jose

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

Danny Does Glamour wrote:

Actually, the higher the number of people the more traffic, therefore the more ad revenue. Not to mention the increase in the number of paid memberships.

Since when was MM focused on quality? lol

This is true, back in the day when I was here as a model, I noticed a lot more photographers with good portfolio... I have added many to my private favs list who have been here since the beginning... Now that I check my favs list more then HAFL of them are no longer on here.... It's disappointing really... The good are leaving and the bed are coming in... YAY!

   Jennifer  wrote:

Lol says the guy who trolls these damn forums and who's main photo hasn't changed in excess of 5+ years. You just want to argue, your wrong wrong wrong. And that's why your not in NYC or LA shooting top models, your stuck in Tex-ASS with the same damn photo I have seen for years, if you have enough time to post 'n here 11,000+ times you just look like a loser, beg them to reset your counter, but they probably won't.

Why thanks for noticing!   While my Avatar has stayed the same the
images on the side and within have been updated.   However thanks
for trying to make this personal.   I'm not a fashion shooter.   I don't
shoot for agencies nor do, I really ever want too.   

Not stuck in Texas.   Stuck in Chicago.   As to my point real models.
Not pretend ones who have the time to debate with losers like me
are Testing all the time.   They do it because its part of the job. I'm
not in NYC or LA so that means I'm missing your cover shoots for
Elle, Vogue and W.   I will say this again.   Models with DNA, LA models,
Ford, Arlene Wilson, Factor and others Test all the time.
Sometimes nude.   Nope not for losers like me but they do and guess
what.   I don't see them here but I see you.

   Jennifer  wrote:
Lol says the guy who trolls these damn forums and who's main photo hasn't changed in excess of 5  years. You just want to argue, your wrong wrong wrong. And that's why your not in NYC or LA shooting top llamas, your stuck in Tex-ASS with the same damn photo I have seen for years, if you have enough time to post 'n here 11,000  times you just look like a loser, beg them to reset your counter, but they probably won't.

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

Erlinda wrote:

This is true, back in the day when I was here as a model, I noticed a lot more photographers with good portfolio... I have added many to my private favs list who have been here since the beginning... Now that I check my favs list more then HAFL of them are no longer on here.... It's disappointing really... The good are leaving and the bed are coming in... YAY!

YAY! for Model Mayhem's profits!

BOO! for people looking for quality networking with industry professionals.

Danny Does Glamour wrote:

YAY! for Model Mayhem's profits!

BOO! for people looking for quality networking with industry professionals.

bummer

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.

Thanks but no Thanks



Dude Everyone works there OWN way, A TFP shoot is Paid the images you give the model Are the Payment!

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Why thanks for noticing!   While my Avatar has stayed the same the
images on the side and within have been updated.   However thanks
for trying to make this personal.   I'm not a fashion shooter.   I don't
shoot for agencies nor do, I really ever want too.   

Not stuck in Texas.   Stuck in Chicago.   As to my point real models.
Not pretend ones who have the time to debate with losers like me
are Testing all the time.   They do it because its part of the job. I'm
not in NYC or LA so that means I'm missing your cover shoots for
Elle, Vogue and W.   I will say this again.   Models with DNA, LA models,
Ford, Arlene Wilson, Factor and others Test all the time.
Sometimes nude.   Nope not for losers like me but they do and guess
what.   I don't see them here but I see you.

+1 no matter how good and well established a model is, she still once 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!

   Jennifer  wrote:

Yes that was a personal attack, BITE ME!!

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