La Lana  wrote:
a lot of designers like thin models, because their bodies don't take attention from the outfits.

meh I think that's some sort of urban myth. Sure it's about the clothes, not the model, but at the same time the right model also makes the clothes. more often than not they have quite stunning bodies, and those bodies definitely get attention. there's plenty of other bodytypes that also wouldn't take attention from the outfits, it's not like boobs make it impossible to look at clothes you know...

I just learned it's nothing personal. I know plenty of designers, and plenty of them think my type of bodytype (to name one) is fabulous. They would never hire me for a show though, but that's okay, they have there reasons.
but the right model...she can draw attention to her, the way she looks, the way she moves, and that draws attentions to the clothes as well. So the attentiontheory...I'm not buying it.

-B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote:

I believe I know what he means.

Shorter girls (as long as they are well proportioned) can look great in many outfits, especially lingerie, and can look fantastic nude. No question.

However, the advantage of a tall skinny model from a photographer's perspective is twofold:-

a) They look great in almost everything and obviously also nude. It's very hard to find an outfit that a tall skinny model can't model.

b) With or without clothes, the extra length of their limbs and torso combined with their skinniness means that they are generally more bendable and can make more interesting shapes with more space between the angles, limbs and torso than a more compact model. If you wanted to make the largest number of interesting shapes out of a pipe-cleaner, would you use a short one or a long one?



Just my $0.02

Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

Probably a short one...considering most pro gymnasts are short.  Some of the most bendable people you could think of.  Not to mention performers in cirque de soleil...had a chance to meet a few of the performers...short as can be.

Anna Adrielle wrote:

meh I think that's some sort of urban myth. Sure it's about the clothes, not the model, but at the same time the right model also makes the clothes. more often than not they have quite stunning bodies, and those bodies definitely get attention. there's plenty of other bodytypes that also wouldn't take attention from the outfits, it's not like boobs make it impossible to look at clothes you know...

I just learned it's nothing personal. I know plenty of designers, and plenty of them think my type of bodytype (to name one) is fabulous. They would never hire me for a show though, but that's okay, they have there reasons.
but the right model...she can draw attention to her, the way she looks, the way she moves, and that draws attentions to the clothes as well. So the attentiontheory...I'm not buying it.

I read it in a blog by Ford models...they gave a large hint that that's why designers like thinner girls...

Anna Adrielle wrote:

meh I think that's some sort of urban myth. Sure it's about the clothes, not the model, but at the same time the right model also makes the clothes. more often than not they have quite stunning bodies, and those bodies definitely get attention. there's plenty of other bodytypes that also wouldn't take attention from the outfits, it's not like boobs make it impossible to look at clothes you know...

I just learned it's nothing personal. I know plenty of designers, and plenty of them think my type of bodytype (to name one) is fabulous. They would never hire me for a show though, but that's okay, they have there reasons.
but the right model...she can draw attention to her, the way she looks, the way she moves, and that draws attentions to the clothes as well. So the attentiontheory...I'm not buying it.

A lot of designers by me use people more my height, but my boobs will probably always be too big...even when I was a 0 I was a full C cup...that's okay my body is more suited for glamour.

Anna Adrielle wrote:
there are plenty of other opportunities for you out there!

Absolutely! 


It is far better to concentrate on what you can do rather than dwell on what you can't.  I wish people understood just how unattractive whining and complaining really is.  Before the Internet and the digital revolution, going back iin the days when I could only shoot film ... I was involved in running casting calls for models for a local designer.  I mainly booked models who were tall, but I made a few exceptions.  Not that I only shot fashion, but I was under the impressin that models needed to be tall.

However in recent years, I've been shooting with so many more models that are shorter than 5' 8" ... some as short as barely 5' tall!  Of course my focus has changed as I am shooting more bikini, glamour, commercial and editorial work than fashion.  My thoughts are that I don't even consider height when deciding to shoot with models.  So now that people have me thinking about it, I look at my portfolio here on MM and realize that a the vast majority of my images are of models 5' 6" or shorter.  There are plenty of opportunities to shoot with me regardless of your height!

Anna Adrielle wrote:
meh I think that's some sort of urban myth. Sure it's about the clothes, not the model, but at the same time the right model also makes the clothes. more often than not they have quite stunning bodies, and those bodies definitely get attention. there's plenty of other bodytypes that also wouldn't take attention from the outfits, it's not like boobs make it impossible to look at clothes you know...

I just learned it's nothing personal. I know plenty of designers, and plenty of them think my type of bodytype (to name one) is fabulous. They would never hire me for a show though, but that's okay, they have there reasons.
but the right model...she can draw attention to her, the way she looks, the way she moves, and that draws attentions to the clothes as well. So the attentiontheory...I'm not buying it.

I just worked with one of my favorite models who is ... I don't know?  5' 4" or 5" and with a full figure that is typical of an African American woman which she is.  Kelda has nice curves.  She is a rap artist and has met up with a great designer who makes clothing by hand for real women!  Her clothing line is awesome in how wonderful it makes women with figures look!  I love women with curves! 

I'll be uploading some images of her soon!

llama emily  wrote:
Wow. 

As a girl who is 5'7", this is very offensive.

I'm tired of always hearing from short curvy girls that "tall and thin" isn't pretty.  (Or worse, it's "wrong").

Fashion is an industry that (currently) FAVORS this look.  It is an industry you won't change by yourself, but collectively "society" MAY change over time -- maybe.   There are good reasons why height standards exist in the industry, and you should do more research on this BUSINESS before coming in here on your soapbox telling everyone what's "wrong".

(For your information, too -- 5'7" is short.  Fashion starts around 5'9" and prefers 5'10" .)

I agree...

Lets not "hate" on tall thin women, okay? I've heard enough of that...Really, you don't hear tall thin girls/ladies/woman/chicks "hating" on those who are not.

Its not kind to do the reverse, either.
Jen
p.s. soapbox put away now...

La Lana  wrote:
A lot of designers by me use people more my height, but my boobs will probably always be too big...even when I was a 0 I was a full C cup...that's okay my body is more suited for glamour.

Or bridal too, actually.
Jen

Aby Sloan wrote:

Thanks for noticing... x

Hello,

I saw it too and want to likewise state that "no offense was taken..."

As I read through the thread I do not see any "hating" on tall girls at all.

Just a clear question of "why?"


Jen

Aby Sloan wrote:
WHY?

Don't worry Aby you're too old anyway

Modeling for high-fashion agencies is a lot like wanting to play in the NBA or WNBA. There are millions and millions of young men and women who would love to play professionally, however only a few thousand ever actually get to play professionally and of those a dozen to two dozen get to be international stars

udor wrote:

Can you be a little bit more condescending and insulting to a plethora of naturally tall and slender women on the planet?!

Thank you.
From, a real woman.
Jen

Eliza C wrote:
...

Tall skinny models do not look so great in anything sleeveless. Or swimwear or lingerie. You may think so - but generally that is one industry standard that gives the smaller girls a chance. The tall are regarded as looking gangly and awkward.

Likewise your skinny model. I know you like shooting them Stefano but sometimes such models if they haven't got an arse can look shit for example in pencil skirts and a corset. Of course they can be pinned. But then why is it a problem to pin a hem on a shorter model?

The feminine shape rather than androgenous clothes horse is why there is room for the retro figured model and plenty of girls making money from that too.

...

OH!
You are just pleasant all over tonight...well then, I will just choose to leave my uncovered arms and arse in my port regardless.
Jen
p.s. and yes, my stats are current in my port....that is my height and those are my measurements...are you saying that I am an androgenous non woman? Oh, how kind? not.

Aby Sloan wrote:
WHY?

I usually hear 5'9"+.

I have a chance! Whoo-hoo!

Anna Adrielle wrote:

meh I think that's some sort of urban myth. Sure it's about the clothes, not the model, but at the same time the right model also makes the clothes. more often than not they have quite stunning bodies, and those bodies definitely get attention. there's plenty of other bodytypes that also wouldn't take attention from the outfits, it's not like boobs make it impossible to look at clothes you know...

I just learned it's nothing personal. I know plenty of designers, and plenty of them think my type of bodytype (to name one) is fabulous. They would never hire me for a show though, but that's okay, they have there reasons.
but the right model...she can draw attention to her, the way she looks, the way she moves, and that draws attentions to the clothes as well. So the attentiontheory...I'm not buying it.

So what if I am casting a campaign?

1. I am shooting sample sizes. These outfits are made in advance to a specific size, they cannot be altered because there is no time to alter them AND once altered they could not be pulled by any stylist for any other editorial because they would not longer be SAMPLE SIZE.

2. I would need 3-6 models. They would need to be interchangeable. They would need to work well in a group, by themselves and paired. Height is important because I can't have one very tall and on very small model together.

3. MONEY- Every change in a uniform system costs money. And while a very very few smaller girls might make good fashion models, a lot of taller girls make great fashion models. In a system that relies on uniformity for the pulls and group shots why would you decide to use all shorter models when they do not as a group look as good as taller models in the clothes?

Uniformity, it works for a lot of performance related fields, like for example the Rockettes. At 5 foot 4 the OP could not be a Rockette,

via their website

"ROCKETTES REQUIREMENTS

ROCKETTES must be between 5'6" and 5'10 1/2" tall (measurements will be taken in stocking feet). Rockettes candidates must be proficient in jazz and tap. To find out more about the Rockettes, please visit Rockettes.com.


ENSEMBLE/PRINCIPAL REQUIREMENTS

MALE AND FEMALE DANCERS must be proficient in jazz and ballet. Pointe work is a plus, but not required, for Female Dancers. Male and Female Dancers will be taught a song as part of the audition....



GIRLS (CLARA) must be between 7 and 14 years old and be 4'10" and under. All GIRLS must be strong in ballet, able to work en pointe (having had at least once year of experience en pointe) and have some jazz dance ability. They must bring their pointe shoes with them to audition. There will be no exceptions.



LITTLE PEOPLE PERFORMERS must be adults under 4'10" tall, agile, move well to music and be able to project their voice and personality. Auditioning is STRONGLY ENCOURAGED, but LITTLE PEOPLE PERFORMERS ONLY may submit a video by mail (Check back for more details in February 2013).


Principal Roles are not cast by open audition. Submissions are accepted only through talent agents in response to published breakdowns.

There are NO EXCEPTIONS to any of the role requirements listed on this website. If you do not fit any of these requirements, unfortunately there are no roles available for you in the Radio City Christmas Spectacular. 

PLEASE NOTE:  ANY AUDITION DATES AND TIMES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. PLEASE CHECK BACK TO THIS WEBSITE REGULARLY FOR UPDATES. Radio City assumes no liability as a result of schedule changes.

Feel free to pass this information along or post a link to this webpage.

Thank you for your interest auditioning for the Radio City Christmas Spectacular"

Michael Pandolfo wrote:

Are you under the impression that the clothes you make look so good are designed by top fashion houses that required fashion designers and agency-standard models? You're talking about a pair of Levi's and a crop top, not haute-couture.

And no, you don't make the clothes look good. The clothes were manufactured to make YOU look good. You took no part in the design, manufacture, fitting, purchasing decisions or marketing of those garments.

Your part in the equation was only in the selection of the proper attire. Looking good in what you choose to wear doesn't make one a fashion mogul...or a model.

That's where we are now? Axe Body Spray and picking out a pair of jeans at Forever 21 is fashion?

well.. jeans and a shirt is certainly what the real world buys : )

im trying to say its foolish to say that only tall models look good in the fashion industry, when we all quite clearly wear clothes. and we DO NOT wear "haute-couture" everyday..   And CURVE is sexy... and certainly makes a corset look gorgeous!! a dress look FLATTERING.   when you have no curve, how can you display your works "flatter factor"?

If the clothes were manufactured to make me look good, why is it.. i can still look better naked?  (no clothing garment is as beautiful as the human flesh... im sorry.. do you have sex with your partners in haute-couture on a regular basis?..)

i suppose we can only ask... WHY is haute-couture necessary?

by the way.. i guess these clothes were only manufactured to make tall models look good? maybe this is just the limitation of not so good designers?   there are not a lot of tall women in the world... and why do we need sooo many designers for them?

Just like... the world is only becoming more obese... the fashion industry needs to learn some innovation!! start making a clothing line for the obese people.. lets be honest, 64% of the average american population is  obese..

I would love to see a designer make an obese woman cry because she looks so god damn good in her "haute-couture" outfit...  is there something so wrong with this? it seems everyone has a hate on for the overweight people.

(not trying to say that fashion designers do not have awesome and wicked designs... but id like to see some diversity in size and shape.. it would certainly intrigue me more.. its the 21st century.)

Star wrote:

So what if I am casting a campaign?

1. I am shooting sample sizes. These outfits are made in advance to a specific size, they cannot be altered because there is no time to alter them AND once altered they could not be pulled by any stylist for any other editorial because they would not longer be SAMPLE SIZE.

2. I would need 3-6 models. They would need to be interchangeable. They would need to work well in a group, by themselves and paired. Height is important because I can't have one very tall and on very small model together.

3. MONEY- Every change in a uniform system costs money. And while a very very few smaller girls might make good fashion models, a lot of taller girls make great fashion models. In a system that relies on uniformity for the pulls and group shots why would you decide to use all shorter models when they do not as a group look as good as taller models in the clothes?

Uniformity, it works for a lot of performance related fields, like for example the Rockettes. At 5 foot 4 the OP could not be a Rockette,

via their website

"ROCKETTES REQUIREMENTS

ROCKETTES must be between 5'6" and 5'10 1/2" tall (measurements will be taken in stocking feet). Rockettes candidates must be proficient in jazz and tap. To find out more about the Rockettes, please visit Rockettes.com.


ENSEMBLE/PRINCIPAL REQUIREMENTS

MALE AND FEMALE DANCERS must be proficient in jazz and ballet. Pointe work is a plus, but not required, for Female Dancers. Male and Female Dancers will be taught a song as part of the audition....



GIRLS (CLARA) must be between 7 and 14 years old and be 4'10" and under. All GIRLS must be strong in ballet, able to work en pointe (having had at least once year of experience en pointe) and have some jazz dance ability. They must bring their pointe shoes with them to audition. There will be no exceptions.



LITTLE PEOPLE PERFORMERS must be adults under 4'10" tall, agile, move well to music and be able to project their voice and personality. Auditioning is STRONGLY ENCOURAGED, but LITTLE PEOPLE PERFORMERS ONLY may submit a video by mail (Check back for more details in February 2013).


Principal Roles are not cast by open audition. Submissions are accepted only through talent agents in response to published breakdowns.

There are NO EXCEPTIONS to any of the role requirements listed on this website. If you do not fit any of these requirements, unfortunately there are no roles available for you in the Radio City Christmas Spectacular. 

PLEASE NOTE:  ANY AUDITION DATES AND TIMES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. PLEASE CHECK BACK TO THIS WEBSITE REGULARLY FOR UPDATES. Radio City assumes no liability as a result of schedule changes.

Feel free to pass this information along or post a link to this webpage.

Thank you for your interest auditioning for the Radio City Christmas Spectacular"

OK...

so we have stated that...

there is one set size.

why do they chose the MOST UNCOMMON size among the mjority of women exactly? 


if you want MORE INTERCHANGABLE models.. with the SAME HEIGHT...



wouldnt you choose the more COMMON HEIGHT among the variety of women?

sounds like someone doesnt know how to market themselves to the real world..? but rather market themselves into this whole "red carpet celebrity" scam that everyone buys into.. because the fashion industry created such high standards people lose their confidence, and self esteem for false reasons, because the fashion industry is all FAKE, retouching, acting, the behind the scenes drama, the scams, the way money is laundered....

i think i will stay in this industry HAPPILY as a hobbiest anyways.. : )

no need to be fed to the dogs!

Patrick Walberg wrote:
Kelda has nice curves. [...] a great designer who makes clothing by hand for real women!  Her clothing line is awesome in how wonderful it makes women with figures look!  I love women with curves! 

Oh Patrick... why had you to use this stereotype that "real women have curves"? 

This is so insulting to other women who are tall and slender (e.g. yoga body) and being teased by the 2/3rd overweight population...

You know that I respect you for years!

Shon D.- Homme wrote:
Also, fashion models do have curves. 34-24-34 is pretty curvy.

YES!  Exactly!

A woman with those measurements and standing 5'9" is slender, yet curvy!

A friend of mine has those measurements and is a size 0... but she has a naturally 23" waist... man... she has a total hourglass figure!

Eridu wrote:
I have no background in engineering or astronomy but, I want to plan the frst manned mision to Mars. I feel as if the opportunities for those who have been sci-fi enthisiasts their entire lives should include the chance of planning such missions.

WTF?

*claps*

Sugar Sharai wrote:

OK...

so we have stated that...

there is one set size.

why do they chose the MOST UNCOMMON size among the mjority of women exactly? 


if you want MORE INTERCHANGABLE models.. with the SAME HEIGHT...



wouldnt you choose the more COMMON HEIGHT among the variety of women?

sounds like someone doesnt know how to market themselves to the real world..? but rather market themselves into this whole "red carpet celebrity" scam that everyone buys into.. because the fashion industry created such high standards people lose their confidence, and self esteem for false reasons, because the fashion industry is all FAKE, retouching, acting, the behind the scenes drama, the scams, the way money is laundered....

i think i will stay in this industry HAPPILY as a hobbiest anyways.. : )

no need to be fed to the dogs!

Why would any artist aim for common when they could have extraordinary? How exciting would sports be if they used average people? If common people sold clothes, or movies, or tv shows than wouldn't the people casting cast common people?

Guess what, they don't. This is a business and the people involved in this business gain nothing by "forcing" consumers to endure tall beautiful models in ads and editorials etc...

Shon D.- Homme wrote:
Fashion designers ain't here to cater to you, though.

very few fashion designers are here in the first place ( at least commercially viable ones )

MyrnaByrna wrote:
OH!
You are just pleasant all over tonight...well then, I will just choose to leave my uncovered arms and arse in my port regardless.
Jen
p.s. and yes, my stats are current in my port....that is my height and those are my measurements...are you saying that I am an androgenous non woman? Oh, how kind? not.

No I am not.

I am saying that the industry regards taller models with less curves as not necessarily suitable for lingerie and swimwear. That doesn't mean I think it and there are notable exceptions to that just as there are shorter models working on runways that carry clothes particularly well despite their lack of height.

With retro clothing the fashion companies often look for curvier girls. No secret about that either. There are certain clothes that don't suit tall lean figures without curves the same as there are certain clothes that don't look good on shorter girls.

And there are certain times for certain roles. For example you may carry a dress down a runway well while I may be chosen to wear the same dress at a trade show to speak and demonstrate it. Another model will get the catalogue shoot and another the campaign. The dress is the same. We do different things in it.

That isn't an insult to anyone.

ChiMo wrote:
Depending on who you talk to, between 50% and 80% of
communication is done through body language.

So one could think of those taller models as having a much
louder "voice" on the printed page.

They are all A4 on the printed page.

Anna Adrielle wrote:
fit modelling and showroom also often goes through an agency (I know that from working fit modellling and showroom myself, and from girls from agencies). so that's that. And sure there's are opportunities out there outside of agencies, if you look for them, or if they happen to fall into your lap ( because you happened to stumble across an ad in the newspaper, for instance).
Honestly, both fit and showroom pay good money, but it's hard work, kinda boring, and long days (especially showroom, fit is okay). Not the glitz and glam people are hoping for. Which is okay. but if I was a shortie looking for a bit of fame and glory, I'd much rather go freelance and make fabulous art nudes and travel the country and experience all these fabulous things then to work everyday as a fitmodel and have designers (lol) "hand chalk all over me day in day out".

I like fashion. So for me there was nothing better than working in the fit environment with a great design team. It is rather nice having the creative director ring me up now and again even now. The design team asking me back. So obviously they appreciated me too. I never once had a boring day that is for sure. And I got to do runway with Premier girls on £5k a day but it was me having champagne in the office afterwards with the boss and getting thanked. And the money is good. Talking to some agency girls they say they sometimes don't get a job for two months. I was working every day and that is what I like. Amazing people on meets daily. Great fun too when the mail boy comes into the office and there are a couple of fit models in various states of undress. I could write a book on it but can't. Just to say I thoroughly enjoyed it because I am interested in the fashion process and business. That is NOT necessarily the same buisness as fashion photography and editorial modelling. And if a model wants fame and glory it's true that isn't for them. BUT I think it is possible realistic and interesting for iothers too. NEVER a dull moment that is for sure. But yes hard work.

My objective was to earn a living as a model. It was never to seek fame and glory as a shortie. I did that starting with Art modelling but then achieving it mainly through Agent Provocateur. The experience was wonderful and I only left it to pursue my academic career. I learned so much about fashion while I was there that Agency girls don't necessarily see. Modelling the clothes is for me less interesting than having them designed on me. It's kind of weird knowing the corset cut was made on my body when I see them in the campaigns and shops.

There are fit modelling agencies yes. But just like the photography agencies a lot of companies will source their own models. Have a look on fashion company websites. And even the classifieds in newspapers particularly where you may see six fashion jobs advertised in one ad. They want someone in human resources, one shop mamager, three sales staff and a fit model that kind of thing. I never even bothered applying to a fit agency.

Star wrote:

So what if I am casting a campaign?

1. I am shooting sample sizes. These outfits are made in advance to a specific size, they cannot be altered because there is no time to alter them AND once altered they could not be pulled by any stylist for any other editorial because they would not longer be SAMPLE SIZE.

2. I would need 3-6 models. They would need to be interchangeable. They would need to work well in a group, by themselves and paired. Height is important because I can't have one very tall and on very small model together.

3. MONEY- Every change in a uniform system costs money. And while a very very few smaller girls might make good fashion models, a lot of taller girls make great fashion models. In a system that relies on uniformity for the pulls and group shots why would you decide to use all shorter models when they do not as a group look as good as taller models in the clothes?

Uniformity, it works for a lot of performance related fields, like for example the Rockettes. At 5 foot 4 the OP could not be a Rockette,

I never said anything about it being okay that models can be short. They're all pretty much the same standardsize and roughly the same height. What I said was is that I dont't really believe in this concept of "the models are there not to draw the focus on themselves, all the focus goes to the clothes".
If you did a casting, which girl would you pick:
the girl that is toally unnoticeable
the girl that has that "something" that just draws the attention to her, and then that attention also goes to what she's wearing and how it moves.

I think being unnoticeable is one of the worst things that could happen to you as a model.

Star wrote:
Why would any artist aim for common when they could have extraordinary? How exciting would sports be if they used average people? If common people sold clothes, or movies, or tv shows than wouldn't the people casting cast common people?

Guess what, they don't. This is a business and the people involved in this business gain nothing by "forcing" consumers to endure tall beautiful models in ads and editorials etc...

Unfortunately - and note I say unfortunately - the trend now is to use common people that the consumer can identify with. Nothing new about this either: the very same thing happened in the 30's and 40's with recession and war and a backlash against Holloywood. Models were very ...for want of a better world 'normal' looking. And there are a fair few campaigns particularly with more high street fashion - to use 'real'. I prefer extraordinary. But she isn't defined by height weight or age. Or maybe she is: and it's that which gives her the niche work in fashion.

Having said that larger models can be extraordinary too. Some of you may laugh and sneer at this but the truth is the fashion world takes very seriously a massive US market of women who think they are too big to spend money on clothes so it is a rapidly expanding buisness:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/08/fashi … wanted=all

I went for a casting a couple of months ago and lost out to a local plus size mature model - it is what the boutique wanted for their ad so their clients can identify with it. I don't have any issue with that she's a great model. And most definitely extraordinary.

Shon D.- Homme wrote:
Also, fashion llamas do have curves. 34-24-34 is pretty curvy.

curvy is more than measurements, I'm sure you know that. It's also bodytype. if you have 3 llamas with the same measurements and height, one is still going to be more curvy than the other. Because one might have bigger boobs on a smaller ribcage, and a but more fluffiness on her ass in the side and back with small hips. And the other might have a broader built and be more flatchested with very little butt. not all fashionmodels are curvy (at least not to me). ev

I LOVE doutzen kroes (dutch pride whoop whoop), I think she has a killer body. But I don't consider this curvy. (I thiink gisele bundchen has a somewhat similar bodytype)
[img]http://images.starpulse.com/pictures/2012/06/19/previews/Doutzen Kroes-20120619-47.jpg[/img]

compared to Candice Swanepoel, who just naturally goes in and out more
[img]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1raMGplQCbE/T6J-ctZ421I/AAAAAAAAolM/kSgjOW7NrOw/s640/Candice Swanepoel Models Bikinis Beach 4GiNsk8MIwfl.jpg[/img]

being curvy is more than just measurements, it's also how those measurements are in proportion to your body. it's more of a bodytype. (well, to me it is)

Eliza C wrote:

I like fashion. So for me there was nothing better than working in the fit environment with a great design team. It is rather nice having the creative director ring me up now and again even now. The design team asking me back. So obviously they appreciated me too. I never once had a boring day that is for sure. And I got to do runway with Premier girls on £5k a day but it was me having champagne in the office afterwards with the boss and getting thanked. And the money is good. Talking to some agency girls they say they sometimes don't get a job for two months. I was working every day and that is what I like. Amazing people on meets daily. Great fun too when the mail boy comes into the office and there are a couple of fit models in various states of undress. I could write a book on it but can't. Just to say I thoroughly enjoyed it because I am interested in the fashion process and business. That is NOT necessarily the same buisness as fashion photography and editorial modelling. And if a model wants fame and glory it's true that isn't for them. BUT I think it is possible realistic and interesting for iothers too. NEVER a dull moment that is for sure. But yes hard work.

My objective was to earn a living as a model. It was never to seek fame and glory as a shortie. I did that starting with Art modelling but then achieving it mainly through Agent Provocateur. The experience was wonderful and I only left it to pursue my academic career. I learned so much about fashion while I was there that Agency girls don't necessarily see. Modelling the clothes is for me less interesting than having them designed on me. It's kind of weird knowing the corset cut was made on my body when I see them in the campaigns and shops.

There are fit modelling agencies yes. But just like the photography agencies a lot of companies will source their own models. Have a look on fashion company websites. And even the classifieds in newspapers particularly where you may see six fashion jobs advertised in one ad. They want someone in human resources, one shop mamager, three sales staff and a fit model that kind of thing. I never even bothered applying to a fit agency.

I'm not talking about fit modelling agencies. I'm talking regular agencies.

Anna Adrielle wrote:

I'm not talking about fit modelling agencies. I'm talking regular agencies.

Companies are not going to pay agency rates for fit models unless their ads don't work. They do. There were a lot of applicants for my job. Many of the girls were from agencies. I think a factor is also expectations. They don't want someone who will drop them when they get an editorial shoot and leave them in the lurch a few days before a collection deadline.