Le_Demimonde wrote:
I don't recall asking you to either work with me or contribute your sophmoric-childish opines to my response.

Spelling iz gud.

You've posted your thoughts on a public forum, expect returned thoughts.

Jolly Rauncher wrote:

Spelling iz gud.

You've posted your thoughts on a public forum, expect returned thoughts.

Adieu young one.

Kelleth wrote:
Why in the world anybody want want all the raw images is beyond my understanding.

Why anybody would have use for more than 1 or 2 edited photos per look is also beyond me.

1.  I'll tell you one reason why-  because there are llamas who (like corporations) can process a photograph much better than a photographer can to get the "look" that they want.  It is actually common for raw files to be given to a corporate client because their art related department(s) can usually do a better job at converting the raw file into the final product.

A photographer isn't likely to want to spend 4 hours on each photograph, processing  20 of your most liked shots, but a llama with great skills might.  There are reasonable reasons that photographers give but just as many give luke-warm reasons that border silly.   Part of the TF process is to find a llama/photographer that suits your needs.  If you want raw, find a photographer that's willing (not likely if you have so-so processing skills); But if you are highly skilled, then process the raws to your content and share with the photographer... but that's how mature folks do things...  all with a written contract of course.  no muss.  no fuss.  no misunderstandings.  no problems.  too easy.

2.  Because different people like different things.  What a photographer might think are your best 2 shots, might not have been your pick.  Likewise, if you want to use your selected photographs from that session for something else, and you picked the shots that you wanted the photographer to process.... those shots that you selected might not be the best shots to represent you in whatever it is you're trying to do at another particular point in time.  The high fashion looking shots might work for one thing, but the more life-style shots might be better for something else-  even though the 15 shots at that location, in that same outfit, same hair, etc., were all taken in the same afternoon.

It's not for everyone to understand.  Not to be pert, but it's one of those things where if you don't understand it, then you probably don't need it; thought you might not get it, it might make all the sense in the world to many others. 

BodyartBabes wrote:

You are kidding, right?

I've been doing this since the late 60's, and this is *NOT* what I have seen.

How "many years" have you been doing this?

New models:  Yes, want all the photos, but because they are LEARNING. Some are doing FOR THE PHOTOS.  After all, they are not being paid cash with which they can buy food, pay a bill, or anything.

Photographers ... by these threads and posts, IMHO are *NOT* nice [guys/gals] they are out for themselves, trying to rip off the models, inflate their own egos, and make money off models, which to us old guys is the slimiest, scummiest thing you can do -- lower than trying to take naked pictures of the royals.

Experienced models -- would say"If We work another hour, can I get some additional edits?"   Their TIME is valuable, and since this is a TF*, they would trade more TIME for service.  NEVER would they offer money, especially at first.  After all, they are EXPERIENCED and *know* how things work.

Experienced Photographers  Would never be in *that* situation, since they do a little more fine-picking of MODELS, and know what they are going into a shoot for, and so does the model.  When the shoot is over, everyone is happy (usually) and there is no "re negotiation."  Usually, if there *is negotiation it's DURING the shoot, as a pose comes up, the model asks "Can we do this/that/the other so I have some shots for this/that/the other".

====

Now back to the OP and this post.


We are talking TF*.   

BodyartBabes wrote:
Now back to the OP and this post.
We are talking TF*.   

Jojo West wrote:
It seems like this is such an issue for people on both sides of the deal, that's not even taking into consideration what an MUA or Hair Stylist may have as input, if they're doing the shoot on TF basis too!

What we do should be FUN! Yes I know it's a job, but shouldn't you enjoy doing your job? We shouldn't let misunderstandings and poor communication affect our work.

Talk it out. If a photographer tells me I only get 1-2 photos from a TF shoot that runs 2-3 hrs, I will respectfully decline. It isn't worth my time. If a photographer is getting grief for not releasing RAWs and it's bothering you that much, decline to work with the model. It really is that simple.

I'll go back to my previous comment, communication and collaboration.

And models, if you want more pictures just ask, the worst the photographer can do is say no. Nothing lost.

Maybe this will lighten the mood (it got kind of heated in here):

Remember opinions are like bums (as in toosh) everybody has one.

So you'd turn down a shoot with the late Avedon or Mesiel if they only gave you 1 or 2 images?   There are some stellar shooters on MM who only provide a very small amount of images from a trade shoot.   Considering the work that some put in and the level of their images its understandable.   I have been asked a few times for RAW images.   In both cases the model didn't actually mean RAW format.   I have been asked for all the images and that seems to be more of a problem.   You are correct in that communication is a must.

Jojo West wrote:
What we do should be FUN! Yes I know it's a job, but shouldn't you enjoy doing your job? We shouldn't let misunderstandings and poor communication affect our work.

Talk it out. If a photographer tells me I only get 1-2 photos from a TF shoot that runs 2-3 hrs, I will respectfully decline. It isn't worth my time. If a photographer is getting grief for not releasing RAWs and it's bothering you that much, decline to work with the model. It really is that simple.

Again JoJo you are spot-on, with one exception...

There are SOME photographers here that you would consider yourself LUCKY to "trade" 3 hours and get 1-2 photos. The excellent quality of their work would make it well worth your time. I am not (yet) in that category and so I provide 15-20 in "trade" for 2hr/shoot. But if you look at SOME of the professionals here you could consider yourself lucky to have 1-2 photos from them!

Just a few Examples...(some 18+ images)
https://www.modelmayhem.com/5058
https://www.modelmayhem.com/386700
https://www.modelmayhem.com/179
https://www.modelmayhem.com/2623
https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/2158320/viewall
https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/2623/viewall

BodyartBabes wrote:
Well, I've been around, on-line, since there was an ON-LINE.   My first modem was a 110 baud acoustic coupler...
~blah blah blah...~

>>>Today, digital does NOT COST MONEY!!!  You do not incur a cost in transferring a digital photo the way you did in making a print.  That is a *BIG* difference in the VALUE of the encounter *AND* in the value of the "print."

Teila K Day Photography wrote:
1.  I'll tell you one reason why-  because there are models who (like corporations) can process a photograph much better than a photographer can to get the "look" that they want.  It is actually common for raw files to be given to a corporate client because their art related department(s) can usually do a better job at converting the raw file into the final product.

Corporate clients PAY (well!) for that product. RAW files are not "given" to a corporate client...the client PAYS for them.

It's a rare photographer that shoots Trade/TF* to provide a "corporate client" with RAW files. That is usually a PAID for product.

So, your comparison is bogus...and doesn't apply to a typical "Trade" shoot that the model and photographer usually agree is for both parties "self promotion only" in the "portfolio" environment!

From your own profile...

Teila K Day wrote:
FRIEND REQUEST:
Please only send a "friend request" if you're:
1. Paying us to shoot
2. Willing to travel to our location for TF work (*note booking fee*).
3. have reliable transportation AND conform to our TF requirement (see above).
4. communicate reliably via phone/email.
5. ***  Your "friend request" must accompany a description (via MM mail) of what type of shoot you're looking for.
6.***  We appreciate the work of all models, however we will only respond to  *TFCD* models that fit the particular look that we're looking for during the times when we're testing new concepts.  Sometimes we looking for thin and sometimes we need thick. Drop us a note and either way we'll have your info on file.
** NOTE: $25 required (cash/visa/master) to book TF shoot.  Deposit will be refunded in cash after you complete the shoot.
** Deposit is NOT refundable IF you use OUR outfits, etc. (goes for cleaning, consumables, steaming, etc.)

LOL! Love it.

I'd like to hear the other "IF/etc." reasons on your non-refundable "Trade" deposit. LOL! Nice. I may have to try that. So, what are "consumables" in say a 2hr trade shoot?

BodyartBabes wrote:
Yes, and some of us have been trading -- FAIRLY -- since the late 60's, or even longer, if you are older than me.

As I've said time and again, TF* is a form of payment.  It's an exchange of goods/services.   If models are happy with what you give them, fine.  If they are not, fine.

As was pointed out, there are different tpes of models, just as there are different types of photographers.  Some models just want a lot of images.  Others just want a "good" image.  Some models go into a shoot with an idea in mind, and they are happy.  Others go in wanting 200 images.  That's fine too.

Sometimes, models get paid, if there is a commercial purpose.

Most of my model work is not commercial.  It's art, fun, hobby, etc.   It's the release from the "paid" work of shooting people, events, food, whatever.

I often "trade sets."  The model works for me for a certain period of time on my images, and I shoot with her for a time on images for her.

Works wonders what being nice, flexible, and not controlling can do.

Scott

I am "nice" and flexible, but I don't rant that not giving models what most of them don't want and the rest don't need, is somehow cheating them.  I put a lot of time into creating my final images, and provide the model with several shots they've chosen, and usually plenty more that I chose.  But, not ALL the images, and very rarely do they get access to ANY unretouched images.  If you have to do that to get trade shoots, so be it, but don't act like it's the only fair approach.

Out of about 200 shoot with around 150 models, I've honestly never had a model demand all the images, like that was the only fair trade.  I  have had a couple ask about unretouched images, and of course many ask what they get.  I'm happy to answer, and to explain.

BodyartBabes Profile page wrote:
Website/On-line work:
~To release my work on-line, in an uncontrolled fashion is quite an expensive proposition. ~

Interesting statement from you, Scott! Considering your multi-page insulting rants on this thread about how -we- should all give away ALL images in uncontrolled unfinished RAW file fair "trade"...on $5 8GB bulk drives. LOL!

Me thinks thou dost protest too much.

Wolfy4u wrote:
Why is it that photographers keep talking about models asking for 'RAW' photos without realizing the what models want is to see their poses and what worked and what didn't. They'd like a little input to which photos they could have from a TF shoot.
To a model...  'RAW' = 'unedited'. This may be inaccurate, but it's the definition that they understand.
Personally, I provide them with copies of unedited jpgs of internet (800-533) size and I've never had a model say, "Hey, these aren't 'RAW'". Most times they don't even ask for edits from me.
We should also understand that what's important to us in photo is usually very different than what models see as important. TF means both sides gain something. I try to provide a model with at least 1-2 photos that they like as long as it isn't embarrassing to me.

Actually, I've had plenty of models who ask about, or discuss, RAW files while knowing exactly what they're talking about.  One of my early favorite models got a BA in digital art, and several other models I have, and hope to, work with are professional photographers / retouchers.

ArtisticGlamour wrote:
He's just blowing smoke in a bullshit rant for attention, I think ulterior motives...because THIS is from his own profile page...

Interesting statement from you, Scott! Considering your multi-page long rants on this thread about how -we- should all give all images in uncontrolled unfinished RAW file fair "trade" on $5 8GB bulk drives. LOL!

Me thinks thou dost protest too much.

Maybe biz is slow and talent in short supply?

Le_Demimonde wrote:
Maybe biz is slow and talent in short supply?

Exactly! Perhaps he feels insulting many of us somehow raises his OWN standing. Just speculation, of course. But, often it's the GUILTY MAN that protests the LOUDEST.

I'm not buying it, anyway. And I think most models would also be suspicious. Nothing in life is "free" so I usually suspect ulterior motives. There's just something about the rants that doesn't pass the smell test. A lack of respect for both models and photographers, in general.

But, I speculate...because only his hairdresser knows for sure.

Jeffrey M Fletcher wrote:
I'm not a model but I do know there are a few photographers who I would put in not an hour or two of work but a week or two of work if I could own one of their prints - and I be sure I'd gotten away with a steal.

Absolutely.  Just as there are models who I'd happily give 100 retouched images if that would get me a trade shoot.

The thing is, you just have to get over the fact that *YOU* want to control everything.

No  I  Don't!!!

If  you  think  of  the  Photographer - Model  situation as being similar to  the  Director - Actor  situation  you  would  never think it  presumtious  or  conceited  to  believe  that  a photographer  has  (or should have) total control over  what form  the images that  he or she  gives  out to anyone, including the model.

I suspect it is extremely rare  for actors  to request  un-edited  versions  of  a film,  so that they  can  have someone  work on them,  presumably so that  this  other person can make the actor  appear more important in the film. But  whatever the reason,  a director, or his  editor, would  be insane to hand over un-finished work  to the actor!

Why would  models  presume  more from their  photographers  than  actors  presume  from  their directors?  I  can think of no valid  reason!

You  might  think  the analogy doesn't  apply, since  actors  always get paid...  but  believe me  that is  not always  the case!

Silverstone Productions wrote:
Before the shoot, I offer the model a choice: up to 50 of her favorite images un-edited, or five or six of her favorite images edited. After the shoot, I download the images to my laptop and we look through them and she chooses her favorites. If she wants the un-edited images, then I just burn them to a CD and give them to her right there.

The problem I would have with that is by not providing "finished" images they would be edited (very possibly butchered) by someone else, yet they would still credit me as the photographer. You have lost control of your own images.

Silverstone Productions wrote:
I haven't read every post in this thread, but it's gotten pretty heated in here. I believe that I have solved the problem that divides the two camps.

Before the shoot, I offer the model a choice: up to 50 of her favorite images un-edited, or five or six of her favorite images edited. After the shoot, I download the images to my laptop and we look through them and she chooses her favorites. If she wants the un-edited images, then I just burn them to a CD and give them to her right there. If she wants them edited, then I put them in a separate folder and work on them over the next few days. Then I either email the finished images to the model or send her a CD.

This is just the way that I do shoots, but I've found that it works rather well.

Lol, see previous post.

ArtisticGlamour wrote:

The problem I would have with that is by not providing "finished" images they would be edited (possibly butchered) by someone else, but they would still credit me as the photographer. You have lost control of your own images.

Before I work with a model, I look at her portfolio. Usually she has good to great images. I trust that serious models know the difference between a good image and a butchered image. If she knows how to edit an image or prefers to work with a different retoucher, that is her right. I am not worried about losing control.

As long as I get good images that I can edit and use in my portfolio, she can have her favorite images to use in her own portfolio. As I see it, that is a win/win for everybody.

Silverstone Productions wrote:
I haven't read every post in this thread, but it's gotten pretty heated in here. I believe that I have solved the problem that divides the two camps.

Before the shoot, I offer the model a choice: up to 50 of her favorite images un-edited, or five or six of her favorite images edited. After the shoot, I download the images to my laptop and we look through them and she chooses her favorites. If she wants the un-edited images, then I just burn them to a CD and give them to her right there. If she wants them edited, then I put them in a separate folder and work on them over the next few days. Then I either email the finished images to the model or send her a CD.

This is just the way that I do shoots, but I've found that it works rather well.

People work with me because of what they have seen from me. it is funny that the most established models seem to trust my judgement on which images will be the best to work on and the most amateur models i have worked with ask for everything.

I state before the shoot what i will be giving out. If the model doesn't like it, she/he can walk away.
If they do end up shooting, they have no grounds for complaint.

Don't let the models choose what you do. Let the models choose you because of what you do!

SB Glamour Photos wrote:
People work with me because of what they have seen from me.
...
Don't let the models choose what you do. Let the models choose you because of what you do!

Great advice!

Photography is not my profession, nor do a make very much money from it. I am happy to do mostly TF shoots, but I try to get a little better or learn something new with each shoot. I believe that is the reason for the way I work, and why I don't hold on to my pictures with an iron fist.

I understand that most professional photographers NEVER gives out any RAW files, and I respect that. I am simply saying that if a model wants un-edited images from a shoot, then I do not mind letting her have some. Even if she does butcher an image, that does not mean that I have to use it in my port. If she decides to use a "butchered' image in her port, then that is to her own detriment. Quite possibly someone will edit them in a way that I never would have thought of.

Connor Photography wrote:
Asking a photographer to give all raw images to the model is like a photographer asking the model to have dirty sex with him.  That is NOT customary thing to do for a trade shoot.

I literally spilled water over my laptop. I had not seen it put that way before.

Silverstone Productions wrote:
As long as I get good images that I can edit and use in my portfolio, she can have her favorite images to use in her own portfolio. As I see it, that is a win/win for everybody.

Absolutely cool, if that works for you. It's your choice and it's all negotiable.

My point isn't to say there is a set right/wrong...I'm just trying to help (usually newer) models understand WHY many of us don't give away RAW files, and that it's not an ego problem or that we're being dicks. It's because we want the VERY BEST POSSIBLE image to be put forward...with our names on it.

SB Glamour Photos wrote:
People work with me because of what they have seen from me. it is funny that the most established models seem to trust my judgement on which images will be the best to work on and the most amateur models i have worked with ask for everything.

This.

Silverstone Productions wrote:

Great advice!

Photography is not my profession, nor do a make very much money from it. I am happy to do mostly TF shoots, but I try to get a little better or learn something new with each shoot. I believe that is the reason for the way I work, and why I don't hold on to my pictures with an iron fist.

I understand that most professional photographers NEVER gives out any RAW files, and I respect that. I am simply saying that if a model wants un-edited images from a shoot, then I do not mind letting her have some. Even if she does butcher an image, that does not mean that I have to use it in my port. If she decides to use them in her port, then that is to her own detriment. Quite possibly someone will edit them in a way that I never would have thought of.

I think the problem other photographers see with that is that if she does butcher the image then credits you, it may not be in your port, but it's attached to your name.

Silverstone Productions wrote:
As I see it, that is a win/win for everybody.

Yes, the universe is just that simple.  Girls meet boys, boys meet girls.  They have sex and marry, have a few babies.  They live happily ever after UNTIL they have different objectives. 

I think TF/? is the same.

Connor Photography wrote:
Asking a photographer to give all raw images to the model is like a photographer asking the model to have dirty sex with him.  That is NOT customary thing to do for a trade shoot.

Jojo West wrote:
I literally spilled water over my laptop. I had not seen it put that way before.

I am so sorry, I did not meant to.  But I guard my RAW files like my virginity.  I won't show my pink for anyone. 

BodyartBabes wrote:
LONGGGGG....................

Please stop making forum threads so long. Regardless of differing views, blabbing for 1/4 of a page just pisses people off. The majority of us on this site let the quality of our work validate our opinions. Thread-posts are not about the poster, it's about the ideas/opinions they are sharing. We don't care about the fact you've been shooting since '69 or wtvr. Nobody cares that I was published in-print after 7 months, published in-print in 2 continents after 17 months and 3 days. We care about the content explained briefly in the post, and we sometimes look at the caliber of the posters' work and their accomplishments to decide how heavy to weigh their opinion.

Please stop with the long-assed posts, Scott! Please!!!

IMHO alone;

Ðanny
http://www.dbiphotography.com (Blog On Site) 

Disclaimer: I am not an expert, nor do I claim to be. Anyone who questions the weight of my opinion(s) is free to validate my words based upon their review of my work – which may/may not be supportive.

BodyartBabes wrote:

I'm having a tough time determining which is more dysfunctional, the content of your message or the random use of capitalized words.