Quixotic Erotic wrote:
Get ready for an online beating here on MM. Do a search and you'll see most people on M are anti SG. Being "accepted" as one of their models is not what you might think it means. Do some research on how modeling for them works.

I figured as much. I will search it out.

Isriah wrote:
Has anyone here worked with them and did you have a bad experience?

never worked, never considered them.
SG is a franchising of misery.
Isriah, you can easily create your own brand ("Isriah SuperGirls", for example) -- your own web site costs peanuts these days, with your own copyrights, profits (if any) and no crooks around

Isriah wrote:
I mean back in the day when I read their contact it sounded kind of sh**y.

You do not get pay unless you have the most creative set and that is only 500 dollars.

They have the rights to your image and make money off of YOU.

So yes, I know what they are about. I do like that they do all different looks though. However, like I said, I had a few friend involved with them that got out and away from them and they told me some very bad things. One even said if I was taking photos for them she would come and haul my a** away from the studio. Ha Ha.

I was just curious if anyone else had any stories about them. Now that I see all the past threads. Wow. It certainly has been discussed!

Aren't those testimonials enough to just not do it?

Why are we even talking about this?

Isriah wrote:
I was actually accepted awhile back ago by SG to be one of their models. However, I've had other friends who have worked with them and STRONGLY were against me having anything to do with them. I guess they considered them very abusive and highlighted things that were turmoil in said model's life. (ex: self harm scars)

Has anyone here worked with them and did you have a bad experience?

So let me get this straight. You have friends who have worked for them (so their opinion is based on personal experience) who had tried to dissuade you from signing up and making you go through what they went through.... and still you post on MM asking for the advice of strangers.

I suspect you're just looking for that one person who will tell you to go for it, because that's what you really want. By having one person to tell to it's okay, you can give yourself an excuse if things don't work out; just a person to blame.

Francisco Castro wrote:
I suspect you're just looking for that one person who will tell you to go for it, because that's what you really want. By having one person to tell to it's okay, you can give yourself an excuse if things don't work out; just a person to blame.

Good Egg Productions wrote:
Aren't those testimonials enough to just not do it?

Why are we even talking about this?

+1

You mention "friends", as in the plural, and don't mention a single one of those friends who shared a positive experience...and you still want opinions from outsiders? This would say to a lot of us that you're not looking for honest opinions (you already got those), but rather you're looking for validation to go ahead with it.

Dan OMell wrote:

never worked, never considered them.
SG is a franchising of misery.
Isriah, you can easily create your own brand ("Isriah SuperGirls", for example) -- your own web site costs peanuts these days, with your own copyrights, profits (if any) and no crooks around

++ Isriah, if everyone tells you a dog is a biter, why are you drawn to pat it yourself? The above advice seems very sensible to me.

Jay Farrell wrote:
They dangle the carrot, but just want the content the photographer is stupid enough to sign away, with no commitment from them whatsoever. They're beneath the barrel scum.

Isn't that pretty much the same for almost every e-zine and radio station promotion that use photographers for their content with the promise of "exposure" that means nothing?  I don't really see the difference, other than Suicide Girls might have been doing it first.

K E E L I N G wrote:

Isn't that pretty much the same for almost every e-zine and radio station promotion that use photographers for their content with the promise of "exposure" that means nothing?  I don't really see the difference, other than Suicide Girls might have been doing it first.

Or rather Suicidegirls is just the most well-known.  But you're right, that shit happens all the time.  It's pretty standard and certainly not exclusive to SG.  People are always searching to profit from the work of others.  It's the "American" way.

Dan OMell wrote:

never worked, never considered them.
SG is a franchising of misery.
Isriah, you can easily create your own brand ("Isriah SuperGirls", for example) -- your own web site costs peanuts these days, with your own copyrights, profits (if any) and no crooks around

Good point here.

nudeXposed wrote:
suicide girls? really? what sick puppy wants pictures of dead girls anyway?

Crime scene photographers?