J Millman Photography wrote:
Ok, I have yet to pay a model to model for me, although recently I have discussed doing so with someone on here.
Having never done so before, am I right or wrong to assume that the model should not expect any images from the shoot, as, after all, she is being paid in return for her time?
I ask because the member I have been discussing this issue with seemed somewhat surprised that I don't think she should be expecting any of the images.
Thanks.

If she wants images, she can request a TF shoot.

-JAY- wrote:

If she wants images, she can request a TF shoot.

Or pay for said images

J Millman Photography wrote:
Ok, I have yet to pay a model to model for me, although recently I have discussed doing so with someone on here.
Having never done so before, am I right or wrong to assume that the model should not expect any images from the shoot, as, after all, she is being paid in return for her time?
I ask because the member I have been discussing this issue with seemed somewhat surprised that I don't think she should be expecting any of the images.
Thanks.

Forget the other member and what he/she does and come to an agreement with the model.
Many photographers do not furnish images if they pay the model, while many do.
Some use images as part of the sitting payment and the real cheapos even use snacks or lunch as part of the payment.
Models are the same as you, me, and everyone else. They eat, pay rent, buy gas, etc., and photographs are not accepted normally by landlords, grocery stores, or gas stations.

Michael Lohr  wrote:
Silly not to give the model a couple of the best pictures of the shoot.
Photography is about networking. Chances are the model you hire has a larger network then you. The more your pictures get out there, the greater the chance opportunity will come your way.

This is what I feel is the best answer. As long as their performance met your expectations.

Michael Lohr  wrote:
Silly not to give the model a couple of the best pictures of the shoot.
Photography is about networking. Chances are the model you hire has a larger network then you. The more your pictures get out there, the greater the chance opportunity will come your way.

Yes, I agree!

I pay models and give them all the images I keep : )

Kithos wrote:
It would be a shame to give a model any images after paying them! After all, who the heck wants free advertising! Especially with models who get thousands of views to their accounts daily. Better to just remain unknown and horde the images for your own collection.

Exactly.  That's why I pay all the models I work with, and I also give them images.

Michael Lohr  wrote:
Silly not to give the model a couple of the best pictures of the shoot.
Photography is about networking. Chances are the model you hire has a larger network then you. The more your pictures get out there, the greater the chance opportunity will come your way.

Opportunity to hire more models and give away your work, sounds like a ideal business plan.

Michael Lohr  wrote:
Silly not to give the model a couple of the best pictures of the shoot.
Photography is about networking. Chances are the model you hire has a larger network then you. The more your pictures get out there, the greater the chance opportunity will come your way.

AJScalzitti wrote:
Opportunity to hire more models and give away your work, sounds like a ideal business plan.

Michael Lohr  wrote:
Silly not to give the model a couple of the best pictures of the shoot.
Photography is about networking. Chances are the model you hire has a larger network then you. The more your pictures get out there, the greater the chance opportunity will come your way.

+1

AJScalzitti wrote:
Opportunity to hire more models and give away your work, sounds like a ideal business plan.

Love it!!!

If I pay, I want a full commercial release, and then I might, just might give out some images.

If some young lady wants a bunch FB pics so she can look hot for her friends, then she can pay ME, or at least TF.

If you work for free, the word will spread that you work for free.

Dan Howell wrote:
To the many voices who advise no pay = no images:

What exactly do you gain by withholding images from a model? You obviously valued his/her contribution to your shoot enough to hire them. If not, they why did you hire them? What do you think is going into your pocket by denying a model images of themselves. Doesn't that same logic apply to a model showing examples of tearsheets from a magazine shoot. Were you suggesting policing that too...?

My ability to sell those images to that same magazine.

Dan Howell wrote:
To the many voices who advise no pay = no images:

What exactly do you gain by withholding images from a model?

Give a model two choices.

1) I'll do a trade shoot with you, and you'll get images.

2) I'll pay you, and I'll also give you images.

Which is the model going to choose?

If the model believes your work would enhance her portfolio, she should be willing to trade with you or pay you (or at the very least give you a deeply discounted rate). But by giving the model that choice, you've taken away any incentive to trade with you.

That leaves you with a choice.

Which foot do you want to shoot yourself in?

AJScalzitti wrote:

My ability to sell those images to that same magazine.

Your ability to sell images to a magazine is not impinged by providing a model with selected images given timing and selection parameters. You are flat out wrong if you suggest that there is an absolute prohibition between publication and providing images. It is unprofessional or uninformed to say that there is.

Camerosity wrote:
1) I'll do a trade shoot with you, and you'll get images.

2) I'll pay you, and I'll also give you images.

Which is the model going to choose?


Which foot do you want to shoot yourself in?

Bullshit.

You do not get the same selection of models in form 1) as you do in form 2).

I select the models that are appropriate for for the project I am doing. I try not to limit myself to only TF models. Assuming I have a budget for models, I don't negotiate with images. Similarly, I don't negotiate with my magazine clients for a quantity of magazines when I accept a job. I expect they will provide them to me.

The foot you shoot is your own if yours, not mine, if you think that your two options encompass all possibilities. Personally I bill more to my clients than I would ever expect to get from models. Why don't you?

Camerosity wrote:
1) I'll do a trade shoot with you, and you'll get images.

2) I'll pay you, and I'll also give you images.

Which is the model going to choose?


Which foot do you want to shoot yourself in?

Dan Howell wrote:
Bullshit.

You do not get the same selection of models in form 1) as you do in form 2).

The foot you shoot is your own if yours, not mine, if you think that your two options encompass all possibilities. Personally I bill more to my clients than I would ever expect to get from models. Why don't you?

The question is hypothetical, since I don't pay models for shoots that I'm not receiving income from.

Dan Howell wrote:

Your ability to sell images to a magazine is not impinged by providing a model with selected images given timing and selection parameters. You are flat out wrong if you suggest that there is an absolute prohibition between publication and providing images. It is unprofessional or uninformed to say that there is.

I agree, you are uninformed.  I have had several opportunities that have stated the images must have never been published or shown prior, including social media.  I have sold images from test and trades to publications and book publishers.  Sure I can give them to the model after the fact, common practice to provide tears actually but that is another issue.

AJScalzitti wrote:

Opportunity to hire more models and give away your work, sounds like a ideal business plan.

If one is hiring models to work on their book then it usually means they are not quite up to the level to get the models they would like to get for free. So one is really not giving away anything that has any material value.

Dan Howell wrote:
Your ability to sell images to a magazine is not impinged by providing a model with selected images given timing and selection parameters. You are flat out wrong if you suggest that there is an absolute prohibition between publication and providing images. It is unprofessional or uninformed to say that there is.

AJScalzitti wrote:
I agree, you are uninformed.  I have had several opportunities that have stated the images must have never been published or shown prior, including social media.  I have sold images from test and trades to publications and book publishers.  Sure I can give them to the model after the fact, common practice to provide tears actually but that is another issue.

AJ is correct. The vast majority of magazines won't publish photos that have been published before - and that includes photos that have appeared in a public portfolio on the Internet or in social media.

That's why I have a password-protected folder on my portfolio page - for photos that are pending publication. If access is restricted, most magazines are okay with that.

One photo editor asked me (three times!) whether any of the photos I had submitted had been posted on Facebook or any other site - before he'd even look at the photos.

AJScalzitti wrote:

My ability to sell those images to that same magazine.

But nobody's talking about giving the model that you pay for a shoot right's to whatever images you give them outside of self promotion/ portfolio.

Fotopia wrote:
That would depend entirely on the reputation you would like to have among models.

Do you suppose that models in ads, editorials, and catalog work don't get images of their work in addition to their day rates?

One isn't discussing 20x24" platinum prints, the cost to email a model a few jpegs is how much exactly?

Actually they don't they actually have to go buy the magazine and tear the image out or go find it in the web and save it. The client is to busy to be sending images out to everyone they hire.

Michael Lohr  wrote:
If one is hiring models to work on their book then it usually means they are not quite up to the level to get the models they would like to get for free. So one is really not giving away anything that has any material value.

A little over a year ago I did a trade shoot with a model and gave her seven images, all of which are in her portfolio.

My average post-processing time is about three hours per photo.

The model's profile now says that she expects a minimum of 15 photos from a shoot - whether it's trade or paid. Good luck with that.

Camerosity wrote:

Give a model two choices.

1) I'll do a trade shoot with you, and you'll get images.

2) I'll pay you, and I'll also give you images.

Which is the model going to choose?

If the model believes your work would enhance her portfolio, she should be willing to trade with you or pay you (or at the very least give you a deeply discounted rate). But by giving the model that choice, you've taken away any incentive to trade with you.

That leaves you with a choice.

Which foot do you want to shoot yourself in?

I think that if the clients you are going after are models looking for portfolio building then you make a good point.

AJScalzitti wrote:

I agree, you are uninformed.  I have had several opportunities that have stated the images must have never been published or shown prior, including social media.  I have sold images from test and trades to publications and book publishers.  Sure I can give them to the model after the fact, common practice to provide tears actually but that is another issue.

Guess you missed this part:  "given timing and selection parameters" There are many shades of exclusivity and embargo with image sales. Some pertain to models; some have absolutely no bearing.

I'm willing to put my 20 years of full-time magazine photography experience and that of my peers against your 'several opportunities' in contrasting your assertions.

Camerosity wrote:
Give a model two choices.

1) I'll do a trade shoot with you, and you'll get images.

2) I'll pay you, and I'll also give you images.

Which is the model going to choose?

If the model believes your work would enhance her portfolio, she should be willing to trade with you or pay you (or at the very least give you a deeply discounted rate). But by giving the model that choice, you've taken away any incentive to trade with you.

That leaves you with a choice.

Which foot do you want to shoot yourself in?

ddtphoto wrote:
I think that if the clients you are going after are models looking for portfolio building then you make a good point.

Yes, I have done paid shoots for models' portfolios. Not enough to make a living - but in a good month, enough to make my mortgage payment.

A-M-P wrote:

Actually they don't they actually have to go buy the magazine and tear the image out or go find it in the web and save it.

Your joking right?

Maybe that is how certain people run their business. Best practice is to take care of the people that are part of the team. Good work begets more good jobs.
One might get their next job from someone else viewing a models or makeup artist portfolio and seeing the shot there.