M A R L H A M wrote:
You do realise that most of the models you linked in your earlier post haven't been active on MM for months, often years? What does that tell you?

In fact I recognised one of the models you linked as she's very popular on the UK centric sites where she has long lists of references. I bet she won't be impressed by the implied slight that she's only there to work with adult gwcs or to learn that her modelling career is 'finished'.

It's interesting that you regard MM as somehow better than other sites. I've worked with many models who do not share that view.

For the record I'm not a member of either of the principal UK sites. Most of my models are sourced via Facebook and occasionally here on MM.

Please cite me where I implied ANYTHING OF THE SORT.

I have always said that models who.leave here can often go on to better things.
It was my opponents in this thread that implied otherwise.

Cite or be damned

And FYI YOU CANNOT SEARCH MODELS ON FB. Try me. I am  on there .More bullshit. From Canterbury. It's a bit like Hicksville Tenn btw. Don'tt get me wrong. You cannot find them on FB on google very often  after you have found them here. But watcha doin here if you can source models on the UK sites? Oh you aren't there? Yesssss....

As I said. You may find the odd model on the UK sites and the odd photographer who is ok. But you will find me on them too. I'm one of the ones that 'don't respond'

Eliza C  new portfolio wrote:
And FYI YOU CANNOT SEARCH MODELS ON FB. Try me. I am  on there .More bullshit.

I would think that a researcher of such high caliber as yourself would, well, do some research.

Google:   facebook models females

This is your starting point. Many models do, in fact, have fb pages.

M A R L H A M wrote:
It's not good form Eliza to go back and edit your forum posts in an attempt to change their intonation after someone else has commented based on what you originally said. At least I don't think so.

MelissaAnn  wrote:
Wow. Someone's grown a little big for their britches!

I was answering the question of another poster Eliza.  If you don't feel that my comment was relevant, go ahead and file that away with all your other opinions.  The person I answered was asking a valid question, and I'm sorry you didn't like his question (or my answer) because it happened to contradict you/question what you were saying.  For every 2 dozen models you link, there's hundreds more just like them that are failing/not getting work.  Your links do nothing to prove the point you're trying to make.  If I posted 100 links to successful nude models in Seattle, that doesn't prove that most nude models in Seattle are successful.  Surely you can see that?

If you'd like to start another 5 page argument, go right on ahead since you seem to enjoy that so much, and apparently have the time for it. 

Several good points have been made in this thread.  Some by you, and many by others, who had every bit as much to add.

Yep my first post was against the stripper rates argument. I put it in the first post I made. Unfortunately for some, other people have fucked it up big time and I can only smile for those that charge them. Its stripper rates a go go....or I am correct in saying that this is not justified because there is no more demand for it than clothed and have produced evidence to support it. 8 to 1 clothed over nude. It's my experience in London; and it's the casting calls in London, and I damn KNOW it's the fucking taxmans view too.

So what advice do you have got the poster? And what models can you cute that are similar to her in London. I didn't have to google long for those known to me personally or how they earn the majority of their income.

Lohkee wrote:
I would think that a researcher of such high caliber as yourself would, well, do some research.

Google:   facebook models females

This is your starting point. Many models do, in fact, have fb pages.

As do I.

Cite mine.
I have 3000 followers it shouldn't be hard.

FROM GOOGLE AND POST LINK.

Eliza C  new portfolio wrote:
As do I.

Cite mine

Oh fer christ's sake - Here, I'll give you a freebie.

https://www.facebook.com/TraciiTaylorModelingHireMe

I don't need to cite yours. You do what you do. Not everyone fits into your view of how things are or should be. Get over it (and yourself).

M A R L H A M wrote:
It's not good form Eliza to go back and edit your forum posts in an attempt to change their intonation after someone else has commented based on what you originally said. At least I don't think so.

WHAT? I didn't. If I was editing it was down to typos or rephrasing  etc and hadn't seen your post.

Lohkee wrote:
Oh fer christ's sake - Here, I'll give you a freebie.

https://www.facebook.com/TraciiTaylorModelingHireMe

I don't need to cite yours. You do what you do. Not everyone fits into your view of how things are or should be. Get over it (and yourself).

So you cant find me with 3000 followers including the mother of two regular Vogue models, 49 people here, 17 designers 6 of which placed in Vogue, 4 fashion house directors, 4 magazine fashion editors, ,11 National Geographic photographers and journalists, 11 top buresque stars, 33 people from bands,. Ok good my faith on the world is restored.

Eliza C  new portfolio wrote:
Cite mine.
I have 3000 followers it shouldn't be hard.

FROM GOOGLE AND POST LINK.

I don't understand what you're trying to prove:

https://www.google.co.uk/#q=facebook+el … hion+model

M A R L H A M wrote:
I don't understand what you're trying to prove:

https://www.google.co.uk/#q=facebook+el … hion+model

Ok. Now try adding me

Actually that's odd because it didn't come up till 4th page twenty mins ago

Not that I am bothered. I am quite pleased it's that quick

M A R L H A M wrote:

I don't understand what you're trying to prove:

https://www.google.co.uk/#q=facebook+el … hion+model

She don't either . Just arguing/"talking" to make herself feel important. Same as usual in every thread she gets in .

Eliza C  new portfolio wrote:

So you cant find me with 3000 followers including the mother of two regular Vogue models, 49 people here, 17 designers 6 of which placed in Vogue, 4 fashion house directors, 4 magazine fashion editors, ,11 National Geographic photographers and journalists, 11 top buresque stars, 33 people from bands,. Ok good my faith on the world is restored.

Assumptions will (as this thread has repeatedly shown) be your undoing, I have not searched for you; nor do I intend to. Nothing personal. It's just not really germane to the topic at hand. Again, You have your view of the world (and how it should be) and other people have theirs. It's not a matter of "right" or "wrong" just different approaches and life experiences. That is all.

Eliza C  new portfolio wrote:

Ok. Now try adding me

You'll have to delete me first LOL

Hi_Spade Photography wrote:

She don't either . Just arguing/"talking" to make herself feel important. Same as usual in every thread she gets in .

As I said I produce evidence people resort to personal attack because they have nothing else.

Eliza C  new portfolio wrote:
As I said I produce evidence people resort to personal attack because they have nothing else.

. . .

Lohkee wrote:
. . .

Eliza C  new portfolio wrote:
Yep my first post was against the stripper rates argument. I put it in the first post I made. Unfortunately for some, other people have fucked it up big time and I can only smile for those that charge them. Its stripper rates a go go....or I am correct in saying that this is not justified because there is no more demand for it than clothed and have produced evidence to support it. 8 to 1 clothed over nude. It's my experience in London; and it's the casting calls in London, and I damn KNOW it's the fucking taxmans view too.

So what advice do you have got the poster? And what models can you cute that are similar to her in London. I didn't have to google long for those known to me personally or how they earn the majority of their income.

Apparently you're so wrapped up in your own garbage that you don't even notice the contributions of others. Check the first page Eliza, I contributed to the thread and gave my advice to the OP long time ago.

You're taking what's said in this thread all personal, and accusing me of personally attacking you because I pointed out that you're not always right, and the experiences of other models are often different than yours. Contradicting you does not equal a personal attack. When somebody expresses a different opinion than you, it does not necessarily make them (or you) wrong, it can simply be 2 people sharing their personal insight.  I'm not sure why you seem incapable of allowing others to express opinions that differ from yours without taking it personally, or making the whole situation about you.

MelissaAnn  wrote:
Apparently you're so wrapped up in your own garbage that you don't even notice the contributions of others. Check the first page Eliza, I contributed to the thread and gave my advice to the OP long time ago.

You're taking what's said in this thread all personal, and accusing me of personally attacking you because I pointed out that you're not always right, and the experiences of other models are often different than yours. Contradicting you does not equal a personal attack. When somebody expresses a different opinion than you, it does not necessarily make them (or you) wrong, it can simply be 2 people sharing their personal insight.  I'm not sure why you seem incapable of allowing others to express opinions that differ from yours without taking it personally, or making the whole situation about you.

+1 million, but it won't matter

Eliza C  new portfolio wrote:

Now who do you think has given the most relevant advice to Angela here?

Probably me ... few words and to the point.

AJScalzitti wrote:

+1 million, but it won't matter

Lohkee wrote:

Assumptions will (as this thread has repeatedly shown) be your undoing, I have not searched for you; nor do I intend to. Nothing personal. It's just not really germane to the topic at hand. Again, You have your view of the world (and how it should be) and other people have theirs. It's not a matter of "right" or "wrong" just different approaches and life experiences. That is all.

And tell me do your life experiences tell you anything about earning a living as a model in London that can assist the op?
Or can you cite models with similar experience to the Op on London that may be relevant?
And can you produce evidence to counter mine that there are more paid castings for nude models than clothed castings?

MelissaAnn  wrote:
Apparently you're so wrapped up in your own garbage that you don't even notice the contributions of others. Check the first page Eliza, I contributed to the thread and gave my advice to the OP long time ago.

You're taking what's said in this thread all personal, and accusing me of personally attacking you because I pointed out that you're not always right, and the experiences of other models are often different than yours. Contradicting you does not equal a personal attack. When somebody expresses a different opinion than you, it does not necessarily make them (or you) wrong, it can simply be 2 people sharing their personal insight.  I'm not sure why you seem incapable of allowing others to express opinions that differ from yours without taking it personally, or making the whole situation about you.

My experience is relevant; I was a pro model in London. Just a journeyman model but I know the market. But that's only part of it. My opinion is also based on data and evidence I have cited. It doesn't make me right. But nothing has proved me wrong either. I have however proved other opinion questionable.

You are making it about me; I have made it about evidence.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Take a look every so often at the welcome page for castings.   Take notice of how much is TF for clothed work vs. paid.   I constantly hear from paid only nude models.   Never from paid fashion only models.   I can't recall the last travelling fashion only model I've seen.   I get why some members want MM seen differently.   This is not a professional website.  Its not full of well paid work for non nude models.   Part of why I suggested that if a model doesn't do nudes she might consider being more flexible on payment.   Photographer aren't paying most of the models here to shoot in a great exotic gown.   They might love that gown but aren't paying to shoot you in it.   They may pay to see you naked and shoot you.

Most of the clothes only models fade away after a few weeks here.   One I shot is very pretty but now asks for payment and gets no offers expect for cheesy lingerie.   In fact a former nude art model confessed her best year saw her make around $24,000.   I do get why some members want to paint this site as a great alternative to being with a agency and claim there is a lot of paid work for non nude models.   Saying it doesn't make it so.   One of our members mentioned that the OP could easily command over $100.00 per hour (in American bucks)   for non nudes.   I don't think so when beautiful nude models struggle to make that.   I don't think so when you see over and over models leave MM and admit that the only offers they receive is
erotic nudes.   

MM is mostly filled with amateurs some of whom are fantastic photographers but who only pay models for nudes.   MM models?   As one member said,   its filled with unreliable dreamers.

I have cited today's castings in the UK. That is all I need to do to make your belief questionable.
You have produced no evidence or data whatever.

If you are booking unreliable dreamers it's your problem.
Other photographers dont have it.

I have also said many times that $100 an hour in London would be less than the bare minimum of any basic London agency and again have shown that with cites and shown there to be minimum hours. Four in fact. Plus lunch breaks plus extra commercial use fees. Now of course if you require absolute assurance and have a third party budget go to them by all means. But those castings are on MM in London because not every client has such budgets. It's a free market. You know their prices you know average freelance prices in London.

The Something Guy wrote:

Probably me ... few words and to the point.

So few words in fact you have nit even attempted to answer the ops question.

Why not actually have a go?

Eliza C  new portfolio wrote:

I have cited today's castings in the UK. That is all I need to do to make your belief questionable.
You have produced no evidence or data whatever.

If you are booking unreliable dreamers it's your problem.
Other photographers dont have it.

I have also said many times that $100 an hour in London would be less than the bare minimum of any basic London agency and again have shown that with cites and shown there to be minimum hours. Four in fact. Plus lunch breaks plus extra commercial use fees. Now of course if you require absolute assurance and have a third party budget go to them by all means. But those castings are on MM in London because not every client has such budgets. It's a free market. You know their prices you know average freelance prices in London.

Several members gave you some great advice.   I don't know about the UK.  but as I watch the announcement board in  real time.   I've not seen ANY well paid work non nude work.   A member just posted paid nude work.   It doesn't matter though, Eliza.   Because the only view points you value are those who agree with you.   Melissa was dead on.

Eliza C  new portfolio wrote:
And tell me do your life experiences tell you anything about earning a living as a model in London that can assist the op?
Or can you cite models with similar experience to the Op on London that may be relevant?
And can you produce evidence to counter mine that there are more paid castings for nude models than clothed castings?

Why would I even want to try? None of this matters at all. Regardless of **your** experience in London, the OP's might well be very different. There are beautiful models (just about everywhere) some of which, can indeed command serious bank, others not so much. There are just too many variables involved to make a blanket statement regarding a course of action with any degree of reliability. I'm not saying that you are right, or wrong. I am saying that your way is not the only way. Perhaps your postings have given the OP some ideas worth perusing. Perhaps not. Who knows? It's not a contest Eliza, and it's not personal. Why make it so?

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Members take a look at the main page and notice the castings.   I've been watching them for a while and most I've seen are unpaid.   One a few minutes ago was a promo gig for $15.00 an hour.   A few travelling models but mostly TF or unpaid work.   Currently I see a casting for a petite fashion show.   Its unpaid.   People just don't have a lot of resources to pay models.   I used to go with friends to fashion shows.   There would often be agency models.   Most received clothes and no cash.   If there is all this paid clothed fashion work then why are models complaining that the only offers they get are nude.

Moreover its just not that difficult to get models to shoot in clothing.   Photographers are paying for nudity.   That's about it.

Ate you looking at the UK castings? That is what is relevant here in this thread.

I have cited them 21 clothed to 3 nudity the highest paid of which was a sculptor.

But IF what you say was true then models would be perfectly entitled to charge stripper rates. Supply and demand. But it isn't. People can see the castings. And that is what serious models are here for look at the views.

Fine if you can get models to shoot tf that's great. But don't be surprised if models don't respond to $20 an hour for two hours. I'd rather do eight hours for four days at $15 an hour doing promo.
And that would be my choice. And clearly it is also the choice of many other models. It's a free market what you worried about? They can always take what you guys are offering and would if it's fair.

Eliza C  new portfolio wrote:

Ate you looking at the UK castings? That is what is relevant here in this thread.

I have cited them 21 clothed to 3 nudity the highest paid of which was a sculptor.

But IF what you say was true then models would be perfectly entitled to charge stripper rates. Supply and demand. But it isn't. People can see the castings. And that is what serious models are here for look at the views.

Fine if you can get models to shoot tf that's great. But don't be surprised if models don't respond to $20 an hour for two hours. I'd rather do eight hours for four days at $15 an hour doing promo.
And that would be my choice. And clearly it is also the choice of many other models. It's a free market what you worried about? They can always take what you guys are offering and would if it's fair.

I'm looking at MM welcome page.   I've been watching it for several weeks.   Right now the only paid work I see is nude.   Look yourself.   Where is all this clothed fashion work you keep mentioning?   I rarely PM models anymore.   I just do castings.  Where is all this work?   A few casting calls here doesn't equal a lot of work.   Never mind though.  I don't want to wade through pages of data and cites and more shots of you at horse shows in hats.

Lohkee wrote:

Why would I even want to try? None of this matters at all. Regardless of **your** experience in London, the OP's might well be very different. There are beautiful models (just about everywhere) some of which, can indeed command serious bank, others not so much. There are just too many variables involved to make a blanket statement regarding a course of action with any degree of reliability. I'm not saying that you are right, or wrong. I am saying that your way is not the only way. Perhaps your postings have given the OP some ideas worth perusing. Perhaps not. Who knows? It's not a contest Eliza, and it's not personal.

I agree. As I said....I just gave my view but showed with evidence the views of others to be false. Nobody has produced counter evidence.

I gave two dozen models with similar dance and burlesque backgrounds in London many of whom make serious money and have serious credits. I think that is relevant. I don't see many of them making money from nude modelling. A few don't have a problem with it....including the op....but I know because I have worked with an know a number of them their main income comes from clothed modelling. As I say look at their credits.

That may not apply to other models elsewhere. But it's the most relevant to the Op.

Tony Lawrence wrote:

I'm looking at MM welcome page.   I've been watching it for several weeks.   Right now the only paid work I see is nude.   Look yourself.   Where is all this clothed fashion work you keep mentioning?   I rarely PM models anymore.   I just do castings.  Where is all this work?   A few casting calls here doesn't equal a lot of work.   Never mind though.  I don't want to wade through pages of data and cites and more shots of you at horse shows in hats.

You.may have missed this Tony. I posted on.previous page. This is tonight's first page for UK. There are a couple of promo lowish paid jobs true. Two. Then these. Maybe you can explain. It's just a typical UK MM castings day.




https://www.modelmayhem.com/casting/1979509 £100 corset shootfordesigner https://www.modelmayhem.com/casting/1975462 £200 fashion website A photographerforfashion brand who wantsfitmodelstats £100-£200a dayregular https://www.modelmayhem.com/casting/1979465

Of course you see models will always do a job for £65 if it's runway for a Knightsbridge store . 110 views already https://www.modelmayhem.com/casting/1979447

Hair modelling £300-£400 https://www.modelmayhem.com/casting/1979408 And another £200 https://www.modelmayhem.com/casting/1979416 And another £300 https://www.modelmayhem.com/casting/1978861

Retro fashion hot rodshoot£150(aw damn that's temptingme...,) https://www.modelmayhem.com/casting/1979390

Lifestyle lingerie website £285 https://www.modelmayhem.com/casting/1978819

Theres loads more tbc and negotiable.

Now nude. Theres one art nude ina chapel£150.£180fora private video. And that's it.

Oooh....apart from this one from.a SCULPTORsounds reallycool andit's £200andthere'll be noprospects of gwc shenanigans.

https://www.modelmayhem.com/casting/1979404

A typical UK days castings here on MM. Hardly any nude andwhat there is is lowerpaid often that the non nude.Andwhat'smore I have done okasking fora bit more or travel expenses met.

Of course because I knowthis is fairly typical, I know that theres not the demand for nude modelling people think there is. And THAT is why we donthave stripper ratesa go go because if it was much higher, it would be fair on laws of supply and demand. It's also of course why many of the models replying tothosecastings are often the same ones not responding to insulting offers from photographers approaching them.

Now thats what you call DATA. Only 3 nude jobstodayandone is a sculptor offering most. Being cast in bronze is wonderful to boot. 22 non nude.

Eliza C  new portfolio wrote:
I agree. As I said....I just gave my view but showed with evidence the views of others to be false. Nobody has produced counter evidence.

You missed my point. It isn't about "right" and "wrong" at all. Your views might indeed be right **for you** but that is a far cry from saying that the views of others are wrong (as it were). Hopefully you have given the OP food for thought and planted a seed. Hopefully others have also given the OP food for thought and planted a seed. Hopefully the OP will find a path that works well as a result.

Lohkee wrote:
You missed my point. It isn't about "right" and "wrong" at all. Your views might indeed be right **for you** but that is a far cry from saying that the views of others are wrong (as it were). Hopefully you have given the OP food for thought and planted a seed. Hopefully others have also given the OP food for thought and planted a seed. Hopefully the OP will find a path that works well as a result.

Of course. It's up to her or other people viewing to judge. I cannot change the minds of those who deny evidence.

But when it's,said that paid nude outweighs paid clothed modelling jobs

1. That calls onto question stripper rates. If it's true laws of supply and demand justify them.

2. Why are 22 of 25 jobs in the UK tonight clothed? And many outweigh the rewards of the nude ones to boot. It was similar yesterday; and has been similar every other time I have checked.

3. Photographers moan that they don't get responses when they approach models yet paid castings get 100 plus views. That should indicate the models are actually here and interested in that work but not low paid or tf except in excepttional circumstances.


Now this is like arguing with creationists. I am waiting for someone today I planted the castings; just like they say we plant fossil evidence.
However, of course of people want to keep their opinions that's fine When they tell others that though I am entitled to show the evidence.

Eliza C  new portfolio wrote:

Of course. It's up to her or other people viewing to judge. I cannot change the minds of those who deny evidence.

But when it's,said that paid nude outweighs paid clothed modelling jobs

1. That calls onto question stripper rates. If it's true laws of supply and demand justify them.

2. Why are 22 of 25 jobs in the UK tonight clothed? And many outweigh the rewards of the nude ones to boot. It was similar yesterday; and has been similar every other time I have checked.

3. Photographers moan that they don't get responses when they approach models yet paid castings get 100 plus views. That should indicate the models are actually here and interested in that work but not low paid or tf except in excepttional circumstances.


Now this is like arguing with creationists. I am waiting for someone today I planted the castings; just like they say we plant fossil evidence.
However, of course of people want to keep their opinions that's fine When they tell others that though I am entitled to show the evidence.

Eliza you do realize that photographers are contacting models they like directly and offering them work.   That's why you see lots of nudes in UK shooters books when they never do castings.   One I know shoots a lot of women and pays yet never has done a call that I've seen.   However it doesn't matter because once you've decided something that's it.   If you think there is more clothed fashion work on a site filled with men who shoot nudes and want too then so be it.   That doesn't make you right and others wrong and I have no desire to run around to try and prove anything.

The Trousseau wrote:
eh.  I am a amateur photographer with a very expensive hobby of selling vintage wedding dresses.  I pay models $50 for two hours of shooting.  If they come in the agreed upon hair and makeup, we shoot right away.  If I need to help them do hair and makeup, then they are with me for three hours. 

It isn't much, but no one is making any money off of this venture.  They make far more than I do. 

Is it fair?  Sure, if everyone agrees to it.

Of course. If a model agrees to it shooting for less is fine. But equally if you had to go to an agency you would be paying a great deal more. Since nobody us going to use a model from MM fir more than an agency fee, then it's fair to say it's absurd for an MM model to charge higher rates than them. If a model worked at $25 an hour for two hours as normal, she won't be able to establish a decent income. That doesnt mean to say she shouldnt do it when it suits her. I imagine you'd get models happy to have shots in beautiful vintage wedding dresses in.their port especially if they were aiming at the bridal market (can be lucrative in the UK, produce regular tears, show work etc) . Just as some models would like images from.photographers for trade without pay or small amount. That isn't an issue.

What I am saying is that if a model wants to do the job professionally she has to establish rates. She can always come down or work tf for the right job.

The Op asked what's normal for London. Shes a dancer, so she has skills that quality her to because model. She has port images. She's happy to do tf sometimes. But she doesn't feel she needs to do tf nudes. She may feel she may model tf or for thirty quid for two hours for other jobs; but is wondering about establishing rates. So I know it has to be competitive by undercutting agencies, and in line with what other models are charging and other model employers are paying. So ball park thats going to be £25-£80 an hour; with most charging much less for day rates. Like any job, low hours irregular work pays more per hour than long hours regular work. So the chances are she will take regular work long hours at the lower level. Hence a life model will get that because it's regular and/or long hours. Promo and fit the same. So taking that work or dance or acting or film tv extra work  will mean she is going to lose out on that if she commits to a two hour low pay job. So therefore many professional models won't look at it; unless there is something else on offer like good images too .

So a model may look at Tony's port and day yes love those do tf no probs and $40 is a bonus. Or they may look at your dresses and say yes they'd be good in my port and again fifty dollars is a bonus. What I am saying however, is EXPECTING models Robert their normal rates at that for short hours irregular work is unreasonable because it's not sustainable. If they are hobby models that's different. But the Op asked about rates. In London.


If a model needs work, she can always look at castings here. In London, you can see the range of pay. Theres a £65 fir half day but it's for a fashion show for a Knightsbridge store. That nay be worth a model doing
as that could leaf to regular showroom work for example; and it's good on the resume. However, that does not mean she is going to work for a photographer who just wants t&a for that, or a zombie make up shoot, or
A bodyscape if which she may have lots already. But decline those offers and we get all sorts of ranting and rudeness to the point where a lot of models don't respond. This is CAUSED by the expectations that good photographers don't gave to pay models at all (and of course everyone thinks they are good) and that $20 a hour is a goid offer. It nay he to model for a Knightsbridge store, or for your dresses or Tony or Hughs images; for SOME models at SOME times. But that's our choices, and is ridiculous to expect of professional models in London as standard.