Fotografica Gregor wrote:
Uh.... make that 5'9+=   (at size 0/2)

for me anyway, as my main gig is editorial fashion

This is not my idea by the way

http://www.newmodels.com/height.html

but when I am shooting personal projects including fine art nudes, alt and glam,  I am all about proportion

I still like sizes 0-4 for this however

edited to add - I'd shoot with you in a heartbeat for glam and beauty work

And to carry this chain of thought (which I think is far more fruitful than most on this subject have been) further, when I shoot fine art, whether clothed or nude, proportion is much less important than the ability to project a mood and/or the ability to assume interesting shapes and postures.  For pinup, while proportion and physical beauty are important, the ability to project a teasing, flirtatious attitude is far more important.

Which is by way of saying that the limitations imposed by the standards of one genre or another, are far less limiting than the choices of genres that the model makes for herself.  More limited choices equal more restrictions and fewer actual opportunities for success, less limited choices equal fewer restrictions and more actual opportunities for success.  Ultimately, we limit ourselves far more than anything outside of ourselves does.

All IMHO, as always

Aby Sloan wrote:

Well obviously it wasn't Dior or Chanel or whichever big name you can think but I am still proud I was part of it and that they choose me... I was the shortest one as you can think but they didn't make me feel like it and called me again after for more projects! Anyway I am proud of it

Nice! That atmosphere is fun and exciting, isn't it?!

Aby Sloan wrote:
I guess I formulated myself in the wrong way and I should have just wrote "why" that's it!

Because fashion isn't about reality; it's about fantasy.

udor wrote:

Nice! That atmosphere is fun and exciting, isn't it?!

It was great indeed

Aby Sloan wrote:
Not trying to prove anyone wrong... Just saying it isn't fair on shorter girls like me to hear people putting you down... What I mean by saying I will prove them wrong is that I also can do it and DID it even I am not tall... Not trying to be the next Dean Johnson at all!

I am not only talking for me here as I have accomplished quite well I think so far but for other women in my case and god knows there is millions who think the same but are discourage by mean people!

If by "mean," you intone that an established standard should be lowered or altered in some way to even the playing field? Affirmative action for short fashion models? Even affirmative action operates under the premise that the individual is otherwise qualified, despite the contextual-qualifying issue for such [equal] opportunity.

Aby Sloan wrote:

Yes I did manage to catwalk as well for London Fashion Week... pretty Epic I would say and I am only 5'4!

As for Emily I understand what you mean and again sorry if you I offended you

Well then, what are you complaining about??!

Modeling is a tough game. You're judged harshly on your look and given a "no" many times with no explanation whatsoever.

Have you ever seen a designer's sketches? The "models" that they draw out their ideas on are impossibly proportioned, tall and skinny. This is simply the way that THEY want their designs to be seen. So if you want to be angry at someone, be angry at Christian Dior.

You're 5'4". There's plenty of room for you in the greater modeling arena. You just have to find where you fit in best and work that.

Neil Peters Fotografie wrote:
this is mostly practical reasoning for 5'8" - 5'10" limits
but, ya, it is lost in industry wide ignorance
people (agencys) are afraid to change
and the ignorant part is
they don't know why.....
they ignore 3/4 of the beauty in the world
and their own bottom line $$
height, does not matter in print work. only runway.

if you want to be on the cover of a magazine
become a 5'4" movie star / singer
models don't get covers (cept for Cosmo)

now the historical reasoning.....

1.  so the designer only has to bring one dress to the show
     and it fits anyone
2.  many fashion shows use the same 10 models for 10 different designers
     (instead of dealing with 100 models)
     again, their dress's fit any model
3.  most fashion show runways are elevated 3' above the seated audience
     5'8" is really impressive from that perspective
     and, just like a big screeen TV
     5'8", is a bigger picture, so to speak
     you literally, get to see more dress
4.   at the VIP pre-party / post- party of a fashion show
      a 5'8" model stands out in the crowd
5.   tall models tend to be less curvy, ie., model skinny
      and this photographs very well
      without distracting the eye from the dress
      (this perception has changed in the last decade)

i've shot many many fashion shows
and many new designers understand very well
their target audience is 5'1" - 5'6"
....for actually selling dress's....
and they prefer models in this height range
it gives the customer a more realistic view of the dress they might buy

i am shooting a fashion show tonight
we are expecting 1500 people in the audience
not one of the 10 models will be over 5'6"
because Denise Le, the designer
wants it that way ....

it is slowly changing.....

Thanks Neil for this. Actually I think like I said before I may have formulated myself wrong as I am not talking about Runway. Actually I do understand why they want 5'7 and more what I am talking about it is even for print lots of people do not want us shorter girls sadly...BUT of course with a lot of networking I am finding people willing to work with me which is great

RKD Photographic wrote:
Because it's cheaper and more economical to standardise on dress and shoe sizes than have to make samples in a variety of sizes.
There are plenty of great-looking girls that height, so why would they even bother to fit the clothes to the llama when it's way easier to fit the llama to the clothes?

The 'industry standard' height for llamas also happens to coincide with a perfect proportion for viewing said garments 'drape' properly...

1 to all these points.

From an agency POV, although some do indeed make occasional exceptions for a slighty shorter llama with a stunning and unique look, for the most part they have too many applications from girls over 5'7" to need (or want) to look at anybody else. Also, agencies want llamas that can do everything. A girl might be stunningly beautiful but if she's too short for catwalk work that automatically cuts their potential earnings from her in half from day one. Why buy a car that can only do 30mph when there is another equal in every respect that can do 70?

From a photographer's POV, taller girls are easier to photograph tall (although there is plenty that can be shot with shorter llamas) and taller girls do tend to bend and twist in a more interesting way a lot of the time and clothes certainly hang better. That said, I have and still do shoot shorter girls but usually in ways where their height is less of an issue... nudes for instance.


Just my $0.02

Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

Neil Peters Fotografie wrote:
this is mostly practical reasoning for 5'8" - 5'10" limits
but, ya, it is lost in industry wide ignorance
people (agencys) are afraid to change
and the ignorant part is
they don't know why.....
they ignore 3/4 of the beauty in the world

it is slowly changing.....

Sorry Neil, but I do have to slightly disagree about the "slowly changing thing"... in smaller markets, there have always been different requirements for models than in the NYC market.

I too am involved in runway photography (NYC Fashion Week) and involved in fashion show production (Couture Fashion Week) as well as many smaller fashion shows and shoot the small shows as well, were shorter models can be accepted.

But when you are looking at THE only real industry event (except Miami for swimwear) for North America, it's NY Fashion Week... and I bet that you won't find the height requirements changing much.

I shot the picture below solely for the purpose of illustrating the audience at a major event in NY... you don't see a 3 inch elevated runway either:

Chado Ralph Rucci, NY Fashion Week


Now, please don't feel that I am trying to compete with you, etc., but I can talk about my market, because, well... that's were I am making my living, but I know some about smaller markets in closer vicinity to NY..., but I don't know your market... just pointing out differences, because your statement above was very definitive.

Best!

udor

udor wrote:
Sorry Neil, but I do have to slightly disagree about the "slowly changing thing"... in smaller markets, there have always been different requirements for models than in the NYC market.

I too am involved in runway photography (NYC Fashion Week) and involved in fashion show production (Couture Fashion Week) as well as many smaller fashion shows and shoot the small shows as well, were shorter models can be accepted.

But when you are looking at THE only real industry event (except Miami for swimwear) for North America, it's NY Fashion Week... and I bet that you won't find the height requirements changing much.

I shot the picture below solely for the purpose of illustrating the audience at a major event in NY... you don't see a 3 inch elevated runway either:

Chado Ralph Rucci, NY Fashion Week


Now, please don't feel that I am trying to compete with you, etc., but I can talk about my market, because, well... that's were I am making my living, but I know some about smaller markets in closer vicinity to NY..., but I don't know your market... just pointing out differences, because your statement above was very definitive.

Best!

udor

i understand very well Udor, and thank you !
i guess i should emphasize .... slowly, as extremely slowly ....

if there is no 3 foot elevated runway
then 5'8" becomes critical
since most of the audience would literally
miss the show

in the big markets like NY
it's not difficult to find 100 tall models
not as easy in small markets like Arizona

most of the fashion scenes are small markets
...but the fashion world...
evolves around the big markets
and you are 100% right
that perspective will not change anytime soon....

thank you sir

Aby Sloan wrote:
I guess I formulated myself in the wrong way and I should have just wrote "why" that's it!

Sorry if I offended some of you and you didn't understand my point! Wasn't my intention...

First off I love love love how you have apologized two or three times with no one catching it or acknowledging it at all....

I am 5'4 I know ill never be a fashion model and I am okay with that. I have been a full time model for the last year and I have modeled for over 5 years. I had a few agencies want to sign me but I didn't like what they offered or who they were. This doesn't get you down it inspires you to keep going! After my 500th no I made my own epk, cd, and my next move is targeting agencies who take us freaks (for being short;)

Just do you and if you want to talk PM me... Ppl here get too heated sometimes since they feel their livelihood is being attacked, everyone here has something to prove or they would t be here. I got chewed out by a commercial agent for even having MM lol you can't win them all sweetie and the more you just do you the happier you will be!

AnnaLisaZ wrote:

First off I love love love how you have apologized two or three times with no one catching it or acknowledging it at all....

Thanks for noticing... x

Aby Sloan wrote:
Emily, I am not attacking nobody... I am just saying my concern and think that sometimes doors should be open wider... sorry if I offended you, wasn't my intention at all xx

There are openings for shorter girls but it is obviously more difficult.

You will get those saying here it is all about drape and sample sizes but that is based on assumption and it's incorrect. Samples are made on fitting models who frequently are not industry standard height. Sometimes they are. Then that does come into play. I can't model a floor length dress made on a 5ft 11 in model. So the openings for us shorter girls are limited a little by those factors.

But there are plenty of opportunities open. Fitting modelling is a possibility. You have to have the exact meaurements they seek and height doesn't always come into it. Fit jobs are frequently advertised on the fashion houses website under careers. Probably the only way in to the bigger fashion houses. Then there are opportunities for ads and catalogues for local boutiques, small designers and editorial for lifestyle magazines etc. Quite a lot actually simply because small designers and boutiques generally can't afford agency models. It is still competitive because agency models will go for these castings too. So you are always up against it but if they like your look you have a chance. Then there are niche markets like vintage/retro. Lingerie and swimwear height is also less of a factor. Then obviously jewellery, millinery and cosmetics. You also have fashion modelling in the far east which uses shorter models as do the designers from that region in the market here.

You have to have determination and be realistic. Look for castings where height or industry standard is not stipulated. Look for fitting jobs. You are in London which is a great advantage. But don't expect to bang on the front door because the snotty nosed butler isn't going to let you in. With fit modelling you can climb in through the back window and work your way up from the kitchen. We shorter models are never going to work runway or editorial at top level but if fashion is what interests you you can get work in the backrooms and at lower and niche levels. And there is a lot of work there for us to hoover up. Fashion is a very big house and plenty goes on in the back rooms. What many people here think of as fashion - ie high fashion editorial modelling - is just the pinnacle of a very large pyramid.

model emily  wrote:

Oh, I'm sorry - I thought we were talking about the fashion industry here, not hobbying.

In that case, do what you will.

And this is what creates such a ridiculous argument on MM.

The OP is saying "it's not fair" that only 5'9" models are hired as fashion/runway models. Shorter women are closer to the average size woman.

The reason she thinks it's not fair is because she thinks those standards are some arbitrary policy incorporated by some random person in the industry (and because she is on the short end of the standard). If she was 6'0" I'm sure she'd have no problem with the standard.

Regardless, it's the people who design the clothes that have set the standard because those are the models who look best in their sample designs. It isn't discriminatory. Presenting the design in a manner which promotes its sale is effective business.

So, what would be "fair" to the OP? Forcing designers to change? Lowering their standards so that every 5'2" 150 lb woman in world can walk the runway in their designs? You think that's what real women want? No, they don't.

It's a simple of fact of marketing that you don't market to who people are, but who they want to be and how they want to see themselves. An overweight woman from Tulsa doesn't want reality. She wants vanity sizing...and she wants to fantasize.

The other part of the argument is photographers coming in and saying, "I don't care about height as long as she's ." That's wonderful. That's the reason so many non-standard models on MM actually make some money and schedule some shoots. Because these photographers don't require standard fashion models. They're shooting as a hobby and only looking to satisfy their own needs. That's great. But don't argue that when a model is asking about making it in the fashion/runway world...it's a completely separate avenue of modeling and photography.

Let me ask the OP...you think it's unfair a 5'4" model can't make it in fashion/runway work. Much of the world's population, especially in America, is obese. Is it unfair that morbidly obese women aren't hired for fashion? Do you also think it's unfair that a 4'11", 180lb woman isn't parading the catwalk? Or is it only short women because that's the category you fall?

Eliza C wrote:
I can't model a floor length dress made on a 5ft 11 in model. So the openings for us shorter girls are limited a little by those factors.

But there are plenty of opportunities open. Fitting modelling is a possibility.

Exactly, considering that runway modeling is only about 2% of the jobs that are available for models... that means that there are 98% of opportunities to model as a hobby, part-time or full time in a huge segment...

RKD Photographic wrote:
Because it's cheaper and more economical to standardise on dress and shoe sizes than have to make samples in a variety of sizes.
There are plenty of great-looking girls that height, so why would they even bother to fit the clothes to the model when it's way easier to fit the model to the clothes?

The 'industry standard' height for models also happens to coincide with a perfect proportion for viewing said garments 'drape' properly...

Because the fit models aren't actually all industry standard.
And nobody looks better in the clothes than the girls they were made on.

So actually the assumption that fit models are industry standard is a false one.

There are other factors but that isn't one of them. Drape and movement is different and naturally longer legs can make the clothes float better down a runway generally than shorter ones.

I found a 5ft 2" model here on MM who did fit for VS. That of course doesn't mean she'd do runway for them. But I bet she looks good in the bras and may have done some merch cat shoots.

Moore Photo Graphix wrote:


Last time I check, modeling and fairness is like oil and water and art and good taste! They don't go together no matter how matter how fast you spin the blender. This article explains it.

http://modelbitch.blogspot.com/2011/05/ … e-you.html

The fashion industry is in the business of selling fantasies, just look at those Axe body and hair products for men as an example. Just because no one is booking for fashion work doesn't make them mean people. They felt you weren't the model they were looking for that specific project/genre. There are other genres of modeling available like glamour and fine art. To be success in modeling, you need to know your market and knowing this business is about preferences.

Are you accusing me of asking a question and comparing me to that link?
That's very nice....
I guess I will not take part of this thread anymore! Once again I will apologize for posting this... I had a question but turned it the wrong way!...

Aby Sloan wrote:
WHY?

Honestly, Aby, I don't know.

Victoria's Secret will only take 5'7" and up, but Old Navy is featuring petites & real women in their latest ad's/promotional/commercial photos & videos.

My belief is that modeling is an art and like any art, it is in the eye of the beholder, it is the standard that the company/designer set. I will never work for Vicky Secrets, but I have been blessed enough to wear couture & casual frocks from local, international & national designers.

I understand that at 5'2" I will never do runway successfully and if I get asked to do so, its a local, mix art gig.

Commercial modeling is illusive as some consider it a combination of acting/modeling and others consider it catalogue modeling.

Aby, I say do what you feel is best and if you want to change the industry standard...Im with ya, girl!

Have you seen BellaPetite.com? They are a magazine run by successful petite model, Ann Lauren..they have featured ANTM petite Sundi, celebrity petites such as the Kardashian sisters, Fergie, Gaga, Reese Witherspoon, ect...

Perhaps the opportunities for petite/short models are far and between, but they are there. Some settle for what they can succeed in (parts modeling, beauty, artistic, implied, nude) and others, as yourself, strive to not box themselves into a category and they pursue modeling with an open mind (including pursuing fashion, even if others may consider it a waist of time or effort lost as the "standard" is so high)....

Like I said, modeling for me is art and to each their own.

Keep being awesome!

Melodye Joy wrote:
Honestly, Aby, I don't know.

Victoria's Secret will only take 5'7" and up, but Old Navy is featuring petites

Aby Sloan wrote:

Cheers melody, Am out of here now! I feel like I made a mistake to post this

I have felt the same when asking, but don't let it deter you...we'd never get any ideas, critique, suggestions if we didn't ask. *hugs*

Have a wonderful weekend!

udor wrote:
Exactly, considering that runway modeling is only about 2% of the jobs that are available for models... that means that there are 98% of opportunities to model as a hobby, part-time or full time in a huge segment...

Yes - but what is not recognised is that 98% is in fashion - not fine art nude or promo modelling or whatever (though it is possible to do a bit of everything) those are different cakes.

Local photographer wants model for local boutique ad and the budget isn't there for agency model. Happens every day of the week for thousands of girls across virtually every town or city in the western world that has boutiques and designers. A lot of those girls are nowhere near 5ft 9" . Now the thing is many of you guys don't call that 'fashion' modelling because it isn't the top tier. But it is modelling and it's fashion  and it pays so I don't know what else you'd call it. I don't like the constant insinuation that we are aspiring to the top tier and need to get our feet back on the ground and our tits out to make money. I don't have an issue with that but since I make more money modelling clothing that art modelling and am only 5ft 6ins then I know there's plenty of work out there. At the same time I acknowledge that it is virtually impossible to get in that top tier if one is on the short side. But then it's almost impossible to get to it if you are industry standard too. Only a tiny minority make that and few of us have that kind of aspiration.

But there is no reason the rest of us can't do the local boutique, small designer, fitting, lifestyle mag, petite, swimwear/lingerie, retro website catalogue, millinery/jewellery etc etc. or even fitting modelling for the top houses.

Melodye Joy wrote:

Honestly, Aby, I don't know.

Victoria's Secret will only take 5'7" and up, but Old Navy is featuring petites & real women in their latest ad's/promotional/commercial photos & videos.

My belief is that modeling is an art and like any art, it is in the eye of the beholder, it is the standard that the company/designer set. I will never work for Vicky Secrets, but I have been blessed enough to wear couture & casual frocks from local, international & national designers.

I understand that at 5'2" I will never do runway successfully and if I get asked to do so, its a local, mix art gig.

Commercial modeling is illusive as some consider it a combination of acting/modeling and others consider it catalogue modeling.

Aby, I say do what you feel is best and if you want to change the industry standard...Im with ya, girl!

Have you seen BellaPetite.com? They are a magazine run by successful petite model, Ann Lauren..they have featured ANTM petite Sundi, celebrity petites such as the Kardashian sisters, Fergie, Gaga, Reese Witherspoon, ect...

Perhaps the opportunities for petite/short models are far and between, but they are there. Some settle for what they can succeed in (parts modeling, beauty, artistic, implied, nude) and others, as yourself, strive to not box themselves into a category and they pursue modeling with an open mind (including pursuing fashion, even if others may consider it a waist of time or effort lost as the "standard" is so high)....

Like I said, modeling for me is art and to each their own.

Keep being awesome!

5'10" fashion standard models are also 'real women' last I checked...

AJScalzitti wrote:

5'10" fashion standard models are also 'real women' last I checked...

That is correct AJScalzitti, my meaning was everyday, real women. Perhaps she has curves, perhaps she is 'short' or petite, without expertise or little knowledge of modeling. My meaning was that some, such as Old Navy, has come to make use of a variety of models, rather than stick to "standard".

I didn't mean that someone 5'10" wasn't real. My apologies if that got lost in translation.

Aby Sloan wrote:
Are you accusing me of asking a question and comparing me to that link?
That's very nice....
I guess I will not take part of this thread anymore! Once again I will apologize for posting this... I had a question but turned it the wrong way!...

No? I was responding to the thread, and wanted to share that link with you to get a better understanding of how the modeling business works. If you did read it, there's a section there that talks about how modeling is not a business based on fairness. Let's go back to the Axe example I gave earlier. If you saw any of their ads, they goal was sell guys on the idea that using their products will help them attract ladies. I've seen threads like before, and I can tell that most, if not all are more interested with getting answer that'll make them happy instead of hearing the inconvenient truth of business.

nyk fury wrote:
all you shorties should do dark, arty stuff with me. the hell with fashion.

I'd be more inclined to buy fashion magazines if they were shot by you. Intriguing stuff.

But don't call us shorties or we will get a bit darker in temper than you may like us

Eliza C wrote:
I'd be more inclined to buy fashion magazines if they were shot by you. Intriguing stuff.

But don't call us shorties or we will get a bit darker in temper than you may like us

i've been told that agencies would never let me near their models. i could use some dark temper in my future shoots.

Moore Photo Graphix wrote:
No? I was responding to the thread, and wanted to share that link with you to get a better understanding of how the modeling business works. If you did read it, there's a section there that talks about how modeling is not a business based on fairness. Let's go back to the Axe example I gave earlier. If you saw any of their ads, they goal was sell guys on the idea that using their products will help them attract ladies. I've seen threads like before, and I can tell that most, if not all are more interested with getting answer that'll make them happy instead of hearing the inconvenient truth of business.

How is Axe fashion?

It's deodorant. Nothing to do with fashion modelling.

I'm 5ft 6 ins and worked almost full time in a pretty well known couture fashion house and did runway for them. That is an inconvenient truth and there are dozens of girls here with similar experiences.

A lot of work for models in the fashion industry has nothing to do with deodorant ad campaigns. Or even photography. Maybe that is why many of you don't know so much about it. I am sure that you know the photography part of it but that isn't where the modelling is necessarily.

nyk fury wrote:

i've been told that agencies would never let me near their models. i could use some dark temper in my future shoots.

I feel I want to see the movie your pictures appear to be telling the narrative of. That is visonary. A dark vision but nicely....lit.

Eliza C wrote:
I feel I want to see the movie your pictures appear to be telling the narrative of. That is visonary. A dark vision but nicely....lit.

the closest thing to that in my mind is guillermo del toro. or maybe that is just wishful thinking.