Monad Studios wrote:
I just took a look at traffic stats.  MM peaked in mid-2011 and has been declining dramatically since then.

I'm only in my tenth month on MM, so I don't know what it was like back in the day. But 3000+ hits a month (in the five months I've been counting) seems pretty fair.

A R A G O N wrote:
MM killed MM...

BINGO!

What new features have they introduced in the last 2 years?

Darren Brade wrote:

BINGO!

What new features have they introduced in the last 2 years?

None...Zippo, Nada, not a damn one.

But we get 502's, 504's Gateways...Dos Attacks, Profiles being breached, Can't Upload Pictures, Can't Log on, Can't stayed Logged in, and on and on.

QuaeVide wrote:

As a general rule, photographers own the rights in the images, and so are free to grant rights to FB.

As a general rule, models do not own the rights in the images, and so are not free to grant rights to FB.

I'm full aware that photographers own the rights to their photos. I've never had anyone ask me not to post them on Facebook.

Rieni Otten wrote:
Nobody covered this yet... so I ask... how are MM stocks doing compared to FB stocks? :-)

MM has zero stocks...So FB is doing better.

Darren Brade wrote:
You think you've got it bad?

On FB it amazes me what women can get away with showing, male models have to be EXTRA careful since even any part of their glutes  are off limits from the FB Police.

Actually, what bothers me most about FB is that there's no distinction on the basis of image style (though I know how hard this would be to moderate).

Want to show a tasteful black and white of a male nude in silhouette? Get a warning or your account suspended.

Got a bodyscape, a great implied fashion nude or even a pic of "The Birth Of Venus" to display? Warning or suspension.

Want to put on a lime-green thong and take an ass-first shot with your iPhone? Hey, go right ahead.

Alabaster Crowley wrote:
I'm full aware that photographers own the rights to their photos.

Your question, in part, was: Isn't it the same when a llama posts an image as when a photographer posts an image? The answer is: No, in general.

I've never had anyone ask me not to post them on Facebook.

Not really the point.

Rieni Otten wrote:
I like MM but I also use FB a little. I'm wondering, as a photographer, how do you find models on FB? Do you search for "model" or what? Also, put one (semi)nude photo on your FB account and you'll get banned!

1. Ask your fb models what groups they use and join them. Post a message in that group(s) details of your casting.

2. As mention, when doing nude shoots include a draped shot that covers everything and post this with a link to the full set of pictures. Black censor bars are a fun way to do it too. I see people cover up with the Facebook logo. Lol

QuaeVide wrote:

Alabaster Crowley wrote:
I'm full aware that photographers own the rights to their photos.

Your question, in part, was: Isn't it the same when a model posts an image as when a photographer posts an image? The answer is: No, in general.


Not really the point.

It was a rhetorical question

DOUGLASFOTOS wrote:

MM has zero stocks...So FB is doing better.

Um, unless something changed in recent times.....IB is/was on NASDAQ

Cherrystone wrote:

Um, unless something changed in recent times.....IB is/was on NASDAQ

I can't find them. Maybe years ago..but now??? I will dig a lil deeper...

DOUGLASFOTOS wrote:

I can't find them. Maybe years ago..but now??? I will dig a lil deeper...

Remember Hellman & Friedman bought them out.

Cherrystone wrote:

Um, unless something changed in recent times.....IB is/was on NASDAQ

Not on NASDAQ..They were delisted in 2010!!!

Internet Brands agreed to be acquired for $640 million by the private equity firm Hellman & Friedman in September 2010,[14][15] and was thus delisted from NASDAQ.

DOUGLASFOTOS wrote:

None...Zippo, Nada, not a damn one.

But we get 502's, 504's Gateways...Dos Attacks, Profiles being breached, Can't Upload Pictures, Can't Log on, Can't stayed Logged in, and on and on.

You gotta see this!

https://twitter.com/m_mayhem/status/231438673634263042

Moore Photo Graphix wrote:

You gotta see this!

https://twitter.com/m_mayhem/status/231438673634263042

Here...

J  Welborn wrote:
No not at all-----the Facebook "fad" will go away just as it did for Myspace and any other trash gossip site .

Facebook is for kids and those with too much time on their hands LOL

Then you're not paying attention. Businesses of all types, major corporations to radio stations have Facebook accounts. My university has one as one countless others. FB is inextricably intertwined and will not be going away. MySpace was a little ahead of its time.

It boggles my mind that you don't realize how much FB has penetrated the US corporate system.

DOUGLASFOTOS wrote:
Not on NASDAQ..They were delisted in 2010!!!

Censoring Assholes agreed to be acquired for $640 million by the private equity firm Hellman

BlueMoonPics wrote:
Forgot the Hellman & Friedman also own Getty images.  Last I read they're thinking of spinning Getty off.

Ah now everything is beginning to make sense. H&F has destroyed iStock Photo, their rankings are dropping just like MM. They have been milking the cash cow for as much as they can and now that the cow is no longer giving as much milk they have put it up on the market for sale (Getty/iStock).

All H&F does is turn decent businesses to crap.

So let us hope that they also sell off IB and maybe MM can regain some of its former glory.
Or not. It may be too late.

There is another similar site with a great interface and much better portfolio resolution.
It is having a bit of a problem gaining traction, but if enough people jump on it will beat MM.

I'm not going to say the name here, but if you want to have a look at it PM me and I'll tell you what it is called.

K E E L I N G wrote:

If you are networking properly on FB you already know they are there.  And they are there in droves.  If you just walk over to fb without putting in the networking time though, you most likely won't get anywhere.  The owners manuals for MM and FB are drastically different.

But as much as I love this place and grew up in it, FB is much more productive for me now.  Much much more.

Something has to be more productive then here.
I did not put up a casting, but browsed for local models.
I emailed those I owed a shoot, since I had promised long ago. Those I know are away or tied up for the long weekend. Those I cold called either did not bother to respond (now blocked so as to not waste my time in the future), or came back wanting paid.

So the available time, will be filled with a third shoot with a model who had to ask for the day off work, and is in the midst of preparing to move to Toronto. We are going to pull out the stops and shoot way out of the box. With luck we will include a hawk and falcon in the shoot. Did I happen to mention that this young lady is signed? And has a real shot at getting signed by Ford or Elite where she is going. Her local mother agency is promoting her hard for her new city (3 year move for studies). Beautiful young women with the right stats are a dime a dozen where she is going, but this young lady is charming, not a hint of diva, a pleasure to work with. This last is what will give her an edge in a very competitive market.

Ironic, isn't it?

Foxy Tokala wrote:
I don't have a FB so if you want me or people on FB need me they come here!  Plus how many "models" on FB have you worked with that show up and are actually model ready/type?!  People always stretch themselves more on FB because their friends and people they date and everyone else is judging them anytime they put something.  I don't know maybe it's just me...

I haven't had a notably different result in following through between models I meet on FB and models I meet here.  But there's a lot of overlap.  Models I meet on FB who link me to their MM for additional information, especially if they shoot nudes, and models I meet here who I wind up talking with on FB because the messaging is easier.

Ruben Sanchez wrote:
FB is also where I get most of my paying clients.

I have sold a lot of prints through FB recently (15) and I'm not even marketing for that.

Herman Surkis wrote:
Something has to be more productive then here.
I did not put up a casting, but browsed for local models.
I emailed those I owed a shoot, since I had promised long ago. Those I know are away or tied up for the long weekend. Those I cold called either did not bother to respond (now blocked so as to not waste my time in the future), or came back wanting paid.

So the available time, will be filled with a third shoot with a model who had to ask for the day off work, and is in the midst of preparing to move to Toronto. We are going to pull out the stops and shoot way out of the box. With luck we will include a hawk and falcon in the shoot. Did I happen to mention that this young lady is signed? And has a real shot at getting signed by Ford or Elite where she is going. Her local mother agency is promoting her hard for her new city (3 year move for studies). Beautiful young women with the right stats are a dime a dozen where she is going, but this young lady is charming, not a hint of diva, a pleasure to work with. This last is what will give her an edge in a very competitive market.

Ironic, isn't it?

huh

where is the irony you speak of ?

QuaeVide wrote:
Your question, in part, was: Isn't it the same when a model posts an image as when a photographer posts an image? The answer is: No, in general.

That depends. If it was a TFP shoot, both model and photographer own equal rights. If it was a paid shoot but model didn't release all rights to the photographer (apart from the right to publish), she still has the portrait rights. Since a lot of people shoot on TFP bases I don't think it's right to state that in general the photographer owns more rights than the model. If you shoot TFP and don't put anything on paper, the photographer will even need to ask the model for permission for putting any of the the photos in his portfolio.

Garry k wrote:
huh

where is the irony you speak of ?

The irony is that a possible Ford model is bending over backwards to work with me. And MM models(?) cannot even bother to reply to a request.
Wait, you are right, no irony. She is looking to be a professional model, and is acting professionally.
Come to think about it, most of the MM models that I credit are actually making money.
And the rest of the models that I credit, are agency.
Hmmm...is there a trend here?

And Garry, there is still that beer thing when I am next in Van.

Rieni Otten wrote:
That depends. If it was a TFP shoot, both model and photographer own equal rights. If it was a paid shoot but model didn't release all rights to the photographer (apart from the right to publish), she still has the portrait rights. Since a lot of people shoot on TFP bases I don't think it's right to state that in general the photographer owns more rights than the model. If you shoot TFP and don't put anything on paper, the photographer will even need to ask the model for permission for putting any of the the photos in his portfolio.

So wrong on so many levels. At least in USA, Canada and UK.
I'll let others explain.

QuaeVide wrote:
Your question, in part, was: Isn't it the same when a model posts an image as when a photographer posts an image? The answer is: No, in general.

Rieni Otten wrote:
That depends. If it was a TFP shoot, both model and photographer own equal rights. If it was a paid shoot but model didn't release all rights to the photographer (apart from the right to publish), she still has the portrait rights. Since a lot of people shoot on TFP bases I don't think it's right to state that in general the photographer owns more rights than the model. If you shoot TFP and don't put anything on paper, the photographer will even need to ask the model for permission for putting any of the the photos in his portfolio.

Don't know about France, although I have my doubts.  But the bold part is typically completely false in the US, and most other places.  The only exception would be if there was paperwork created to make that outcome happen.

Herman Surkis wrote:

The irony is that a possible Ford model is bending over backwards to work with me. And MM models(?) cannot even bother to reply to a request.
Wait, you are right, no irony. She is looking to be a professional model, and is acting professionally.
Come to think about it, most of the MM models that I credit are actually making money.
And the rest of the models that I credit, are agency.
Hmmm...is there a trend here?

And Garry, there is still that beer thing when I am next in Van.

Yup

Art of the nude wrote:

P-Studios wrote:
HALF THE MODELS ON MM OUR GONE MM NEEDS TO DO A CLEAN UP ON ANY ONE NOT USING THERE PAGE FOR OVER 9 MO

When I do model searches, I only have it display people who have logged in in the last 14 days.

+1

GRAF wrote:

I suspect that your location in New York City is much more to do with this.

+1

J  Welborn wrote:
No not at all-----the Facebook "fad" will go away just as it did for Myspace and any other trash gossip site .

Facebook is for kids and those with too much time on their hands LOL

This.

Stephanie Fish wrote:

When searching or browsing models, just click the Recent Activity link. It'll bring up models who are actually signing in.
:-)


And as for Facebook - its nice to have. But it's not MM.
MM was created for us: photographers, models, stylists, retouchers. People in the business.

Facebook was made was any joe schmo that has access to the Internet.


I trust the people MM contains much more. It's more personal to me.

Agreed.

DanaColePix wrote:

Look for modeling and photography groups in your area..
If there aren't any, then start one.
Thats one way to find local models.

Post up new work frequently.. Once a week or every 2 weeks, tag or mention the models Mua's whomever, worked on the shoots...if they are on FB, and they will also do the same...
Their friends will see them and their friends friends will see them.
Models on FB usually have tons of other model friends on their lists.
MUA's and Hair stylists and Wardrobe stylists usually have tons of model friends as well...
If they like your work then they will add you or subscribe to see more of your work.
With FB they also get a sense of your personality, which is also a big thing to take note of...

With enough networking and marketing yourself, then you will start to see what those of us who use FB faithfully and successfully, are talking about !!

Those who say FB sucks just don't know how to use it and make it work for them...Whether for testing or for profit..

This

GRAF wrote:
Is Facebook killing Model Mayhem.

no, the site is doing that all by itself...