Plus Model Yendi Barker wrote:
I did my first "implied" nudity shoot the other day, and it has opened up Pandora's Box! I quote "implied" because when I got the negatives, I realized that the camera was purposefully aimed at my nipples and crotch! So even though those photos were not published, they were still taken for the photographer's collection!

I am curious why Yendi assumes the photographer would save those for his "Yendi collection"?

Which scenario is more likely?

A) There were shots of Yendi that were taken in the course of the shoot that were inadvertent. The images were shown to Yendi via the negatives. Those images of Yendi were not used in any way.

B) The shots of Yendi were taken purposefully just so the photographer could get a sneak peak at Yendi's one-of-a-kind nipple/crotch. In fact, Yendi's lady parts were so phenomenally exquisite he has saved them for some personal collection to stimulate his otherwise humdrum masturbatory exercises. He will title this collection, you guessed it, The Yendi Archives.

Doesn't Yendi think if it was the second option that he never would have shared those shots with Yendi in the first place?

udor wrote:

... and the escort should be armed... heavily... not just pepper spray, but also a gun and a spare magazine for easy reloading.

Hope that the escort is also reacting quickly, as soon as he/she hears the word "Okay... I am going to shoot you know!" to fast draw the gun and unload on the evil photographer...

forget reloading, high capacity mag!

Michael Pandolfo wrote:
Doesn't Yendi think if it was the second option that he never would have shared those shots with Yendi in the first place?

That's what I would think...

JOEL McDONALD wrote:
Always check for model references on the photogs' profile page.

If no posted model references then ask for them.

If no references provided at all, then move on.

I don't have model references on my profile... the question about references hasn't come up yet... ever... not sure if references are really that important!


I know this older gentleman who collects references of new models and posts them... and pretends to be some sort of a father figure to them... and demonstrates on the model what she should do when she is being touched like this and that... very hands-on... they don't have a clue what's happening...

But the references are very shiny...

Sedition wrote:

forget reloading, high capacity mag!

Yeah, but what if the photography has a high-capacity magazine too and shoots fully-automatic?

Ed Woodson Photography wrote:
I'm a bit confused here.

If the shoot was "implied", why were your nipples and crotch visible enough for the Photographer to photograph them?

And, if the Photographer was trying to get away with something, why did he give you the "negatives"?

And, if they aren't posted anywhere, why did you suddenly get bombarded with requests to do *TF* nude shoots?

it took you two pages to figure this out?

the other dozen threads were not enough of a clue?
https://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=885483
https://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=885482

Ed Woodson Photography wrote:
I'm a bit confused here.

If the shoot was "implied", why were your nipples and crotch visible enough for the Photographer to photograph them?

And, if the Photographer was trying to get away with something, why did he give you the "negatives"?

And, if they aren't posted anywhere, why did you suddenly get bombarded with requests to do *TF* nude shoots?

I've worked with a few new models and one of the things we always went over for doing implied was light and camera awareness. You should always be aware of what is showing, where the flash will light and shadow...

AVD AlphaDuctions wrote:

it took you two pages to figure this out?

the other dozen threads were not enough of a clue?
https://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=885483
https://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=885482

No, it took me reading the OP's post to figure it out.   I was unaware there were other threads.

Have a nice day!

New Art Photo wrote:
I doubt runaways do TFP shoots...

.

Trade for Spare Change?
trade for drugs?
trade for cardboard boxes?

-B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote:
A great way to end up working only with GWCs who will pay to see you naked but have no interest in the images.






Just my $0.02

Ciao
Stefano
www.stefanobrunesci.com

T-D-L wrote:
+1

If models don't want to worry about crappy images, or weirdos, or people shooting for "the bank" then they should only shoot nudes with photographers whose work they like and would consider using, not just thinking in terms of "Oh, well I can make some quick $$$ so why not?"  It's the internet...that shit's forever lol.  General rule of thumb I also tell anyone who is considering shooting more racy stuff:  Don't half-ass it.  If you're only comfortable shooting implieds, then don't bother.  Your nips and crotch will be visible at some point.  In the rare situation when I specifically need an implied shot, I will only work with models comfortable with nudity...less hassle, and no worrying about if your naughty-bits are going to be showing or any regrets later on.  Short story:  Don't shoot implieds if you're not comfortable with nudes.  Makes life easier for all in the long run and will help you to avoid these problems.

Also, lets not forget the OP has some sort of responsibility here and needs to be a little more cognizant of what's going on around her.  Aiming a camera at someones crotch is probably hard to miss.  Noticing that every time you change positions and you hear a shutter click or see a flash go off might be another hint you need to remind the photographer of your limits.  Basically I find it hard to believe that you weren't at least somewhat aware that something fishy was going on.

And finally, what's wrong with TF nude shoots at my place?  Or any other photographers?  A $5 tshirt isn't worth your dignity, but (ex.)  $100/hr with a shitty photographer is?  I don't get the logic.  If it's all about "My dignity this, my dignity that, shitty photographers are asking me to shoot" then be more selective and just say "Not interested" to those you don't like.  It's really that simple.  People who aren't on your level are going to ask you to do things for what you believe is less than your worth...that's a fact of MM.  There's no need to rant and complain about it.

^^^

Michael Pandolfo wrote:
What exactly is a fake photographer? He took photos of you with a Williams Sonoma Toaster?

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

A great way to end up working only with GWCs who will pay to see you naked but have no interest in the images.






Just my $0.02

Ciao
Stefano
www.stefanobrunesci.com

Thinking the same thing.

Michael Pandolfo wrote:

I am curious why Yendi assumes the photographer would save those for his "Yendi collection"?

Which scenario is more likely?

A) There were shots of Yendi that were taken in the course of the shoot that were inadvertent. The images were shown to Yendi via the negatives. Those images of Yendi were not used in any way.

B) The shots of Yendi were taken purposefully just so the photographer could get a sneak peak at Yendi's one-of-a-kind nipple/crotch. In fact, Yendi's lady parts were so phenomenally exquisite he has saved them for some personal collection to stimulate his otherwise humdrum masturbatory exercises. He will title this collection, you guessed it, The Yendi Archives.

Doesn't Yendi think if it was the second option that he never would have shared those shots with Yendi in the first place?

masturbatory: is that really a word? I'd like to use it in a conversation but if it's copyrighted or trade-marked I'd feel like I owed you something.

Plus Model Yendi Barker wrote:
I hope you all are a little more educated now.

pardon me for saying so, but everything that you have posted in this thread shows your lack of experience about posing implied/nude in the first place. The point of an implied/nude shoot is to shoot nude or implied nudity. This is up to YOU and the PHOTOGRAPHER to discuss what level of nudity that you are comfortable with. aka keep the communication open with him/her from the get go and find out what their interpretation of head shot or implied/nudity defines if that is what you agree to shoot. If you are not comfortable with their interpretation, you should either find a different photographer that you are comfortable with, or maybe implied/nude modeling is not for you.  Also if the photographer is going beyond your comfort levels during the shoot, you should simply pick up your things and leave instead of letting the action continue. The fact that you are rude and condescending to people with the above statement furthermore shows that you are trolling and only hoping to gain one sided sympathy for your own view points vs. actually discussing the issue with those who are much more experienced than you in the industry to find out ways that you can easily avoid situations that you are uncomfortable with in the future.

Northern Lights Images wrote:
check refs and bring escort

Check references. Forget the escort.

I hope you all are a little more educated now.

I'm definitely more educated now.

At first, I thought your post was BS.  Now, I've learned that it is actually total BS.

Plus Model Yendi Barker wrote:
1st of all I did not overpost. I tried to edit my forum post twice and every edit popped up as a new discussion. I'm still fairly new to MM because I usually book through other means and through casting calls.

Just an FYI - if you edit a post, it doesn't start a new thread.

You must have clicked on "New Topic" - that's the only way to start a new one.

Plus Model Yendi Barker wrote:
Id like to thank the 3 or 4 people who had meaningful responses. Evie in example. But the rest of you are DEFINITELY TROLLING! Playing the devils advocate just displays your lack of morals.

1st of all I did not overpost. I tried to edit my forum post twice and every edit popped up as a new discussion. I'm still fairly new to MM because I usually book through other means and through casting calls.

2nd, in the fistnet dress, my nipples were covered so it was impossible to see them. But thanks for recommending that everyone check out my portfolio.

3rd the photog said he was aiming for a headshot but he was so far away that he caught EVERYTHING which really upsets me.

Lastly, blame the perv for this issue...not me. I've been modeling for 4 years. I started out as a mainstream model for the A1 agency.  I started modeling as a Plus Size model for less than a year. The only thing I'm new to is freelancing and booking my own gigs. So it has nothing to do with a lack of modeling experience.

I hope you all are a little more educated now.

Trolls?  Devils advocates? Lack of morals?  More educated?  This post you just made does little to educate us.   So you are an experienced model.  We get that! 

The photographer gave you the negatives.  I asked for clarification on the photographer having shot film and giving you the negatives.  It's rare that a photographer would shoot film nowadays, let alone give the model the negatives.

You're making judgement of other peoples morals does not go over very well either.

Poor communication seems to be the issue here.

I'm definitely more educated now.

At first, I thought your post was BS.  Now, I've learned that it is actually total BS.

Plus Model Yendi Barker wrote:
I saw your port. You're a perv.

By the way, critiques are not allowed in this part of the forum.

Can we be nice?

Plus Model Yendi Barker wrote:
I saw your port. You're a perv.

Yep, you're absolutely correct and rule #1 is in effect.

Plus Model Yendi Barker wrote:

I saw your port. You're a perv.

Yeah, you crossed a line here.

If you end up in the brig and have some spare time, you might want to read this...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humility

Charlie-CNP wrote:
pardon me for saying so, but everything that you have posted in this thread shows your lack of experience about posing implied/nude in the first place. The point of an implied/nude shoot is to shoot nude or implied nudity.

This is up to YOU and the PHOTOGRAPHER to discuss what level of nudity that you are comfortable with. aka keep the communication open with him/her from the get go and find out what their interpretation of head shot or implied/nudity defines if that is what you agree to shoot.

If you are not comfortable with their interpretation, you should either find a different photographer that you are comfortable with, or maybe implied/nude modeling is not for you.  Also if the photographer is going beyond your comfort levels during the shoot, you should simply pick up your things and leave instead of letting the action continue.

The fact that you are rude and condescending to people with the above statement furthermore shows that you are trolling and only hoping to gain one sided sympathy for your own view points vs. actually discussing the issue with those who are much more experienced than you in the industry to find out ways that you can easily avoid situations that you are uncomfortable with in the future.

Broke into paragraphs for you ... but I agree with what you've said.

Plus llama Yendi Barker wrote:
I hope you all are a little more educated now.

I just got a masters now reading the topic in "how to be wrong and condescending 101"

Jersey Shore wrote:
i am still in the dark, trying to understand this thread. what i do not understand is this:
if you got the negatives from the shoot, how will the crotch and nipple shots affect you?
all you have to do is to keep the negatives you were given and those photos will never see the light of day... right?

it seems to me that there are quite a few people who post in these forums for the sole purpose of drawing attention to themselves. i draw this conclusion whenever i come across a posting that really does not make sense.

There is a definite communication problem!

Patrick Walberg wrote:
Broke into paragraphs for you ... but I agree with what you've said.

haha Thanks Patrick!

Jersey Shore wrote:
i am still in the dark, trying to understand this thread. what i do not understand is this:
if you got the negatives from the shoot, how will the crotch and nipple shots affect you?
all you have to do is to keep the negatives you were given and those photos will never see the light of day...right?

By negatives I don't mean a roll of brown film. I mean the digital negatives, as in the original, raw images on a cd.

Plus Model Yendi Barker wrote:
Id like to thank the 3 or 4 people who had meaningful responses. Evie in example. But the rest of you are DEFINITELY TROLLING! Playing the devils advocate just displays your lack of morals.

1st of all I did not overpost. I tried to edit my forum post twice and every edit popped up as a new discussion. I'm still fairly new to MM because I usually book through other means and through casting calls.

2nd, in the fistnet dress, my nipples were covered so it was impossible to see them. But thanks for recommending that everyone check out my portfolio.

3rd the photog said he was aiming for a headshot but he was so far away that he caught EVERYTHING which really upsets me.

Blame the perv for this issue...not me. I've been modeling for almost 5 years. I started out as a mainstream model for the A1 agency in 2008.  I crossed over to the Plus Size modeling industry in 2012 and have been freelancing since then. The only thing I'm new to is freelancing and booking my own gigs. It has nothing to do with a lack of modeling experience.

Lastly I rebuke the statement that "posing for a picture makes you a model." WRONG! That was clearly the statement of a fake photographer. It is a lot of hard work making sure that my hair, nails, and skin are intact before a shoot or stint on the runway. I've lost weight for gigs and had extensive training on how to angle my body and face to maximize the amount of usable images. The dude who said that is a gwc.


I hope you all are a little more educated now.

I think that you can rest assured that no Shooters reading your posts on this thread will be bombarding you to shoot at their house or anywhere else for that matter.

IT always makes me laugh how models with the most suggestive, slutty, cheap shots on their folios get all whiny and indignant declaring they don't do topless or nude shots like they are more degrading than what is already there simply because their bits are somewhat covered although still shoved in your face and clearly the what the pic is really all about.

Not saying this is necessarily the situation in the OP's case, but its not exactly devoid of any connection either.

Some models expect shooters to know that they don't do topless or nude shots even though what they are already showing is far more sexually provocative and implicit  that any half decent art nude and certainly any topless shot could be.

The most unreliable things about a lot of models is the info on their folios.  How many times have we all seen topless or naked shots on a portfolio of a model that says she dosen't do them in the description?
Why do models get so upset then when shooters ask the question to confirm the information provided one way or the other?

There are loads of smart models out there that do nudes but say otherwise on their folios. Everyone knows it. You can't blame shooters asking about nudes when info on models folios is proven to be about as reliable as a 2 bob watch.


Best if you are so worried about your "Dignity" you might want to consider deleteing a lot of the pics on your folio and make sure you only wear more, and do more " Respectable" shots in the future.