R Byron Johnson wrote:

Eh, I think you're just taking it too damn personally.  It would seem pretty stupid for a model to be more concerned about hurting the poor photographer's feelings than with her own safety.

And it would be equally silly for a photographer to assume the safety/liability/theft risks inherent in an escorted shoot just to avoid offending a model that can't do her job without a bodyguard.

R Byron Johnson wrote:
It would seem pretty stupid for a model to be more concerned about hurting the poor photographer's feelings than with her own safety.

The thing is, if the photographer is really concerned with the model's safety then he or she won't agree to escorts - statistically escorts are the people most likely to bring hardship and harm to the model.

Now, if your concern is to not argue with the model and get her in for a shoot, that's a different matter.

Image K wrote:

And it would be equally silly for a photographer to assume the safety/liability/theft risks inherent in an escorted shoot just to avoid offending a model that can't do her job without a bodyguard.

Sure, I often take that into consideration myself.  I just personally think the risk of sexual assault trumps the risk of property theft. 

It's really all a matter of self-interest.  And these escort threads always come down to photographer's insisting that their personal interests are far more important than the model's.  In other words, it typically turns out to be a display of blatant hypocrisy, with photographers demanding that the models "just trust" them, while the photographers refuse to "just trust" the models or the escorts they bring.  There really is no compromise to be made of it.

Decay of Memory wrote:

The thing is, if the photographer is really concerned with the model's safety then he or she won't agree to escorts - statistically escorts are the people most likely to bring hardship and harm to the model.

Now, if your concern is to not argue with the model and get her in for a shoot, that's a different matter.

I honestly find that a little hard to believe, at least if you're talking about what goes on during a shoot.  So escorts assaulting models during a shoot is like widespread thing?  What are these "statistics" and where did you find them?

PR Zone wrote:
I clicked on this thread because, in the UK, escort means hooker - and I was wondering what the OP wanted to shoot that required that kind of service.

As far as 'chaperones' go - I'm all in favour, have no problem with it at all - whatever makes the model happy is fine with me

Actually, "escort" usually means the same thing in the US as well.  The term confused me too when I first encountered it.

R Byron Johnson wrote:
Sure, I often take that into consideration myself.  I just personally think the risk of sexual assault trumps the risk of property theft. 

It's really all a matter of self-interest.  And these escort threads always come down to photographer's insisting that their personal interests are far more important than the model's.

So, as a photographer, I have to assume the safety/liability/theft risks because of the fact that a model could be raped is a lager concern? bullshit

Theft isn't the only risk to a photographer at a shoot with an escort present. Photographers have been battered/assaulted at shoots by significant others when they posed their wives/girlfriends too provocatively.

Several years ago, a MM photographer was held up at gunpoint by an escort. Another was kidnapped by an escort.

If an escort trips over a power cord, and knocks over a light stand, is he going to pay for it? Will your insurance cover it? Personally, I would be annoyed if I had to file a claim with my insurance company (and risk my rates going up) because an escort was present when I could have prevented it by not allowing him to be present.

What if the escort trips and shatters his kneecap? Who pays his medical bills? In some jurisdictions, you would be responsible for them. He could actually sue you. Will your insurance cover it, since he had no legit business-related reason for being there?

Sorry, but I'm not buying the model has more risk, so I need to allow her escort argument.

You want to shoot escorted models? Roll the dice and take your chances. I'll decide what risk that I'm comfortable with.

R Byron Johnson wrote:
In other words, it typically turns out to be a display of blatant hypocrisy, with photographers demanding that the models "just trust" them, while the photographers refuse to "just trust" the models or the escorts they bring.  There really is no compromise to be made of it.

You're putting the cart before the horse.

The concept of an escort was started by the model, not the photographer. In any escort negotiation, it's the model that insists on the escort based on the fact that the photographer is a stranger...yet the model doesn't see that the escort is a stranger to the photographer...and doesn't care.

R Byron Johnson wrote:
I honestly find that a little hard to believe, at least if you're talking about what goes on during a shoot.  So escorts assaulting models during a shoot is like widespread thing?  What are these "statistics" and where did you find them?

The statistics that he is referring to can be found on any sexual assault website.

The vast majority of women are assaulted by someone that they know (husband, boyfriend, family member, ex, co-worker), as opposed to a "stranger" at a photo shoot...and in the vast majority of models that are assaulted/murdered, the crime was perpetrated by their significant other (or an ex).

Most sexual assaults happen at the victim's home, or within 2 miles of her home...not at a studio or obscure shoot location.

No one said that thy were assaulted at a shoot.

Image K wrote:

So, as a photographer, I have to assume the safety/liability/theft risks because of the fact that a llama could be raped is a lager concern? bullshit

Theft isn't the only risk to a photographer at a shoot with an escort present. Photographers have been battered/assaulted at shoots by significant others when they posed their wives/girlfriends too provocatively.

Several years ago, a MM photographer was held up at gunpoint by an escort. Another was kidnapped by an escort.

If an escort trips over a power cord, and knocks over a light stand, is he going to pay for it? Will your insurance cover it? Personally, I would be annoyed if I had to file a claim with my insurance company (and risk my rates going up) because an escort was present when I could have prevented it by not allowing him to be present.

What if the escort trips and shatters his kneecap? Who pays his medical bills? In some jurisdictions, you would be responsible for them. He could actually sue you. Will your insurance cover it, since he had no legit business-related reason for being there?

Sorry, but I'm not buying the llama has more risk, so I need to allow her escort argument.

You want to shoot escorted llamas? Roll the dice and take your chances. I'll decide what risk that I'm comfortable with.



You're putting the cart before the horse.

The concept of an escort was started by the llama, not the photographer. In any escort negotiation, it's the llama that insists on the escort based on the fact that the photographer is a stranger...yet the llama doesn't see that the escort is a stranger to the photographer...and doesn't care.

What the hell does that matter?  Bottom line:  A llama is asking a photographer to forgo his/her self-interest in favor of her own, whilst the photographer is asking the llama to do the same.  So whose self-interest should take precedence?  Whose paranoid fears of harm are more legitimate than whose?  There's no answer to such questions and thus no real compromise that can be reached. 

I just think it's hypocritical as fuck for photographers to tell llamas who want to bring an escort that they're just being overly cautious, only to turn around and whine about all the possible dangers that an escort might bring them.  You can't accuse someone of being paranoid only to turn around and be paranoid yourself.

Personally, I don't give a shit if a llama brings an escort.  I don't think I'm taking any greater risk by doing that than I am when hanging out at a bar or walking down a street at 2 in the morning.  I put myself in risky situations all the time, so to be quite honest, from my perspective, you all look like a bunch of whiny pussies.

R Byron Johnson wrote:
What the hell does that matter?  Bottom line:  A model is asking a photographer to forgo his/her self-interest in favor of her own, whilst the photographer is asking the model to do the same.  So whose self-interest should take precedence?  Whose paranoid fears of harm are more legitimate than whose?  There's no answer to such questions and thus no real compromise that can be reached. 

I just think it's hypocritical as fuck for photographers to tell models who want to bring an escort that they're just being overly cautious, only to turn around and whine about all the possible dangers that an escort might bring them.  You can't accuse someone of being paranoid only to turn around and be paranoid yourself.

Personally, I don't give a shit if a model brings an escort.  I don't think I'm taking any greater risk by doing that than I am when hanging out at a bar or walking down a street at 2 in the morning.  I put myself in risky situations all the time, so to be quite honest, from my perspective, you all look like a bunch of whiny pussies.

+1

Those that got burnt are not so much paranoid, but scared of getting burnt again. Not much different from a mugging victim that keeps looking over their shoulder or drives around the block ten times waiting for a parking spot under the street lamp. I also wonder how many thought an escort ripped them off, only to find the "stolen" equipment at a later date. Heck, I've misplaced plenty of things, but never thought someone stole it.

aquarelle wrote:
Here's my compromise:  The model can bring a female escort.  It's a win-win because it has been my experience that the friend or sister is often "nude-curious" and will sometimes join in posing, or come back on her own to pose.

In my experience, the other female will get bored, and distract the model until she decides to leave early.  Now, if the other female is also modeling, that's a different matter.  I've had some very nice results from that arrangement.

aquarelle wrote:
Here's my compromise:  The model can bring a female escort.  It's a win-win because it has been my experience that the friend or sister is often "nude-curious" and will sometimes join in posing, or come back on her own to pose.

"nude curious?" so she comes along to be a peep-a-lilly? A photo shoot is not the time for someone's co-dependency to be dealt with.

photo212grapher wrote:

+1

Those that got burnt are not so much paranoid, but scared of getting burnt again. Not much different from a mugging victim that keeps looking over their shoulder or drives around the block ten times waiting for a parking spot under the street lamp. I also wonder how many thought an escort ripped them off, only to find the "stolen" equipment at a later date. Heck, I've misplaced plenty of things, but never thought someone stole it.

+1

Each side of the camera has it's own risks- and if anyone does their research, they know this before they even get involved in the industry.

aquarelle wrote:
Here's my compromise:  The model can bring a female escort.  It's a win-win because it has been my experience that the friend or sister is often "nude-curious" and will sometimes join in posing, or come back on her own to pose.

Here's my problem with that: Everyone thinks females are less "scary" then males.
One- Ladies can be just as vicious as a male, and sometimes, worse in regards to if you're scared of getting your house destroyed. And like mentioned above me, there's also when the female "escort" gets bored, and starts whining, etc. Or what if the female escort decides to start ripping into the model because they didn't know what type of shoot it was? It's the same, both genders.

Two- What if you model is bringing an MUA? Are you going to specify it's only allowed to be a female MUA? Because, honestly, the best MUA I've ever worked with is a guy. I can provide references, I can give you his portfolio, I can give you credits of places he's worked for. And yet, I still get shit for it because of his gender- and that's wrong.

Michael Pandolfo wrote:

Oh well in that case lol.

I made a promise too. I promised I would never work with a model who wasn't mature or adult enough to make her own life decisions and who needed to negotiate her daddy's approval and make promises to placate him. Or one who needed to use a promise she made to daddy as a way to justify her fear and insecurity.

Was this model 15? Because it doesn't sound like an adult.

Yep Yep Yep.

Honestly I do not mind an escort as long as they dont interfere with my shoot.

How do you know in advance if they don't interfere.

Rick OBanion Photo wrote:
So much has been said I do not want to open the debate on escorts. However a new model contacted me last week about a shoot and she eventually called me. She said she needed to bring an escort since it was a promise she had made to her overly worried father....as I was about to say no thanks...she said that her escort was an MUA and stylist. I checked the MUA's profile, it all looked quite good.
Win/win.
So I offer this idea to those ladies wanting/needing escorts. Make friends with an MUA or stylist. Make very good friends with one...or two.
Not many photographers would say no to this arrangement.

YES!

One of my earliest agency models brought a friend with her (she was 17 and shooting in a studio with 2 older males, can't say I blame her).

Friend acted as MUA, and Stylist. Worked great.

But, currently, no escorts policy.
Bring a MUA, that is not an escort that is a MUA. And hell no, I would not turn that down.

pullins photography wrote:

Ask her if her overprotective father has her chaperoned when she's on a date with some boy? That's where the potential of an issue is highest.

Steubenville anyone????

AVD AlphaDuctions wrote:
I actually like this solution. An MUA who is the model's responsibility? win.
for a test? how could I argue with that? its not an escort but why quibble about something that is my favour? srsly

as for the MUA using a camel's hair brush to defend the model - get real. for an unpaid test they will bring the walmart nylon brushes.  maybe just maybe if the model is actually paying them to be an MUA/escort they might consider bringing the real deal

Or if the MUA is serious about their escort craft, they'll bring a real camel.   And as soon as the evil tog boy starts getting out his model filleting knife, the camel can bite him in the baws with its big chiclet teeth.

R Byron Johnson wrote:
What the hell does that matter?  Bottom line:  A model is asking a photographer to forgo his/her self-interest in favor of her own, whilst the photographer is asking the model to do the same.  So whose self-interest should take precedence?  Whose paranoid fears of harm are more legitimate than whose?  There's no answer to such questions and thus no real compromise that can be reached.

Actually, the photographer is asking the model to put their own interest ahead of fear.  BOTH parties benefit from not having useless distractions around, and from the comfort that comes from a trusting working relationship.

Big A-Larger Than Life wrote:

Or if the MUA is serious about their escort craft, they'll bring a real camel.   And as soon as the evil tog boy starts getting out his model filleting knife, the camel can bite him in the baws with its big chiclet teeth.

Big A, you have a twisted and evil mind!   

Big A-Larger Than Life wrote:
I don't get why so many models are so scared of photographers?   They're not going to bite lol.  Legit pros are decent people. The 'creepos' are the fakers who try to pose as photographers to lure in models.  But those aren't legit pro photographers.  I don't get why many models seem to think they're one in the same.  They're not. 

Some models act so defensive like they hate all photographers and think they're creeps.  Why would you even continue to want to be a model then?  If you feel you need a damn bodyguard, uhhhh, you're doing it wrong.... just sayin'.  Tog boys are harmless people. They're too worried about getting the perfect shot and making the client happy to have time to serial kill you between frames.   Jeezus. 

And even they WERE these big dangerous people, how the fuck would taking a MUA protect you?  Most MUAs are tiny 5'2" girls.  What are they gonna kick the evil tog in the ankle when he pulls out his Rambo knife?   You'd probably have better luck yourself just kicking the guy in the baws.  If they really were dangerous.  Which legit professional photogs are not. 

Moral of the story models- if you feel you need two sessions of body combat classes at your local gym and Kevin Costner at your side to go to a modeling job, uhhhhh you're doing it wrong....

1

Big A-Larger Than Life wrote:

Or if the MUA is serious about their escort craft, they'll bring a real camel.   And as soon as the evil tog boy starts getting out his model filleting knife, the camel can bite him in the baws with its big chiclet teeth.

but who will escort the camel?  and who will do its makeup? theres no way to know if the makeup is safe for the camel unless its tested and you would not buy products that are tested on animals, would you?

Laura UnBound wrote:
If a photographer is supposed to believe the model when she says "oh my escort won't do that, they're really well behaved!" Then likewise the model should believe the photographer when they say "you don't need to be protected from me because I'm not going to do anything wrong"

Since neither party is willing to do that...they simply just don't work together, rather than hash out the "but why can't I do what I want even though its not what you want!?!?!?" Argument over and over and1 over.

Very well said

Herman Surkis wrote:
Steubenville anyone????

PLEASE explain what a underage drinking, misogynist football players, and the rape of a minor have to do with a photo shoot? And do explain in detail, because I can't wait to hear the parallels.

Otherwise, comparing the rape of a child, who also happened to be under the influence of alcohol, to a photo shoot is offensive at best, to everyone involved. Not only does it portray all photographers as potential rapists, it diminishes the severity and tragedy of what happened in Ohio.

Patchouli Nyx wrote:
how is this thread not like all the other 4,500,294 escort threads on MM?

Because apparently someone thinks that bringing a MUA as an escort has never been suggested in 50% of the posts in the now 4,500,295 threads on the subject.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:

Big A, you have a twisted and evil mind!   

Image Studios wrote:
How do you know in advance if they don't interfere.

Easy - they won't interfere if they are down the street at Starbuck's while the shoot takes place.

M Pandolfo Photography wrote:
I wonder if her overly-worried father is calmed knowing an MUA/Stylist is acting as his daughter's protection?

Has the term "escort" become so bastardized that it now means anyone who accompanies the llama to the shoot? An MUA is not an escort. A driver who delivers the llama and leaves is not an escort. The entire purpose of an escort is for the llama's protection in the oh-so-likely (if you listen to threads on here) event the photographer is dangerous.

What is the MUA going to do to protect daddy's daughter? Threaten the photographer with a camel-hair brush?

On another note...why is everyone looking for an escort compromise? Here's the compromise. If you require an escort to accompany you to our shoot, shoot with someone else. That's my compromise.

1000 .

Laura UnBound wrote:
If Im shooting art nudes I dont need your MUA, your Hair stylist, your wardrobe stylist, your whatever the balls they do...

Exactly. I have had shoots where the photographer has flat out told me I was NOT to wear makeup! See my Avatar for an example.

Rick OBanion Photo wrote:
So much has been said I do not want to open the debate on escorts. However a new model contacted me last week about a shoot and she eventually called me. She said she needed to bring an escort since it was a promise she had made to her overly worried father....as I was about to say no thanks...she said that her escort was an MUA and stylist. I checked the MUA's profile, it all looked quite good.
Win/win.
So I offer this idea to those ladies wanting/needing escorts. Make friends with an MUA or stylist. Make very good friends with one...or two.
Not many photographers would say no to this arrangement.

I do this with models in NYC. Models still pay my rates and leave if another comes in (if they want to stay longer) or I stay a little longer if I have an open day that allows me to stay a little longer. This way the look fab and feel safe.

R Byron Johnson wrote:
you all look like a bunch of whiny pussies.

And you sound like you haven't yet graduated high school.

By your own admission, you are new to photography. Spend some more time behind the lens, and we'll have this discussion again, Sir Lancelot.

You simply don't have the experience to know what you're talking about, and it shows.