Stanley L Moore wrote:
Just got a message from one of my newest models whoi is leaving MM for an exclusive agency contract. How common is this? Hate to see teh good ones get away.

Frankly I'd applaud them.

Getting away from generally not much, to possible greater heights.

Stanley L Moore wrote:
How common is this?

Not common enough.  I love it when I see models from here go onto success.

ei Total Productions wrote:

Not common enough.  I love it when I see models from here go onto success.

Yup.

Like Melissa Baker.  There are terrific models on here who go one to to terrific things.  Nice to see.

Stanley L Moore wrote:
Just got a message from one of my newest models whoi is leaving MM for an exclusive agency contract. How common is this? Hate to see teh good ones get away.

Maybe you'd be happier for him/her if you didn't view them as one of "your" models.

I don't get the statement, "hate to see the good ones get away." Why were you shooting if not to further his/her career and yours?

The really good ones get signed. That's the goal for an aspiring agency model. They reached their goal where many don't.

I guess this has to do with the motivation of the photographer. If I photograph a model who gets signed I would feel great pride. I wouldn't mourn the loss as if "one of my models" died.

You'd be happier if the person hadn't been signed so they could always be accessible to you?

Edit: I wrongly assumed it was a "she" in the original comment. That may have been presumptuous.

Michael Pandolfo wrote:
You'd be happier if the person hadn't been signed so they could always be accessible to you?

Getting signed and maintaining accessibility are two separate things. There is nothing to suggest that the OP does not desire success for his models and is not pleased for his model, but it also seems normal enough to regret the loss of access - one door opens for the model, another door closes for the OP.

Stanley L Moore wrote:
Just got a message from one of my newest models who is leaving MM for an exclusive agency contract.

Wish I had a model.

Stanley L Moore wrote:
bad news today

Stanley L Moore wrote:
Just got a message from one of my newest models whoi is leaving MM for an exclusive agency contract. How common is this? Hate to see teh good ones get away.

How is this bad news ?

Images by MR wrote:

Stanley L Moore wrote:
bad news today

How is this bad news ?

It was an exclusive model of him.

natural beauties of qld wrote:
There is nothing to suggest that the OP does not desire success for his models and is not pleased for his model

So, the fact that the thread was titled "bad news today" and the content of the message was that one of 'HIS' models was signed...doesn't indicate he thought the model being signed was a bad thing?

I didn't see one mention that he was pleased for the model. Quite the contrary.

The vibe I got was one of someone who feels an unhealthy attachment to the models he works...documented by the possessive "my" models.

Combine that with the tone of the OP has the feel of someone who was just dumped and trying to seek solace and advice how to deal with the "loss" and, yes, maybe it's just me but I put this, if not in the creeper bin, at least the unhealthy bin.

William Kious wrote:
Why is it bad news that someone is taking positive steps forward?

It's also creepy as hell when photographers refer to models in the possessive. Frankly, your post makes my skin crawl. "Your" model is "getting away" from you?

I think "ownership" of a model is seriously creepy.

But, I also think people overdo the "my model" thing.  I mention "my friends," and "my doctor" and when I was teaching, "my students."  None of which imply ownership, just a connection.

Stanley L Moore wrote:
Just got a message from one of my newest doctors who is leaving my HMO for an exclusive contract with another HMO.  How common is this? Hate to see the good ones get away.

does that still seem "possessive" to you?

Does it seem like the OP wishes ill on the doctor?

Or, does it just seem like he is sad at losing HIS doctor and wants to know how often doctors switch HMOs?

Digitoxin wrote:
Folks who are concerned about the "possessive" thing:  are y'all over doing it a bit?

Bad news today...


does that still seem "possessive" to you?

Does it seem like the OP wishes ill on the doctor?

Or, does it just seem like he is sad at losing HIS doctor and wants to know how often doctors switch HMOs?

QFT +1000000000000000000000


Oh yes Bad News A MODEL got signed and is actualy on his/her way to MAKING money at this ,Gosh let me be a asshole and not wish him/her luck or be happy for his/her success ....

Art of the nude wrote:
I mention "my friends," and "my doctor" and when I was teaching, "my students."  None of which imply ownership, just a connection.

Friends are people you see often and with whom you have long standing relationships. Often, they see elements of your personality that even family might not know.

Doctors are people who you entrust with very sensitive information about your body, health and well-being.

You see students on a daily basis and you get to know them. Again, it's a relationship that grows through familiarity.

A photographer saying the same of models? It's creepy. It denotes an unhealthy attachment. Have a few casual friendships grown with a few of the models I've worked with? Sure. But I would never refer to them as "mine" (or anything of the sort.)

For the record: I go to THE doctor. I don't go to MY doctor. I work with A model. I don't work with MY model.

Cherrystone wrote:

Frankly I'd applaud them.

Getting away from generally not much, to possible greater heights.

I DID enthusiastically congratualte him on this success. It is nice to see models furthering their careers. He hasa great look and I think will do well. But his agency does not want him on MM.

Wondering how common that is. It makes MM membership somewhat of a 2nd class site.

Digitoxin wrote:
It happens and I am very happy for her/him IF the agency is solid.  Exclusive agencies can be a godsend when they are terrific and really develop and promote their girls/guys.  Or, they can be a total disaster.  I wish her/him the former.

What city?  NYC?

He wishes it was NYC..... No Dallas, Texas.

Michael Pandolfo wrote:

Maybe you'd be happier for him/her if you didn't view them as one of "your" models.

I don't get the statement, "hate to see the good ones get away." Why were you shooting if not to further his/her career and yours?

The really good ones get signed. That's the goal for an aspiring agency model. They reached their goal where many don't.

I guess this has to do with the motivation of the photographer. If I photograph a model who gets signed I would feel great pride. I wouldn't mourn the loss as if "one of my models" died.

You'd be happier if the person hadn't been signed so they could always be accessible to you?

Edit: I wrongly assumed it was a "she" in the original comment. That may have been presumptuous.

Actaully I am pleased he is on his way. Most of the models I use are on the amateur end of things... at least niche models, bodybuilders and the like. So when he is famous I can say "I knew him when."  LOL.

I sent him hearty congratulations. I do not care about furthering my career. I am retired and a hobbyist. I just wondered about exclusive contracts...

Stanley L Moore wrote:
Just got a message from one of my newest models whoi is leaving MM for an exclusive agency contract. How common is this? Hate to see teh good ones get away.

Never assume that a relationship with a model will continue past the last shoot, be careful in believing any are your muse, and be especially cautious telling this to others or the model themself.

Images by MR wrote:

Stanley L Moore wrote:
bad news today

How is this bad news ?

LOL. Well it is bad news for ME. Excellent news for him. I regret he won't be available to me in the future. But he could go far which is all to the good for a young model.

Stanley L Moore wrote:

He wishes it was NYC..... No Dallas, Texas.

There are a couple of good mother agencies in Dallas.  If he is with one of them, that might be good.  They will need to get him moving quickly -- mothered out to markets that suit him or the "exclusivity" may not help the model at all.  He needs to be proactive and work with his booker regularly.

What markets is he exclusive in?

William Kious wrote:
Why is it bad news that someone is taking positive steps forward?

It's also creepy as hell when photographers refer to models in the possessive. Frankly, your post makes my skin crawl. "Your" model is "getting away" from you?

PLEASE. Take a chill pill. I am actually very happy for him. "my moddel" is just a figure of speech not an indicator of possession. I will not be able to shoot with him which is my loss but of course his great gain. So it all works out for the good.

If you look at my port you can see I give ample credit to all the models I work with unlike some photographers who selfishly regard "their" models as their own. I find lack of credit by some photographers to be unprofessional.

Michael Pandolfo wrote:

So, the fact that the thread was titled "bad news today" and the content of the message was that one of 'HIS' models was signed...doesn't indicate he thought the model being signed was a bad thing?

I didn't see one mention that he was pleased for the model. Quite the contrary.

The vibe I got was one of someone who feels an unhealthy attachment to the models he works...documented by the possessive "my" models.

Combine that with the tone of the OP has the feel of someone who was just dumped and trying to seek solace and advice how to deal with the "loss" and, yes, maybe it's just me but I put this, if not in the creeper bin, at least the unhealthy bin.

I am sorry but you are reading way too much into my post. I am indeed happy when others succeed. It would be unhealthy to resent other people's success. Which I in no way do. I agree ther are some sad folks who in bitterness hate when other's succeed. I am not one of them.

William Kious wrote:

Friends are people you see often and with whom you have long standing relationships. Often, they see elements of your personality that even family might not know.

Doctors are people who you entrust with very sensitive information about your body, health and well-being.

You see students on a daily basis and you get to know them. Again, it's a relationship that grows through familiarity.

A photographer saying the same of models? It's creepy. It denotes an unhealthy attachment. Have a few casual friendships grown with a few of the models I've worked with? Sure. But I would never refer to them as "mine" (or anything of the sort.)

For the record: I go to THE doctor. I don't go to MY doctor. I work with A model. I don't work with MY model.

Please recognize almost NO ONE thinks that way you do.  We ALL go to OUR doctor or MY doctor as the case may be. 

Some models are MY models, when I hire, provide or bring them or . . .  Sure they work with others and then they are THEIR models. 

Lighten up !

William Kious wrote:
Friends are people you see often and with whom you have long standing relationships. Often, they see elements of your personality that even family might not know.

Doctors are people who you entrust with very sensitive information about your body, health and well-being.

You see students on a daily basis and you get to know them. Again, it's a relationship that grows through familiarity.

A photographer saying the same of models? It's creepy. It denotes an unhealthy attachment. Have a few casual friendships grown with a few of the models I've worked with? Sure. But I would never refer to them as "mine" (or anything of the sort.)

For the record: I go to THE doctor. I don't go to MY doctor. I work with A model. I don't work with MY model.

Hmmmm.

I see my friends all the time on the weekends but Monday through Friday
I work with my co-workers
I go to lunch with my stock broker right after I talk to the guy who sold me my house (my realtor). 
In the afternoon,
I met with my senator and my local congressmen right after discussing politics with
The civilian liaison chief of my police department who also happens to be
my dentist.  Then I went for a jog.
My personal trainer told me to.

My, my.

William Kious wrote:
A photographer saying the same of models? It's creepy. It denotes an unhealthy attachment.
For the record: I go to THE doctor. I don't go to MY doctor. I work with A model. I don't work with MY model.

It hardly denotes and unhealthy attachment, thats the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Most of society refers to people they know with the term "my", My mother, My Father, My Friends, My Doctor, My Teacher, My Trainer. Its just a way to say you have a connection with the person.

If the OP had said, "this model is mine" then I could see your "ownership" crap here but what he said is very common.There is a huge difference between My and Mine in that context.

Innovative Imagery wrote:

Please recognize almost NO ONE thinks that way you do.  We ALL go to OUR doctor or MY doctor as the case may be. 

Some models are MY models, when I hire, provide or bring them or . . .  Sure they work with others and then they are THEIR models. 

Lighten up !

+1

The only thing creepy here is how up themselves people are. Talk about two faces.

Digitoxin wrote:

Hmmmm.

I see my friends all the time on the weekends but Monday through Friday
I work with my co-workers
I go to lunch with my stock broker right after I talk to the guy who sold me my house (my realtor). 
In the afternoon,
I met with my senator and my local congressmen right after discussing politics with
The civilian liaison chief of my police department who also happens to be
my dentist.  Then I went for a jog.
My personal trainer told me to.

My, my.

On this thread that makes you practically a serial killer.

Stanley L Moore wrote:
Just got a message from one of my newest models whoi is leaving MM for an exclusive agency contract. How common is this? Hate to see teh good ones get away.

..and back on HIS topic...

It's quiet common, models come and go for various reasons. Check what the deal means, you're a photographer not an agent so you may still be able to work with him. Exclusivity would normally mean they are represented by only one agency.

Darren Brade wrote:

..and back on HIS topic...

It's quiet common, models come and go for various reasons. Check what the deal means, you're a photographer not an agent so you may still be able to work with him. Exclusivity would normally mean they are represented by only one agency.

That's what I would've thought. One agency. But this model says they don't want him on mayhem.

Stanley L Moore wrote:
That's what I would've thought. One agency. But this model says they don't want him on mayhem.

Again very common for Agencies to want their Models off MM. For all intent and purposes (and this is not a dig at MM) this is not a professional website. The agency doesn't want clients bypassing them and booking through a non supported website.

MM has no bearing on dealing direct with models, you may have to go through his new booker depending on what your prior arrangements where.

William Kious wrote:
It's also creepy as hell when photographers refer to models in the possessive.

QFT.

Innovative Imagery wrote:

Please recognize almost NO ONE thinks that way you do.  We ALL go to OUR doctor or MY doctor as the case may be. 

Some models are MY models, when I hire, provide or bring them or . . .  Sure they work with others and then they are THEIR models. 

Lighten up !

+1
It is just a common expression that has nothing to do with actual possesion or control over someone

Got to go.. late to go see MY doctor