Photographer
Laurence J Power
Posts: 6
London, England, United Kingdom
Why is it that models seem to ignore the field in their profile stating whether they have tattoos or piercings? I have to tell you all that I will not work with models who have any tattoos or piercings other than ears and possibly navel. This is my preference since I mainly shoot swimwear and find it distracting from the garment being worn. Yes I can take it out in Photoshop, but that costs either in time or money.
If I booked you based on your profile and during the shoot found a tattoo, not only would I cancel the shoot, but I would refuse to pay on the basis that you had mislead me.
If the owners of the site wanted to make a change, I would suggest adding a second field re piercings, - "piercings other than ears or navel" but that is me being selfish.
Photographer
Ken Warren Photography
Posts: 933
GLENMOORE, Pennsylvania, US
Well, since the feature was only added a few months ago, I'm sure many models haven't even noticed it yet.
Photographer
Raku Photo
Posts: 81
San Jose, California, US
Or the direct discussion with the model prior to the shoot. I always ask, since I prefer no tats. Sometimes they're cool. But most of the time I look upon tats as someone else's art on my art.
Photographer
Muskopf Photography
Posts: 278
Dayton, Ohio, US
My current casting has it like this: "Chest and neck tattoos are problematic for this project. I want the focus to be on what the model and I are doing, not what some tattoo artist did."
I find that people will generally focus on the tattoos and piercings. If the focus of the shot is not the tattoos/piercings, then it's just like the camera was out of focus--the viewer won't see what we want them to see.
I'm not anti-tattoo/piercing in normal life, but a model is "an example"--meaning that they are representative of "all women". Why do you think so many fashion designers give models the same hair, the same makeup, etc.? It brings the focus to the clothes. For me, I want someone to look at a photo and think "I want to be in a photo like THAT." If they can see themselves there, then we're good. If most of our paying clients do not have huge tattoos, then it doesn't make much sense to show models with them.
Model
BeatnikDiva
Posts: 14859
Fayetteville, Arkansas, US
Laurence J Power wrote:
Why is it that models seem to ignore the field in their profile stating whether they have tattoos or piercings? I have to tell you all that I will not work with models who have any tattoos or piercings other than ears and possibly navel. This is my preference since I mainly shoot swimwear and find it distracting from the garment being worn. Yes I can take it out in Photoshop, but that costs either in time or money.
If I booked you based on your profile and during the shoot found a tattoo, not only would I cancel the shoot, but I would refuse to pay on the basis that you had mislead me.
If the owners of the site wanted to make a change, I would suggest adding a second field re piercings, - "piercings other than ears or navel" but that is me being selfish. I have "no," because my piercing can be tucked, if I happen to be naked, and my tattoo can be easily concealed, if I happen to be naked.
And it behooves everyone to discuss details like that up front, as already stated. Also already stated is the fact that the tattoo option is fairly recent.
Don't leave it to chance, then there's no miscommunication.
Clothing Designer
GRMACK
Posts: 5436
Bakersfield, California, US
Laurence J Power wrote:
Why is it that models seem to ignore the field in their profile stating whether they have tattoos or piercings? I have to tell you all that I will not work with models who have any tattoos or piercings other than ears and possibly navel. This is my preference since I mainly shoot swimwear and find it distracting from the garment being worn. Yes I can take it out in Photoshop, but that costs either in time or money.
If I booked you based on your profile and during the shoot found a tattoo, not only would I cancel the shoot, but I would refuse to pay on the basis that you had mislead me.
If the owners of the site wanted to make a change, I would suggest adding a second field re piercings, - "piercings other than ears or navel" but that is me being selfish. +1000
I also find lack of - or wrong measurements - a problem from the designing end. To state: "Fashion" or "Runway" as part of their profile, and then supply things like 0" is maddening. Wasting time with back-and-forth emails ending in "My mom buys all my clothes so I don't know my measurements." is a mess, or those who cannot even work a tape measure either (ahem!).
I also have an issue with the ink part. Some seem to keep adding onto their ink and still say "None" which then becomes a bigger issue with the MUAH person who then comes up to me with, "Cripes! Why didn't you tell me she was working on a growing arm or leg sleeve! You know how much of my kit and time it will take to cover all that? Maybe a full-body blend and air-brush too? Water will affect it too, ya know." Ugh!
A piercing is an easy clone in PS, but some "Growing artwork" or "Ink in progress" where they say "None" and leave it at that can become a total disaster in a fold of the skin for even a retoucher to fix. Profiles should be accurate and not open to question.
I wish MM would have used a simple "Yes" or "No" on the ink matter and not "Some" since those with even minor ink say "No" (Which can become an issue with the MUAH later.). "Some" is very subjective and even a court of law wouldn't accept "some" as a verdict. Often those who tick "None" do have some so the correct answer is "Yes. I have ink." or "No. I do not have ink." "Some" as an answer, really?
Maybe the mods could even kick back profiles as "Incomplete for measurements" too if they ticked "Fashion" or "Runway" and no size or measurements are listed. Engaging in back-and-forth email diatribes is a total waste of time compared to if they were honest up front in their profiles, but many are incomplete or just plain impossible: Like 250 pounds (visible in their port too) with a 23 inch waist, and size 4 in their profile list.
Same for the ink too if mods identify it. If they see it, change it to "Yes" (Makes more sense), or even "Some" as MM's creators seem to accept that as an answer. Personally, I'd just ditch the word "Some" as an answer. Like being "Somewhat" pregnant: You are, or you aren't. But "Some" is totally wrong.
I would really like the Browse/Search in MM to "actually work" without having to find out they either lied about, or neglected to fill in something later on. It's a big waste of time reviewing ports to screen for those issues, especially in a large metropolitan area like LA or NYC.
Maybe time for a "Delete this model from future searches" with the Browse button "Due to incorrect or incomplete information."
Maybe time for the site to get their mods to work to get models to update their profiles "correctly" if they see an obvious error. The "Browse" is becoming a big mess with the current configuration and made much worse with bad or overlooked info being supplied that needs to be scrutinized better.
My two cents while awaiting here all day for Fedex and a "Signature required" delivery via a phone call.
Photographer
Good Egg Productions
Posts: 16713
Orlando, Florida, US
Gosh, what did you do for the 20 years before Model Mayhem??
Ask?
Photographer
AJ_In_Atlanta
Posts: 13053
Atlanta, Georgia, US
It's a new field on MM so any model who has been here would have in default to N/A unless they went in and updated it.
Besides its always better to ask or look at their images, some model don't think a tattoo is worth mentioning on MM because it can be "easy to cover" or "photoshop". That obviously isn't true, dermablend is expensive as is my time retouching; so it's always better to ask and determine if it will or will not be an issue for your specific idea
Photographer
wr not here
Posts: 1632
Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Laurence J Power wrote:
Why is it that models seem to ignore the field in their profile stating whether they have tattoos or piercings? I have to tell you all that I will not work with models who have any tattoos or piercings other than ears and possibly navel. This is my preference since I mainly shoot swimwear and find it distracting from the garment being worn. Yes I can take it out in Photoshop, but that costs either in time or money.
If I booked you based on your profile and during the shoot found a tattoo, not only would I cancel the shoot, but I would refuse to pay on the basis that you had mislead me.
If the owners of the site wanted to make a change, I would suggest adding a second field re piercings, - "piercings other than ears or navel" but that is me being selfish. Ask and ye shall not be deceived.
Model
Figures Jen B
Posts: 790
Phoenix, Arizona, US
Laurence J Power wrote:
Why is it that models seem to ignore the field in their profile stating whether they have tattoos or piercings? I have to tell you all that I will not work with models who have any tattoos or piercings other than ears and possibly navel. This is my preference since I mainly shoot swimwear and find it distracting from the garment being worn. Yes I can take it out in Photoshop, but that costs either in time or money.
If I booked you based on your profile and during the shoot found a tattoo, not only would I cancel the shoot, but I would refuse to pay on the basis that you had mislead me.
If the owners of the site wanted to make a change, I would suggest adding a second field re piercings, - "piercings other than ears or navel" but that is me being selfish. I agree with the idea of chaning piercings to read as "other than ears" because there is a difference. I have ear piercings but have selected no because I do not have body piercings.
The tattoo choice is pretty new though and I'm not sure if I updated my non nude profile right now or not.
Jen
Model
Alabaster Crowley
Posts: 8283
Tucson, Arizona, US
I say "no" on piercings because it's removable, leaving no trace, like I had none at all~*
Photographer
Muskopf Photography
Posts: 278
Dayton, Ohio, US
Alabaster Crowley wrote:
I say "no" on piercings because it's removable, leaving no trace, like I had none at all~* Yeah, on what I've seen so far, piercings haven't been a big deal. I don't mind little nose rings.
The piercings below the lower lip, Monroes, and septum piercings have been a problem where they produce bad shadows, so I just ask that they remove them. Touching up the hole isn't a big deal.
Model
Caitin Bre
Posts: 2687
Apache Junction, Arizona, US
Laurence J Power wrote:
Why is it that models seem to ignore the field in their profile stating whether they have tattoos or piercings? I have to tell you all that I will not work with models who have any tattoos or piercings other than ears and possibly navel. This is my preference since I mainly shoot swimwear and find it distracting from the garment being worn. Yes I can take it out in Photoshop, but that costs either in time or money.
If I booked you based on your profile and during the shoot found a tattoo, not only would I cancel the shoot, but I would refuse to pay on the basis that you had mislead me.
If the owners of the site wanted to make a change, I would suggest adding a second field re piercings, - "piercings other than ears or navel" but that is me being selfish. I never noticed that there was anything to do with piercings or tats. I will go look and correct mine.
I have a few small easy edit tats and a navel piercing. easy edit and can remove ring.
Edit: Just seen it and corrected my profile. Honestly never even knew there was any choices. Certainly they must not of been there when I 1st filled out my profile or I would have checked them.
Model
JoJo
Posts: 26560
Clearwater, Florida, US
Laurence J Power wrote:
Why is it that models seem to ignore the field in their profile stating whether they have tattoos or piercings? I have to tell you all that I will not work with models who have any tattoos or piercings other than ears and possibly navel. This is my preference since I mainly shoot swimwear and find it distracting from the garment being worn. Yes I can take it out in Photoshop, but that costs either in time or money.
If I booked you based on your profile and during the shoot found a tattoo, not only would I cancel the shoot, but I would refuse to pay on the basis that you had mislead me.
If the owners of the site wanted to make a change, I would suggest adding a second field re piercings, - "piercings other than ears or navel" but that is me being selfish. Why is it that photographers seem to ignore one of the most important parts of a model’s account?
They use Browse, click in all kinds of search parameters…
They further filter through the results and then set-up a shoot.
Some even hire models in this fashion
… but they don’t seem to bother looking at the model’s port.
Laurence J Power wrote:
If I booked you based on your profile and during the shoot found a tattoo, not only would I cancel the shoot, but I would refuse to pay on the basis that you had mislead me. If you booked a model with a tattoo it’s your own fault for not asking.
Do your “due diligence”, you know, that thing photographers are always telling models about.
Model
Alabaster Crowley
Posts: 8283
Tucson, Arizona, US
Muskopf Photography wrote:
Yeah, on what I've seen so far, piercings haven't been a big deal. I don't mind little nose rings.
The piercings below the lower lip, Monroes, and septum piercings have been a problem where they produce bad shadows, so I just ask that they remove them. Touching up the hole isn't a big deal. A septum retainer is pretty cheap. That's what I have, and like I said, it doesn't show at all. So there actually IS something in there, but it tucks in.
Model
Alabaster Crowley
Posts: 8283
Tucson, Arizona, US
I did show up to a shoot one day and the photographer was like, "Oh you have a septum ring; that's not going to work for this concept." He clearly didn't read my profile or look at my portfolio. I told him I couldn't take it out without my retainer, which I didn't have on me. My profile said that I had it but that it can be removed, so I added the bit about needing to know before hand. I'm also probably just going to bring it with me to shoots from now on. This was before they added the piercing section to profiles.
Whose fault it that, really?
Model
Isis22
Posts: 3557
Muncie, Indiana, US
It's funny because both of my tattoos are not visible with most modest swimwear. That wasn't planned that way but it's worked out well for me.
I did go back and put "some" for tattoos and piercings when that feature was added. I think they should email all models when they update those kinds of questions in our profiles.
Photographer
Illuminating Moments
Posts: 3
Santa Cruz, California, US
Late to this thread and only found it because I was looking into shooting tattooed models and I came upon this thread. Yeah, every shoot does not need to have a tattooed model, but sometimes in my own personal opinion is it adds to the overall look.
Good to know that it was just added over the summer, I was wondering the same thing about why some folks did not list their tattoos.
Photographer
Gene Cannon
Posts: 159
Wendell, North Carolina, US
I agree with the OP on the tattoo situation. I enjoy taking head and shoulder shots from the back and recently had a situation where the model had "no" under tattoos. When she arrived, she had a large tattoo on the back of her neck (she had very short hair). Since then if a model has "no" under tattoos, I will verify before the shoot!
Photographer
Lallure Photographic
Posts: 2086
Taylors, South Carolina, US
I have seen far too many images here, totally ruined by excessive tattoos. Piercings are also a problem, but tattoos are truly excessive on models on this site.
Photographer
Virtual Studio
Posts: 6725
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Lallure Photographic wrote:
I have seen far too many images here, totally ruined by excessive tattoos. Piercings are also a problem, but tattoos are truly excessive on models on this site. Not nearly as many as have been ruined by bad photography dude, not nearly as many.
Photographer
Erlinda
Posts: 7286
London, England, United Kingdom
Cool another tattoo and piercing bashing thread *The joy* 
Photographer
Boudoir Studio
Posts: 322
Santa Clarita, California, US
Erlinda wrote:
Cool another tattoo and piercing bashing thread *The joy* After all it is Saturday.... Tuesdays are for the escort threads, Thursdays are for flakes.
Photographer
Chuckarelei
Posts: 11271
Seattle, Washington, US
Erlinda wrote:
Cool another tattoo and piercing bashing thread *The joy* Snyder Studios wrote:
After all it is Saturday.... Tuesdays are for the escort threads, Thursdays are for flakes. Sunday and Monday are creepy and unprofessional photographers threads.
Photographer
ValHig
Posts: 495
London, England, United Kingdom
You could look at their portfolio. Or ask them. If you've managed to book a model and haven't figured out what she looks like that's kind of on you.
|
