Forums > General Industry > Photography or prostitution?

Photographer

G Anderson Photo

Posts: 18

Madison, Wisconsin, US

Ok, so you think you are hot and you bang your models is that your point? 

That's great, but I don't see how it pertains to my posts.  I personally don't see the need to brag about my sex life on here.  That's none of your business.


Andrew Thomas Evans wrote:

You haven't had sex with a model before? It happens, and it's pretty common - at least to those of us who are hot.



Andrew Thomas Evans
www.andrewthomasevans.com

Dec 16 12 11:56 am Link

Photographer

Keith92883

Posts: 137

Corona, California, US

Why are you up in someone else's business?

Dec 16 12 12:10 pm Link

Photographer

Ashwell Fine Art

Posts: 102

London, England, United Kingdom

G Anderson Photo wrote:
Ok, so you think you are hot and you bang your models is that your point? 

That's great, but I don't see how it pertains to my posts.  I personally don't see the need to brag about my sex life on here.  That's none of your business.

Just looked at the OP's port - it's disgusting.

That's not a critique - it' just my emotional reaction.

So what's his point?

Dec 16 12 12:36 pm Link

Photographer

Art Silva

Posts: 9451

Santa Barbara, California, US

Ashwell Fine Art wrote:

Just looked at the OP's port - it's disgusting.

That's not a critique - it' just my emotional reaction.

So what's his point?

Could be feeling left out of "the action" or justifying an action, one of the two depending if this is actually about someone else or if he's talking in the third person.

Dec 16 12 12:46 pm Link

Photographer

G Anderson Photo

Posts: 18

Madison, Wisconsin, US

I looked at your port - it's bloody boring ol chap!

So, what's your point?

I started this thread to get some input/opinions on an ethical/legal situation I encountered and have gotten very few responses directly dealing with that issue.
Instead of I have gotten all kinds of speculation on my motive and personal attacks on me and my portfolio.   
It I wanted a personal attack, I would just e-mail my ex-wife!  LOL

So, now It is fun just to check out responses to this thread for purely entertainment purposes as it is very difficult to take this drivel seriously. 


Ashwell Fine Art wrote:

Just looked at the OP's port - it's disgusting.

That's not a critique - it' just my emotional reaction.

So what's his point?

Dec 16 12 08:17 pm Link

Photographer

Imageri by Tim Davis

Posts: 1431

Minneapolis, Minnesota, US

G Anderson Photo wrote:

It is my business because good models that I planned on using for paid LEGIT nude and adult modeling gigs are "taken off the market" because this photog convinces them to "keep things private with him"    There is not much I can do about it.  I am just venting out of frustration.  I try hard to make sure I do everything in a legal manner and try to be familiar with all the laws governing nude, adult and hardcore shoots.   What this photog is doing is unethical in my opinion and is probably illegal.   The models are definitely consenting to the sex so there is no issue there, but I don't think they realize they may be guilty of prostitution in the eyes of the law.

Once again why is this your business? Do you think you are making things better by running your mouth? Find different ways to show value in your work and maybe the models will work with you. They are consenting adults and you are putting your nose in business that does not concern you.

Dec 16 12 08:45 pm Link

Photographer

Odin Photo

Posts: 1459

Salt Lake City, Utah, US

G Anderson Photo wrote:
So, I know of a photographer here on MM that pays models a very high rate for what appears to be artistic nude photos.  A few of those photos are posted on his port for each model to "make it look good".  However I know from models that have worked with him, that there is full hardcore photos/videos produced that he agrees to "never publish".  This makes it hard to recruit models that he works with for legitimate nude and adult modeling gigs as he tells them that they "don't want to have that stuff published just keep it private".   These models are generally new models looking for paid work who have no other history of doing porn or doing llama herdering.   In my opinion this photog is turning paid nude models into his own personal prostitutes.  I appreciate opinions on this.

I haven't read the other posts, so I'm sorry if this has already been addressed.

I'm having some difficulty here. The only models that you can presume are doing this, are the ones who have been comfortable enough to tell you that they have been shooting hard core porn with this individual. Every other model, that has not told you this directly, would require an assumption on your part as to whether they would have accepted that offer or if the offer was ever even made.

So you have enough of a trusting relationship with these models that they have been able to tell you, "I shot hard core porn with so and so.", but they still don't want to shoot legit nudes with you? You said that "he tells them that they "don't want to have that stuff published just keep it private". This was moments after you stated that "A few of those photos are posted on his port for each model to "make it look good". So, obviously, they don't have a problem with a certain level of nudes being published. What type of nudes do you want to shoot and publish that these women who have done hardcore porn are unwilling to let you shoot and publish?

How is this the other photographers fault? I'm not saying that people shouldn't bait and switch someone, but it seems like a pretty easy sell to say you can shoot legit nudes with me for x$ or go shoot hardcore porn with the other guy for y$ and then have some legit nudes published to "make it look good."

So would they like to have someone "make it look good" or have someone actually make it good? If they still choose him over you, well then, obviously, your offer, whatever it is, isn't worth it to them. No matter how reproachable the other photographer's actions were, they are still just making a value based decision on your offer. It is not the other photographers fault that it is difficult for you to hire models, it is just a circumstance that he is involved in.

Dec 16 12 09:47 pm Link

Photographer

Srefis Limited

Posts: 960

Asheville, North Carolina, US

Its not private enough if you know about it?

Dec 16 12 09:53 pm Link

Photographer

Paul Ferris

Posts: 3508

New York, New York, US

Prostitography!

Dec 16 12 09:56 pm Link

Photographer

UCPhotog

Posts: 984

Union City, California, US

G Anderson Photo wrote:
I started this thread to get some input/opinions on an ethical/legal situation I encountered and have gotten very few responses directly dealing with that issue. Instead of I have gotten all kinds of speculation on my motive and personal attacks on me and my portfolio.

You simply asked for opinions in the last line of your op. You might wish to be more specific about what you are looking for.

You op to me sounded like you couldn't get newer models to work with you now that they worked with him. So what? Move on. There are tons of models. Want models who are willing to shoot nudes for a low/fair/decent rate? Advertise for college girls. You state a large city - there has to be schools there. But they are probably not naive.

Dec 16 12 10:34 pm Link

Photographer

UCPhotog

Posts: 984

Union City, California, US

This is Starbucks vs Pete's Coffee and Tea. If the customers are headed to one instead of the other, they do better marketing, offering customers something worthy. It's not always about the $$.

Dec 16 12 10:55 pm Link

Photographer

barepixels

Posts: 2910

San Diego, California, US

OP, you sounds jealous

=============================================
http://hiddenorchid.com  its like pinterest but for Art Nudes

Dec 16 12 11:31 pm Link

Photographer

Art of the nude

Posts: 11892

Olivet, Michigan, US

Dekilah wrote:
If he is approaching the models on MM requesting that they shoot porn or other adult content, they should CAM him. MM does not allow adult or porn networking on the site.

I don't think he wants to do that, given that HE also recruits them for adult / porn shoots.

G Anderson Photo wrote:
It is my business because good models that I planned on using for paid LEGIT nude and adult modeling gigs are "taken off the market" because this photog convinces them to "keep things private with him"

Dec 17 12 03:53 am Link

Photographer

udor

Posts: 22381

New York, New York, US

Paul Ferris  wrote:
Prostitography!

Photostution

Dec 17 12 04:17 pm Link

Photographer

Odin Photo

Posts: 1459

Salt Lake City, Utah, US

udor wrote:
Photostution

Prophotostitutionography.

Dec 17 12 04:36 pm Link

Photographer

udor

Posts: 22381

New York, New York, US

Odin Photo wrote:

Prophotostitutionography.

borat  smile

Dec 17 12 04:41 pm Link

Photographer

Charger Photography

Posts: 1720

San Antonio, Texas, US

G Anderson Photo wrote:
This is where there is a LACK of reading comprehension.  Where did I ever say I was shooting models nude TF.   Just for the record.  I have NEVER shot a model nude TF.  I ALWAYS pay them so I own the photos outright.   Can you all say that?

I stated CLEARLY in my post that I offered legit PAID shoots. Go back and re-read my posts.   In the case of at least 2 models, I shot the models FIRST, then spent a lot of time selling follow-up shoots only to have the model disappear because the photog in question "took her private".
So, based on the comments on here I am supposed to pay the model MORE than he did and offer to NOT sell the pics.   From a business standpoint, WHY on earth would I want to do that?

I will sit back now and watch all the speculative posts on how I am jealous, how i am doing this to get laid, how I am cheap, etc. etc.  It is entertaining!



I do lots of TF... I still own the pics and copyright. I only pay traveling models... smile Because thats how they pay their bills !!!

Dec 17 12 05:26 pm Link

Photographer

Art of the nude

Posts: 11892

Olivet, Michigan, US

G Anderson Photo wrote:
It is my business because good models that I planned on using for paid LEGIT nude and adult modeling gigs are "taken off the market" because this photog convinces them to "keep things private with him"    There is not much I can do about it.  I am just venting out of frustration.  I try hard to make sure I do everything in a legal manner and try to be familiar with all the laws governing nude, adult and hardcore shoots.   What this photog is doing is unethical in my opinion and is probably illegal.   The models are definitely consenting to the sex so there is no issue there, but I don't think they realize they may be guilty of prostitution in the eyes of the law.

Tiffany Katz wrote:
I'm beginning to see a trend that the nice guys get disrespected the most in forums.  "Mind your own business", "Shut up", and things of that nature.  All people seem to care about is what they can get away with.  Ethics have gone out the window.  It's unfortunate.

"Nice guys" who are upset that models won't shoot pron with them do, certainly.

Dec 17 12 06:34 pm Link

Filmmaker

ButchArri

Posts: 53

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US

I think it's a good thing that this post is getting a significant response, because at the end of the day there are these photogs that tell models "THis is the way it is..."  In a world with no internet, or no MM there's no discussion about such things and models, other photographers and the photographers taking advantage aren't aware of these things or aren't being exposed until it's too late.  Obviously there's no way to stop it completely and there are some models that will consent even knowing the photog is smarmy only to later become bitter and angry in general, it's better to have some level of visible discussion about it for those that actually are on the fence and will think about it and not do the regrettable thing.

Dec 17 12 06:57 pm Link

Photographer

Eastfist

Posts: 3544

Green Bay, Wisconsin, US

OP is only 14 posts in. Why do I suspect this is a bait sockpuppet account?

Dec 17 12 07:09 pm Link

Photographer

291

Posts: 11911

SEQUOIA NATIONAL PARK, California, US

G Anderson Photo wrote:
Photography or prostitution?  I appreciate opinions on this.

eliminate the confusion between photography and let's fuck around and take pictures.  that should remove all question and consternation.

Dec 17 12 07:20 pm Link

Photographer

Innovative Imagery

Posts: 2815

Los Angeles, California, US

While perhaps not written as clearly as possible, it seems the OP has this as the main issue.

Models he would pay to shoot with him with a model release so he can publish are being told by this other photographer they can shoot with him and not have them published.  So they can make their money, but keep it private.   This effectively removes these models from his shoot pool. 

He wants to know if it is common and how do the rest of us feel about this practice. 

Additionally he is concerned that to shoot with no intent to publish, changes "legit adult modeling" into "illegal" prostitution and that these beginning models may not be aware of the distinction.

Dec 17 12 09:17 pm Link

Photographer

Carlos Occidental

Posts: 10546

Glendora, California, US

...of all the silly MM threads.

Boo Hoo.  Another photographer in my area pays models more, and some even have sex with him.  And now they don't want to work with me for my paltry offerings.  Boo ooo hoo.

Dec 17 12 10:11 pm Link

Photographer

UCPhotog

Posts: 984

Union City, California, US

Innovative Imagery wrote:
He wants to know if it is common and how do the rest of us feel about this practice. 

Additionally he is concerned that to shoot with no intent to publish, changes "legit adult modeling" into "illegal" prostitution and that these beginning models may not be aware of the distinction.

I hate the practice. But I don't whine about it. If I can't get a model to shoot, then I move on, maybe reconnecting with the model a month or three later. I usually have no issues at that time. They either want to shoot or they don't. They know by that time that the first photographer was doing something that other photographers don't do.

Art doesn't need to be published to be considered art. Maybe the OP needs to re-read the First Amendment to the Constitution and some of the major decisions regarding it.

Dec 17 12 10:16 pm Link

Model

Wynd Mulysa

Posts: 8612

Berkeley, California, US

G Anderson Photo wrote:
So, I know of a photographer here on MM that pays llamas a very high rate for what appears to be artistic nude photos.  A few of those photos are posted on his port for each llama to "make it look good".  However I know from llamas that have worked with him, that there is full hardcore photos/videos produced that he agrees to "never publish".  This makes it hard to recruit llamas that he works with for legitimate nude and adult llamaing gigs as he tells them that they "don't want to have that stuff published just keep it private".   These llamas are generally new llamas looking for paid work who have no other history of doing porn or doing escorting.   In my opinion this photog is turning paid nude llamas into his own personal prostitutes.  I appreciate opinions on this.

I think if it's recorded it's porn, not prostitution.

Also that guy may have been lying to make himself look cool.

P.S. Can you send me his picture?

Dec 17 12 10:17 pm Link

Photographer

Carlos Occidental

Posts: 10546

Glendora, California, US

UCPhotog wrote:
Art doesn't need to be published to be considered art.

That is very true!  But it does need to be purchased by at least one buyer.  Art takes a producer to call it art, and a buyer to call it art.  Not just the producer.  Until then, it's just the opinion of the producer.  Not very valuable.  When someone buys it as art, you have the opinion of the producer, and now, a buyer.   It's now very difficult to argue that it's not art when someone puts forth their money and buys it as art.

Dec 17 12 10:42 pm Link

Photographer

SleeperAwake

Posts: 19

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US

G Anderson Photo wrote:
This is where there is a LACK of reading comprehension.  Where did I ever say I was shooting models nude TF.   Just for the record.  I have NEVER shot a model nude TF.  I ALWAYS pay them so I own the photos outright.   Can you all say that?

OP Profile: I particularly enjoy doing outdoor shoots using natural lighting.  I OCCASIONALLY HAVE PAID WORK FOR CERTAIN TYPES OF SHOOTS.

If you really are just looking at this from a business standpoint, maybe you should advertise that you "always" pay instead of only playing that card while being "attacked".  Maybe your portfolio could also show a lot of that outdoor natural light shooting that you particularly enjoy, rather than just naked girls.  That's why this comes off as insincere to people.

Dec 17 12 10:55 pm Link

Photographer

Art of the nude

Posts: 11892

Olivet, Michigan, US

Carlos Occidental wrote:
That is very true!  But it does need to be purchased by at least one buyer.  Art takes a producer to call it art, and a buyer to call it art.  Not just the producer.  Until then, it's just the opinion of the producer.  Not very valuable.  When someone buys it as art, you have the opinion of the producer, and now, a buyer.  It's now very difficult to argue that it's not art when someone puts forth their money and buys it as art.

I would argue that a large portion of the photography, especially nude photography, that people spend money on isn't art, and that no one claims it is.  Money, while great, isn't really a reliable indicator of artistic value.

Dec 19 12 03:43 am Link

Photographer

PTPhotoUT

Posts: 1961

Salt Lake City, Utah, US

G Anderson Photo wrote:
It is my business because good models that I planned on using for paid LEGIT nude and adult modeling gigs are "taken off the market" because this photog convinces them to "keep things private with him"    There is not much I can do about it.  I am just venting out of frustration.  I try hard to make sure I do everything in a legal manner and try to be familiar with all the laws governing nude, adult and hardcore shoots.   What this photog is doing is unethical in my opinion and is probably illegal.   The models are definitely consenting to the sex so there is no issue there, but I don't think they realize they may be guilty of prostitution in the eyes of the law.

In the eyes of the Law, they can only prove that the models were paid and legit pics were produced. The consensual sex happened inconsequential to the paid modeling. Why do you think that he produces a few pics to make it "look good."  In many ways the girls are better off by not having adult pics published. But that is what you want to do with them. So you are a better person because you want to possibly ruin other career choices for them, because you want to publish their adult work? You are upset because the girls won't let you shoot adult work (porn) with them for you own financial gain (and personal satisfaction).  Boo hoo.

Dec 19 12 04:12 am Link

Photographer

Dan OMell

Posts: 1335

Ufa, Bashkortostan, Russia

following this interesting discussion with close attention, I came to conclusion that
BOTH sides deserve to be set in stone:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0b/Sex_worker_statue_Oudekerksplein_Amsterdam.jpg/452px-Sex_worker_statue_Oudekerksplein_Amsterdam.jpg

http://0.tqn.com/d/goeasteurope/1/0/s/T/-/-/Photographer-Statue-Bratislava.jpg

Dec 20 12 09:26 am Link

Photographer

ontherocks

Posts: 22606

Salem, Oregon, US

lol

Dan OMell wrote:
following this interesting discussion with close attention, I came to conclusion that
BOTH sides deserve to be set in stone:

Dec 20 12 09:27 am Link

Photographer

Photography by Sean

Posts: 145

Atlanta, Georgia, US

FemmeArtPhoto wrote:
Are you implying that models do not have minds of their own?

The American legal system in its entirety implies that women in general don't have a mind of their own.

Dec 20 12 09:30 am Link

Photographer

Ben Beksel Photography

Posts: 271

Shell Lake, Wisconsin, US

So is the issue....

Photographer A) will pay handsomely for hard core porn that the models don't mind shooting and it will never see the light of day. 

Photographer B - The OP) want's to shoot hard core porn that WILL see the light of day and maybe pays the same or less than photographer A...  Now he's upset because his models would rather work with the other guy and not expose themselves doing hardcore to the world?

Seems completely logical to me... So in an effort to stop his "Better offer"  you're labeling it prostitution?

Dec 20 12 10:11 am Link

Photographer

Andrew Thomas Evans

Posts: 24078

Minneapolis, Minnesota, US

G Anderson Photo wrote:
That's great, but I don't see how it pertains to my posts.  I personally don't see the need to brag about my sex life on here.  That's none of your business.

It just sounds like you're not getting any, or are jealous because someone else is getting some and you're not, OR, you got turned down by someone who he ended up "shooting".

Or maybe you have a plug that's been up your butt for a while - you know those need to be removed, right?



Andrew Thomas Evans
www.andrewthomasevans.com

Dec 20 12 10:35 am Link

guide forum

Model

Damianne

Posts: 15975

Austin, Texas, US

Look, everyone, the OP's sex life is none of our business.

This other dude's, however, should be discussed and judged in detail.

Dec 20 12 12:58 pm Link

Photographer

Merlinpix

Posts: 7099

Farmingdale, New York, US

I like  ice cream

Dec 20 12 01:49 pm Link

Photographer

PDF IMAGES PHOTOGRAPHY

Posts: 4603

Jacksonville, Florida, US

Sounds like a bit of Photographer envy/ jealousy ?!

Dec 20 12 01:53 pm Link

guide forum

Photographer

Robb Mann

Posts: 10657

Baltimore, Maryland, US

Im just impressed that this thread wasnt locked days ago!

Dec 20 12 05:35 pm Link

Photographer

rmsoansphotography

Posts: 261

London, England, United Kingdom

G Anderson Photo wrote:
So, I know of a photographer here on MM that pays models a very high rate for what appears to be artistic nude photos.  A few of those photos are posted on his port for each model to "make it look good".  However I know from models that have worked with him, that there is full hardcore photos/videos produced that he agrees to "never publish".  This makes it hard to recruit models that he works with for legitimate nude and adult modeling gigs as he tells them that they "don't want to have that stuff published just keep it private".   These models are generally new models looking for paid work who have no other history of doing porn or doing escorting.   In my opinion this photog is turning paid nude models into his own personal prostitutes.  I appreciate opinions on this.

If it's art nude then its nothing sexual, though I'm not going to say anything about people who do such things for other people's sexual gratification

Dec 21 12 07:35 am Link

Photographer

WMcK

Posts: 5286

Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom

G Anderson Photo wrote:
I started this thread to get some input/opinions on an ethical/legal situation I encountered and have gotten very few responses directly dealing with that issue.

If you want an ethical opinion ask a priest/pastor/rabbi/guru/imam.
If you want a legal one ask a lawyer.
If you want to know what shutter speed and f number he should have been using, ask here.

Dec 21 12 09:17 am Link