Eliza C wrote:
You see? Every time you open your mouth you put your foot in it. 'Great faces'. Now that automatically implies you have to be a face. Take a look at mine. I have been a full time pro model but I am under no illusions that my face is editorial beauty stuff or that I could ever do fashion editorial or campaign stuff. But I am good at my level and worked hard at it.

Hi Eliza!

The term ''faces'' is often used in the industry (the ones involving agencies) for models.

Many of the bigger agencies have a ''new faces'' division for newly signed and recently discovered talent/models.

It's also not a qualifier for ''beauty'', because agencies and their clients need a variety of looks.




Regarding your computer situation:

Many browsers have a private browsing function. I use Firefox and the command says ''Start private browsing''. After you finish your session your history and the cookies from that session will automatically be deleted.

NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
Do they have an actual print edition?

Or are they just an "internet magazine?"

I see what ya did there....

udor wrote:

I was always interested in astrophysics and that's why I studied engineering physics.... but wasn't smart enough. 

That's why! 

Lmfao. XD

Kitter LaGore wrote:
I am sure you all have friends who post ZILLIONS of pictures on facebook with "I shoulda been a model" as the album title. What is worse is when they contact you and say " Oh mah gaaad! I wanna model, help me get started!!" -.-

Sounds a bit like MM only difference being MM is 'pay me I'm an experienced model' with a port full of phone pic's.

Fifi wrote:
I briefly skimmed the article, but taking a look at the rest of the site... why are people wasting their energy getting upset about the tripe that they post. The site looks like it was created and run by complete idiots.

FIFFIIIIIiiiiiiiiiiiieeeeeeeee...!!! 

udor wrote:
FIFFIIIIIiiiiiiiiiiiieeeeeeeee...!!! 

Indeed, she hardly graces us with her presence any longer. It's really nice to see her here when she does.

Studio36

Fifi wrote:
I briefly skimmed the article, but taking a look at the rest of the site... why are people wasting their energy getting upset about the tripe that they post. The site looks like it was created and run by complete idiots.

Hey, girl, I was just thinking about you the other day. I was working my way through some sites for a client and came across that bit of work you did with the cigar. Nice! Very nice indeed!

Missed ya'

Studio36

c_h_r_i_s wrote:
5' 2" fashion catalog model for 'British Gnome Stores'.

You know the average height of the human female throughout the entire world is well under 5'8.  I just don't understand why the mainstream fashion industry has decided to only acknowledge a 5'8 or taller woman as being able to look great is clothes and be signed to the top agencies. Why they limit themselves to finding the more rare super tall girl rather than opening up to the possibility that really great models, who perhaps have more skill as a model than those awkwardly lanky ladies, are everywhere.  Being 5'2 doesn't mean I look like a Gnome and would only be able to model clothes that a tiny person can wear. I truly believe if you are a great fashion model, it's because you are a great model that knows how to make clothes look good, not because you are 5'8 or over.

Jessa The Austin Model wrote:

You know the average height of the human female throughout the entire world is well under 5'8.  I just don't understand why the mainstream fashion industry has decided to only acknowledge a 5'8 or taller woman as being able to look great is clothes and be signed to the top agencies. Why they limit themselves to finding the more rare super tall girl rather than opening up to the possibility that really great models, who perhaps have more skill as a model than those awkwardly lanky ladies, are everywhere.  Being 5'2 doesn't mean I look like a Gnome and would only be able to model clothes that a tiny person can wear. I truly believe if you are a great fashion model, it's because you are a great model that knows how to make clothes look good, not because you are 5'8 or over.

and I do not understand why the NBA does not allow short men play center

A R M wrote:
I do not understand why NASA does not hire the mentally challenged. they are people too!

Another completely ridiculous response. We are talking about creating IMAGES here, not the mental capacity of people and their ability to complete complicated jobs.

A R M wrote:

and I do not understand why the NBA does not allow short men play center

That's a ridiculous response. First of all, there is no height requirement to play in the NBA. Although having height can be an advantage while playing in the game, height does not give you any sort of advantage while modeling.

I think that MANY people would agree that if the model is proportionate and talented with posing than what height he or she may be doesn't matter. You can't tell how tall someone is in a photograph.

c_h_r_i_s wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaHnOrUD … re=related

Legs ! long legs. 5'8 +

As I mentioned earlier in this forum, I can definitely see the advantage of having super tall women on the runway. The runway is like a stage and taller people can stand out more on the runway and offer more stage presence.

Although...I have walked plenty of runways with more stage presence than many of the taller girls that walked before and after me. Knowing how to walk and show off the clothes could be considered much more important than having an amazon wearing them. Just ask any of the designers that have asked me to walk for them. It's ultimately about selling the clothes to the audience, right? Then let's think about who's in that audience....not a bunch of 5'8 and taller model body types. The people viewing the runway shows and looking at the fashion ads are mostly average people that would say: " Oh, I can't wear that, I'd have to have legs like her."


My original point is that in photographs, it doesn't matter how tall the model is if they are proportionate and a good poser. I have heard over and over again that if someone didn't know I was actually 5'2 they would have guessed I was 5'9.

Scarlett Candee wrote:
Taller girls have different proportions. Longer legs, smaller head compared to the rest of the body, etc. I'll let Stefano or someone else well-versed explain it further.

Not necessarily. Just because a woman is tall doesn't mean that she will have proportionately longer legs.

Jessa The Austin Model wrote:
Not necessarily. Just because a woman is tall doesn't mean that she will have proportionately longer legs.

But if a woman is tall AND has proportionately longer legs, she has an edge over her shorter equivalent. If there was a shortage of tall women, the short ones would land more fashion gigs. Darwin at work.

A R M wrote:

But if a woman is tall AND has proportionately longer legs, she has an edge over her shorter counterpart. If there was a shortage of tall women, the short ones would land more fashion gigs. Darwin at work.

That's what I was getting at, thanks for clearing it up.

A R M wrote:

But if a woman is tall AND has proportionately longer legs, she has an edge over her shorter equivalent. If there was a shortage of tall women, the short ones would land more fashion gigs. Darwin at work.

What advantage exactly? If the taller woman doesn't have the modeling skills that the shorter model has than her photos are not going to sell the clothes as well. Isn't that the entire point of putting fashion on models and photographing it for magazines, ect?

The fact is that the fashion industry has closed their doors to shorter models because of these inaccurate ideas that taller women are somehow better models.

Darwin has nothing to do with this. This isn't about evolution, it's about close minded individuals who could use some eye opening to the vast possibilities out there. Talent shouldn't be automatically determined with height as a first elimination. It feels like discrimination. I take just as good if not better fashion photos as those taller models and it's a bit unfair that I will never be agency represented because of these close minded standards.

udor wrote:
I was always interested in astrophysics and that's why I studied engineering physics.... but wasn't smart enough. 

That's why! 

Laurie-Anne Foster wrote:
Lmfao. XD

Jessa The Austin llama wrote:
What advantage exactly? If the taller woman doesn't have the llamaing skills that the shorter llama has than her photos are not going to sell the clothes as well. Isn't that the entire point of putting fashion on llamas and photographing it for magazines, ect?

The fact is that the fashion industry has closed their doors to shorter llamas because of these inaccurate ideas that taller women are somehow better llamas.

Darwin has nothing to do with this. This isn't about evolution, it's about close minded individuals who could use some eye opening to the vast possibilities out there. Talent shouldn't be automatically determined with height as a first elimination. It feels like discrimination. I take just as good if not better fashion photos as those taller llamas and it's a bit unfair that I will never be agency represented because of these close minded standards.

Your arguments are typical "internet llama" material. Maybe you deserve to be the internet llama posterchild as described by that article after all.

Eliza C wrote:
What? Where did I say models are a secret society?

Well... I was purposely exaggerating because you had emphasized so many times that a photographer or stylist can not know anything about a model's life...

Eliza C wrote:
BUT if you are now agreeing with me can you also enlighten the photographers and others here who clearly DO think that only elite agency girls are involved in fashion , about freelance models; how they have ports here; how they do that basic stuff and how many of them do things like fitting modelling for example? And also an acknowledgement there are lots of agency models here would be nice too. And that there are even niches for models doing petite, plus size etc both in fitting and even some photography.

Never said anything differently... ever!!!

Eliza C wrote:
And if you are saying that models are regular people; many of them are freelance, and that we do stuff like you are now talking about like flyers etc then we are in complete agreement so I don't know what the argument is?

I am guessing you mixed up the arguments...

Eliza C wrote:
You were among those saying that very few freelance models of the kind on MM are not involved in the work.

Nope, I wasn't saying such things!

Eliza C wrote:
So - are there many girls in your daily grind with MM ports or not?
And you will also then know what a fit model does; the fact a lot of us do promo work or fine art nude etc etc. AND that some who have popsted here apparently DON'T see that. If  you do know this then excuse me because it appeared you were saying that MM models don't do any fashion work.

See, I never said this... in other threads, I often pointed out that at runway shows or shoots, I am often surprised that even agency models exchange their MM information with each other..., especially in response to some people that claim MM models are only hobbyists... and my experience is just different. 

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Those curious about llamaing and height can check out:   http://www.newmodels.com/  This site by a former MM member is a excellent source of information.   Fashion agencies often use their runway llamas for print.   I think we can mostly agree that taller llamas are easier to see on a runway and it might be ridiculous to have a 5'2" llama with a llama 5'10"  Another problem is designers only make a few sample pieces and having to make things for short llamas as well as tall ones wouldn't work.   

There are many small llamas who may be beautiful and have lean proportional figures but what happens if ad or project has them working with tall men or tall women.   An agency only has so many slots for llamas as well.   However one of the biggest reasons is tall beautiful llamas tend to stand out so to say.   Anyone who's seen Iman or the current crop of agency faces knows what I mean.   You may be stunning at 5'2" but people just notice taller people in general and studies show that taller people get better jobs and make more money.   http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/Careers/02/0 … index.html   People tend to associate success, intelligence and even attractiveness with height.   

Height matters, age, skin color, weight and overall figure all matter as a llama.   This bullshi^ about being photographed tall is just that, bullshi7.   If height wasn't a issue then fashion and commercial agencies would just accept any and all llamas they felt were attractive enough to book work but they measure their llamas.   Print llamaing is very calculated.   They want female llamas who aren't too small vs. their male llamas.   They want young, thin and usually White women and girls.   You can yap about how height, age, weight or anything doesn't matter on MM all you want but go pick up almost any Lifestyle, fashion magazine, catalog, cosmetic and or beauty ad who is using llamas not stars and check them out.

Being short as a llama is not a plus.   Being unsigned is not a plus.   Being a older llama is not a plus.   However don't debate that with me.   Debate it with real world agencies who book work for their clients.

Why is it so impossible to consider that there are great llamas that could be the exception to the rule?

Of course a 5'2 and 5'8 llama would look different next to each other, but that's because they are! So are the average people in the world. Walk down the streets of NYC and you will see thousands of different body types.  If a client  wants to produce a specific photo advertising clothes and wants 2 llamas that are similar in body type, then all they have to do is hire 2 llamas that are similar body type. That doesn't mean they have to be 5'8. Why not hire two 5'2 llamas?? Anyone should be able to llama if they are good at it and they can sell  the clothes with their llamaing skills. Why do designers only make samples in specific sizes? Because the llamas they are hiring come from agencies that only have llamas in specific sizes because of these close minded standards. It's not because they can't make garments in different sizes. That isn't set in stone, it just takes less fabric to make a garment in my size. So alter the clothes, what's the big deal? Designers do it ALL of the time before runway shows so the clothes look perfect on their llamas, even if their llamas are already agency standard height.


Things can change, and maybe they should. It's ultimately all a matter of what the public wants in the end because that's who is buying the clothes and keeping the whole cycle a float. How did plus llamaing get it's start? Because the average woman in America is not a llama body type. The average human female in the entire world is not young, white, skinny and 5'8 or over. Get it?

Scarlett Candee wrote:
As an internet model, (I'm 5'0) I am well aware I will never do fashion. And guess what? I can live with that. There are many more options anyway.

I won't delude myself into thinking the fashion industry will change just because it's unfair and omg short girls can totally model clothes too!

I agree, we won't ever be fashion models while the fashion industry has these standards. I'm not delusional. I know exactly what the standards are. I've been modeling 9 years. I'm not a newbie to the entire process.

My point is that things CAN change and they do all the time. Maybe I won't see it in my lifetime, but I'm ok with at least setting the stage for change and giving the world an example of a short model who can produce quality fashion photos and rock a runway.

Of course there are other options, I've explored them thoroughly, but if I'm good at fashion modeling why should I be told I can never have success at it because the fashion industry has set limiting standards?

Jessa The Austin Model wrote:
The average human female in the entire world is not young, white, skinny and 5'8 or over. Get it?

Nobody wants to be the average person. Ever heard of the whole "aspirational model" concept in advertising?

A R M wrote:

Your arguments are typical "internet model" material. Maybe you deserve to be the internet model posterchild as described by that article after all.

I really don't think you have anything relevant to say and nothing to back up your ridiculous comments. What exactly is your motivation behind bashing me? Is it so hard for you to be excited about the possibility that you as a photographer should have the opportunity to photograph beautiful women that are wonderful models without having to wait for the chance that a 5'8 women gets in front of your camera through an agency? Your model could be living next door, but because you want to agree with the close minded ones, you will never know. Must be sad to be you, so beaten down and hopeless believing  that the world will never change.

I am trying to do nothing here but open up minds to the possibilities out there and you just want to be insulting.

A R M wrote:

Nobody wants to be the average person. Ever heard of the whole "aspirational model" concept in advertising?

Why don't they want to be happy with who they are?? Because the advertising industry has brain washed society into believing that you have to look a certain way to be considered beautiful.

I'm talking about selling a product; clothes. If a customer can relate to the person in the photo selling the product, they are more likely to buy it. If they see an  image of an above average person who has a look that is unattainable for the average person viewing the ad, they can be discouraged from buying the clothes the model is wearing.

Jessa The Austin Model wrote:

I really don't think you have anything relevant to say and nothing to back up your ridiculous comments. What exactly is your motivation behind bashing me? Is it so hard for you to be excited about the possibility that you as a photographer should have the opportunity to photograph beautiful women that are wonderful models without having to wait for the chance that a 5'8 women gets in front of your camera through an agency? Your model could be living next door, but because you want to agree with the close minded ones, you will never know. Must be sad to be you, so beaten down and hopeless believing  that the world will never change.

I am trying to do nothing here but open up minds to the possibilities out there and you just want to be insulting.

I am not bashing you, you are doing it yourself by sustaining this argument that has been done to death. As the legit professional you supposedly are, you should know better why taller women get the fashion gigs. It has been explained so many times by so many people that even I, who am just a dumb hobbyist understand well its rationale.

Jessa The Austin Model wrote:
Why don't they want to be happy with who they are?? Because the advertising industry has brain washed society into believing that you have to look a certain way to be considered beautiful.

I'm talking about selling a product; clothes. If a customer can relate to the person in the photo selling the product, they are more likely to buy it. If they see an  image of an above average person who has a look that is unattainable for the average person viewing the ad, they can be discouraged from buying the clothes the model is wearing.

Are you aware that your work -at least what I see in your port- only perpetuates that stereotype? Because height aside, you look pretty much like that same aspirational model.

A R M wrote:

I am not bashing you, you are doing it yourself by sustaining this argument that has been done to death. As the legit professional you supposedly are, you should know better why taller women get the fashion gigs. It has been explained so many times by so many people that even I, who am just a dumb hobbyist understand well its rationale.

It isn't that I am unaware of why the taller models get fashion gigs, it is that I think it's not fair and that there is a lot of room for change. I don't need the current closed minded " rules" explained to me, I question  why they should stay in place.

A R M wrote:
Are you aware that your work -at least what I see in your port- only perpetuates that stereotype? Because height aside, you look pretty much like that same aspirational model.

Again, your own insulting opinion.

Jessa The Austin Model wrote:

Why don't they want to be happy with who they are?? Because the advertising industry has brain washed society into believing that you have to look a certain way to be considered beautiful.

I'm talking about selling a product; clothes. If a customer can relate to the person in the photo selling the product, they are more likely to buy it. If they see an  image of an above average person who has a look that is unattainable for the average person viewing the ad, they can be discouraged from buying the clothes the model is wearing.

If people were happy with who they are they wouldn't venture onto MM.
It's all about dreams as is advertising.
Peoples hopes and aspirations are the same on MM as in advertising 'being happy'.