The Grand Artist wrote:
Just curious because people keep asking what industry when people say the industry on a site called Model Mayhem. Next you are going to tell me a company called Apple is not a grower of apples.

Would you consider Craigslist as an industry?

I would say MM is not much different... it is very diverse, it is more a community where "representatives" of different industries (professional) and "communities" (artist, hobbyists, models, glamour and other people who shoot in a certain field) are coming together to network.

Btw., I would say that people who work in the fashion industry and have a MM profile might be only 10-20%, probably mixing in with commercial photographers.

The vast majority of MM members are people who shoot as a hobby, with income derived from non-related professions in the field of glamour and art/art nudes and similar genres.

MM is not an industry and that's why you are being asked which industry you are referring to when you mention "the industry"...

Hope that helps.

udor wrote:
Would you consider Craigslist as an industry?

I would say MM is not much different... it is very diverse, it is more a community where "representatives" of different industries (professional) and "communities" (artist, hobbyists, models, glamour and other people who shoot in a certain field) are coming together to network.

Btw., I would say that people who work in the fashion industry and have a MM profile might be only 10-20%, probably mixing in with commercial photographers.

The vast majority of MM members are people who shoot as a hobby, with income derived from non-related professions in the field of glamour and art/art nudes and similar genres.

MM is not an industry and that's why you are being asked which industry you are referring to when you mention "the industry"...

Hope that helps.

I think you are wrong here Udor.
Model Mayhem can certainly be called a part of an industry.
Internet models and photographers, regardless whether hobbiests or professionals make up a huge industry in and of itself.
  The industry as many refer to it is generally considered the fashion/commercial industry, but I would be interested to know if "The Industry" (fashion/commercial) really does move/pay much more money to its contributors than the Internet Modeling Industry?
  Internet modeling and the photographers in it very likely spend more yearly on equipment than the fashion/commercial photographers, simply by the numbers involved.
  Internet models, going by rates often posted in MM threads seem to make as much if not more annually than fashion models that are not Super Models.

GeorgeMann wrote:
Internet models, going by rates often posted in MM threads seem to make as much if not more annually than fashion models that are not Super Models.

We asked for a local agency here for a model's day rate a week ago for a CATALOG/look book

The rate was $4000 (usd)

I think you might want to rethink your numbers.

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:

We asked for a local agency here for a model's day rate a week ago for a CATALOG/look book

The rate was $4000 (usd)

I think you might want to rethink your numbers.

We Never see those rates posted here by the models that supposedly get them.

If one happens to show up, let's ask her what her annual salary is, I will bet it isn't even close to $1,040,000.00
Please read my post, I said "Annually"

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:

We asked for a local agency here for a model's day rate a week ago for a CATALOG/look book

The rate was $4000 (usd)

I think you might want to rethink your numbers.

I think you're being screwed over.

GeorgeMann wrote:
The industry as many refer to it is generally considered the fashion/commercial industry, but I would be interested to know if "The Industry" (fashion/commercial) really does move/pay much more money to its contributors than the Internet Modeling Industry?
  Internet modeling and the photographers in it very likely spend more yearly on equipment than the fashion/commercial photographers, simply by the numbers involved.
  Internet models, going by rates often posted in MM threads seem to make as much if not more annually than fashion models that are not Super Models.

I'd say you're dead wrong on all counts. Big shoots (advertising, catalog), and other commercial functions push the wheels on this "industry" thing.

MM is more a community than an industry imo. I mean, there aren't any clients here. And there aren't any clients looking for vendors here. I've always looked at this site as a resource.

GeorgeMann wrote:

We Never see those rates posted here by the models that supposedly get them.

The models who get those rates aren't on this site.

udor wrote:

Would you consider Craigslist as an industry?

I would say MM is not much different... it is very diverse, it is more a community where "representatives" of different industries (professional) and "communities" (artist, hobbyists, models, glamour and other people who shoot in a certain field) are coming together to network.

Btw., I would say that people who work in the fashion industry and have a MM profile might be only 10-20%, probably mixing in with commercial photographers.

The vast majority of MM members are people who shoot as a hobby, with income derived from non-related professions in the field of glamour and art/art nudes and similar genres.

MM is not an industry and that's why you are being asked which industry you are referring to when you mention "the industry"...

Hope that helps.

BINGO!!!!!

WIP wrote:

I think you're being screwed over.

Depends. If it's a national ad campaign with top shelf agency talent then those numbers aren't too crazy for a full day rate. I know a hand model who told me he still gets about $30,000 a year for an ATT commercial he did 3 years ago. His hand was in the spot for about 5 seconds.

GeorgeMann wrote:

I think you are wrong here Udor.
Model Mayhem can certainly be called a part of an industry.
Internet models and photographers, regardless whether hobbiests or professionals make up a huge industry in and of itself.
  The industry as many refer to it is generally considered the fashion/commercial industry, but I would be interested to know if "The Industry" (fashion/commercial) really does move/pay much more money to its contributors than the Internet Modeling Industry?
  Internet modeling and the photographers in it very likely spend more yearly on equipment than the fashion/commercial photographers, simply by the numbers involved.
  Internet models, going by rates often posted in MM threads seem to make as much if not more annually than fashion models that are not Super Models.

I agree.  That was pretty much what I was doing to write, but you summed it up better than I could have.  I could compare MM members to amateur motorcycle racers (motorcycling is another passion).  There are undoubtedly more amateir racers and teams on the planet than professional, and they are no less an important part of the motorcycle industry than professionals, in fact, the professionals would not be in business without them.  No one should dismiss the importance of the amateur industry, and professionals can and do actually make a living catering to the amateur industry, even if it is not as glamorous.

studio36uk wrote:
Visiting MM is to the [model / photographic] "industry" as visiting a zoo is to being a zoo keeper or zoologist.

Studio36

I like it!  May I quote it?  . . . Oh, I just did.

Edit--Purely a personal opinion based on what I see here, I think that in most cases (Please note the caveat.) the word "industry" as relates to MM is used primarily by folks who are aspiring to professional status rather than by those who have either achieved it or who have rejected it.  There are quite a few folks here who earn all or most of their incomes from modeling and/or photography and probably about as many, like me, who earn only a small part of our incomes from such pursuits.  Most of these folks rarely refer to themselves as being part of "the industry" and, in my observation anyway, consider their activities here on MM as being at the most peripheral to the professional activities from which they earn the bulk of their incomes. 
     The exceptions to this are the folks who have indeed created a niche "industry" in internet modeling, such as the traveling models and MUAs who serve the amateur and professional photographers who employ them.  I don't include photographers in this group because they are generally (as relates to internet modeling) the clients rather than the providers of professional services and as such, don't earn a significant part of their incomes from those activities.
     At least that's how it looks to me.

studio36uk wrote:
Visiting MM is to the [model / photographic] "industry" as visiting a zoo is to being a zoo keeper or zoologist.

Studio36

So no one on Model Mayhem earns any money from modeling?

ddtphoto wrote:

The models who get those rates aren't on this site.

Please, when you have time, name a few models other than the aforementioned "Super Models" that are making near one and a half million dollars annually.

GeorgeMann wrote:
I think you are wrong here Udor.
Model Mayhem can certainly be called a part of an industry.
Internet models and photographers, regardless whether hobbiests or professionals make up a huge industry in and of itself.
  The industry as many refer to it is generally considered the fashion/commercial industry, but I would be interested to know if "The Industry" (fashion/commercial) really does move/pay much more money to its contributors than the Internet Modeling Industry?
  Internet modeling and the photographers in it very likely spend more yearly on equipment than the fashion/commercial photographers, simply by the numbers involved.
  Internet models, going by rates often posted in MM threads seem to make as much if not more annually than fashion models that are not Super Models.

Spending on excessive amounts on equipment is something people do with a hobby, or perhaps a failed business, so that supports Udor's comments.

What Interent models claim as rates are not the same as what the make in a day/week/year.  When I worked for a major retailer in the us we payed $1500 a day for catalog models (more in NYC).  Large advertising campaigns paid more, sometimes a lot more for national usage.

As for photographers, who exactly are their clients here?  Models who can barley afford a few hundred for a portfolio shoot?  Somehow I doubt anyone is booking jobs over $1k let alone over $10k.

AJScalzitti wrote:
Spending on excessive amounts on equipment is something people do with a hobby, or perhaps a failed business, so that supports Udor's comments.

What Interent models claim as rates are not the same as what the make in a day/week/year.  When I worked for a major retailer in the us we payed $1500 a day for catalog models (more in NYC).  Large advertising campaigns paid more, sometimes a lot more for national usage.

As for photographers, who exactly are their clients here?  Models who can barley afford a few hundred for a portfolio shoot?  Somehow I doubt anyone is booking jobs over $1k let alone over $10k.

We are talking annually, not per job.
Good MM internet nude photo models do very well for the amount of actual time they spend per day modeling.
It matters not whether the money is spent on a failed business, a hobby, or equipment. If the money is made and or spent through model photography it is part of the Modeling business/industry.
To say Agency models are regularly making $1500.00 a day is stretching it a bit. When you were paying $1500.00 a day to the agency, the model was not getting that, only a fraction of it actually saw it's way to her/his pocket.

As far as MM being a part of the "industry", whatever that means, any business, of a particular type, is in an "industry" of some type regardless if it nets $5,000,000.00 or $5.00 per year.
If they are selling it and someone is buying it, it is "industry"

Vector One Photography wrote:
MM is about the online modeling industry which should not be confused with THE industry or the (fashion, glamour, or art) modeling industry or real life at all.  This services those that are and are not in THE industry but most are not.  Some used to be in THE industry, some what to be in THE industry but most just want to be on MM.

In part you are right, but in which THE industry do you place
Automotive industry (WAY LARGER than modeling)
Airline industry
Boat manufacturing industry
and literally the thousands of other industries that are considered "THE industry" to those operating within them?
Referring to the fashion, commercial, glamour, as "THE industry" is really nothing more than a bunch of professional photographers and some not so professional listening to themselves talk.

The Grand Artist wrote:
Just curious because people keep asking what industry when people say the industry on a site called Model Mayhem. Next you are going to tell me a company called Apple is not a grower of apples.

"Industry?"  I'm confused.  What "industry" are we talking about? Just the subject of photographing people is a broad subject in itself! Modelmayhem is a website that is about many things.  People who are interested in the occupation of modeling, photography, and related fields can join the fun! There are professionals of course, but it is not a requirement of membership here.

Vector One Photography wrote:
MM is about the online modeling industry which should not be confused with THE industry or the (fashion, glamour, or art) modeling industry or real life at all.  This services those that are and are not in THE industry but most are not.  Some used to be in THE industry, some want to be in THE industry but most just want to be on MM.

But there ARE some people on here who participate in the "Industry" of fashion, glamour, or art that you speak of! The website is not limited to any specific genera of photography of people as far as I can tell.   Yes, it is online, and there are many here involved in shoots with people they've connected with on the Internet.  The website has its uses, sort of like a tool or resource one uses to help imporve their work.

GeorgeMann wrote:
We are talking annually, not per job.
Good MM internet nude photo models do very well for the amount of actual time they spend per day modeling.
It matters not whether the money is spent on a failed business, a hobby, or equipment. If the money is made and or spent through model photography it is part of the Modeling business/industry.
To say Agency models are regularly making $1500.00 a day is stretching it a bit. When you were paying $1500.00 a day to the agency, the model was not getting that, only a fraction of it actually saw it's way to her/his pocket.

As far as MM being a part of the "industry", whatever that means, any business, of a particular type, is in an "industry" of some type regardless if it nets $5,000,000.00 or $5.00 per year.
If they are selling it and someone is buying it, it is "industry"

By fraction you mean 80% after the agency takes 20%.  So $1200 a day outside of NYC and yes commercial models can earn $100k a year for a good long time.  Sure some may earn half that and others earn that in one advertising campaign; but actual business and companies pay more then GWCs or aspiring professional building a book.

When did I say anything about industry, you asked if agency models actually earn more than Internet models.

The Grand Artist wrote:

So no one on Model Mayhem earns any money from modeling?

There are models on Model Mayhem that actually make a living as freelance models. Like any business, understanding the business part of the enterprise is as important or more important than the core activity.

udor wrote:
Would you consider Craigslist as an industry?

I would say MM is not much different... it is very diverse, it is more a community where "representatives" of different industries (professional) and "communities" (artist, hobbyists, models, glamour and other people who shoot in a certain field) are coming together to network.

Btw., I would say that people who work in the fashion industry and have a MM profile might be only 10-20%, probably mixing in with commercial photographers.

The vast majority of MM members are people who shoot as a hobby, with income derived from non-related professions in the field of glamour and art/art nudes and similar genres.

MM is not an industry and that's why you are being asked which industry you are referring to when you mention "the industry"...

Hope that helps.

GeorgeMann wrote:
I think you are wrong here Udor.
Model Mayhem can certainly be called a part of an industry.
Internet models and photographers, regardless whether hobbiests or professionals make up a huge industry in and of itself.
  The industry as many refer to it is generally considered the fashion/commercial industry, but I would be interested to know if "The Industry" (fashion/commercial) really does move/pay much more money to its contributors than the Internet Modeling Industry?
  Internet modeling and the photographers in it very likely spend more yearly on equipment than the fashion/commercial photographers(????), simply by the numbers involved.
  Internet models, going by rates often posted in MM threads seem to make as much if not more annually than fashion models that are not Super Models(????).

GerogeMann, I have to disagree with the way you run your numbers, and I have to agree with Udor, regarding the perception people, in general, have about this website.

"Industry" connotes a marketplace, which extends beyond hobbyists occasionally hiring amateurs, or spending money on the latest prosumer camera body.

The yearly overhead for hobbyist photographers pales in comparison to a working professional's budget. You don't include sales of consumer/prosumer cameras as part of doing business in "the industry", because "the industry" is not about camera sales.

The income/rates "posted" by MM models is a matter of wishful thinking, more than anything else.

Unless Internet Brands allows advertising & modeling agencies (as well as other clearly-established industry players) to do business here, this website will not move past the occasional negative media news reports.

GeorgeMann wrote:
We Never see those rates posted here by the models that supposedly get them.

If one happens to show up, let's ask her what her annual salary is, I will bet it isn't even close to $1,040,000.00
Please read my post, I said "Annually"

Most agency models don't get to work every day or even every week.
I've worked with models from premier and Oxygen. They can get up to £5 k a day, but maybe only once or twice a month.

Natalia's right and if you go to any bog standard agency you can see their rates. Typically around £100 an hour for minimum two hours PLUS VAT PLUS commercial use fees.

All a freelance model has to do is undercut that a bit to get work.

So my rates are £75 an hour or £245 a day rate.

It's not unreasonable, and a freelancer will normally sign off the model release without commercial use extra fees.

A model will work for an artists or art or education institution, or a promo company for lower rates hourly because the work is regular and long hours.
A fashion house will pay decent money and its regular. A boutique, designer or hair company will pay decent money. Again this can be regular even though maybe not long hours.
If you book one off shoots for say two hours say two weeks in advance its probably going to cost you at least a day's work elsehwre and sometimes say a term's work at an art college working say every Wednesday which could mean £1500, or three days fit a week for a month which could be at least that and possibly double.

So your point about estimating salary based on hourly rate is not relevant. Its the same for photographers too. Just because you may get £3k for a wedding or £15k for a campaign doesn't mean you have a salary of millions.

I only shoot about once a month at the moment but that's because its all I want. And tbh I'd rather a week's temping than a two hour shoot. If I take the latter I will lose the former.


Photographers who think they can get agency models cheaper should try them.
But check those same agency models aren't here. Because quite a few are and will cost you a fraction of what their agency will  charge you. Otherwise, as I said be my guest and ask an agency what they will charge. If they will shoot with a photographer at all without a client.

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:

We asked for a local agency here for a model's day rate a week ago for a CATALOG/look book

The rate was $4000 (usd)

I think you might want to rethink your numbers.

That reflects the model's contribution to the sales and be resting income for the client.

Every model on MM who contributes to a MM photographer's multi-million annual sales gets that much or more per day.

ddtphoto wrote:

I'd say you're dead wrong on all counts. Big shoots (advertising, catalog), and other commercial functions push the wheels on this "industry" thing.

MM is more a community than an industry imo. I mean, there aren't any clients here. And there aren't any clients looking for vendors here. I've always looked at this site as a resource.

There is no fashion industry.

There's a fashion division of the retail industry and a fashion division or the advertising industry.

If you're not in retail or advertising, you're shooting sentimental photos (weddings/bar mitzvahs/senior portraits) or you're not making a solid living. There's really nothing else.

Though the destruction of network TV is leading to a "content industry".

Vector One Photography wrote:
MM is about the online modeling industry which should not be confused with THE industry or the (fashion, glamour, or art) modeling industry or real life at all.  This services those that are and are not in THE industry but most are not.  Some used to be in THE industry, some want to be in THE industry but most just want to be on MM.

In other words, a subset of the service industry. It's like hiring a plumber or a carpenter to come to your house and perform a service.

Eliza C  new portfolio wrote:
But check those same agency models aren't here. Because quite a few are and will cost you a fraction of what their agency will  charge you. Otherwise, as I said be my guest and ask an agency what they will charge. If they will shoot with a photographer at all without a client.

Agencies supply models to the retail industry and the advertising industry, they're not in the personal service industry.

I've read posts where people have asked about hiring an agency model for a test shoot, but I've never heard of it happening.

I think it's probably easier to get an agency model for a test shoot for free than it is to hire one.

Karl JW Johnston wrote:
an industry implies people get paid..

/troll


but seriously. there are many types of creative industries...mm is a bit of a park of a place where all types of creatives come and interact

in photography, therere's all kinds of industries, and they all work very differently...

portrait, art, wedding, pets, boudoir, aerial, UAV, auto, real estate, general Corporate, advertising and general commercial, stock, teaching, adult, film et al, headshots, beauty, editorial, fashion, n

you'll find them all on here and more. probably far more. neither is less legitimate than the other, but i do notice the fashion photographer genre tends to think very highly of themselves. i have no idea why..they're generally the least affluent of all.. side from the ones at the very top of course, but that applies to all industries: there's 1% at the top, and 99% at the bottom. and no middle class at all.

Portrait, wedding, pets, boudoir, all sentimental photos - service industry - the same as a caterer or carpenter.

Aerial, auto, real estate, corporate, commercial, stock headshots, beauty, editorial, fashion - all are advertising industry. The people paying for the photos are paying for them as an investment in a venture to generate income.

Teaching - depends on what you mean - possibly that's education, but if you're talking about teaching photography, that can be retail or advertising or entertainment.

Adult is entertainment.



Personally, I think viewing it this way - looking at where the money comes from and why, is the most important thing if you want to make money as a photographer. The industry determines the underlying story of the photo. A great or artistic photo is useless. Photos must be propaganda (by the true definition) or they don't have a value to the person paying for them.


Artwork is sold based in the story of the artist. You could have a story like Olivia Bee, but for the most part, art sales come at the end of a career because they are based on the story if the career. It's a form of licensing a name.

I've sold photos as art - people buying them because they liked what they looked like - but that's back to the service industry - interior decorating. Though the most expensive one was a bit of propaganda as it's being used to help define a consultant's brand. Since it's in an office wall. It's not advertising and not worth as much.

Mikey McMichaels wrote:

Agencies supply models to the retail industry and the advertising industry, they're not in the personal service industry.

I've read posts where people have asked about hiring an agency model for a test shoot, but I've never heard of it happening.

I think it's probably easier to get an agency model for a test shoot for free than it is to hire one.

If you are in with the agencies yes.
Otherwise you are correct they aren't generally in the business of supplying models just for photographers, unless they have a client or are shooting editorial,  which is what I was getting at.

But many agency models are here, and will shoot with certain photographers. At lower rates than their agency would charge but many photographers here would still balk at it.

Mikey McMichaels wrote:

Portrait, wedding, pets, boudoir, all sentimental photos - service industry - the same as a caterer or carpenter.

Aerial, auto, real estate, corporate, commercial, stock headshots, beauty, editorial, fashion - all are advertising industry. The people paying for the photos are paying for them as an investment in a venture to generate income.

Teaching - depends on what you mean - possibly that's education, but if you're talking about teaching photography, that can be retail or advertising or entertainment.

Adult is entertainment.



Personally, I think viewing it this way - looking at where the money comes from and why, is the most important thing if you want to make money as a photographer. The industry determines the underlying story of the photo. A great or artistic photo is useless. Photos must be propaganda (by the true definition) or they don't have a value to the person paying for them.


Artwork is sold based in the story of the artist. You could have a story like Olivia Bee, but for the most part, art sales come at the end of a career because they are based on the story if the career. It's a form of licensing a name.

I've sold photos as art - people buying them because they liked what they looked like - but that's back to the service industry - interior decorating. Though the most expensive one was a bit of propaganda as it's being used to help define a consultant's brand. Since it's in an office wall. It's not advertising and not worth as much.

Art - real Art - can attract business from the fashion and commercial sectors too. And Education.
Fashion and commercial may indeed then enlist that talent as propaganda to sell. But what can get those photographers in demand on the first place is their Art. I am thinking in particularof Marco Sanges and Steve McCurry at the moment. Then you have people like Ira Meyer who is published by National Geographic etc. These people take great and artistic  photographs. They make a living from it. The integrity of it is what attracts the commercial world to it. So hardly useless.