Jessica Vaugn  wrote:

It amazes me what people say in mixed company, even if its a joke. Geeze!

He wasn't joking.. totally racist. I told him "I'm Jewish" and he responded "okay, well then you need to hear this.."

CarlottaChampagne wrote:
you insult me or my people (that's for you, photographer who told me Jews ruined Christmas) I won't consider lowering the rate.

I didn't realize of I guess I forgot their are people that stupid in the world today.

Skip Nall
http://www.skipnallphoto.com/

Tog wrote:
The snag, as I see it, is that these rates are never posted.

Arriving at an agreement to work together is a negotiation.

The first rule of negotiation is this: 
   The first party to name a price is at a significant disadvantage.

So, unless you are doing cookie-cutter "standard" (e.g. "average") photography, there is no such thing as a "standard" rate.  In particular...

...  Not all models are created equal.
...  Not all models are suitable for a particular project.
...  Not all projects are created equal.
...  Not all usages are created equal.
...  Not all budgets are created equal.
...  Not all photographers are created equal.
...  etc.

In my opinion, any photography business is 10% photography & 90% business.  Negotiation is very, very important business skill.  We all can stand to improve our business (& in particular negotiation) skills.  Fortunately, there are plenty of adult education classes & self help books available.

Tog wrote:
This isn't a rant.  Another nearby thread got me thinking and I didn't want to derail it.  I'd be curious to hear your thoughts so I figured I'd ask.

The complaint was, "Why do photographers complain about my rates?"

What I see frequently are statements on portfolios that TFP is not done and that model X charges reasonable and standard rates.

The snag, as I see it, is that these rates are never posted.  I don't know how other photographers view this, but what the cynic in me sees when I read this is, "I have no idea what standard rates are because no one will post them.  I am going to try to negotiate as much money out of you as I can." 

Now, that may be perfectly reasonable, I understand everyone has to make a living, etc., but it's creating a catch-22.

If you don't like the reactions of photographers who won't pay your rates, and yet you won't actually tell them what your rates are until they've already engaged you in conversation...  You see the conflict here?

If your rates were posted, those who weren't willing to pay would at least have an opportunity to see up-front that you're out of their ballpark and move on.  (I'm not saying this would happen in every case, but it would at least filter some of it.)

Your thoughts on this?

I think you've hit  the nail on the head as to why I believe negotiating rates HURTS you.

Sure, the rational thing is to try to get as much from a potential client as possible but the haggling for a rate produces an unintended side effect which is that the initial conversation is adversarial. Compromise to a rate is rarely mutually beneficial as at least one person is feeling that they are settling for less than what they feel they want. The flip-side is taking advantage of one of the involved parties. I would want people feeling like they are at least getting what they need from the transaction that makes it worth their while to be there.

Rate negotiation is lazy pricing. It relies on a skill set that most people don't enjoy engaging in and it wastes valuable time and energy on something that has a good chance of being a non-starter.

With rates it's better to understand your needs and establish a sales plan based on a weekly or monthly goal shoot frequency and a minimum take for each booking. Basing booking on a minimum take away goal allows a better value creation potential as you can use other variables to entice a booking and not just have pricing be the focus.

Mickle Design Werks wrote:

I think you've hit  the nail on the head as to why I believe negotiating rates HURTS you.

Sure, the rational thing is to try to get as much from a potential client as possible but the haggling for a rate produces an unintended side effect which is that the initial conversation is adversarial. Compromise to a rate is rarely mutually beneficial as at least one person is feeling that they are settling for less than what they feel they want. The flip-side is taking advantage of one of the involved parties. I would want people feeling like they are at least getting what they need from the transaction that makes it worth their while to be there.

Rate negotiation is lazy pricing. It relies on a skill set that most people don't enjoy engaging in and it wastes valuable time and energy on something that has a good chance of being a non-starter.

With rates it's better to understand your needs and establish a sales plan based on a weekly or monthly goal shoot frequency and a minimum take for each booking. Basing booking on a minimum take away goal allows a better value creation potential as you can use other variables to entice a booking and not just have pricing be the focus.

I'm not sure I was aiming for a specific nail.  I see two things going on.

1) If a model complains about people arguing with them about their rates, but won't actually share those rates until a conversation is started... Well, you're just inviting what you're complaining about.  If the value of negotiating is higher than the angst of cheapskates trying to brow beat you down (which, in itself, is another form of negotiation) then suck it up.

2) The very common statement of "my rates are standard" when no such standard exists and the common understanding is that all of this is happening on a sliding scale.  As a "negotiating point" that one seems kind of, well, underhanded....

I'm not arguing for or against flat rates, negotiations, or anything else.  I just wanted to get model's opinions on the matter.

Looknsee Photography wrote:

Arriving at an agreement to work together is a negotiation.

The first rule of negotiation is this: 
   The first party to name a price is at a significant disadvantage.

So, unless you are doing cookie-cutter "standard" (e.g. "average") photography, there is no such thing as a "standard" rate.  In particular...

...  Not all models are created equal.
...  Not all models are suitable for a particular project.
...  Not all projects are created equal.
...  Not all usages are created equal.
...  Not all budgets are created equal.
...  Not all photographers are created equal.
...  etc.

In my opinion, any photography business is 10% photography & 90% business.  Negotiation is very, very important business skill.  We all can stand to improve our business (& in particular negotiation) skills.  Fortunately, there are plenty of adult education classes & self help books available.

When I called plumbers to my home most would give me a ideal over the phone of what I'd be looking to pay and there was always a base per hour fee.   Models don't actually lose anything by providing a base rate and adjusting upward or even downward and I can at least know if my budget can handle her base rate.   I don't like to haggle.   Sure a base rate might mean a model could have made more but so what.   She got what she felt was fair for her time.


I sell laptops on Ebay and Craigslist.   Unlike some sellers, I don't do the low ball rate to entice buyers.   I start with them minimum amount I think is fair.   Some of my friends start with a really low price hoping to get bidders.   It works many times.   However very often they end up with a price under what they wanted to sell for.   I don't have as many sales but when I do I'm happy with whatever I receive because its either what I wanted to sell for or above.    Most of all  I don't like to shop where I don't know the prices.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
In this economy where so many people struggle to to pay for basic things I think if you aren't working and someone offers you $20.00 a hour rather then turn your nose up get that money.   The Bible tells us Pride goes before a fall.   $20.00 per hour cash is actually more then the median per hour wage many Americans earn which is just over $23.00 per hour according to the DOL.   Sure its great to make $100.00 or more per hour and some of the models here can make that but some of you better learn to adjust your rates to match the limited budgets of some of the artists here.

Photographers with less money can just not shoot you or nudes at all.

I agree that hourly rates can look horrific compared with what most people earn. However there are two factors here that make a model's (or photographer's for that matter) fees different.

1. If you take a job for two hours it can cost a whole day or even week or more work in another modelling field. The average wage person generally has long term employment in that field so has less money but a degree of job security. I know how it appears though you are corect; so to counter that I charge a day rate whether it is an hour or ten (£145). For an hour it looks expensive but for 10 it looks a bargain. All most journeymen models want is a fair days pay for a fair days work; and a one hour shoot needs to pay that as it can prevent it happening; frequently.

2. I had one photographer and only one baulk at my fees and he wasn't from MM. He then explained how he had just had to shell out £6000 for a new camera; his mortgage was astronomical on his £750k property and he had just had to pay the kids school fees. That is not someone I think has genuine financial issues in booking models!!! I later found out he was also getting paid quite a lot for the shoot. He got some mug to shoot it for free and it is just a provincial mag ad shoot.  By stark contast most struggling and amateur photographers are happy to pay; and realistically that is going to be quite a bit of my paid work. The hard up ones actually never moan and I make sure I give them as much as I can input wise; possibly more than I would with a top of the tree  photographer who I expect to direct me. So believe me we can earn our fee when shooting with students, amateurs and gwcs but can bring them on a lot. I do not turn that work down and see the value in it; especially when they see what they have in the can. I know other pro models who say the same when they have really helped someone and that person has been really pleased to pay. Of course it works the other way too; and an aspiring model would do well to book a competent pro photographer and not expect him to shoot for free. A good photographer will develop her skills enormously; but probably the photos may not be of use to him so he needs reimbursing for putting a lot of effort in and possibly missing other paid work so deserves a lot more than minimum wage!!!

As for posting the rates - as I said not all modelling is for photographers and often fashion houses pay more even fitting .  An advertsing agency may have a decent budget too but short of agency standard so just offer £300 or something. They tell YOU (ie the model) what they are paying/offering you. Both and other modelling types can lead to more regular work too. So why list a rate when people are happy to pay what they want to? I stick to one rate when asked but when offered I am not!!!

There is also the assumption that because a rate is not listed a model will try it on. That is not the case any more than it would be for photographers. Oh you don't think we ring up a photographer with an alias and ask how much you are then send an email under our modelling name? And it can vary in both directions. Sometimes its less for a pro and sometimes more; and often completely different from advertised rates!!!

Tog wrote:
I don't know how other photographers view this, but what the cynic in me sees when I read this is, "I have no idea what standard rates are because no one will post them.  I am going to try to negotiate as much money out of you as I can." 

Your thoughts on this?

I don't understand why negotiation seems to bother so many people. I do it every day in my real job fixing cars. My diagnostic rate is $110 per hour with a minimum 1 hour. Then I'll tell you what's wrong and what it will cost to fix. Up to the customer to decide yes or no.

I generally offer my budget when contacting models, they are free to accept, decline or try and re-negotiate. I've never felt bad when someone turned me down.

When I ask a model's rates, I know that they often have different rates for different types of work and give breaks when they want to work with a particular photographer. If I can't afford what the model needs to work with me, we just part ways. I doubt that they feel offended.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
In this economy where so many people struggle to to pay for basic things I think if you aren't working and someone offers you $20.00 a hour rather then turn your nose up get that money.   The Bible tells us Pride goes before a fall.   $20.00 per hour cash is actually more then the median per hour wage many Americans earn which is just over $23.00 per hour according to the DOL.   Sure its great to make $100.00 or more per hour and some of the models here can make that but some of you better learn to adjust your rates to match the limited budgets of some of the artists here.

Photographers with less money can just not shoot you or nudes at all.

I know few models on here (and especially who have posted in this very thread) who are truly struggling. Just saying. We work hard, and we value our time accordingly.

The type of model you'll attract with $20/hr is not the kind of model you want, trust me. Just like in any other profession, the best command higher rates.

Looknsee Photography wrote:
Arriving at an agreement to work together is a negotiation.

The first rule of negotiation is this: 
   The first party to name a price is at a significant disadvantage.

So, unless you are doing cookie-cutter "standard" (e.g. "average") photography, there is no such thing as a "standard" rate.  In particular...

...  Not all models are created equal.
...  Not all models are suitable for a particular project.
...  Not all projects are created equal.
...  Not all usages are created equal.
...  Not all budgets are created equal.
...  Not all photographers are created equal.
...  etc.

In my opinion, any photography business is 10% photography & 90% business.  Negotiation is very, very important business skill.  We all can stand to improve our business (& in particular negotiation) skills.  Fortunately, there are plenty of adult education classes & self help books available.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
When I called plumbers to my home most would give me a ideal over the phone of what I'd be looking to pay and there was always a base per hour fee.

Models  plumbers.  Modeling work varies greatly.  Plumbing work is often more consistent.  Thus, it's easier for a plumber to guesstimate how much it'll cost to unplug that drain.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Models don't actually lose anything by providing a base rate and adjusting upward or even downward and I can at least know if my budget can handle her base rate.

Any model who quotes you $xxx an hour will never get you to pay any more than $xxx an hour.  In fact, it is likely that the model will have to settle from something less than $xxx.  Like I said, the first party to quote a price is at a huge disadvantage.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I don't like to haggle.   Sure a base rate might mean a model could have made more but so what.   She got what she felt was fair for her time.

If you don't like to haggle, that's fine -- you are not required to haggle.  But if you want the model to pose for you for, say, 3 hours, why don't you offer her $xxx for those three hours right off the bat?  Why do you need the model to go first?

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I sell laptops on Ebay and Craigslist.   Unlike some sellers, I don't do the low ball rate to entice buyers.   I start with them minimum amount I think is fair.   ...    Most of all  I don't like to shop where I don't know the prices.

An auction is not the same thing as a negotiation.  In an auction, you start at your initial price, and the price increases; in a negotiation, you start at your posted rate and negotiate downwards.

You don't have to shop where you don't know the prices; the same can be said about the models negotiating with you.  Like I said, if you are only willing to pay $xxx for a session, go ahead & tell the model that.  You know why you want the model to say her rates first -- admit it.

Eliza C wrote:

I agree that hourly rates can look horrific compared with what most people earn. However there are two factors here that make a model's (or photographer's for that matter) fees different.

1. If you take a job for two hours it can cost a whole day or even week or more work in another modelling field. The average wage person generally has long term employment in that field so has less money but a degree of job security. I know how it appears though you are corect; so to counter that I charge a day rate whether it is an hour or ten (£145). For an hour it looks expensive but for 10 it looks a bargain. All most journeymen models want is a fair days pay for a fair days work; and a one hour shoot needs to pay that as it can prevent it happening; frequently.

2. I had one photographer and only one baulk at my fees and he wasn't from MM. He then explained how he had just had to shell out £6000 for a new camera; his mortgage was astronomical on his £750k property and he had just had to pay the kids school fees. That is not someone I think has genuine financial issues in booking models!!! I later found out he was also getting paid quite a lot for the shoot. He got some mug to shoot it for free and it is just a provincial mag ad shoot.  By stark contast most struggling and amateur photographers are happy to pay; and realistically that is going to be quite a bit of my paid work. The hard up ones actually never moan and I make sure I give them as much as I can input wise; possibly more than I would with a top of the tree  photographer who I expect to direct me. So believe me we can earn our fee when shooting with students, amateurs and gwcs but can bring them on a lot. I do not turn that work down and see the value in it; especially when they see what they have in the can. I know other pro models who say the same when they have really helped someone. Of course it works the other way too; and an aspiring model would do well to book a competent pro photographer and not expect him to shoot for free. A good photographer will develop her skills enormously; but probably the photos may not be of use to him so he needs reimbursing for putting a lot of effort in and possibly missing other paid work so deserves a lot more than minimum wage!!!

As for posting the rates - as I said not all modelling is for photographers and often fashion houses pay more even ftting .  An advertsing agency may have a decent budget too but short of agency standard so just offer £300 or something. Both can lead to more regular work too. So why list a rate when people are happy to pay what they want to? I stick to one rate when asked but when offered I am not!!!

Nice shots first of all.   You do look like Kelly.   Very pretty.   Lets take your rates for a moment.   You do art and fashion nudes and you have lots of cool images so photos aren't quite needed unless from strong shooters.  I could see your rate easily being $75.00 or more per hour.   If so say that so goofs who are broke don't pester you with rates you won't accept.   If the assignment requires travel, etc.   you could of course ask for more but at least, I have a ball park amount to work with.   

However a model who has limited imagery or lives in a low wage area might never receive $75.00 a hour so if she's not working and her days  are spent watching Judge Judy on TV then $20.00 a hour might be good to accept.   When, I go to look at cars.   There are posted prices and I'm free to ask for less if I want as the seller is free to say, no.   However having a price means I have a good ideal where to start at.   A poster has mentioned we can all learn to be better at negotiations which, I agree with.   Key is that currently its a buyers market even if models don't quite know or understand that fact.   Most of the 'work' is TF.   When your offered
payment understand that once you turn it down your cell phone, rent, car payment still needs to be paid.

I like being able to pay my bills.   Make the money while you can.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
In this economy where so many people struggle to to pay for basic things I think if you aren't working and someone offers you $20.00 a hour rather then turn your nose up get that money.   The Bible tells us Pride goes before a fall.   $20.00 per hour cash is actually more then the median per hour wage many Americans earn which is just over $23.00 per hour according to the DOL.   Sure its great to make $100.00 or more per hour and some of the models here can make that but some of you better learn to adjust your rates to match the limited budgets of some of the artists here.

Photographers with less money can just not shoot you or nudes at all.

Ah, the mythical hourly rate.  It's really an illusion.

That hourly rate usually doesn't include the prep time the model goes through before the shoot, when she's washing & plucking & shaving & applying base make-up, and such.  Further, many sessions are at remote locations.  So, it might take a model four or more hours in order to model for a single hour session.  It is a rare circumstance when a model can do two short sessions in a day, and it's even rarer for her to be able to do more than two.  So, four hours of modeling can take 8-10 hours of the model's time.

But the bottom line -- an agreement to work together is a negotiation, and each party can decide what the opportunity is worth to him/her.  You can offer a model, say, $20 an hour -- I suppose you can even try to make that sound good, but let's not kid ourselves -- hiring a model for $20 is not truly close to the median per hour wage many Americans earn.

Looknsee Photography wrote:

Looknsee Photography wrote:
Arriving at an agreement to work together is a negotiation.

The first rule of negotiation is this: 
   The first party to name a price is at a significant disadvantage.

So, unless you are doing cookie-cutter "standard" (e.g. "average") photography, there is no such thing as a "standard" rate.  In particular...

...  Not all models are created equal.
...  Not all models are suitable for a particular project.
...  Not all projects are created equal.
...  Not all usages are created equal.
...  Not all budgets are created equal.
...  Not all photographers are created equal.
...  etc.

In my opinion, any photography business is 10% photography & 90% business.  Negotiation is very, very important business skill.  We all can stand to improve our business (& in particular negotiation) skills.  Fortunately, there are plenty of adult education classes & self help books available.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
When I called plumbers to my home most would give me a ideal over the phone of what I'd be looking to pay and there was always a base per hour fee.

Models  plumbers.  Modeling work varies greatly.  Plumbing work is often more consistent.  Thus, it's easier for a plumber to guesstimate how much it'll cost to unplug that drain.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Models don't actually lose anything by providing a base rate and adjusting upward or even downward and I can at least know if my budget can handle her base rate.

Any model who quotes you $xxx an hour will never get you to pay any more than $xxx an hour.  In fact, it is likely that the model will have to settle from something less than $xxx.  Like I said, the first party to quote a price is at a huge disadvantage.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I don't like to haggle.   Sure a base rate might mean a model could have made more but so what.   She got what she felt was fair for her time.

If you don't like to haggle, that's fine -- you are not required to haggle.  But if you want the model to pose for you for, say, 3 hours, why don't you offer her $xxx for those three hours right off the bat?  Why do you need the model to go first?



An auction is not the same thing as a negotiation.  In an auction, you start at your initial price, and the price increases; in a negotiation, you start at your posted rate and negotiate downwards.

You don't have to shop where you don't know the prices; the same can be said about the models negotiating with you.  Like I said, if you are only willing to pay $xxx for a session, go ahead & tell the model that.  You know why you want the model to say her rates first -- admit it.

Hello,   

Recently a model I looked at and wanted to hire had a nude posted rate of $125.00 per hour.   Well beyond my ability to pay so, I didn't email her.   By posting that she avoids those who can't pay her base rate.   I respect that.   I don't like going back and forth give me a price you think is fair for your time and lets move on.   Either, I can afford you or I can't.   The model doesn't lose out because she has started at a price she feels is fair for her time.   There is no losing here.   She can decide to go up or down depending on the job, location , etc.   but I have a figure in my mind to work with.

I don't like mystery.   Lets get things clear as we can from the start.   I like when I see models posted rates for things.   Some say fees can be negotiated but give me  a starting price point.

Emily Bruer wrote:
I personally do not post my rates because I dont want to put anyone off. I want the opportunity to hear about the shoot and negotiate with the photographer. There are several factors that influence how low I'm willing to go such as how good the photographer is, the length of the session, how far I have to travel, and what we are shooting.

Mercy wrote:
I am not a fan of posting rates because really it all depends. Usually my rates are $100/hr give or take about $25. I do give discounts for half and full day as well. Maybe I'm doing a travel special. Maybe you only have XX to spend BUT you can drive me to my next shoot and make me delicious hummus. Or you have something to trade. Or I really like your work and we can negotiate a lower price. Maybe I'm not as booked as I would like and am willing to take what you can spend. It doesn't always happen, but I find that if people get angry when I give rates instead of saying something like "well I can't afford that but I can do ____" I don't want to work with them anyway. If they are going to be weird about payment online then they are going to be weird about payment in person and the likely hood of me being ripped off is much greater.

That's good business.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Recently a model I looked at and wanted to hire had a nude posted rate of $125.00 per hour.   Well beyond my ability to pay so, I didn't email her.   By posting that she avoids those who can't pay her base rate.   I respect that.   I don't like going back and forth give me a price you think is fair for your time and lets move on.   Either, I can afford you or I can't.   The model doesn't lose out because she has started at a price she feels is fair for her time.   There is no losing here.   She can decide to go up or down depending on the job, location , etc.   but I have a figure in my mind to work with.

Like I said...
   ...  If you don't like haggling, you don't have to.
   ...  If you aren't comfortable with negotiating, you don't have to.
   ...  If you wish to insist that the model goes first, you can reject models without
        posted rates.
That's all fair & your own personal choice.

Regarding "There is no losing here":  well, many will agree with you, and some (like me -- big surprise) will not.  You lost an opportunity to work with that model.  The model lost the opportunity to work with you.  For all we know, she might have been willing to come down off of her "base rate" for you, but you didn't ask, so we'll never know.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I don't like mystery.   Lets get things clear as we can from the start.   I like when I see models posted rates for things.   Some say fees can be negotiated but give me  a starting price point.

Again, that's your personal choice.

But I still note that you aren't willing to suggest your price first.  If you know how much you are willing to pay, why aren't you willing to say it?  The answer to that question might give you some insight into why some models don't post rates.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Nice shots first of all.   You do look like Kelly.   Very pretty.   Lets take your rates for a moment.   You do art and fashion nudes and you have lots of cool images so photos aren't quite needed unless from strong shooters.  I could see your rate easily being $75.00 or more per hour.   If so say that so goofs who are broke don't pester you with rates you won't accept.   If the assignment requires travel, etc.   you could of course ask for more but at least, I have a ball park amount to work with.   

However a model who has limited imagery or lives in a low wage area might never receive $75.00 a hour so if she's not working and her days  are spent watching Judge Judy on TV then $20.00 a hour might be good to accept.   When, I go to look at cars.   There are posted prices and I'm free to ask for less if I want as the seller is free to say, no.   However having a price means I have a good ideal where to start at.   A poster has mentioned we can all learn to be better at negotiations which, I agree with.   Key is that currently its a buyers market even if models don't quite know or understand that fact.   Most of the 'work' is TF.   When your offered
payment understand that once you turn it down your cell phone, rent, car payment still needs to be paid.

I like being able to pay my bills.   Make the money while you can.

Thank you kind sir. Looked at yours too - very impressive!

I think if someone wants to book a model who sits round watching Judge Judy all day they are bonkers. They are better off paying just a little more and getting a pro. UNLESS they are brilliant directors.

Pay peanuts get monkeys. Some of us monkeys can really work hard grinding those organs though Pay nothing and you won't even get monkeys but stuffed toy monkeys. Look pretty don't actually move. But yes certainly don't pay us monkeys peforming Tiger money. Crap analogy but hope you get the meaning.

BUT in other modelling fields are skills may be rather more specialised and worth a little more and some are willing to pay for that expertise. So can't have flat rates; much depends on the length of the gig - one offs, days, weeks, full time part time etc or indeed what their budget offers. Not going to work less than they are willing to pay.

I think you hit the nail on the head there though when you say low wage area etc. The thing is London is not. And there is masses of work. Generally this is the factor that none of us consider. Now I am in a low wage area and don't get a fratcion of the work I did have but don't want it (too busy usually at Uni). I continue because of the odd good job that comes up; but yes it would be tremendously hard to be a professional full time model here and earn basic wages on a monthly basis. I still go back and for to London for jobs too and see other models doing the same on the train. Would they be better off working for a lower wage? No - because the volume of work isn't there; and where it is they are happy to pay what they pay. Again no baulks here; but there isn't so much work. Models need to move; commute to London or look for other employment.

Looknsee Photography wrote:

Ah, the mythical hourly rate.  It's really an illusion.

That hourly rate usually doesn't include the prep time the model goes through before the shoot, when she's washing & plucking & shaving & applying base make-up, and such.  Further, many sessions are at remote locations.  So, it might take a model four or more hours in order to model for a single hour session.  It is a rare circumstance when a model can do two short sessions in a day, and it's even rarer for her to be able to do more than two.  So, four hours of modeling can take 8-10 hours of the model's time.

But the bottom line -- an agreement to work together is a negotiation, and each party can decide what the opportunity is worth to him/her.  You can offer a model, say, $20 an hour -- I suppose you can even try to make that sound good, but let's not kid ourselves -- hiring a model for $20 is not truly close to the median per hour wage many Americans earn.

I know many people who have to drive hours to make well under $20.00 per hour and most women, I know spend time to make themselves look presentable without ever modeling.   They pluck, shave apply make-up,
deodorant and some wear perfume.   There is a shooter on MM who pays on average $20.00 per hour and gets attractive models to pose nude.   I know him personally.   While he's not in a remote location many models have to travel to him and come from places several hours away.   All for $20.00 per hour for a average of four hour shoots.

Most MM models would never do this.   He gets models from OMP and CL.   The average wage earner in America gets around $23.00 per hour which is taxed income.   Currently thousands of Americans are unemployed having some money beats no money any day of the week.   Lets not kid ourselves to use your words, modeling isn't the same as working all day at Wa-Mart or as this same friends parents did as migrant
workers both of which pay less then $20.00 per hour.    Look if a model can get more they should but if your not working or are at a job that pays mim. wage then $20.00 per hour doesn't sound bad to me.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I know many people who have to drive hours to make well under $20.00 per hour and most women, I know spend time to make themselves look presentable without ever modeling.   They pluck, shave apply make-up,
deodorant and some wear perfume.   There is a shooter on MM who pays on average $20.00 per hour and gets attractive models to pose nude.   I know him personally.   While he's not in a remote location many models have to travel to him and come from places several hours away.   All for $20.00 per hour for a average of four hour shoots.

Most MM models would never do this.   He gets models from OMP and CL.   The average wage earner in America gets around $23.00 per hour which is taxed income.   Currently thousands of Americans are unemployed having some money beats no money any day of the week.   Lets not kid ourselves to use your words, modeling isn't the same as working all day at Wa-Mart or as this same friends parents did as migrant
workers both of which pay less then $20.00 per hour.    Look if a model can get more they should but if your not working or are at a job that pays mim. wage then $20.00 per hour doesn't sound bad to me.

It is only the fact that a one or two hour shoot with travel is a problem; it isn't sustainable and can cost whole day (or weeks) jobs. So I think a day rate (not too far off that actually) is better for all concerned.

Otherwise it is just using wal mart girls who are happy to do the three times a year modelling job for $20 because its extra and fun and they can say they are a model. It undermines professional models. It also gives the gwcs who think it is about shooting pretty girls the wrong idea about women and modelling. Art instututions and fashion houses would never have it because there it is clearly nothing to do with looks as such and everything to do with craft.
You can make a model look like she is moving an outfit in a photo but you can't in front of the client. You can pose someone for a portrait but ask that person to think of dymnanic poses to hold for 1 5 10 20 and 30 minutes. I mean you strike one you can't hold and you are out.

Modelling requires a lot more skill than working a check out or posing in front of a camera for gwcs but the other factor is Wal mart employ you every day you don't have to graft and graft to get each day's work in the first place!

Eliza C wrote:

It is only the fact that a one or two hour shoot with travel is a problem; it isn't sustainable and can cost whole day (or weeks) jobs. So I think a day rate (not too far off that actually) is better for all concerned.

I can live with that ideal and I'm not suggesting what a persons time is worth.   When, I was in Texas I did a shoot with a local nude model who is very pretty.   I worked with one other photographer and we paid her $100.00 and shot all day.   We took her to dinner and paid to have her make-up done.   She was cool with her cash and had a great time.   Photographers on this site may struggle to find models for affordable prices but away from here many are happy to shoot for $20.00 to $25.00 per hour.

Eliza C wrote:

It is only the fact that a one or two hour shoot with travel is a problem; it isn't sustainable and can cost whole day (or weeks) jobs. So I think a day rate (not too far off that actually) is better for all concerned.

A normal paid shoot for me involves *at least* a 4-hour round-trip commute by car. I rarely drive less than 2-3 hours (one way) to get to a paid shoot. The only difference is, I can only accept a working rate that reimburses both gas and toll costs, while still earning me a profit.

ShivaKitty wrote:
In 2010, I barely got by, and had to work part-time in strip clubs, due to lack of bookings that year. In 2011, in the very same market area, I did really well for myself.

Lots of factors for pulling in $100/hour. It's not as easy as being "good" or being "experienced." That only has a little bit to do with it.

I disagree, certainly marketing has something to do with getting jobs but if a model isn't "good" or "expierenced" I can't imangine someone paying them $100/hr.

I rarely shoot nudes, but I have with the wonderful Ms. Jessica on this thread.  As I have said, I think some photographers get upset when someone whom they feel is not in the same league ask for that rate.  To me if you say your rates are $100/hr I am going to compare that model to her - she better be able at least stand their ground or I would pass.

Tony Lawrence wrote:

I can live with that ideal and I'm not suggesting what a persons time is worth.   When, I was in Texas I did a shoot with a local nude model who is very pretty.   I worked with one other photographer and we paid her $100.00 and shot all day.   We took her to dinner and paid to have her make-up done.   She was cool with her cash and had a great time.   Photographers on this site may struggle to find models for affordable prices but away from here many are happy to shoot for $20.00 to $25.00 per hour.

The alternative is as Shiva Kitty says is that a minimum of 4 hours is accepted as reasonable.

Eliza C wrote:

It is only the fact that a one or two hour shoot with travel is a problem; it isn't sustainable and can cost whole day (or weeks) jobs. So I think a day rate (not too far off that actually) is better for all concerned.

Otherwise it is just using wal mart girls who are happy to do the three times a year modelling job for $20 because its extra and fun and they can say they are a model. It undermines professional models. It also gives the gwcs who think it is about shooting pretty girls the wrong idea about women and modelling. Art instututions and fashion houses would never have it because there it is clearly nothing to do with looks as such and everything to do with craft.
You can make a model look like she is moving an outfit in a photo but you can't in front of the client. You can pose someone for a portrait but ask that person to think of dymnanic poses to hold for 1 5 10 20 and 30 minutes. I mean you strike one you can't hold and you are out.

Modelling requires a lot more skill than working a check out or posing in front of a camera for gwcs but the other factor is Wal mart employ you every day you don't have to graft and graft to get each day's work in the first place!

Many of the photographers on MM are hobby shooters.   Some can afford $100.00 a hour out of pocket and most have no clients.   I know many here who have paid traveling models their rates hoping to achieve better images by using known experienced talented models and most have in my mind wasted their money.   A few have gotten excellent results but most would have done as well with models charging half those rates.   In fact one of my favorite guys on MM is in Lansing and doesn't pay yet produces great work.    So paying or not has little to do with results.     

Those who might think I'm FOS should check out the early:   Girls Gone Wild videos.   Most weren't paid a cent and these were sometimes beautiful women doing a whole lot more then some classic nude poses.   I would also say when 14 year newbie who after one or two shoots is appearing in Vogue, Elle, V or W its more about looking good and having a killer figure.   Photographers often pose models but if she looks like truck driver after a meth binge all the great posing in the world won't help.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Many of the photographers on MM are hobby shooters.   Some can afford $100.00 a hour out of pocket and most have no clients.   I know many here who have paid traveling models their rates hoping to achieve better images by using known experienced talented models and most have in my mind wasted their money.   A few have gotten excellent results but most would have done as well with models charging half those rates.   In fact one of my favorite guys on MM is in Lansing and doesn't pay yet produces great work.    So paying or not has little to do with results.     

Those who might think I'm FOS should check out the early:   Girls Gone Wild videos.   Most weren't paid a cent and these were sometimes beautiful women doing a whole lot more then some classic nude poses.   I would also say when 14 year newbie who after one or two shoots is appearing in Vogue, Elle, V or W its more about looking good and having a killer figure.   Photographers often pose models but if she looks like truck driver after a meth binge all the great posing in the world won't help.

So why do the top models come to art model classes to learn how to pose? Some actually model. That is the reality of how those models learn their craft. They are sent to fitting sessions; etc too. That is how I learned; that is how they learned. It isn't plucked from the street into Vogue; they are intensively coached.

The girls gone wild thing isn't modelling it's real.
It is like filming a documentary of council estate people and saying what good gritty acting

And I can't begin to tell you the difference betweeen that and say a model like Dovima or Suzy Parker.



But then you know that full well Tony I have seen your port!!!

As for photographers - yes some are able to do it like naturals; and are brilliant directors. Some are great at capturing the moment. Like those elephants weren't paid much probably

But as I said. If one is modelling a dress you can direct and get that capture; you can teach a model and bring her on a lot. But some of us have to do that for hours day in day out for companies and insitutions who don't want to have to do that or have it left to chance. This isn't a happy accident. I have to do stuff like this when there are no photographers there in front of people :



Look around MM. Some of the models are worth a lot to those who don't want a great accident or to spend time directing. You want the shots you are guaranteed them with a professional. Yes you may get lucky or be brilliant; but to offer that to a hobby photographer at a very reasonable cost that sustains us as professionals and facilitates their path to it is worth its weight in gold and we are legion here.
Your head would be on a plate at a fashion company if you had someone show a client who didn't know exactly what to do because they have researched the fabric, construction, vision, etc. You can - if you are very good - get away with using someone who doesn't in a photo. It's static. You can reject the awkward ones. A model working in house asked to show a client a dress cannot be awkward for one second. Sometimes we have to do shop windows and are seen by hundreds of people; sometimes we have to look good on a stage for artsists from multiple angles so elegance is produced through yoga and pilates and knowledge and research of art and negative space etc.

It is the same as acting. Yes sometimes there are great films with never before actors. Sometimes movies are completely saved because of the quality of acting. Without Harrisson Ford and Daniel Craig we'd have never believed and been swept along by Cowboys and Aliens. Yes if you are on a low budget then paying heavyweight actors is not an option but better to have a good solid journeyman from the stage perhaps than an amateur is what I am saying. yes plenty of stories of brilliant newcomers without acting experience but we have all seen the cringe movies too. And new directors can learn an enormous amount from a good journeyman shakespearian (classic nude )actor for a few quid.

Doesn't bother me anyway - when fully pro I was working constantly now can pick and choose. But I look at brilliant models around here who aren't getting what they are worth; and photographers using amateurs who may be beautiful but aren't models. You may as well photograph a beautiful tree or animal but don't tell me its a model. And what happens? They then think they are and then become the very people who ask for the silly money that you chaps all moan about!!

291 wrote:
quoting rates in definitive is incorrect.  a model doing a national campaign for coca-cola is not compensated based on their location/cost of living, it's based on the assignment.

WOW!  I didn't know companies like coca-cola use MM to cast models.

I don't understand why photographers put themselves in a begging situation when it comes to paying for shoots. Personally I think the MM photographers are in the drivers seat as far as negotiations go (unless the model is truly exceptional). I would think it would be easier and smarter to tell the model what you have to offer and let them take it or leave it. Plenty more models.

Ivanafox wrote:
I don't understand why photographers put themselves in a begging situation when it comes to paying for shoots. Personally I think the MM photographers are in the drivers seat as far as negotiations go (unless the model is truly exceptional). I would think it would be easier and smarter to tell the model what you have to offer and let them take it or leave it. Plenty more models.

This.

It the golden rule: he who has the gold makes the rules.

As a person who offers a service, I understand who is likely to hire me and who isn't, there is no need to haggle over price. If I want to increase my chance of being hired it not best to take the chance that my rate is not competitive relative to my substitution with another shooter of my quality.

I'm struck with the arrogance of some Models that quote the "standard" $100 per hour rate thinking that I want to bother with negotiating them down to where I want them. I'm not going to bother wasting my time with needless back and forth. You should know what you need to make at a minimum from each gig and for how long you would want to shoot before you need to get more for the job. Why the need to guess?

If your demand is to the point where you can do without my money, good for you. I'm betting that chances are that each potential lead is valuable and the one chance you have to book is often squandered by trying to be coy and bait a negotiation. If some are like me, I can't be bothered with this needless game playing, especially if I'm the one willing to pay.

Eliza C wrote:
I think you hit the nail on the head there though when you say low wage area etc. The thing is London is not. And there is masses of work.

The problem starts when models in Skagness, or bloody Sidcup, or the God forsaken Outer Hebrides, are asking for London rates. My opinion is always: Want London rates? Move to London! If I need to pay London rates, I'll hire a London model.

Studio36

Eliza C wrote:

So why do the top models come to art model classes to learn how to pose? Some actually model. That is the reality of how those models learn their craft. They are sent to fitting sessions; etc too. That is how I learned; that is how they learned. It isn't plucked from the street into Vogue; they are intensively coached.

The girls gone wild thing isn't modelling it's real.
It is like filming a documentary of council estate people and saying what good gritty acting

And I can't begin to tell you the difference betweeen that and say a model like Dovima or Suzy Parker.



But then you know that full well Tony I have seen your port!!!

As for photographers - yes some are able to do it like naturals; and are brilliant directors. Some are great at capturing the moment. Like those elephants weren't paid much probably

But as I said. If one is modelling a dress you can direct and get that capture; you can teach a model and bring her on a lot. But some of us have to do that for hours day in day out for companies and insitutions who don't want to have to do that or have it left to chance. This isn't a happy accident. I have to do stuff like this when there are no photographers there in front of people :



Look around MM. Some of the models are worth a lot to those who don't want a great accident or to spend time directing. You want the shots you are guaranteed them with a professional. Yes you may get lucky or be brilliant; but to offer that to a hobby artist at a reasonable cost is worth its weight in gold and we are legion here.
It is the same as acting. Yes sometimes there are great films with never before actors. Sometimes movies are completely saved because of the quality of acting. Without Harrisson Ford and Daniel Craig we'd have never believed and been swept along by Cowboys and Aliens. Yes if you are on a low budget then paying heavyweight actors is not an option but better to have a good solid journeyman from the stage perhaps than an amateur is what I am saying. yes plenty of stories of brilliant newcomers without acting experience but we have all seen the cringe movies too. And new directors can learn an enormous amount from a good journeyman shakespearian (classic nude )actor for a few quid.

I wonder how many of the current models at Elite, Ford, or LA models attended art classes at any school to learn how to pose.   I suspect very few if any.   Usually you take you butt in with some casual snaps and if they like you give you a rounds list to start Testing and or paying to shoot.   You get a book and off you go to see clients at calls.   Unlike acting where talent beyond looking good is required can you look beautiful in poses.   That really can't be taught.   As being tall, slender 15 years old with a look that agencies want can't be taught.   There are lots of 'experienced'  models on MM who I would never pay even if I had Oprah's money.   


Two years ago, I agreed to pay a traveling models rate for a shoot.   She came and was super stiff and awkward.    Her images however were great and she looked wonderful and relaxed.   So, I asked her what was up.   Oh, that shoot was around five hours long.   I don't have five hours of money to hope to get a few usable images.   The truth is either you have it or you don't.    No amount of instruction will really make you a better model no matter what modeling schools tell girls.   If all you have is that deer in the head lights look or the Myspace duckface there's little anybody can do.

Ivanafox wrote:
WOW!  I didn't know companies like coca-cola use MM to cast models.

I don't understand why photographers put themselves in a begging situation when it comes to paying for shoots. Personally I think the MM photographers are in the drivers seat as far as negotiations go (unless the model is truly exceptional). I would think it would be easier and smarter to tell the model what you have to offer and let them take it or leave it. Plenty more models.

You would be surprised who looks at MM.

And most paid work - check the paid castings - is not necessarily from photographers. They regularly offer more than my going rate actually and sometimes I get them. We'd all starve if photographers were the paymasters!!! And photographers would if models were.

But both would do well to employ the professional when needed rather than take chances.

Otherwise yes; they are free to choose if they don't like the rates.

Ivanafox wrote:
WOW!  I didn't know companies like coca-cola use MM to cast models.

Eliza C wrote:
You would be surprised who looks at MM.

Ivana is right. I seriously doubt Coca-Cola would use MM to cast their models.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I wonder how many of the current models at Elite, Ford, or LA models attended art classes at any school to learn how to pose.   I suspect very few if any.   Usually you take you butt in with some casual snaps and if they like you give you a rounds list to start Testing and or paying to shoot.   You get a book and off you go to see clients at calls.   Unlike acting where talent beyond looking good is required can you look beautiful in poses.   That really can't be taught.   As being tall, slender 15 years old with a look that agencies want can't be taught.   There are lots of 'experienced'  models on MM who I would never pay even if I had Oprah's money.   


Two years ago, I agreed to pay a traveling models rate for a shoot.   She came and was super stiff and awkward.    Her images however were great and she looked wonderful and relaxed.   So, I asked her what was up.   Oh, that shoot was around five hours long.   I don't have five hours of money to hope to get a few usable images.   The truth is either you have it or you don't.    No amount of instruction will really make you a better model no matter what modeling schools tell girls.   If all you have is that deer in the head lights look or the Myspace duckface there's little anybody can do.

I worked at most of the major London Art institutions for two years. In that time I saw dozens of agency models and one or two well known ones. Sometimes they were drawing us; sometimes watching and questioning, sometimes there were two or three and with the agent. I heard of super models doing it but admittedly never saw them though it was on tv. Then sometimes they came to practice pose. I didn't see any modelling school people no and yes to some extent can agree in that respect re modelling schools - but don't think these girls you speak of aren't well coached.

Then I and others regularly worked fashion events  with Agency models getting paid a lot more than us; but sometimes the younger ones do it for nothing to learn.

I think the problem is that photographers don't see any of this so they don't think its happening. The job is to sell the clothes. Yes your pics may sell them but who do you think is selling to the client on the floor? The 16 year old Vogue model or the £2k a day Agency model? Or someone they grab off the street? No they are using journeymen models. It is YOUR choice whether you use us or not those who are wise do.

All models can learn from Art models or studying Art and Fashion and the good ones do.
In fact I think some of the top editorial models are a bit one dimensional; little expression or pose ability but then again that kind of modelling is completely different - it is about that unquantifiable 'look'. But they would be lost without a good photographer, stylist, lots of direction. Most hobby photographers haven't got that; most busy pros or semi pros can't as you rightly say have a model who flops and is stiff on the day.

Your travelling model was stiff? what kind of pro model is stiff?
Who is talking about using duckfaces? I am talking about using girls who know how to model rather than try to coach someone who doesn't.

R L P wrote:
There will be many a photographer who feels that the negotiation process for a photo shoot shouldn't be as complicated as negotiating a salary, or a mortgage, or a auto purchase. These photographers may simply choose to move on to the next model. Uncertainty equals hassle for some customers. Having no rate posted has the risk of sending out the message, "if you have to ask my rate … you probably can't afford it". Once again, "given similar quality", most customers would likely choose a restaurant that lists its prices on the menu over one that does not. But for those at the top of the food chain, they may feel that rate omission does not hurt their business though.

Doesn't hurt mine and I am at the bottom rung of professional. They know I am good and am not going to be expensive. Look around here that is what MM is for but don't neceesarily go for the boobies

A model's job is to interpret the photographer/artist/designer's vision. That takes a little intelligence which I always say is a good model's best asset. If she is asking stupid money or inconsistent and is talking money before talking about your vision you know she isn't a professional. When the rate comes it should be reasonable sensible and fair. Photographers know that but some try it on too