Everyones Awesome wrote:
Haha yes thats a comment i've heard a few times myself from people. Its usually along the lines of "i dont know why you spend so much on a camera when my 'Quickpix' can do just as good a job"

They say ignorance is bliss

I once had someone with a fairly capable point-n-shoot ask what kind of camera I use that had gotten so much better shots than she got, after shooting the same city-scapes on a trip. Mine were clear and sharp and had detail, hers were fuzzy, lacked detail, etc. I explained about shutter speed and setting the camera on brick walls and light meters being fooled by bright spots and such to a very blank stare.

But back to the topic at hand, as asked by the OP. How about "I wanna be a fashion model" asked by the pimple-faced, 5 foot 1, 250 pounder. (please note I'm not saying anything bad about short, heavy, acne-faced persons, only about the fact there's no fashion work for anyone not taller, leaner, and with clear skin..)

MainePaintah wrote:
My biggest red flag, and it has happened to me twice, is when a model says, " I want all photos from the shoot"!

Once, I was going to PAY the model, and she still insisted on getting all the photos. I EVEN have it on my profile page that "NO photos will be given out if I pay you".

Another time I was supposed to TFP with a model. She was trading the time that she modeled for me for an original pastel figure painting of herself. Then after a few emails back and forth, she demanded all the photos too and she said, "Well we ARE TFPing, how will I know where all the photos will end up"?

To be fair, both models were newbies at the time. I did not work with either, and I never went back to their port to see how and what they are doing now.

Yes the Unedited image demands do seem to crop up often. Another lesson well learned. A lot of models dont seem to "get" it. If a bad image gets out, no matter who uploaded it, it will always be the photographers fault that it is a bad image, so its their reputation that takes the hit.

Michael DBA Expressions wrote:

I once had someone with a fairly capable point-n-shoot ask what kind of camera I use that had gotten so much better shots than she got, after shooting the same city-scapes on a trip. Mine were clear and sharp and had detail, hers were fuzzy, lacked detail, etc. I explained about shutter speed and setting the camera on brick walls and light meters being fooled by bright spots and such to a very blank stare.

But back to the topic at hand, as asked by the OP. How about "I wanna be a fashion model" asked by the pimple-faced, 5 foot 1, 250 pounder. (please note I'm not saying anything bad about short, heavy, acne-faced persons, only about the fact there's no fashion work for anyone not taller, leaner, and with clear skin..)

Yes some people do need to be given the tough love unfortunately. Its like those x-factor hopefulls that make you think "who the hell told you, you could sing?"

Decay of Memory wrote:
Them models are photographically promiscuous. Once they start talking about their special photographer "friend" when discussing a shoot with you it's crossed the line into disrespect. I tell them "you need to get it straight, you're with me now", and that usually puts an end to that kind of testing behavior.

I agree to a point. Its more about what the "other photographer" has put into their head. Prime example. One model i booked, could even get to the shoot, so i offered to pick her up. Literally just as i was about to walk out the door and get into my car she told me she wanted to bring a chaperone, and Worse, it was her Boyfriend. Cancelled that shoot, and then she told me that her "photographer friend" had told her that she should always take a chaperone, every model brings a chaperone, and its fine for them to be anyone she likes without notice.

I did try and shoot with her again a few weeks later and we agreed i would meet the chaperone beforehand rather than invite a total stranger into my home, and after 3 weeks of planning, she suddenly had an "appointment" at exactly the same time as the shoot.

Oddly enough i told that one where to go

Fernon wrote:
How Ironic for this thread to be titled "Red Flags" when the biggest one I saw was in your port.    Three self portraits....really?  And one laying in bed naked....come on dude.     Good luck.

Hahaha.  +1!

Other red flags to me are

1) "too good to be true" offers
2) "I noticed you don't have any fetish in your portfolio, I could add this much needed genre to your portfolio for only $$$..."
3) "you'd be a fool to decline working with me"
4) profiles that claim 20+ years experience shooting commercial/big production but shows a craptastic looking portfolio
5) Long list of "do not recommend" / dramatic behavior, etc
6) Bad references
7) Any egocentric, apathetic or model-hating attitude, i.e., "I just do this as a favor..."

Fernon wrote:
How Ironic for this thread to be titled "Red Flags" when the biggest one I saw was in your port.    Three self portraits....really?  And one laying in bed naked....come on dude.     Good luck.

Hangover from getting my port actually online. I appreciate your comments and not being party to one of the other hundred dicsussions ive had on the same issue, but if you think that self portraits is "the biggest" red flag, I have to question your mentality. What exactly are you trying to imply?

Fernon wrote:
How Ironic for this thread to be titled "Red Flags" when the biggest one I saw was in your port.    Three self portraits....really?  And one laying in bed naked....come on dude.     Good luck.

ditto..

secondly, posting threads about what comprises a red flag...
that's a big red flag right there....
ie: find out how to fly under the radar.

S W I N S K E Y wrote:

ditto..

secondly, posting threads about what comprises a red flag...
that's a big red flag right there....
ie: find out how to fly under the radar.

So because Im still learning and wanting to discuss the lessons ive learned, and find out other peoples opinions, i should just be quiet and my opinions are invalid?

I have no intention of "flying under the radar" because i want to improve and the best way to do that is to have experienced people help me spot my mistakes. If that means i have to deal with the condescention of a few smart asses along the way, so be it

Everyones Awesome wrote:

I agree to a point. Its more about what the "other photographer" has put into their head. Prime example. One model i booked, could even get to the shoot, so i offered to pick her up. Literally just as i was about to walk out the door and get into my car she told me she wanted to bring a chaperone, and Worse, it was her Boyfriend. Cancelled that shoot, and then she told me that her "photographer friend" had told her that she should always take a chaperone, every model brings a chaperone, and its fine for them to be anyone she likes without notice.

I did try and shoot with her again a few weeks later and we agreed i would meet the chaperone beforehand rather than invite a total stranger into my home, and after 3 weeks of planning, she suddenly had an "appointment" at exactly the same time as the shoot.

Oddly enough i told that one where to go

I take it you're not approaching this issue with a great deal of levity.

Decay of Memory wrote:

I take it you're not approaching this issue with a great deal of levity.

Im actually in a pretty good mood. Although that model did put my good humour to the test. These forums to me are a place to share my thoughts and hear what others have to say on the matter. Maybe there is a perspective that i hadnt considered.

Like all forums, there are always going to be trolls who would rather just discredit the OP with insults or criticisms, than have a grown up discussion, but that is the risk we choose to run when we post.

Everyones Awesome wrote:
Haha yes thats a comment i've heard a few times myself from people. Its usually along the lines of "i dont know why you spend so much on a camera when my 'Quickpix' can do just as good a job"

They say ignorance is bliss

Plenty of photographers and some of them are even *gasp* models can take better photos with their phones then many photographers with their expensive DSLRs.

I don't subscribe to any red flags. I have had good shoots with models who do at least one of these so called red flags.

PashaPhoto wrote:
"photographer friends" don't bother me...

every model that has been around even a little bit, at some point will become friendly with some of the photographers... not unusual and totally normal...

whether or not this becomes a red flag depends entirely on who these "photographer friends" happen to be

Absolutely. I'd probably take it as more of a red flag if they had been modelling for a decade and had NO photographer friends. That kind of leads back to my Original point though, that the majority of the time, its just waffle that they use to justify unreasonable behaviour. Not just models of course, im sure there are equally as many photographers out there who use the "ive had a model do this" line often too. 
Although with photographers you tend to get a vibe from them, or at least i used to. One phot wanted to shoot me nude or implied, but the way he approached me, creeped the hell out of me, and after several discussions, it didnt get any better so i never worked with him in the end.

Rachel-Elise  wrote:
Um... the time when I was MUA for a girl (who was 5'7) who lied about taking part in NY fashion week, and then almost ruined my powder brush by literally *jamming* it into the darkest blush shade I had, and *rubbing* it all over her face.

Let's just say that the rest of that shoot was ruined, due to her clown look... photographer, llama #2, and I were NOT pleased, as it was a trade shoot. If she'd gone and ruined my brush (and, the way she was rubbing it all over, she very well could have), I 'd have had no problem insisting that she pay for a new one. That brush was $55.00!!!!

Of course, this was AFTER we'd already started the shoot, but the rest of the team knew to never work with her again.

Thats awful. See my niggles are generally about people wasting my time, but if someone had started trashing my gear, i'd go ballistic. People tend to forget that not everyone craps $100 bills and the tiniest little expense can be a vast inconvenience. I'm sure word about that particular individual spread pretty quick.

twoharts wrote:
to me it's when they are overly enthusiastic. I LOVE YOUR WORK!!!!

just over the top like they're trying way too hard.

Definitely, especially if, like me, your work is far from perfect. I know most of my work is a 7/10 at best, which is why i strive to learn from others, so when i totally get what you mean when someone seems worryingly enthusiastic haha

e m i l y wrote:

Other red flags to me are

1) "too good to be true" offers
2) "I noticed you don't have any fetish in your portfolio, I could add this much needed genre to your portfolio for only $$$..."
3) "you'd be a fool to decline working with me"
4) profiles that claim 20+ years experience shooting commercial/big production but shows a craptastic looking portfolio
5) Long list of "do not recommend" / dramatic behavior, etc
6) Bad references
7) Any egocentric, apathetic or model-hating attitude, i.e., "I just do this as a favor..."

This

Everyones Awesome wrote:
"I have a photographer friend".
"ive gotten just as good pictures on my iPhone as the phtographers, and I edit them
   better too.. on my iPhone"

I think worry about these so-called "red flags" is hogwash.

When considering a model, I am concerned with only three things:
   ...  Do I like the model's look?
   ...  Is she trustworthy?  (e.g. I check references)
   ...  Can we negotiate an acceptable agreement?

I don't care whether she has a friend.  I don't care about a lot of these things.  I have limits, she has limits, and if our desires overlap, that's great.  If not, no hard feelings.

I've seen photographers come up with lots of irrelevant rejection criteria.  For example:  one has decided to reject models who have password protected folders in their portfolio. 

You guys can choose whatever criteria you want, but I think lots of you are just looking for a way to discard models.


P.S.  I'd rather look at an interesting photo made with a smartphone than a cliche' photo made with a high end camera.

Looknsee Photography wrote:
You guys can choose whatever criteria you want, but I think lots of you are just looking for a way to discard models.

To a certain extent, I am - otherwise I'd be sending invites to every model in my area...

Setting search criteria narrows down the possibility that the model not only looks right but that she and I are more or less on the same wavelength - arguably more important in the long run when shooting TFP... For paid work I don't care if she turns up in a KKK outfit with swastika badges all over it - as long as she does the job to my satisfaction and in a professional manner - then she gets paid and leaves.

With TFP there's a bit more to it. It's supposed to be fun...

Everyones Awesome wrote:

Hangover from getting my port actually online. I appreciate your comments and not being party to one of the other hundred dicsussions ive had on the same issue, but if you think that self portraits is "the biggest" red flag, I have to question your mentality. What exactly are you trying to imply?

I could be wrong, but I think that Fernon is trying to suggest that more than one selfportrait, especially of the snapshot rather than the fine art variety, is likely to lead the observer to suspect that the photographer might be looking for a social rather than an artistic or professional connection.  Any model with an ounce of sense would suspect that a nude or implied nude self protrait in a photographer's portfolio is an invitation to a sexual encounter.  Whether it's the photographer's intention or not, reasonable caution would demand that the model make that assumption. 

I would also suspect that the "fly under the radar" comment in another post refers to this apparent intent.  A photographer whose intents were less than honorable would be well advised to "fly under the radar" and make his intents less obvious.  After all, the function of the portfolio is to suggest to the viewer what the photographer is offering and what the model might expect to get from the session.

I could be wrong, but I believe that was the message these posters were trying to convey.  It certainly is the message I am trying to convey.

All IMHO as always, of course.

Brett Hunt wrote:
When they start telling you what they won' t do instead of saying what they will do to make the shoot better.
The biggest one is no communication

In other words, one should never define their position in terms of "negatives".

Rays Fine Art wrote:

I could be wrong, but I think that Fernon is trying to suggest that more than one selfportrait, especially of the snapshot rather than the fine art variety, is likely to lead the observer to suspect that the photographer might be looking for a social rather than an artistic or professional connection.  Any model with an ounce of sense would suspect that a nude or implied nude self protrait in a photographer's portfolio is an invitation to a sexual encounter.  Whether it's the photographer's intention or not, reasonable caution would demand that the model make that assumption. 

I would also suspect that the "fly under the radar" comment in another post refers to this apparent intent.  A photographer whose intents were less than honorable would be well advised to "fly under the radar" and make his intents less obvious.  After all, the function of the portfolio is to suggest to the viewer what the photographer is offering and what the model might expect to get from the session.

I could be wrong, but I believe that was the message these posters were trying to convey.  It certainly is the message I am trying to convey.

All IMHO as always, of course.

I appreciate the clarification. It is very difficult at times to read the intended tone of these messages, and certainly in my experience, can lead to big misunderstandings.

I Actually edited the implied shot to look like that because the look i was going for was retro grunge, and it never occured to me that people on a site like this would assume that it was an actual snapshot, although i suppose that is a testement to my Photoshop abilities if nothing else.

I understand that models May get the wrong impression from my port, and if i hadnt captioned the images "self portrait" nobody would probably have cared, since i also model, i didn't see any harm in modelling for my own photography portfolio.

Whilst I respect the opnions of others, I think that the other pictures in my portfolio should prove i'm not just a GWC trying to get laid, but if that is the message that my work gives off, then obviously i need to try harder.

Everyones Awesome wrote:
So what red flags cause you concern or in extreme cases to not book a model?

concerns

*confusion --- stating "nude = NO" and simultaneously applying for nude jobs or offering nude shooting

*outdated information on a sedcard used currently --- "I am bruised from a bicycle accident on April, 5th" still displayed on a model's sedcard in January, two years later, combined with a last login that was yesterday

*errors and mistakes on a sedcard which show that the model do not checked it after uploading a text or images --- it indicates that this model does not handle important things accurately

*newest images are two and a half year old --- that's bad with 20 years old people



not to book

*chaperones

*sounding sniffy and arrogant

*shooting only selected nudes

Everyones Awesome wrote:
One that leap to mind immediately are models who make a point of saying "I have a photographer friend".

Assume that photographer will tell that model the work of most others is crap, and that the model will take their word for it.

PashaPhoto wrote:
"photographer friends" don't bother me...

every model that has been around even a little bit, at some point will become friendly with some of the photographers... not unusual and totally normal...

This is quietly understood. The model feeling the need to mention them is the issue.

Looknsee Photography wrote:
You guys can choose whatever criteria you want, but I think lots of you are just looking for a way to discard models.

RKD Photographic wrote:
To a certain extent, I am - otherwise I'd be sending invites to every model in my area...
...
With TFP there's a bit more to it. It's supposed to be fun...

Look how each of us manages our business is our business and no one else's.  If your way works for you, more power to ya.

But for me:  photography is a challenge in problem solving and team leadership.  Having an extensive list of "red flags" just feels wrong to me -- it feels like the photographer is looking for excuses for future failures, as opposed in looking at problems to be solved.

Keep your criteria short & sweet, and figure out how to work with everyone else.  That's my philosophy.  I reiterate -- I look for looks, reliability, and an acceptable agreement.

Looknsee Photography wrote:
Keep your criteria short & sweet, and figure out how to work with everyone else.  That's my philosophy.  I reiterate -- I look for looks, reliability, and an acceptable agreement.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Pay close attention to a models written profile and what she says and doesn't say in your conversation.

I've made wonderful photos of models who couldn't express themselves well verbally.  This includes models who spoke English as a second language.

Why not just review their SAT scores?