Eliza C wrote:
Yes Jessa and I were wondering the same. Are MM owners on the case or how can we alert them? It is basically an attack on MM as well as the models. And quite clearly prejudicial.

I alerted the Nigerian scammers and this was the response I got:

"I'm glad to hear that they took down the screenshot of your profile.

As for them displaying the new screenshot, I don't know if its worth our time to bother with it.

Thanks for reporting!
Dean "


So...that's it then.....

udor wrote:

I don't know Jessa, don't know her profile... but I explained that in the other post... minutes earlier...

Hi! I'm Jessa

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Eliza, I've been following this thread and there is only one fashion model in it.   She has tears but forget that for a moment.   That article is a editorial piece about some web models but please for the love of all that's holy, stop with this stuff about short fashion models.   The majority of catalog, jewelry, cosmetic or beauty work, and fashion is booked via agencies and goes to models 5'8" or taller.   Forget Vogue or V or Elle because they pay next to nothing.   The bread and butter work for most models is catalog and again that work is going to agency signed models most of whom are under 21 and over 5'7".

There are  precious few petite models who work consistently but they are very few in number.   There are two very separate worlds.   The world of the real working fashion and commercial model and they are largely NOT on MM and the web based model who represents herself.   You may be able to point out a few members who buck the trend and work but they are the exception and not the rule.    A little reality the average model makes around $20.00 a hour.   This is adjusted based on down time and is a national average in the US according to the DOL.   Don't believe me?   Look up it up. 

The average fashion models career lasts a year if she's lucky.   A busy model doing catalog and fashion not the average mind you makes around $100,000 a year.   I am not speaking of the current crop of super models but the agency faces at Elite, Ford, DNA and other agencies.   I don't know many who work consistently who are not at least 5'7" and most range from 5'8" to 5'11".  However forget what, I have to say.   Go to:   http://www.dnamodels.com/women-main-board   If I'm looking to show off my new designs do, I hire a 5'2" model from MM or will I go there?

http://www.womenmanagement.com/models/list/1/all/1   no 5'3" models.   There is no niche for those models.   The truth is that real world clients hire real working models who fit industry standards.  There may be some petite working models but they are rare.   Most of all clients with decent budgets should always go to agencies.   Booking web based models is a recipe for failure.   Not pointing any fingers.

I have to strongly disagree with your last statement: "Booking web based models is a recipe for failure"  That is total crap. Booking web based models can be a huge advantage. For example, I am freelance, there is no agency to go through and jack up my rates so they can profit. I am willing to negotiate. I am also super creative and I bring a lot to a shoot because I can do my own styling and makeup. No need to hire a team, I am the entire package and I don't charge extra for my other skills when I am hired as a model. Also, I LOOK 5'8 or taller on camera, so who the hell is going to know that you hired a model that is not to agency standards? Also, what morons thought it was a good idea to put restrictions like this on models? The standards are silly. They only make sense on a runway where a taller person could have more stage presence to showcase clothing. On camera, it makes no difference as long as the model is proportionate and the photographer knows what they are doing. I think if you asked any of the photographers that I have worked with if they thought it was a good investment to book me, they would completely agree. I can make a photographer's portfolio look professional because that is what I bring.

Jessa The Austin Model wrote:
I have to strongly disagree with your last statement: "Booking web based models is a recipe for failure"  That is total crap. Booking web based models can be a huge advantage. For example, I am freelance, there is no agency to go through and jack up my rates so they can profit. I am willing to negotiate. I am also super creative and I bring a lot to a shoot because I can do my own styling and makeup. No need to hire a team, I am the entire package and I don't charge extra for my other skills when I am hired as a model. Also, I LOOK 5'8 or taller on camera, so who the hell is going to know that you hired a model that is not to agency standards? Also, what morons thought it was a good idea to put restrictions like this on models? The standards are silly. They only make sense on a runway where a taller person could have more stage presence to showcase clothing. On camera, it makes no difference as long as the model is proportionate and the photographer knows what they are doing. I think if you asked any of the photographers that I have worked with if they thought it was a good investment to book me, they would completely agree. I can make a photographer's portfolio look professional because that is what I bring.

Jessa you are a very beautiful woman and you may be dependable but a company who needs a project done with little bull shi% would be crazy to consider using most web based models.   I can hear it now.   Hair company exec:   Well, Bob we went with Suzy and Betty from MM and saved a few hundred bucks.   Photographer:   So where are they?   Bob:   darn it, Suzy isn't coming her grandmother is sick and Betty can't find a escort to come with her.   That's just one scenario.   Real world clients don't have time to vet models its why they use agencies.   They often pay a premium price for models but when you have thousands of dollars on the line you don't have time to play with women who are playing at modeling.

That is not to say you aren't serious but how would a client know?    Height is another issue.   Its important because designer samples are usually in one size.   Who has time to provide things that fit short models and while not always  clothing like many gowns and dresses tend to drape better on tall women.   You may feel the standards are silly but agencies, companies, clients and magazines do not.   Most models for fashion are 5'8" or taller, under 21, tiny in size.   I don't see that changing in the near future.   Real world clients with budgets and limited time to play will hire agency models.   Agency girls who don't require escorts.   Agency girls who are dependable.   Agency models who photos haven't been Photoshopped to death and yes a audition tends to weed them out but sometimes you don't have to meet models in person.
You have to go by a comp card and or the agency website.

You may be a good investment for photographers books but you just aren't for real world fashion agencies.   You aren't for those seeking to test with agencies in larger markets.   Its one thing to do limited work in tiny markets like Austin and I lived in Texas by the way.   Its another to work in actual fashion markets like NY, Paris, Milan, LA and to a degree Miami.   This is in no way a put down.   You may be a reliable model with a proven track record but real world companies won't know that.   Advertising agencies don't have time to vet you and won't that's why they use agencies.   Again you are truly beautiful but you are not ever going to be a real world fashion model.   That's my personal view and I'm certain some Knight will dash in to tell me how wrong, I am and that you can be photographed to look tall or she/he will mention Dean Johnson.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Jessa you are a very beautiful woman and you may be dependable but a company who needs a project done with little bull shi% would be crazy to consider using most web based models.   I can hear it now.   Hair company exec:   Well, Bob we went with Suzy and Betty from MM and saved a few hundred bucks.   Photographer:   So where are they?   Bob:   darn it, Suzy isn't coming her grandmother is sick and Betty can't find a llama herder to come with her.   That's just one scenario.   Real world clients don't have time to vet models its why they use agencies.   They often pay a premium price for models but when you have thousands of dollars on the line you don't have time to play with women who are playing at modeling.

That is not to say you aren't serious but how would a client know?    Height is another issue.   Its important because designer samples are usually in one size.   Who has time to provide things that fit short models and while not always  clothing like many gowns and dresses tend to drape better on tall women.   You may feel the standards are silly but agencies, companies, clients and magazines do not.   Most models for fashion are 5'8" or taller, under 21, tiny in size.   I don't see that changing in the near future.   Real world clients with budgets and limited time to play will hire agency models.   Agency girls who don't require llama herders.   Agency girls who are dependable.   Agency models who photos haven't been Photoshopped to death and yes a audition tends to weed them out but sometimes you don't have to meet models in person.
You have to go by a comp card and or the agency website.

You may be a good investment for photographers books but you just aren't for real world fashion agencies.   You aren't for those seeking to test with agencies in larger markets.   Its one thing to do limited work in tiny markets like Austin and I lived in Texas by the way.   Its another to work in actual fashion markets like NY, Paris, Milan, LA and to a degree Miami.   This is in no way a put down.   You may be a reliable model with a proven track record but real world companies won't know that.   Advertising agencies don't have time to vet you and won't that's why they use agencies.   Again you are truly beautiful but you are not ever going to be a real world fashion model.   That's my personal view and I'm certain some Knight will dash in to tell me how wrong, I am and that you can be photographed to look tall or she/he will mention Dean Johnson.

It doesn't work like that and your example illustrates what little you know about how models book their work.
This is how it works.

I go to have my hair done at a good salon. They chat; and ask me what I do. 'Model' I say. So I pay for my hair and give them my card. Then Albert (silent d) the hair exec who has six salons looks at my MM port and I get an email. All my haircuts are free and they pay me to do an ad which they run in all the local newspapers. They pay me to do some shows for them too; both at the salon over wine with their clients; and at hairdressing events. I maybe make £1k a year from them and all my haircuts are free. I work a lot for them for that; but their option would have been to go to an Agency and pay a grand for one ad.


Now it may be correct that if the hair company exec is shooting hair dye or product which he is marketing worldwidde and huge budget is involved; they are going to go to an adevrtising company. And they don't use MM; they use agencies. And the budget is colossal.

But that is NOT what Model Mayhem models are about. Except of course; whereas I am working my arse off doing dozens of job like the scenario above; the Agency model shoots the hair dye box gets £400 and then sits on her butt for a month. So guess what? They sign up here under a different name and market themselves so they can actually make a living. I will tell you how I find that out shortly.

Geddit?

I don't know what you think this place is; but it isn't a place where work comes to you.
IT IS A WEB PORTFOLIO HOSTING SITE and it works when you tout it. And touting it here would account for a very small minority of paid work.
Touting the link on our z cards and appling for castings showing the links is how it works.

Oh. And Bob your hair exec has made a bit of dosh at the game so he has a racehorse. He meets me at the races, I give him a z card with my MM link and he gives me a bit of modelling action too. Now I am never going to do that top stuff and its out of his hands because he pays the advertising company to do it so when sales aren't that good he can have a hissy fit on them because they are supposed to be the top people for this stuff.

But; he goes home and looks at my port. He drops me a line or calls me. He is sponsoring a race at Kempton park and says come and have dinner in the box Eliza and present the trophy. Wear our company sash with Wellup hair Care on it and there's £400 in it for you that ok? then six months later he calls me again and books me for a trade show. Then they do a promotional leaflet in house so I get to do some pics. Again I make a grand out of it in the year. But when I am in the box having dinner; two of the agency models are there too with their partners. I chat to them...and guess what? They are on MM too because the Agency doesn't get them enough work.

See that is the kind of bog standard work we do here and how the work comes in.Those are made up examples. But it is the kind of thing most of us do. But we couldn't without the web port.

So now a real example. I work for a Fashion house as a fitting model. I linked the MM port to the casting response and got the job. I do the fit stuff; I do the parts and I do the odd merchandise cat shoot. ALL the camapign stuff is done out of house by advertising companies. But then a lot of stuff is done in house; but budget is always a factor. So they get the regular Agency girls in but the finance director has told them to cut the costs. So we fit models get roped in and strut our stuff righht up there with the big girls see? And we don't get paid what the Agency girls are on but we get little perks. And we get paid day in day out not just on these times.

The days of carrying round a portfolio going to agencies are long gone. This way you get to work if you're feet are on the ground. And that is why the Agency models are here too.

But for someone to turn round and call us internet models as though we don't work in the real world sucks. Truth is if you graft there is plenty of work. Down to you to push your port.

And Jessa fyi has done a bit of fashion. Maybe not the kind you are talking about. But the actual kinds of jobs that are going on thousands of times a day for little boutiques; regional fashion editorials etc etc. plus the kind of scenarios I have talked about above where an Agency model won't even get a second thought. Unless of course; she is an MM girl.

Internet models . What a stupid f***** expression anyway. We are just models with portfolios online. And if we push them to the right people we work.

Eliza C wrote:

It doesn't work like that and your example illustrates what little you know about how models book their work.
This is how it works.

I go to have my hair done at a good salon. They chat; and ask me what I do. 'Model' I say. So I pay for my hair and give them my card. Then Albert (silent d) the hair exec who has six salons looks at my MM port and I get an email. All my haircuts are free and they pay me to do an ad which they run in all the local newspapers. They pay me to do some shows for them too; both at the slaon over wine with their cleints; and at hairdressing events. I maybe make £1k a year from them and all my haircuts are free. I work a lot for them for that; but their option would have been to go to an Agency and pay a grand for one ad.


Now it may be correct that if the hair company exec is shooting hair dye or product which he is marketing worldwidde and huge budget is involved; they are going to go to an adevrtising company. And they don't use MM; they use agencies. And the budget is colossal.

But that is NOT what Model Mayhem models are about. Except of course; whereas I am working my arse off doing dozens of job like the scenario above; the Agency model shoots the hair dye box gets £400 and then sits on her butt for a month. So guess what? They sign up here under a different name and market themselves so they can actually make a living.

Geddit?

I don't know what you think this place is; but it isn't a place where work comes to you.
IT IS A WEB PORTFOLIO HOSTING SITE and it works when you tout it. And touting it here would account for a very small minority of paid work.
Touting the link on our z cards and appling for castings showing the links is how it works.

Oh. And Bob has made a bit of dosh at the game so he has a racehorse. He meets me at the races, I give him a z card with my MM link and he gives me a bit of modelling action too. Now I am never going to do that top stuff and its out of his hands because he pays the advertising company to do it so when sales aren't that good he can have a hissy fit on them because they are supposed to be the top people for this stuff.

But; he goes home and looks at my port. He drops me a line or calls me. He is sponsoring a race at Kempton park and says come and have dinner in the box Eliza and present the trophy. Wear our company sash with Wellup hair Care on it and there's £400 in it for you that ok? then six months later he calls me again and books me for a trade show. Then they do a promotional leaflet in house so I get to do some pics. Again I make a grand out of it in the year.

See that is the kind of bog standard work we do here and how the work comes in.

Those are made up examples. But it is the kind of thing most of us do. But we couldn't without the web port.

The days of carrying round a portfolio going to agencies are long gone. This way you get to work. And that is why the Agency models are here too.

But for someone to turn round and call us internet models as though we don't work in the real world sucks. Truth is if you graft there is plenty of work. Down to you to push your port.

I don't think Dove or L'Oreal hires models from a local salons and if they did their advertising agency should be fired.   Look, I'm not saying that there is no place for web based models but companies who have any sort of budget need to hire agency models.   lets say, I hired a girl from MM and she couldn't make it for a legitimate reason.   What would I do?   If she were from Next or Marilyn I could replace her quickly.   Not so with a model from the web.   Look, I'm not talking about someone you've met or who you may be friends with.

This is about the main stream industry of fashion and commercial work.   Companies hire agency models via ad agencies or through the agency directly.   That is NOT going to change in the near future.   Any art director who would hire a web based model is playing with fire.   Its one thing to hire web based models for small projects that if they don't happen nobody is really hurt.   However catalog houses, real fashion and commercial projects, mid level to A list magazines, cosmetic and hair companies, larger clothing companies and designers use agencies.   There was a well known Chicago fur maker who would use non agency Black models for their ads.   

Some of the models did billboards and these folks paid $1,000.00 to them.   Well under the going rate for that kind of usage but the models were happy.   They would hold castings and choose their models from them.   Their will always be people looking to save a few bucks.   However even they were burned by models who flaked several times.   I can't speak for the UK but here companies use licensed and bonded modeling agencies.   They trust the agency has verified the models identification and age.   They trust that in some cases a background check has been done.   Some may not want their product connected to someone who is doing adult or pornographic modeling. 

Most of all when your paying thousands of dollars for photography and to a advertising agency the last thing you want is some goof who can't shoot because her man can't come or has to be hours late to a shoot because she can't get a ride.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I don't think Dove or L'Oreal hires models from a local salons and if they did their advertising agency should be fired.   Look, I'm not saying that there is no place for web based models but companies who have any sort of budget need to hire agency models.   lets say, I hired a girl from MM and she couldn't make it for a legitimate reason.   What would I do?   If she were from Next or Marilyn I could replace her quickly.   Not so with a model from the web.   Look, I'm not talking about someone you've met or who you may be friends with.

This is about the main stream industry of fashion and commercial work.   Companies hire agency models via ad agencies or through the agency directly.   That is NOT going to change in the near future.   Any art director who would hire a web based model is playing with fire.   Its one thing to hire web based models for small projects that if they don't happen nobody is really hurt.   However catalog houses, real fashion and commercial projects, mid level to A list magazines, cosmetic and hair companies, larger clothing companies and designers use agencies.   There was a well known Chicago fur maker who would use non agency Black models for their ads.   

Some of the models did billboards and these folks paid $1,000.00 to them.   Well under the going rate for that kind of usage but the models were happy.   They would hold castings and choose their models from them.   Their will always be people looking to save a few bucks.   However even they were burned by models who flaked several times.   I can't speak for the UK but here companies use licensed and bonded modeling agencies.   They trust the agency has verified the models identification and age.   They trust that in some cases a background check has been done.   Some may not want their product connected to someone who is doing adult or pornographic modeling. 

Most of all when your paying thousands of dollars for photography and to a advertising agency the last thing you want is some goof who can't shoot because her man can't come or has to be hours late to a shoot because she can't get a ride.

Have the decency to read what I posted.
I acknowleged that isn't the way the big companies work.
BUT I DID TELL YOU THAT BIG COMPANIES USE US FOR OTHER STUFF. And gave two examples of how; one of which is real and the other based on real.
And it is quite a bit more regularly than their campaign stuff.

Someone I have met or someone I am friends with? That isn't it at all it is NETWORKING. They are always keen to find models for the little stuff and they see you shooting at the races. They are NOT until then my 'friends'. Neither is the bloke with the chain of salons. They do NOT do campaigns. But they need models for day to day stuff. And that work is massive comapred with the one off campaign at the higher level.

Now I also know how it works when it comes through photographers. Don't think it doesn't show when you guys haven't been dealt in with the model booking. Just be happy with the £2.5 k and don't worry about our couple of hundred 'kay?

Now. You are once again tainting us all with that 'unreliable' brush. It sucks; and if you have had it it is because you are a shit judge of models and its your own fault.


The fact is you do NOT know the business. You just appear to know how the advertising campaign works. You have no idea that beneath that there is a massive iceberg of work which advertising agencies are NOT part of. Or; the times when the client says to the advertising company...nah...you book the photographer and do the graphics for the ad.... we want Eliza and Jessa in it. And don't think that doesn't happen because it does. Because we aren't just up there in hyper space we graft and make contacts and use our ports and these people KNOW we are reliable and good.
Here ya go. An image advertising company done for Newbury Racecourse and Coast clothing. One agency model the rest of us the client chose:

Pic by Jason Alden; not on MM. Maybe he is a 'real' photographer not an 'internet' one

Dove or L'Oreal. Jeez who is after that work? If it comes nice - I bet you a few girls here will have done it but most of us won't get to that at a campaign level no.


You know what this is like?
It is akin to saying the hard grafting local product (including fashion) photographer who also does the weddings and portraits; plus a bit of press work; and even gets an exhibition or two from which he sells well; is a wannabe. Because he isn't ever going to do the campaign shoot for L'Oreal. Now there are thousands of hard working photographers who do that stuff it doesn't mean they are an 'internet photographer' because they don't do a L'Oreal campaign .What absolute crappy double standards you guys have!

Now. Once again as you mentioned hair. This was actually all tf because it suited us all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsK37F3GGdw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prAi0sZ6v_E

But I get shed loads of paid work doing that kind of thing. But on this as I say tf. But it illustrates the kind of things that happen. Ceri the model in the red hat is also on here as a model; UGLY agency signed; though she is also a top hair stylist and works with Robert Masciave (who is also here; and in this video being interviewed by Derek Thompson of channel 4 tv). Ceri shot and styled in LA recently. This shoot cost nobody a penny and we have massive air time; plus 10 000 public there; plus international press and tv coverage in the middle east; local lifestyle mag article; local newspapers, a few thousand hits on your tube, and several internet and equine magazines.
So everyone got something out of it. Photographer Sheradon Dublin gets published; Robert gets his new headpieces over plus great publicity for his salon and website and Ceri's work too. Arabian horse racing gets a shed load of extra coverage ...and I get an invitation to Abu Dhabi in November and Berlin by the Sheikh's press people.

So we are all internet people not to be taken seriously are we? Get with the new groove my friend.

And don't write off 'net publications' either. Certainly the clients think blogs etc are important and I get invited to lots of fashion shows etc because of stuff I do in that dept:
http://www.shopcotswolds.co.uk/blog/?aid=258

And I think a lot of models here do that kind of stuff. Millicent Binks for example a burlesque star in the UK and a model here is also a columnist. http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/biography/millicent-binks

So THINK what booking a model like her or I or one of the many other girls here who also have some other media or public presence can do for your product or client. Hell there are girls here who are viral queens.

The mainstream fashion industry campaign editorial and commercial work is the icing on a very very big cake which has all sorts of ingredients you appear to know NOTHING about. I mean don't you guys have lifestyle and fashion magazines for every town, every county, etc like we do here? Some of that will be Agency work but most of it not.

And don't you DARE compare us with the girls who flake. If you are picking them it is your own misjudgement. Get references; or indeed go to an Agency if you don't trust your judgement; pay ten times more for the same girl and stop annoying the hell out of us.

Jessa The Austin Model wrote:
Hi! I'm Jessa

He did acknowledge you were great to be fair on Udor

I made him look at your port

Eliza C wrote:
Have the decency to read what I posted.
I acknowleged that isn't the way the big companies work.
BUT I DID TELL YOU THAT BIG COMPANIES USE US FOR OTHER STUFF. And gave two examples of how; one of which is real and the other based on real.
And it is quite a bit more regularly than their campaign stuff.

Someone I have met or someone I am friends with? That isn't it at all it is NETWORKING. They are always keen to find models for the little stuff and they see you shooting at the races. They are NOT until then my 'friends'. Neither is the bloke with the chain of salons. They do NOT do campaigns. But they need models for day to day stuff. And that work is massive comapred with the one off campaign at the higher level.

Now I also know how it works when it comes through photographers. Don't think it doesn't show when you guys haven't been dealt in with the model booking. Just be happy with the £2.5 k and don't worry about our couple of hundred 'kay?

Now. You are once again tainting us all with that 'unreliable' brush. It sucks; and if you have had it it is because you are a shit judge of models and its your own fault.


The fact is you do NOT know the business. You just appear to know how the advertising campaign works. You have no idea that beneath that there is a massive iceberg of work which advertising agencies are NOT part of. Or; the times when the client says to the advertising company...nah...you book the photographer and do the graphics for the ad.... we want Eliza and Jessa in it. And don't think that doesn't happen because it does. Because we aren't just up there in hyper space we graft and make contacts and use our ports and these people KNOW we are reliable and good.
Here ya go. An image advertising company done for Newbury Racecourse and Coast clothing. One agency model the rest of us the client chose:

Pic by Jason Alden; not on MM. Maybe he is a 'real' photographer not an 'internet' one

Dove or L'Oreal. Jeez who is after that work? If it comes nice - I bet you a few girls here will have done it but most of us won't get to that at a campaign level no.


You know what this is like?
It is akin to saying the hard grafting local product (including fashion) photographer who also does the weddings and portraits; plus a bit of press work; and even gets an exhibition or two from which he sells well; is a wannabe. Because he isn't ever going to do the campaign shoot for L'Oreal. Now there are thousands of hard working photographers who do that stuff it doesn't mean they are an 'internet photographer' because they don't do a L'Oreal campaign .What absolute crappy double standards you guys have!

Now. Once again as you mentioned hair. This was actually all tf because it suited us all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsK37F3GGdw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prAi0sZ6v_E

But I get shed loads of paid work doing that kind of thing. But on this as I say tf. But it illustrates the kind of things that happen. Ceri the model in the red hat is also on here as a model; UGLY agency signed; though she is also a top hair stylist and works with Robert Masciave (who is also here; and in this video being interviewed by Derek Thompson of channel 4 tv). Ceri shot and styled in LA recently. This shoot cost nobody a penny and we have massive air time; plus 10 000 public there; plus international press and tv coverage in the middle east; local lifestyle mag article; local newspapers, a few thousand hits on your tube, and several internet and equine magazines.
So everyone got something out of it. Photographer Sheradon Dublin gets published; Robert gets his new headpieces over plus great publicity for his salon and website and Ceri's work too. Arabian horse racing gets a shed load of extra coverage ...and I get an invitation to Abu Dhabi in November and Berlin by the Sheikh's press people.

So we are all internet people not to be taken seriously are we? Get with the new groove my friend.

And don't write off 'net publications' either. Certainly the clients think blogs etc are important and I get invited to lots of fashion shows etc because of stuff I do in that dept:
http://www.shopcotswolds.co.uk/blog/?aid=258

And I think a lot of models here do that kind of stuff. Millicent Binks for example a burlesque star in the UK and a model here is also a columnist. http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/biography/millicent-binks

So THINK what booking a model like her or I or one of the many other girls here who also have some other media or public presence can do for your product or client. Hell there are girls here who are viral queens.

The mainstream fashion industry campaign editorial and commercial work is the icing on a very very big cake which has all sorts of ingredients you appear to know NOTHING about. I mean don't you guys have lifestyle and fashion magazines for every town, every county, etc like we do here? Some of that will be Agency work but most of it not.

And don't you DARE compare us with the girls who flake. If you are picking them it is your own misjudgement. Get references; or indeed go to an Agency if you don't trust your judgement; pay ten times more for the same girl and stop annoying the hell out of us.

Okay, Eliza we are discussing two different things.   I am talking about main stream consistent work.   Not the occasional modeling gig some here offer or work from sites like Craigslist.   I'm talking about booking a MM model who doesn't show and a client who could be out serious money with no model to replace her.   One of the things agencies get back from test shoots is feedback on the models.  Was she professional?   Did she come high or drunk.   Was she difficult to work with.   I will say this again.   Real world clients with budgets are nuts to use web based models.   Large companies working with advertising agencies like Leo Burnett use models from agencies for almost all of their print.   Nobody with good sense is trying to book some goof from omp.

However your right.   What do, I know?   Web models are where its at.   I'll make sure Sears, Target, Kohl's, Macy, Nordstrom, Marshall and everyone else gets that memo because they haven't yet.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
However your right.   What do, I know?   Web models are where its at.   I'll make sure Sears, Target, Kohl's, Macy, Nordstrom, Marshall and everyone else gets that memo because they haven't yet.

Ya Eliza! You better go tell that hair salon they don't count as an actual company and they should just stop advertizing. Oh, and since Kempton Park isn't using an agency for all their modeling, they probably don't count as a company either, better let them know. In-fact, any company that doesn't go through an agency for all their modeling needs is not a real company and they should just stop advertizing and/or producing catalogs.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Jessa you are a very beautiful woman and you may be dependable but a company who needs a project done with little bull shi% would be crazy to consider using most web based models.   I can hear it now.   Hair company exec:   Well, Bob we went with Suzy and Betty from MM and saved a few hundred bucks.   Photographer:   So where are they?   Bob:   darn it, Suzy isn't coming her grandmother is sick and Betty can't find a llama herder to come with her.   That's just one scenario.   Real world clients don't have time to vet models its why they use agencies.   They often pay a premium price for models but when you have thousands of dollars on the line you don't have time to play with women who are playing at modeling.

That is not to say you aren't serious but how would a client know?    Height is another issue.   Its important because designer samples are usually in one size.   Who has time to provide things that fit short models and while not always  clothing like many gowns and dresses tend to drape better on tall women.   You may feel the standards are silly but agencies, companies, clients and magazines do not.   Most models for fashion are 5'8" or taller, under 21, tiny in size.   I don't see that changing in the near future.   Real world clients with budgets and limited time to play will hire agency models.   Agency girls who don't require llama herders.   Agency girls who are dependable.   Agency models who photos haven't been Photoshopped to death and yes a audition tends to weed them out but sometimes you don't have to meet models in person.
You have to go by a comp card and or the agency website.

You may be a good investment for photographers books but you just aren't for real world fashion agencies.   You aren't for those seeking to test with agencies in larger markets.   Its one thing to do limited work in tiny markets like Austin and I lived in Texas by the way.   Its another to work in actual fashion markets like NY, Paris, Milan, LA and to a degree Miami.   This is in no way a put down.   You may be a reliable model with a proven track record but real world companies won't know that.   Advertising agencies don't have time to vet you and won't that's why they use agencies.   Again you are truly beautiful but you are not ever going to be a real world fashion model.   That's my personal view and I'm certain some Knight will dash in to tell me how wrong, I am and that you can be photographed to look tall or she/he will mention Dean Johnson.

How does a "real" company or client know that I am reliable without being associated with an agency?? My RESUME' , my tear sheets and my references. That's how. My work isn't limited to local Austin boutiques either, I've been out of the country many times now and published internationally. I have worked hard to establish a good reputation, that's how a client can ensure that they are getting what I advertise; professionalism. I don't need an agency to justify that. Agencies are just there to do the dirty work of filtering through the wanna be models to find the true talent and then try to mold them into models. They do the networking and booking, then take part of the model's profit in return. I don't need an agency for that, I can do my own dirty work. To be absolutely truthful, I book most of the same work as the agency models. No, I haven't had a L'oreal campaign at this point, but who is to say that isn't because L'oreal hasn't woken up to see the huge resource of freelance models out there? Times are changing and eventually more and more reputable and established businesses will open up to the idea of taking advantage of the benefits from booking freelance models. The internet has become a powerful tool that has shifted the way the business and  marketing world works these days. Clients using MM to find talent has started to  become more of the norm now because it is acknowledged that there are in fact hundreds of professional, reliable and talented models here.

As far as not being to the fashion world's standards for sample sizes, well, that would be the fashion world's problem. Until the concept that women have to be amazons to model clothes is eliminated from the close minded and discriminatory attitudes of the people who have control over the fashion world, it is what it is. There is always room for change in our world. Maybe, just maybe, Models like myself and Eliza could be an example of that change happening in it's earliest stages...or maybe, it's bigger then you think? 

"A revolution has to start in the mind before it can start in the street."

Seriously, never say never.

Nico K wrote:
Nobody would write an article like this about amateur bands or photographers, so what the hell at models getting the bash like this

You need to read more.

Jessa The Austin Model wrote:
How does a "real" company or client know that I am reliable without being associated with an agency?? My RESUME' , my tear sheets and my references. That's how. My work isn't limited to local Austin boutiques either, I've been out of the country many times now and published internationally. I have worked hard to establish a good reputation, that's how a client can ensure that they are getting what I advertise; professionalism. I don't need an agency to justify that. Agencies are just there to do the dirty work of filtering through the wanna be models to find the true talent and then try to mold them into models. They do the networking and booking, then take part of the model's profit in return. I don't need an agency for that, I can do my own dirty work. To be absolutely truthful, I book most of the same work as the agency models. No, I haven't had a L'oreal campaign at this point, but who is to say that isn't because L'oreal hasn't woken up to see the huge resource of freelance models out there? Times are changing and eventually more and more reputable and established businesses will open up to the idea of taking advantage of the benefits from booking freelance models. The internet has become a powerful tool that has shifted the way the business and  marketing world works these days. Clients using MM to find talent has started to  become more of the norm now because it is acknowledged that there are in fact hundreds of professional, reliable and talented models here.

As far as not being to the fashion world's standards for sample sizes, well, that would be the fashion world's problem. Until the concept that women have to be amazons to model clothes is eliminated from the close minded and discriminatory attitudes of the people who have control over the fashion world, it is what it is. There is always room for change in our world. Maybe, just maybe, Models like myself and Eliza could be an example of that change happening in it's earliest stages...or maybe, it's bigger then you think? 

"A revolution has to start in the mind before it can start in the street."

Seriously, never say never.

I guess, I missed your international work and it really doesn't matter because I am talking about the mainstream industry of fashion and commercial work.   Companies simply cannot afford to screw around with women who want to play models.   They go to agencies who have vetted their models.   Busy people don't have time to race around and ask John the Glamor dude on MM about a past model.   Read through the forums and see how many shooters here have had flakes.   What company or client wants to deal with that?   If you couldn't make a planned shoot for a good reason who could I call to replace you?   If you've come through Supreme Management or IMG they can have another model to me in a few hours if that long.   I book you and your grandmother gets sick and I'm stuck.

Clients can't contact models directly via MM because unless you list your email and or phone number on your profile.  Something MM frowns upon.    You have a link to a outside website but most models here don't and would a company have the time to try and join MM.   That being they aren't photographers.   Yes, Essence is here along with a few other magazines but no large clothing makers or much else.   Jessa, I can see you've been published and I commend your hard work and efforts and its wonderful if that work came because of your presence here or your web site but that is just not how it works for the most part.   Models from sites like MM are too unreliable to be used by real world paying clients with decent budgets.   

I just can't see a Art Director from Ogilvy prowling through profiles on MM to find that perfect face for a client.   They will go to where professionals get what they need.   Other professionals but maybe you and Eliza are right.   Go on-line models!   Start that revolution but make sure to take your escorts no matter what.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I guess, I missed your international work and it really doesn't matter because I am talking about the mainstream industry of fashion and commercial work.   Companies simply cannot afford to screw around with women who want to play models.   They go to agencies who have vetted their models.   Busy people don't have time to race around and ask John the Glamor dude on MM about a past model.   Read through the forums and see how many shooters here have had flakes.   What company or client wants to deal with that?   If you couldn't make a planned shoot for a good reason who could I call to replace you?   If you've come through Supreme Management or IMG they can have another model to me in a few hours if that long.   I book you and your grandmother gets sick and I'm stuck.

Clients can't contact models directly via MM because unless you list your email and or phone number on your profile.  Something MM frowns upon.    You have a link to a outside website but most models here don't and would a company have the time to try and join MM.   That being they aren't photographers.   Yes, Essence is here along with a few other magazines but no large clothing makers or much else.   Jessa, I can see you've been published and I commend your hard work and efforts and its wonderful if that work came because of your presence here or your web site but that is just not how it works for the most part.   Models from sites like MM are too unreliable to be used by real world paying clients with decent budgets.   

I just can't see a Art Director from Ogilvy prowling through profiles on MM to find that perfect face for a client.   They will go to where professionals get what they need.   Other professionals but maybe you and Eliza are right.   Go on-line models!   Start that revolution but make sure to take your escorts no matter what.

That's right Jessa! Real companies can't take chances on a anyone based solely on their resume, tear sheets, and references. That's why they hire their photographers through agencies. Duh! Can't risk having the photographer flake on an important commercial shoot can we?

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Okay, Eliza we are discussing two different things.   I am talking about main stream consistent work.   Not the occasional modeling gig some here offer or work from sites like Craigslist.   I'm talking about booking a MM model who doesn't show and a client who could be out serious money with no model to replace her.   One of the things agencies get back from test shoots is feedback on the models.  Was she professional?   Did she come high or drunk.   Was she difficult to work with.   I will say this again.   Real world clients with budgets are nuts to use web based models.   Large companies working with advertising agencies like Leo Burnett use models from agencies for almost all of their print.   Nobody with good sense is trying to book some goof from omp.

However your right.   What do, I know?   Web models are where its at.   I'll make sure Sears, Target, Kohl's, Macy, Nordstrom, Marshall and everyone else gets that memo because they haven't yet.

Ugh. NO
YOU are talking about elite work mainly corporate; and even then only at top level. WTF do you think myself and HUNDREDS of other fit and show  models in London are doing for designers and stores every day?
Then. Compared say with the campaigh for MandS swimwear which yes a lot of money and agency models and advertising companies and top people are involved with; the sort of work I am talking about doesn't register on your radar. BUT for the two or three models doing that and getting great money; or for the supermodels doing the even bigger stuff for top fashion editorial; what you don't see AT ALL is a giant iceberg beneath.

Have a guess how many independent boutiques there are in the UK. ALL using models. Now try small designers. As I said over thirty milliners alone on my facebook. All with websites; all paying models to shoot and to wear at events. Have a look at how many designers there are on here. Think they are using agency models? Get real. Well they may be; but not from the agencies.

Then as I said even the top fashion houses don't use agency models for showroom, fitting, merchandise brochures, and not even all fashion shows.

So WE HAVE THE MAINSTREAM CONSISTENT WORK don't you get it? The Agency models have the cream and so they should because if a huge amount is riding on it you ned the best money can buy. I am not Silvia Dimitrova. I can work in a supporting role to her but she is stunning and an incredible model so I wouldn't even think myself worthy of doing runway with her; but AP did. But I was there doing all the fit and bits of other things they use models for almost every day.

THAT is what I call the fashion manistream,; all that stuff. What you are talking about is the elite stuff. But as I have said numerous times but you seem incapable of considering; NOBODY uses agency models for the vast majority of bog standard fashion work. I shouldn't say that really because a great many taleted people are involved with it and place a lot of faith in us and give us a huge amount of work. BUT I am sure they will forgive me for saying it isn't that stuff you are talking about.


Now. Once again consider this.
If we were talking about football; this would be the discussion.
YOU:
"Eliza we are talking about two different things. I am talking about the real mainstream foortballers in the premier league. You are talking about having a kick round with your mates."

ME : "what rubbish! Don't you know we have three divisions under that and dozens of minor divisions under that so we are talking about THOUSANDS of professional footballers on nowhere near the amount of money or fame the few hundred premier league boys are on but nevertheless professional footballers. Then all those premier clubs have several reserve teams where the players are on much less money and nobody but the hardcore fans watch them or know them. And in fact; more TYPICAL of what an average pro footballer does. YES beaneath all those thousands there are thousands more having a kick around with their mates but even they can get involved with a small non league club and get paid if they are good and hard working."

Now I don't know how to say it any more. You are talking about the top 1% of the fashion business (editorial and top runway) and the top 2% beneath that (advertising campaigns). And because that isn't even enough to keep agency models in a living they are here with the rest of us grafting.

Now I am not going to argue this any more. You DO NOT know what we do and because we don't do top advertising campaigns you think we aren't profesionals. That is a BULLSHIT IGNORANT AND INSULTING argument; and one that could EQUALLY be apllied to every pro photographer who doesn't do those campaigns too.
Nice work if you can get it; but RIDICULOUS to suggest that is the bulk of the professional work in fashion for photographers or models.

Yep you know what agency models and egncies do. You haven't got a clue what design houses, designers, boutiques, fashion students, fashion colleges, stores, hair salons, regional magazines doing a bit of fashion editorial with local designers or even high st stores  and boutiques;  do every day of the week. Because that employs THOUSANDS of us and the Agency girls are here grabbing a bit too.

I worked as a model in a fashion house for nearly two tyears do you not realise I know what I am talking about? As did my flatmates partner who is 5ft 3 ins btw and worked for in house for their main rival. And there are about another hundred lingerie design houses and designers in London alone all with fit models in several sizes; and very few of the smaller ones go to Agency models or advertising companies for their ads and local mag editorial and fashion shows. And that is just lingerie. Just in London. And I worked for the world's TOP house and they used me almost every day for much of the year. Only a bit of photography and runway; but that is only a fraction  of the day to day fashion biz.

I give up if you are not going to believe me short of taking you by the scruff of the neck and dragging you round every design house, designer and boutique in London for a week ; then taking you to all the little reginal magazines (legion) I don't know what to do. It is like arguing with a creationist.

YES you are right about the top tiers. But you are very wrong about THAT being the mainstream. It is what it is: the icing on a very big cake. And I have not for ONE minute suggested the advertising agencies or the big concerns use us instead of Agency models; so your sarcasm at the end above was completely unwarranted.
Occasional modelling gig. Piffle. We work every day the agency girl doesn't - unless she is here too.

Now IF we were unreliable we wouldn't get the work. But perhaps the actual designers and clients are better at picking models than SOME photographers apparently are. For a start if they don't know you they have interviews and get references before you get the jobs. And John the nude model guy is NOT any good as a reference. I supplied the Royal Geographical Society as my previous long term employer 'reliability' reference; plus I think a fashion college and two designers.

Playing around at being models indeed! What the fuck have I paid all that PAYE tax for then?

DinoUnchained wrote:
That's right Jessa! Real companies can't take chances on a anyone based solely on their resume, tear sheets, and references. That's why they hire their photographers through agencies. Duh! Can't risk having the photographer flake on an important commercial shoot can we?

+1000000000 Dino!

They can't see it is a double standard. I wish we had a few more honest photographers weigh in and admit they do plenty of bits of fashion work yet never had an ad campaign or a Vogue edirorial but nevetheless make a hard working journeyman living same as us.

BTW Tony escorts are only for one on one; and even then few of us use them unless it is assisting - my partner is a stylist and if I am shooting nude he takes me there to make sure the dark industrial estate which has one light on in unit 57 is kosher; then fucks off to the bookies and comes to collect me when I call him. When you work in fashion you never need one because you are always with a team. And most of the time there isn't a photographer in sight until they maybe call one in when everything is ready.

This guy creases me he really does; REALLY great photographer but he doesn't have a clue about how most models earn their living. John the glamour nude guy indeed! Like I have references form that type. You really need to think before you speak sometimes Tony.

Jessa The Austin Model wrote:
How does a "real" company or client know that I am reliable without being associated with an agency?? My RESUME' , my tear sheets and my references. That's how. My work isn't limited to local Austin boutiques either, I've been out of the country many times now and published internationally. I have worked hard to establish a good reputation, that's how a client can ensure that they are getting what I advertise; professionalism. I don't need an agency to justify that. Agencies are just there to do the dirty work of filtering through the wanna be models to find the true talent and then try to mold them into models. They do the networking and booking, then take part of the model's profit in return. I don't need an agency for that, I can do my own dirty work. To be absolutely truthful, I book most of the same work as the agency models. No, I haven't had a L'oreal campaign at this point, but who is to say that isn't because L'oreal hasn't woken up to see the huge resource of freelance models out there? Times are changing and eventually more and more reputable and established businesses will open up to the idea of taking advantage of the benefits from booking freelance models. The internet has become a powerful tool that has shifted the way the business and  marketing world works these days. Clients using MM to find talent has started to  become more of the norm now because it is acknowledged that there are in fact hundreds of professional, reliable and talented models here.

As far as not being to the fashion world's standards for sample sizes, well, that would be the fashion world's problem. Until the concept that women have to be amazons to model clothes is eliminated from the close minded and discriminatory attitudes of the people who have control over the fashion world, it is what it is. There is always room for change in our world. Maybe, just maybe, Models like myself and Eliza could be an example of that change happening in it's earliest stages...or maybe, it's bigger then you think? 

"A revolution has to start in the mind before it can start in the street."

Seriously, never say never.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating Jessa and one only has to look at your port and see your experience internationally etc to see Tony hasn't a clue. He BELIEVES without evidence. In fact he IGNORES evidence. Why he wants to believe there are only the Vogue and L'Oreal campaign models I have no clue. Maybe it is like the wannabe model who thinks mistakenly that is what REAL modelling is too.

Jessa The Austin Model wrote:

Hi! I'm Jessa

Hi Jessa! 

udor wrote:

Hi Jessa! 

It's nice to "meet" you Udor! Perhaps we can be friends!  I see you are from NYC and its a city that I like to frequently visit.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I guess, I missed your international work and it really doesn't matter because I am talking about the mainstream industry of fashion and commercial work.   Companies simply cannot afford to screw around with women who want to play models.   They go to agencies who have vetted their models.   Busy people don't have time to race around and ask John the Glamor dude on MM about a past model.   Read through the forums and see how many shooters here have had flakes.   What company or client wants to deal with that?   If you couldn't make a planned shoot for a good reason who could I call to replace you?   If you've come through Supreme Management or IMG they can have another model to me in a few hours if that long.   I book you and your grandmother gets sick and I'm stuck.

Clients can't contact models directly via MM because unless you list your email and or phone number on your profile.  Something MM frowns upon.    You have a link to a outside website but most models here don't and would a company have the time to try and join MM.   That being they aren't photographers.   Yes, Essence is here along with a few other magazines but no large clothing makers or much else.   Jessa, I can see you've been published and I commend your hard work and efforts and its wonderful if that work came because of your presence here or your web site but that is just not how it works for the most part.   Models from sites like MM are too unreliable to be used by real world paying clients with decent budgets.   

I just can't see a Art Director from Ogilvy prowling through profiles on MM to find that perfect face for a client.   They will go to where professionals get what they need.   Other professionals but maybe you and Eliza are right.   Go on-line models!   Start that revolution but make sure to take your escorts no matter what.

I definitely get your point Tony. Most big name companies can't afford to mess around with finding independent models based on fear of the unknown. I hope you see my point that the unknown is coming to light for a lot of up and coming companies, and perhaps in the near future, more big names will get on board. Perhaps even more, MM could open up a new category for profiles here; advertisers. 
The world is always changing. I'd like to think I'm helping to open the industry to more possibilities than feeling forced to go through agencies to find quality and reliable models.

Demeter Photography wrote:
Its not journalism, its an angry guy or girl venting.  Funny that the author of it talks about insecurities, when its painfully obvious they have many of his/her own.

I didn't see a name attached to the article.  hmmmm I wonder why?

Sadly, by posting it here you are making the person who wrote it successful.  Even bad publicity is good publicity....  and revenue likely.

I imagine that is part of the reason why it was written. Gutter snipes get noticed taking pot shots at bigger targets. Have a look at the hits and rankings betwen MM and Elitedaily I posted in the beginning fo the thread.

But sometimes one just has to swipe mosquitoes as they irritate.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I guess, I missed your international work and it really doesn't matter because I am talking about the mainstream industry of fashion and commercial work.   Companies simply cannot afford to screw around with women who want to play models.   They go to agencies who have vetted their models.   Busy people don't have time to race around and ask John the Glamor dude on MM about a past model.   Read through the forums and see how many shooters here have had flakes.   What company or client wants to deal with that?   If you couldn't make a planned shoot for a good reason who could I call to replace you?   If you've come through Supreme Management or IMG they can have another model to me in a few hours if that long.   I book you and your grandmother gets sick and I'm stuck.

Clients can't contact models directly via MM because unless you list your email and or phone number on your profile.  Something MM frowns upon.    You have a link to a outside website but most models here don't and would a company have the time to try and join MM.   That being they aren't photographers.   Yes, Essence is here along with a few other magazines but no large clothing makers or much else.   Jessa, I can see you've been published and I commend your hard work and efforts and its wonderful if that work came because of your presence here or your web site but that is just not how it works for the most part.   Models from sites like MM are too unreliable to be used by real world paying clients with decent budgets.   

I just can't see a Art Director from Ogilvy prowling through profiles on MM to find that perfect face for a client.   They will go to where professionals get what they need.   Other professionals but maybe you and Eliza are right.   Go on-line models!   Start that revolution but make sure to take your escorts no matter what.

So L'Oreal, Ogilvy, Macy's are mainstream, huh?  They're the only way to be considered a real model?  Looks like about 98% pf models are out of work, then. 

I don't get it..Eliza and Jessa keep bringing up really good points, and all you can do is babble on about how some tightass at some company in the top 1% won't look at MM to find models.  Good for them!  That's what she's saying!  She can get 100X more work by being online and doing work for the other 99% of companies.  And in that process, perhaps she would eventually be noticed by a larger company in the 1%.  And if she isn't?  She couldn't care less.  She's making a good living at this point. And if she is?  A breakthrough!

You can't seem to separate online and MM models from girls just out of high school who are bored and putting up half-naked pictures of themselves.  There are some women and men on here with extremely professional portfolios who have never flaked or requested an escort and use the online medium to do extremely well for themselves, even in "mainstream modelling" (I would consider your definition of mainstream modelling to be inaccurate)

You also can't seem to stop with the cracks about flaking and escorts.  Obviously you're bitter... and it shows.  Like she said earlier, maybe you just need to work harder at finding the higher quality, professional models that exist on MM or online and get references for them.  It would work the same way as an agency hiring a model - with a resume, references, and maybe some phone calls and emails. 

It is also unbelievable the egos some of the people in this thread have (not referring to Tony now).  I can't even believe some of you do well for yourselves - it's a bloody miracle you don't just float off into space with the amount of hot air oozing out of every pore of your bodies.  Seriously.  Appalling.

Tiffany_B wrote:
What I think a lot of the models reading this article and this thread are missing is that there's a big difference between an "internet model" and a model that happens to have some of her work featured online. Just like there's a big difference between a person who can take an okay picture and a photographer or someone who can pick out a cute outfit for their friend and a wardrobe stylist.

An internet model (as defined by the article): How do you spot the internet model, you ask? Their photos are always those that seek attention: cleavage, booty shorts, bad tans, kissy faces, and a plethora of mirror photos taken with a flashing light from her handheld, digital-camera in the corner. Their status updates are also fashioned in a way so as to let the world know what they are doing, even if it pointless, quotidian minutia: “Just did my nails.” Basically this is someone unprofessional who may or may not be attempting to do it for a living and yet has no clue about the business of it and yes some of these girls are on MM, deal with it.

A model with her work online (as defined by me) is an actual working model whether she's a fashion model, fit model or alternative model is irrelevant. She may be agency represented or independent. Heck, for sake of argument she can even be aspiring so long as she treats this like a business. Her online portfolio could be through her agency or right her on MM.

This is what I've been saying all along. It doesn't seem like that difficult of a distinction to me, no prior modeling experience required, just some basic reading comprehension skills and common sense.

The problem was always Jessa's port.
The definition did not fit the headline. It wasn't a myspace girl pretending to be a model. In fact; it was a very high quality model indeed. And a very real person who just happens to host a port here same as all of us. We aren't after work from here; we get our own not beg photographers here for it. And we come to forums to play, learn, let off steam, help each other etc.

But the nails thing - we all do that or similar on fb. Even stylists! And one of my photographer friends on fb has a nosepicking pic of himself! Our facebook is NOT our port.

So again; I think you have to go back and read it yourself; consider what a model looking at that port of Jessa's and thinking omg that isn't a myspace model at all it is a really good MM model. Hence the sistership shown here.

A R M wrote:
This thread is still going?!

Yeah apparently we aren't real models unless we model for L'oreal and work for agencies. We are just internet models

I am hoping that is right so I can get all my PAYE back on my AP cheques as I obviously paid it by mistake if I was just playing at being a model.

Now the point you make I'd ask you to reconsider as so:

Headline: Black people are Criminals

definition in article: what I mean is the ones that go around Harlem mugging people and in gangs carrying guns and selling drugs.

Then there is a pic at the top of the page with: Barack Obama

See the problem?

Sterotypes like this are going to make people angry and they aren't going to accept an excusal of an encouched defintion that doesn't match the headline or the pic.

A R M wrote:
The reality is that for every professional model who has an account here, there are at least two girls who fit the description of the article better. Blanket statements suck and whatever. Perception is a bitch.

Yes but they aren't models are they?
They are girls who want to be models.
Perception is not as much as a bitch as the person who wrote the article

Now let me see there are maybe a dozen of us models here in this thread of all types. So where are the 24 who fit the article? I don't see one!

Eliza C wrote:
Now let me see there are maybe a dozen of us models here in this thread of all types. So where are the 24 who fit the article? I don't see one!

It has been said many times that the forum does not offer a representative picture of the average MM member. Those girls are probably too busy flaking on some poor guy who only wanted nice pictures of naked ladies.

Eliza C wrote:
The problem was always Jessa's port.
The definition did not fit the headline. It wasn't a myspace girl pretending to be a llama. In fact; it was a very high quality llama indeed. And a very real person who just happens to host a port here same as all of us. We aren't after work from here; we get our own not beg photographers here for it. And we come to forums to play, learn, let off steam, help each other etc.

But the nails thing - we all do that or similar on fb. Even stylists! And one of my photographer friends on fb has a nosepicking pic of himself! Our facebook is NOT our port.

So again; I think you have to go back and read it yourself; consider what a llama looking at that port of Jessa's and thinking omg that isn't a myspace llama at all it is a really good MM llama. Hence the sistership shown here.

I will agree with you from the standpoint that having seen Jessa's port which is quite exceptional that the description didn't fit their given definition but playing devil's advocate I personally didn't realize it was a real portfolio until you pointed it out and (perhaps Jessa herself can attest otherwise) the author may have grabbed a random screenshot. Was it uncool? Yes. Unfortunately though I think it's part of the hazard of having images online anywhere. Before my sister stopped llamaing she had almost her whole portfolio lifted and the images attributed to someone else. I'm not trying to minimize whatever emotional toll it may have taken on her but I I think we can all agree that there are worst things that can occur and if nothing else it got her some much deserved new professional admirers.

I also agree that facebook is not a portfolio and that it's full of silly shots and silly status updates. But it's also possible to separate your personal page from one related to your business. My personal page and the page for my jewelry line are separate and that's the case with a lot of people I personally know in the industry. Are there slips or even intentional tomfoolerly to show we're human? Of course. But there are "models" (and I use the term loosely) that use FB for professional purposes in a way that's anything but professional.

I dig the camraderie that ya'll show each other but I do think that there was some mud thrown towards supporters of you guys who also happened to be able to see the truth in the fact that not every llama on the internet is professional.

Tiffany_B wrote:
I also agree that facebook is not a portfolio and that it's full of silly shots and silly status updates. But it's also possible to separate your personal page from one related to your business. My personal page and the page for my jewelry line are separate and that's the case with a lot of people I personally know in the industry. Are there slips or even intentional tomfoolerly to show we're human? Of course. But there are "models" (and I use the term loosely) that use FB for professional purposes in a way that's anything but professional.

People want to connect with a human being on FB so I post things like, "Yay Friday!" to build rappot. I'm not a fashion model, but please don't confuse silly status updates with being unprofessional.

DinoUnchained wrote:

People want to connect with a human being on FB so I post things like, "Yay Friday!" to build rappot. I'm not a fashion model, but please don't confuse silly status updates with being unprofessional.

I agree with you. Hence the portion of that statement that says "Are there slips or even intentional tomfoolerly to show we're human? Of course. But there are "models" (and I use the term loosely) that use FB for professional purposes in a way that's anything but professional" While I thought the inference was clear it apparently wasn't so I will take the time to state now that no, I'm not such a tight ass that I think you can't include some personal touches to your FB page but if you start to do things that are consistently off base for your market (whatever it may be) you run the risk of being labeled an amateur and potentially passed over. I also know that what's deemed acceptable varies based on the type of modeling you do. Additionally as you have a MM profile I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that FB isn't your primary portfolio but just an additional way that you may potentially connect with people.

Jessa The Austin Model wrote:
It's nice to "meet" you Udor! Perhaps we can be friends!  I see you are from NYC and its a city that I like to frequently visit.

Sure, no problem!

Just let me know when you are coming. 

Btw., are you familiar with Leah Waddill from Dallas (formerly NYC region)?

She too travells back to NYC quite frequently. I know her for years and years from working at fashionshows...

I just met up with her 2 weeks ago...

Maybe you should put your heads together.

Laurie-Anne Foster wrote:

So L'Oreal, Ogilvy, Macy's are mainstream, huh?  They're the only way to be considered a real model?  Looks like about 98% pf models are out of work, then. 

I don't get it..Eliza and Jessa keep bringing up really good points, and all you can do is babble on about how some tightass at some company in the top 1% won't look at MM to find models.  Good for them!  That's what she's saying!  She can get 100X more work by being online and doing work for the other 99% of companies.  And in that process, perhaps she would eventually be noticed by a larger company in the 1%.  And if she isn't?  She couldn't care less.  She's making a good living at this point. And if she is?  A breakthrough!

You can't seem to separate online and MM models from girls just out of high school who are bored and putting up half-naked pictures of themselves.  There are some women and men on here with extremely professional portfolios who have never flaked or requested an escort and use the online medium to do extremely well for themselves, even in "mainstream modelling" (I would consider your definition of mainstream modelling to be inaccurate)

You also can't seem to stop with the cracks about flaking and escorts.  Obviously you're bitter... and it shows.  Like she said earlier, maybe you just need to work harder at finding the higher quality, professional models that exist on MM or online and get references for them.  It would work the same way as an agency hiring a model - with a resume, references, and maybe some phone calls and emails. 

It is also unbelievable the egos some of the people in this thread have (not referring to Tony now).  I can't even believe some of you do well for yourselves - it's a bloody miracle you don't just float off into space with the amount of hot air oozing out of every pore of your bodies.  Seriously.  Appalling.

I blame myself because apparently I was clear enough.   So let me try again.   Companies and real world clients with decent budgets who are looking for professional models need to go where pro models exist and that is a licensed and bonded agency like Ford or Next or a commercial agency.   Trying to use a web based model is a recipe for failure.   Yes there are wonderful and reliable models on the web and here but most clients don't have the time, patience or experience to vet and or wade through the chaff to get to the wheat.

If a agency model is a no show I can call and have another model in hours.   Who could, I call if you did it?   Lets say you were not a American citizen and not legally able to work in the US how would I know.   Criminal record?   Agencies vet models.  Since, Eliza likes to provide real life stories.   Here's one.   A local hair product company does a casting on Facebook.   Models come to the open call.   Its a audition.   12:00PM  to 6:00PM   Models came at 6:30 and 7:00.   Several expected to be paid to audition and for their gas.   Two who were chosen had 'managers' call to say they needed to be paid more.

You want professionals?   Go where they exist.   Yes there are great models on-line but busy people who don't have time to ask about your references and check up on you want to book models.   Have them arrive on time ready to work.   If you have a limited budget you do what 'cha have too and I know several companies who have found models on-line and used them with varying results.    Again so, I am clear there are many excellent professional models on MM and some book work with real world clients but lets not kid ourselves.   The majority of paid work consists of lingerie and nude.   Most of the clients are photographers.   Clients who have hired MUA, photographers, stylists and rented props and or paid for locations don't have time to fool around with women who want to play at modeling.   As for my being bitter.   You don't know me so I'll tell you this.   I don't expect models to race to work with me TF or paid.   Nor I'm I bitter or angry about what people do or don't do. 
 
Last; Those who can afford to use agency models should.

Eliza C wrote:
+1000000000 Dino!

They can't see it is a double standard. I wish we had a few more honest photographers weigh in and admit they do plenty of bits of fashion work yet never had an ad campaign or a Vogue edirorial but nevetheless make a hard working journeyman living same as us.

I really don't  understand what this has anything to do with being ''honest''?

I really don't know how this industry works in Europe and can't speak for the markets in the US, but, here in NYC, what you describe  as 'oh so special', is absolutely normal for photographers, models, MUA's and stylists.

It's the regular daily grind:

Lots of small jobs. the occasional great jobs with high pay, the many jobs for charity and always networking your ass off. Always on the run.

That's like this for everybody here, that's why it is so incomprehensible to me why your journeyman description is so special and done only by (London) models...

I know so many photographers and models here who supplement their income with side and odd jobs. That's not something special, it's living in the city.