Photographer
Brooklyn Bridge Images
Posts: 13200
Brooklyn, New York, US
Francisco Castro wrote:
Why make this post if other Points of view are unwelcome ?
Photographer
Jeffrey M Fletcher
Posts: 4861
Asheville, North Carolina, US
I've some doubt the models I work with would feel safer if I turned the sessions into webcam episodes.
Which is what the cam would look like.
...and I don't think I could sell the wacky "it's for your own safety" story either.
No, on second thought, it's more than some doubt.
Look, I'm going stay away from suggesting that violence or impropriety may occur or suggesting creepy webcam scenario's to models. I just can't see where I can fit it in with all the actual shooting ideas and organization there is to go over.
Photographer
Evan Hiltunen
Posts: 4162
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US
I think it was made very clear in the original post that this was an FYI and other viewpoints would not be tolerated ... errr, ummm, appreciated.
Photographer
Good Egg Productions
Posts: 16713
Orlando, Florida, US
Francisco Castro wrote:
Well, what I said I didn't want to happen, eventually, happened. The pro/against escort argument has popped up.
Just goes to show that you can't have a mature discussion on here. There will always be those looking for the negative and those who are just waiting for something to be offended by anything and everything. I don't see that as the case.
I see both models and photographers alike disagreeing that this is a good idea and something they would participate in.
That's not to say that you shouldn't do it. You can do whatever you want. However, more than one model has stated that this is a red flag. I suppose it's all in how you sell it. We all get to conduct our business the way it works best for us. Sometimes, others think it's a terrible way. Others don't. Who cares.
If it works for you, it works for you. It's just that almost everyone else here says it wouldn't work for them. Myself included.
Photographer
Francisco Castro
Posts: 2628
Cincinnati, Ohio, US
UPDATE: I have implemented my idea and so far, of the models that said they wanted to try it, ALL (100% of 14) have said that they LOVED the experience of being able to share their shooting with friends/significant others/family. According to them, the responses that they got from their boyfriends/family have been very good. They got to watch their girl do her thing without intruding.
The camera was unobtrusive, and after a few minutes of shooting, it's presence was ignored and/or forgotten.
So, with that, I will keep the setup and continue to offer it to my clients.
Good day to you all.
Photographer
Solas
Posts: 10390
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
A new take on the escort thread. OP should be given an award for ingenuity
Photographer
Photos_by_Stan
Posts: 287
Youngstown, Ohio, US
Wonder if this means you have updated your model release to EXCLUDE the footage that the surveillance camera is taking ?
As a good deal of standard releases say that ANY form of recording would be your property to do with as you feel fit anytime down the road
Also , does this now mean that models have to sign a separate form saying that they know they are being filmed ?
OR - Will every model that walks into any photographers studio now ask first whether there are any surveillance cameras active .. and should they have the photographer sign a form that they keep stating that fact ?
NOT that anyone is likely to admit it if they are not using out in the open type camera ...
But how many studio photographers currently have cameras set up to watch their property
( not set up to send out to the "family/boyfriend" ).... Just as standard security measures
Photographer
Jerry Nemeth
Posts: 33355
Dearborn, Michigan, US
Cherrystone wrote:
This.
Sounds like a can of worms to me. +1
Photographer
gorgeous3mikecasa
Posts: 77
Chicago, Illinois, US
sounds like a lot of work, i have enough things to set up before a shoot ...
Photographer
Don Garrett
Posts: 4984
Escondido, California, US
Jay Farrell wrote:
I see no reason to do it. It still boils down to, if you don't feel safe stay home. I like this one. If you don't have the stomach to live life, just commit suicide ! Otherwise, when you step out your back door, watch out for meters, they're dangerous.
-Don
Photographer
Seiran
Posts: 98
Topeka, Kansas, US
-The Dave- wrote:
Remote escorts, what an awesome idea!!! Drone escorts, maybe? 
Photographer
Rik Williams
Posts: 4005
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Yeah, this is a great idea! Well, at least for all those camera owning, shady types, the ones who have shizen portfolio work, no references and a limited ability to communicate with others, but aside from those circumstances, I don't think it's a great option.
Or better yet ...maybe tracking bracelets for all photographers ....Yeah! We could sign up on monthly subscription plans to make it more cost effective, that way if things do go a little "off the rails" they'll always know where we've been so they can readily find the bodies.
But seriously, the suggestion of monitoring photo shoots is madness. At best, you're painting photographers as being untrustworthy.
IMHO, If there's no trust given, especially when there are some very good reasons to at least lower ones guard, I see absolutely no point in even discussing a shoot.
The end.
Photographer
Rik Williams
Posts: 4005
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Brooklyn Bridge Images wrote:
Why make this post if other Points of view are unwelcome ? Simple, he only wants to hear the answers he wants to hear.
In reality, it will take an equal amount of trust from the model in order to believe the footage wasn't being streamed/stored where it shouldn't.
The option kind of negates itself.
Photographer
Jerry Nemeth
Posts: 33355
Dearborn, Michigan, US
Francisco Castro wrote:
UPDATE: I have implemented my idea and so far, of the models that said they wanted to try it, ALL (100% of 14) have said that they LOVED the experience of being able to share their shooting with friends/significant others/family. According to them, the responses that they got from their boyfriends/family have been very good. They got to watch their girl do her thing without intruding.
The camera was unobtrusive, and after a few minutes of shooting, it's presence was ignored and/or forgotten.
So, with that, I will keep the setup and continue to offer it to my clients.
Good day to you all. Just because you had no problems the first time does not mean that you won't have problems in the future.
Photographer
Lallure Photographic
Posts: 2086
Taylors, South Carolina, US
Simpler to have a female assistant on set, to help the model, and the photographer, as needed. The model is less likely to be inhibited, by an assistant, that works for the photographer, but having a female present, makes the model more comfortable in the shooting environment, plus can assist the model anytime she needs it, in the dressing room.
Photographer
Toto Photo
Posts: 3757
Belmont, California, US
Francisco Castro wrote:
UPDATE: I have implemented my idea and so far, of the models that said they wanted to try it, ALL (100% of 14) have said that they LOVED the experience of being able to share their shooting with friends/significant others/family. According to them, the responses that they got from their boyfriends/family have been very good. They got to watch their girl do her thing without intruding.
The camera was unobtrusive, and after a few minutes of shooting, it's presence was ignored and/or forgotten.
So, with that, I will keep the setup and continue to offer it to my clients.
Good day to you all. Congrats on your 14 successes--very original, creative problem solving!
Photographer
ChadAlan
Posts: 4254
Los Angeles, California, US
Francisco Castro wrote:
UPDATE: I have implemented my idea and so far, of the models that said they wanted to try it, ALL (100% of 14) have said that they LOVED the experience of being able to share their shooting with friends/significant others/family. According to them, the responses that they got from their boyfriends/family have been very good. They got to watch their girl do her thing without intruding.
The camera was unobtrusive, and after a few minutes of shooting, it's presence was ignored and/or forgotten.
So, with that, I will keep the setup and continue to offer it to my clients.
Good day to you all. If it works for you, then great. You might be on to something.
I don't need something like this in my studio, so I'm going to pass. I would hope models I work with, would do so on the quality of my work, what I have to offer, and my rates or concepts.
Not because I offer live cam monitoring for curious people or parties with romantic involvement. It's not a value added service, imo.
As an idea. It's ok. As a means to alleviate fears and discourage escorts, I think it may just add fuel to the fire of any jealous bf watching.
Photographer
Chuckarelei
Posts: 11271
Seattle, Washington, US
I can't wait for the day that the camera malfunction and stream a naked model posing to those who are will to pay a few bucks.
Your model might discover her new potential as a webcam girl.
Photographer
Connor Photography
Posts: 8539
Newark, Delaware, US
Francisco Castro wrote:
NOTE: This is NOT a pro-escort or anti-escort thread. Please don't bother posting if you have something to say about the merits or demerits of having an escort in the studio. That horse has been beaten to death in MM, and in all forums of social media.
To help alleviate some of the anxiety of not having an escort to a shoot, I decided to install an internet accessible WiFi camera that can be accessed by anyone with the link and the password. (I shut off the camera after each shoot, and change the passwords for each shoot.) The model is free to give the link and password to anyone they would like to be able to "check in" on the shoot.
So far, the response has been pretty positive, and no one has balked at the camera being a compromise.
The one newbie who said that her bf has to be there, I just referred to other photographers in the area and did not use up any time or effort trying to convince her.
Like I said, this is not a thread to argue for or against escorts. This is just an FYI on an alternative that I made available to my clients. Cost was $40 for a D-link camera, and access to the internet, which my studio already had. The problem is that the model wants to bring an escort is not related to ensuring her safety. It is just an excuse. Some models even claim that I bring an escort is for your and my safety. ......hahaaaaa
Photographer
Connor Photography
Posts: 8539
Newark, Delaware, US
Francisco Castro wrote:
UPDATE: I have implemented my idea and so far, of the models that said they wanted to try it, ALL (100% of 14) have said that they LOVED the experience of being able to share their shooting with friends/significant others/family. According to them, the responses that they got from their boyfriends/family have been very good. They got to watch their girl do her thing without intruding.
The camera was unobtrusive, and after a few minutes of shooting, it's presence was ignored and/or forgotten.
So, with that, I will keep the setup and continue to offer it to my clients.
Good day to you all. There you are, it is a nice feature that they are able to share with their family. There is nothing about improving safety or eliminating an escort. Have you had a case that model insists on bring her BF and must be on the set, but after you present your online video, her BF is OK with it. ???
Photographer
The Grey Forest
Posts: 542
Igoumenítsa, Kentriki Ellada, Greece
Sure, but plz make sure to schedule your shoots between noon & 1pm EST, so that all the NSA agents can crowd around their monitors during their lunch break.
Any password can be hacked and your camera/mic turned on remotely at any time. Plus, how would this apply for "comfort level" during nude shoots that anyone (or their company on the receiving end) is watching ?
My standard rule is:
if you want to bring an escort, I have to know who they are and they must also be modeling in the shoot.
(not some mystery person) ~ I've been robbed enough times by sticky fingered guests, thanks,
-or-
if you're so worried about your safety, then I expect you to show up wearing a bicycle helmet and a reflective safety vest, and they can bring pepper spray, a baton, a knife, a gun, or a thermonuclear device if you're so inclined it being necessary for their protection ...just no mystery escorts allowed. But live stream cameras on a nude shoot ??? and impossible to apply for outdoor on location sets ~ futzing around with one camera in hand is enough grief.
Fact is, you shouldn't be in the company nor shooting with someone you're afraid of in the first place.
I'm gonna place this tattered bent stick down next to the dead horse here and stroll away...
Photographer
Francisco Castro
Posts: 2628
Cincinnati, Ohio, US
Connor Photography wrote:
There you are, it is a nice feature that they are able to share with their family. There is nothing about improving safety or eliminating an escort. Have you had a case that model insists on bring her BF and must be on the set, but after you present your online video, her BF is OK with it. ??? There was one model in the beginning who pretty much told me that her boyfriend only allows her to shoot if he was there. At that point, when you hear words like, "allows [me] to shoot", you know the decision is not up to her. I just politely told her that perhaps shooting with another person will be the best recourse, wish her good luck, and walked away from that situation.
I really have no problems walking away from a shoot if I feel that it would add more drama that I care for.... which is very little. I have a very low drama threshold.
Photographer
Francisco Castro
Posts: 2628
Cincinnati, Ohio, US
The Grey Forest wrote:
Any password can be hacked and your camera/mic turned on remotely at any time. Plus, how would this apply for "comfort level" during nude shoots that anyone (or their company on the receiving end) is watching ? That concept of cameras and mics being hacked is pretty much Hollywood magic. I'm sure the super hackers who do have the ability have a lot better things to do than to try to hack into a webcam of a small studio shooting completely non-famous people who only shoots nudes less than 5% of the time. Let me ask you, other than movies, do you actually know anyone who has the ability?
My setup is that the camera sits on a table next to the set, aimed at the set only; no panning ability. When it's going to be used, I ask the model what password she would like, and setup the temporary URL and password. Each shoot gets a different link and password.
When I am not there, I unplug the camera along with my lighting gear. It's hard to hack something when there is no power going to it. I also turn off the WiFi when I am not at the studio via the light switch.
Photographer
ChadAlan
Posts: 4254
Los Angeles, California, US
Francisco Castro wrote:
That concept of cameras and mics being hacked is pretty much Hollywood magic. I'm sure the super hackers who do have the ability have a lot better things to do than to try to hack into a webcam of a small studio shooting completely non-famous people who only shoots nudes less than 5% of the time. Let me ask you, other than movies, do you actually know anyone who has the ability?
My setup is that the camera sits on a table next to the set, aimed at the set only; no panning ability. When it's going to be used, I ask the model what password she would like, and setup the temporary URL and password. Each shoot gets a different link and password.
When I am not there, I unplug the camera along with my lighting gear. It's hard to hack something when there is no power going to it. I also turn off the WiFi when I am not at the studio via the light switch. Hackers and hacking are most certainly not Hollywood magic. Hackers are often employed or invited to help companies find flaws in their security. Hacker conventions award prizes for the speed in which someone can take full control over one's computer.
You're not a likely target, but know that the very real risk does exist
|
