Forums > Model Colloquy > You ticked 'No' to nude, but...

Photographer

Carl Herbert

Posts: 387

Bellevue, Washington, US

Brian Scanlon wrote:
if the offer included $10 million (or whatever the Euro equivalent would be) would it still be the same answer?

(not saying that would ever happen)

The list of names associated with the calendars is impressive, but even so I would be surprised anybody would ever get a $10MM fee for posing. I googled the topic but didn''t find quick info regarding models'' and photographers'' fees. I am curious to know how much these celebrities might have been paid, but given their egos the publisher might keep that information confidential.

Not all of the calendars have been as crotchy as this one. It would seem to depend on the tastes of the photographer or perhaps an artistic director. Herb Ritts''s photo of Laetitia Casta in the 1999 calendar is iconic. And it seems the models and actresses who pose for the calendars consider it an honor.

https://fw010808-flywheel.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/17070678_6_l.jpg

Dec 23 14 01:01 pm Link

Photographer

Outoffocus

Posts: 631

Worcester, England, United Kingdom

Figures Jen B wrote:

I agree.

After reading your reply above this,TMG I understand your post now. Although art can be shot in a basement for no money and non art can be shot for a big budget glossy. The sole determinant of a photo is the photographer. Pure and simple.

Jen

You''d need to explain that for me to understand, if you can be bothered. I don''t know what ''the sole determinant of a photo is the photographer'' means.

Dec 23 14 01:52 pm Link

Photographer

Don Garrett

Posts: 4984

Escondido, California, US

Brooklyn Bridge Images wrote:
How about just shooting those who want to work in this genre instead of trying to bribe/coerce those who dont ?

I absolutely agree. In my case, My "model", Jantana, was not on Model Mayhem, did not declare the type of shoot she would be willing to do, and I dropped the issue when she said no to nudity. I became her friend, and shooting nude was her idea, after she got accustomed to me. There are all sorts of situations one runs into when dealing with people.
-Don

Dec 25 14 08:32 pm Link

Model

Jen B

Posts: 4474

Phoenix, Arizona, US

TMG wrote:

You''d need to explain that for me to understand, if you can be bothered. I don''t know what ''the sole determinant of a photo is the photographer'' means.

art can be shot without a big budget and what you describe as basement sleaze, can be shot with big budget. Its the photographer of the work that determines what the work will look like, not the budget or location.
Jen

Dec 26 14 07:01 am Link

Photographer

Outoffocus

Posts: 631

Worcester, England, United Kingdom

Jen B wrote:

art can be shot without a big budget and what you describe as basement sleaze, can be shot with big budget. Its the photographer of the work that determines what the work will look like, not the budget or location.
Jen

Thank you. Yes, I'd agree with that.

Dec 26 14 03:00 pm Link

Photographer

PR Zone

Posts: 897

London, England, United Kingdom

The essence of my question is: If a hugely popular publication asked you to break your moral code, would you?

In general, I'd never be interested in anything 'edgy' that involved sh*t, p*ss, animals, children or dead people

That 'moral compass' is, for me, immovable and 'money/fame' independent

Nude seems a much 'softer' area - with blurred lines all over the place

If Pirelli/Vogue came a knocking, would your moral compass still point 'due north'?

Dec 29 14 03:33 am Link

Model

Rose Valentina

Posts: 84

Durham, England, United Kingdom

I ticked "yes" to nudes as that's what I predominantly shoot, however, it really means "selective yes." I instinctively know if i want to work with someone when i look at their work and will equally decline if I don't like what I see.

Dec 29 14 06:59 am Link

Photographer

J Andrescavage Photo

Posts: 3339

San Francisco, California, US

PR Zone wrote:
In general, I'd never be interested in anything 'edgy' that involved sh*t, p*ss, animals, children or dead people

What do you mean by the dead people point?  Like, snuff porn?  What are your thoughts on Andres Serrano or Joel-Peter Witkin?

Dec 29 14 01:39 pm Link

Model

Jen B

Posts: 4474

Phoenix, Arizona, US

Carl Herbert wrote:

The list of names associated with the calendars is impressive, but even so I would be surprised anybody would ever get a $10MM fee for posing. I googled the topic but didn''t find quick info regarding models'' and photographers'' fees. I am curious to know how much these celebrities might have been paid, but given their egos the publisher might keep that information confidential.

Not all of the calendars have been as crotchy as this one. It would seem to depend on the tastes of the photographer or perhaps an artistic director. Herb Ritts''s photo of Laetitia Casta in the 1999 calendar is iconic. And it seems the models and actresses who pose for the calendars consider it an honor.

https://fw010808-flywheel.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/17070678_6_l.jpg

If someone's choice to not shoot nude is on principle and then they do it for money then their principle ruse is bull.

Either you will shoot nude or you won't.  The monetary amount to do so sort of weakens your principles if that is what prevents you from doing so. Either you see nudity as an option or you don't.
Jen

Dec 29 14 05:40 pm Link

Photographer

alessandro2009

Posts: 8091

Florence, Toscana, Italy

Jen B wrote:
If someone's choice to not shoot nude is on principle

Don't necessarily.

Anyway I don't think is a good idea make these type of questions.

Dec 30 14 01:11 am Link

Photographer

PR Zone

Posts: 897

London, England, United Kingdom

J Andrescavage Photo wrote:

What do you mean by the dead people point?  Like, snuff porn?  What are your thoughts on Andres Serrano or Joel-Peter Witkin?

These are the area that just don't interest me...   To be honest, I could often add landscapes to that list (but they're not so edgy :-) )

Jan 01 15 07:41 pm Link

Model

Jen B

Posts: 4474

Phoenix, Arizona, US

PR Zone wrote:
The essence of my question is: If a hugely popular publication asked you to break your moral code, would you?

In general, I'd never be interested in anything 'edgy' that involved sh*t, p*ss, animals, children or dead people

That 'moral compass' is, for me, immovable and 'money/fame' independent

Nude seems a much 'softer' area - with blurred lines all over the place

If Pirelli/Vogue came a knocking, would your moral compass still point 'due north'?

If someone were to break their own moral code for money then it wasn't really a moral code, was it? If it "was" a moral code and they sold out then their morality has gaping holes and they are hypocrites.
Jen

Jan 02 15 08:05 am Link

Model

JadeDRed

Posts: 5620

London, England, United Kingdom

Jen B wrote:

If someone were to break their own moral code for money then it wasn't really a moral code, was it? If it "was" a moral code and they sold out then their morality has gaping holes and they are hypocrites.
Jen

I don't know, it depends what could be achieved by breaking it.

I think cheating is immoral but if someone offered me enough money to feed and educate 1000 starving children to do so then I think it would be immoral for me not to.

Jan 02 15 08:53 am Link

Photographer

DeanLautermilch

Posts: 321

Sebring, Florida, US

F O R B E S wrote:
80% of the girls on here who click off "no" to nudes, really mean- "no...I will not shoot nude with everyone, but If I like his/her work and I feel comfortable with him/her, I would be open to try it"

Cheers.

I have had models in my apartment after a shoot suddenly decide a topless or nude image was something they wanted and informed me by removing their clothes. As long as I maintain my 'disinterested doctor type' attitude they are comfortable.

Jan 02 15 09:21 am Link

Model

AnnAdB

Posts: 202

Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands

I have checked NO because, what usually happens here on MM, is that I only get requests for nudes and that's not my field of interest. If it is a good photographer, íf it's an interesting concept and íf it doesn't just focus on me being nude (so it needs to have some sort of story) then I will think about it.

Besides; it is easier to explain to someone that you actually ticked in NO but will make an exception now, then to explain NO while you ticked in YES. A lot of photographers are easily stepped on their toes if you do shoot nudes but just not with them.

So it's basically for your own protection to not just have constant requests to do nudes, especially if it's not your interest.

Jan 05 15 04:19 am Link

Artist/Painter

Hunter GWPB

Posts: 8155

King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, US

JadeDRed wrote:
I don't know, it depends what could be achieved by breaking it.

I think cheating is immoral but if someone offered me enough money to feed and educate 1000 starving children to do so then I think it would be immoral for me not to.

I think it would be immoral to ask you to cheat for the purpose of feeding and educating 1000 starving children.  The act of selflessness of feeding the children is morally negated by the selfish act of imposing a selfish stipulation upon someone else to be the motive for action.  Do what is right because it is what is right.

Jan 05 15 07:24 am Link

Photographer

AJ_In_Atlanta

Posts: 13053

Atlanta, Georgia, US

Or you could just cast someone who checked yes.

Jan 05 15 09:28 am Link

Photographer

DCI Photo

Posts: 7

Corona, California, US

Risen Phoenix Photo wrote:

Wow! Really?
Well you may not know this
When Some people say NO they mean NO!
When other people say NO they mean MAYBE?

I shoot a number of models on MM who say no to nudes but shoot them with me.  Also a couple female photographers on this site. The lack of anominity on the Inter web is what is creating this problem.

If a model checks off "no" for nudity, 95-99% the model means it.  You can still try and you may be a supergood photographer and the model will be sooo impressed and say yes.  But 95-99% of the time the model will think you're a dick.  Besides, there are so many models who tick off "yes" anyway.  So why cause yourself problems?

Nov 02 18 02:38 pm Link

Photographer

Rays Fine Art

Posts: 7504

New York, New York, US

BODYSHOP  FEETURES wrote:
So far it appears that only photographers have responded.  I am curious how the models will respond.

probably not anymore, given the existence of the private female models only forum that was recently introduced.

I agree with those who have said that here on model mayhem "No" is quite likely to mean "Maybe" for all the good reasons already enumerated (as well as some that have not yet been listed )

For myself, I've found it best when contacting a new-to-me model for the first time to offer a menu of possible projects, some nude, some implied, some non nude, and leave the choice up to the model.  More often than one might expect, the model will opt for some degree of nudity or near nudity on a subsequent shoot if not on the first one.  It's a matter of being comfortable with (1) the photographer, (2) the theme or nature of the pictures and (3) the likely ultimate use of the pictures.

Most women, I think, (and like most men) are more willing to be used once they are sure that they won't be abused.

All IMHO as always, of course.

Nov 02 18 06:12 pm Link

Photographer

phoenixphoto

Posts: 125

Gunnedah, New South Wales, Australia

Answering the OP's question: I'm sure there are some models who would choose the publicity & modelling fee to pose nude when otherwise not a nude model.

MM only has a YES or NO option but models who would consider nude work depending on who or what for,can state this in their bio.

Nov 03 18 01:07 am Link

Photographer

gary yong

Posts: 51

Beijing, Beijing, China

you need to ask the model directly if she could pose nude for you or not, i did a  nude photoshoot  with a  beautiful model,and i will never ever post the pictures because i respect her privacy.

Dec 06 18 07:01 pm Link

Model

Miss Melissa1

Posts: 408

Antioch, California, US

As I model I do nudes on a few conditions
1. I always look at their port 1st to see if they are capable of capturing me correctly in my eye.
2. Id like to do a get shoot with them first to get a vibe
3. They need to understand my limitations

Dec 06 18 07:12 pm Link

Photographer

TEB-Art Photo

Posts: 605

Carrboro, North Carolina, US

A good approach for some models might be to keep two MM profiles: one for routine work; one for art.

Dec 07 18 07:17 am Link

Photographer

Mark Salo

Posts: 11708

Olney, Maryland, US

Not long ago it was a misdemeanor to ask a model to shoot nude if he/she had checked "no nudes' in his/her MM profile.

I wonder if this is still in effect.

Dec 07 18 07:29 am Link

Photographer

TEB-Art Photo

Posts: 605

Carrboro, North Carolina, US

Mark Salo wrote:
Not long ago it was a misdemeanor to ask a model to shoot nude if he/she had checked "no nudes' in his/her MM profile.

I wonder if this is still in effect.

If you are polite about it, I don't see any harm. But, I would not do that in general, as I expect it might lead to a high "flake" rate.

Dec 07 18 08:05 am Link

Model

Jules NYC

Posts: 21617

New York, New York, US

https://i.imgur.com/ex0rqf4.jpg

Dec 07 18 11:43 am Link

Photographer

Randy Poe

Posts: 1637

Green Cove Springs, Florida, US

That was the cheapest spammy assed thing have ever seen on this site and you site would not back out, I had to unclick the browser to get out of that spammy assed site of yours.  Come at me bro.

Dec 08 18 12:28 am Link

Model

Kiara Z

Posts: 32

Bologna, Emilia-Romagna, Italy

For pirelli calendar, of course yes. It’s not only a matter of pay, but usually behind this there’s always a top ph and team, which means you will be doing a prestigious work, plus there’s really good exposure.

Dec 08 18 08:48 am Link

Photographer

Gruen Associates Creati

Posts: 3

Flagstaff, Arizona, US

This is called pushing levels. It is absolutely on cool. Model should be free to clearly state that her levels and work with in them. Photographers Should respect those levels and hire models That meet their creative needs. Someone said “thrill of the chase”. Work out your kinky stuff elsewhere.

Dec 08 18 04:34 pm Link

Photographer

Greg Kolack

Posts: 18392

Elmhurst, Illinois, US

Randy Poe wrote:
That was the cheapest spammy assed thing have ever seen on this site and you site would not back out, I had to unclick the browser to get out of that spammy assed site of yours.  Come at me bro.

It was posted 4 years ago...

Dec 10 18 09:54 pm Link

Photographer

Picturesque Imagery

Posts: 52

Austin, Texas, US

Model marks "no" - I don't ask. I don't suggest or bring up the subject. Not before or during the actual shoot.

If she brings it up during the shoot - we discuss of course. You have to be respectful and honor is a big deal to me. Portraits, Photographs are not a picture of someone, they are "about someone" ..  if you know this then you are a good photographer and model.

Dec 20 18 07:37 am Link

Artist/Painter

Grumman Cat

Posts: 22

Scottsdale, Arizona, US

Picturesque Imagery wrote:
Model marks "no" - I don't ask. I don't suggest or bring up the subject. Not before or during the actual shoot.

If she brings it up during the shoot - we discuss of course. You have to be respectful and honor is a big deal to me. Portraits, Photographs are not a picture of someone, they are "about someone" ..  if you know this then you are a good photographer and model.

Agreed! I never have approached a 'no' model and asked her/him about a nude shoot. But I have worked with a couple of models who responded to casting calls that were nude even though they clicked 'no'. I have worked with other models who formerly clicked 'yes', later changed to 'no' but still worked with me. One specifically said she was tired of some of the messages she was getting. But this model did indeed go 'no really means no' a couple of years after that.

Another thing I would add if it hasn't already been mentioned is I find that often a model who *really* doesn't do nudes will

SAY SO

in her profile. That's a dead giveaway tongue

Dec 26 18 08:04 pm Link

Photographer

Jerry Nemeth

Posts: 33355

Dearborn, Michigan, US

There are many models who already shoot nudes.
Those are the models that I work with!

Dec 26 18 10:33 pm Link

Photographer

Michael DBA Expressions

Posts: 3730

Lynchburg, Virginia, US

My policy is simply if the profile says no, I will never ask.

I have experienced models with "no" in their profile approach me to shoot nude. That's ok, and under those circumstances, I sometimes will. But even then, I do not ask about other nude gigs, if their profile still says no.

There are plenty of models who make no bones about shooting nude. There is no need to bother the others with such a request.

Dec 27 18 07:05 am Link

Photographer

Sablesword

Posts: 383

Gurnee, Illinois, US

My take is that what the model writes her profile takes precedence over the "Nudes yes/no" checkbox. So if the model wrote "I only do nudity in PAID shoots - NOT TFP!" then I'll feel free about asking her for a paid shoot with nudity, even if she checked "no" in the "shoots nudes" box. Now this works the other way as well: If the model has Yes checked, but her profile states "I am not doing nudes at this time" or "I only do implied nudity" then I don't ask for a shoot that includes visible nudity.

Also, in my pitch to a "no nudity" model I will include something like "I normally take some topless photos in my shoots, but since you've checked 'no nudes' this will be a no-nudes photoshoot." I see this as a courtesy. It shows that I have actually read the model's profile and am willing to accept her no-nudes stipulation. 

Trying to "renegotiate" after agreeing to a no-nudes photoshoot is just rude.

Dec 27 18 08:08 am Link

Photographer

Eye of the World

Posts: 1396

Corvallis, Oregon, US

Sablesword wrote:
My take is that what the model writes her profile takes precedence over the "Nudes yes/no" checkbox. So if the model wrote "I only do nudity in PAID shoots - NOT TFP!" then I'll feel free about asking her for a paid shoot with nudity, even if she checked "no" in the "shoots nudes" box. Now this works the other way as well: If the model has Yes checked, but her profile states "I am not doing nudes at this time" or "I only do implied nudity" then I don't ask for a shoot that includes visible nudity.

Also, in my pitch to a "no nudity" model I will include something like "I normally take some topless photos in my shoots, but since you've checked 'no nudes' this will be a no-nudes photoshoot." I see this as a courtesy. It shows that I have actually read the model's profile and am willing to accept her no-nudes stipulation. 

Trying to "renegotiate" after agreeing to a no-nudes photoshoot is just rude.

You could also respect what they have written and add a line something to the effect of, "In the future if your policy ever changes please let me know".

Dec 27 18 05:33 pm Link

Photographer

Snarkhunter Imaging

Posts: 68

Harvard, Massachusetts, US

About five years after I did a nude shoot with someone, she wrote to me and asked if I would mind removing them from my portfolio. Her kid had gotten old enough to use the internet, and she was concerned that he'd come across them. She no longer did nude shoots, and had recently changed her profile from "Yes" to "No."

I complied. I don't want anyone to be uncomfortable with work that we did together. Legally, I have the rights to publish them, but to me, that's besides the point. I want enthusiastic collaborators.

When I shoot nudes with someone, I want them to have a "Hell yes!" attitude, not be on the fence. Financial situations change, and so someone compromising their values for short-term financial gain isn't likely to be something they will feel good about forever.

For these reasons and more, I assume that "No" means "No," and I won't push that boundary. My preference for nude shoots is that either they have "Yes" checked or that they answer my "Call," and explain that they check "No" on their profiles just to filter out the perverts.

Dec 30 18 07:51 am Link