So for a few years now i've been looking into alternative modeling sites such as Suicide Girls, Gods Girls (a personal favorite) etc. I've applied to many of them, recently suicide girls contacted me back. Now my concern is that it's an up and down thing (there are some good reviews as well as bad), I personally don;t do much modeling for competitive companies or similar sites, so the two year clause isn't a big deal, however I've been told in some cases you could model for one Ie. Gods Girls first, then model for the other. I've done much research, but i would like to know more about it (personal exp, etc.) and about other site options before I make a final decision(s).
Jun 13 13 01:10 am Link
I'm not entirely interested in the "hustler" type porn style (like playing w/ myself etc.) so sites where it's an option but i'm not required to is fine. :-)
Jun 13 13 01:16 am Link
I'm on SG and I don't know if it's the same for GG, but on SG you need to deactivate and be inactive for 2 years minimum before modeling for any "competition" (including GodsGirls.)
I know SuicideGirls gets a bad rep, but I've only had positive experiences from it, plus if your set gets bought it pays better than GodsGirls. GodsGirls does have video, as well, from the looks of it, whereas SG is really just photosets and "fun" videos like how to put on a corset, make absinthe, ect.
Either way, neither site requires you to. I'm not sure about GG, but on SG your photoset will flat out not be accepted if you include spread shots/masturbation.
Zivity is another good option to look into. It's awesome, a lot of room for creativity and great for networking. Plus, neither SG or GG have competition with it.
Jun 13 13 03:57 am Link
New York, New York, US
Freelance is a better option. You make your own rules and work with who you want to work with. Be your own boss! Why force yourself to follow rules of someone else's contract that will limit your money making potential?
Anything that limits your ability to make money that you sign is stupid!
Why not just wear a sign that says "make me your sucker"?
Jun 13 13 06:39 am Link
Shilo Von Porcelaine wrote:
I've heard of zivity I also heard of deviant nation back in the day. So with suicide girls you only have to exclusively model for ten for 2 years, then you can model for whomever?? I was also hearing rumors about how SG has rights to your nickname, is this really the case?? I would love to model for them (and as if right now I only do modeling as a side now). So I would love as much information as possible! :-)
Jun 13 13 12:41 pm Link
Houston, Texas, US
If you are interested in adult film and photography it's important to have management. My wife did a lot of freelance and had excellent management. It requires travel for the best paying gigs but you are compensated and they pay is extremely good. If you are interested I would refer you to her manager. She had so many bookings she could not fit them in her schedule.
Jun 13 13 03:54 pm Link
Unless a site is paying you a significant amount, on a regular basis, it would be silly to limit yourself. I think most of the things people say about what sites you do or do not have "permission" to llama for are total myth and not ever put forth by anyone official.
I'd mention BlueBlood.com and related sites, or point out that AltPorn.net (APN calls the overall genre porn; I do not. What I do is erotica.) has a pretty complete listing. but I'm kind of baffled by why a random blonde chick, with no obviously apparent alternative attributes or interests, is asking about alt sites?
Jun 27 13 08:45 pm Link
No, with SG the two years is more like your "two weeks notice" with a regular job. It doesn't matter how long you have been on the site, from the day you send management a message asking them to deactivate your profile on the site (however they keep your sets up), you have a two year gap where you are still legally bound not to pose for any other nudey alt girl sites (when they say this, they mean GodsGirls pretty much.)
And yes, they can use your photos to promote the site or on their merchandise. You sell your photos as you do any time you sign a model release. I was published in their latest book without being told about it first. I don't necessarily think that is a bad thing or unfair, however...I did sign a contract, and at the end of the day they are a business. Any photographer you work with could do the very same thing. People just like to make an example of SG because a few years ago the management/terms were getting out of hand. However this has been resolved now.
However, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense for me that someone would quit SG then go straight on to another site. SG is pretty good these days and pays well for what it is (i.e. not hardcore porn.)
Also, re: the above post, SG seem to be going in the direction of more agency ish girls who just happen to have tattoos. Not all the time, but I've been seeing a lot of quite ordinary, not very modified girls on the site. When I shot for them, I had no tattoos whatsoever, which is something that they started out pretty much having as a requirement. And being an "alt model" isn't all about having tattoos or piercings...being alternative is a very individual thing and there's no set rules, which is the point But yeah...it's certainly not what it used to be as far as having some crazy looks.
Jun 27 13 10:33 pm Link
Palo Alto, California, US
They can't force you to not make new content for other venues. Not without a contract. Show me one court case where that has been upheld.
Jun 27 13 10:50 pm Link
That's the thing though, there is a contract you sign before you upload any photo sets where you agree not to...or yes, they would legally be able to take you to court for that. And it has been done in the past (google Apnea.) It's like any other contract you might sign, such as a lease, if you sign it, you agree to the terms and are responsible. If you don't like it and feel like you will go to another site, you don't have to sign it. Simple as
Jun 27 13 10:56 pm Link
Palo Alto, California, US
Non compete is not the same as non disclosure. California will not enforce a nom compete at all and several states limit them. You can sue anyone for anything. SG would have to *successfully* argue their style is their trademark. Which they haven't or the other sites would be gone
Jun 27 13 11:28 pm Link
Shilo Von Porcelaine wrote:
I am not an attorney, so please do not take this as legal advice, but (1) SG did not win in court versus Apnea and (2) I believe she modeled for lots of other publications, so this was a bit more nuanced and SG had specific reasons, having little to do with models, to take issue with GG.
Jun 28 13 02:07 am Link
Amelia G wrote:
I still kinda want to know, from the OP, why there are multiple non-alt girls posting threads on here about SG?
Jul 01 13 08:23 pm Link