East Coast Pose wrote:
I must ask you all why do some models attend lingerie/swimwear shoots with stretch marks, scabs on their feet and masses of pimples on their butt?  Not only that but I have had a few models with scars on their wrists from self-cutting when they were younger.  I mean we are all human and these things happen but why respond to listings if you have these imperfections to this level?

Because they're  N O T  models!  Simples!

"They are self-delusional hubristic narcissist wannabes with grandiose egos and sense of self-worth, who somehow divine that if they label themselves as a "model" they are, as if by magic, transformed into one."

Studio36

studio36uk wrote:

Because they're  N O T  models!  Simples!

"They are self-delusional hubristic narcissist wannabes with grandiose egos and sense of self-worth, who somehow divine that if they label themselves as a "model" they are, as if by magic, transformed into one."

Studio36

this

East Coast Pose wrote:
I mean do people in general know how long it takes to 'photoshop' a single photograph?.

Models know about the things that they do, not the things that you do.

Few know how long it can take to edit photos.  Even fewer know how long it can take to build a set or to get really skilled as a photographer, but, realistically, what did any of us know when we were 18 or 20?

studio36uk wrote:
"They are self-delusional hubristic narcissist wannabes with grandiose egos and sense of self-worth, who somehow divine that if they label themselves as a "model" they are, as if by magic, transformed into one."

That is certainly true of some models, and equally true of some photographers.

East Coast Pose wrote:
Also, I know I can't discriminate but if a model is a mum and has stretch marks all over her body why would she apply for a swimwear/lingerie shoot in the first instance without informing the photographer first?

Well, there's your problem.  You should of course discriminate in who you work with.  If a model has stretch marks or other features that don't meet the look you desire, then pass on that model.

studio36uk wrote:

Because they're  N O T  models!  Simples!

"They are self-delusional hubristic narcissist wannabes with grandiose egos and sense of self-worth, who somehow divine that if they label themselves as a "model" they are, as if by magic, transformed into one."

Studio36

A greater truism has never been spoken.

Jeffrey M Fletcher wrote:
No, removing a scar or pimples in photoshop is not hard. No miracle required just a few minutes of study and a bit of practice.

As for the jerk thing, no ones perfect. If you want unblemished or close to it, state it as a requirement and then be prepared to pay the price.

I had a model who had very nice skin.  However, when she posed certain poses, her forehead scrunched up with huge ridges like rumble strips on a highway.   You would have never suspected it from either seeing her in person nor looking at her past work.   My biggest mistake was not catching them before I took the shot, not that it was likely that she could do much about it.

I performed a few miracles in Photoshop that day, I can tell 'ya.

Steve Korn wrote:
I have to admit this post bugs me a bit.

They're real people and even professional models have inconsistencies.

I think your perception of top models is colored by all the abundance of post production that is used at all levels.

Fixing this stuff in post is not hard, raise your game.

Or, even better yet, leave a scar or two, makes much more interesting photos.

A pig in lipstick is, ... well, one must admit ... still a pig.

Studio36

East Coast Pose wrote:
I don't want too but I am going to have to ask models how their skin is before I shoot again.

Why not? I've asked for images of current hair (if they have multiple styles in their portfolio) and every single casting always states that I want models to have clear skin and good bone structure.

It's not a discrimination against them as people, but modelling is a job where your assets and skills are based largely in your physical appearance... so you will or won't get hired based on how you look. It's just how it works.

Obviously there are better and more polite ways of phrasing things and it doesn't give people licence to simply insult models because they don't fulfil their requirements (such as likening them to pigs...) but you need to make sure you work with models that fit your needs.

Rob Photosby wrote:
Models know about the things that they do, not the things that you do.

Few know how long it can take to edit photos.  Even fewer know how long it can take to build a set or to get really skilled as a photographer, but, realistically, what did any of us know when we were 18 or 20?

I'm constantly surprised by how little models know about the other side of the camera, and the pretty much complete lack of awareness about how much Photoshop time involved for touchups. Having said that, beyond having developed an appreciation and understanding that modelling is a lot more of a skill than I'd thought before I started shooting, I'll confess, I don't know much about it, except that it appears you have to stop eating entirely.

East Coast Pose wrote:
Also, I know I can't discriminate but if a model is a mum and has stretch marks all over her body why would she apply for a swimwear/lingerie shoot in the first instance without informing the photographer first?

The mindset that full disclosure is the model's responsibility is obviously not working.  And probably not realistic. Is it the model's responsibility to read your mind, know what you do and don't want, and inform you; or is it your responsibility to become informed?

East Coast Pose wrote:
I don't want too but I am going to have to ask models how their skin is before I shoot again.  This is where I am making my mistakes I think.
Thanks

You already know the answer to the problem, but the term 'ask' implies the solution will be 'tell'.  "Is your skin OK?"  "Oh yeah. It's fine."  'Show' is better than 'Tell'.  As has already been stated, if skin is an issue, then a current, unretouched pic is what you need.  (I don't know why everyone keeps using the term 'selfie'. That seems to trigger the creep meter in the model forum. I would rather see a non-selfie, better angle, better image.) Also consider that many women are very self conscious about their bodies, even models, so expand your verbiage to include tattoos and piercings as points of concern, not just stretchmarks and scars. If you only refer to their 'faults' then the interaction can go downhill quickly.   And save yourself another headache and ask for a current pic of hair and face. I shot with a model recently who had shaved off her eyebrows, but I had clarified before the shoot, so it wasn't a surprise.

Dekilah wrote:
I've had some photographers just flat out ask me how my skin is, if I have acne and to what degree, and if I have any noticeable scars. I didn't find it offensive, but I'm also pretty laid back about that sort of thing and I understand why they are asking. Not all models seem to understand why this is important or they feel it's too personal.

Whhaaaaaa?

If you are a model, your appearance is your main "product" and how you carry and portray it is your main skill.   For a model to get offended by someone asking about the "quality" of the "product" would say to me that the model doesn't have a clear understanding of what is being sold.

DAVISICON wrote:
Thats exactly why you need to require recent unretouched selfies be submitted to avoid those surprises.

Check the EXIF though. I've received 2-month old "selfies" claimed to be taken "a few hours ago."

East Coast Pose wrote:
How do more experienced photographers handle these situations?

.

Dekilah wrote:
On one side of this, I think it is the model's responsibility to take care of her skin as best she can to minimize pimples and such. Things she cannot minimize such as scarring and recurring acne, should be clearly stated for any relevant shoots (example: if she has acne on her bum, she should state that on booking if her bum will be showing in a photo). No, we're not perfect, but noticeable imperfections are something a model should be aware of and open about. Obviously not every little scar needs to be mentioned and one or two "spots" here or there probably aren't a huge deal, but larger scars, bold stretch marks, bruises, and the like are very relevant.

On the other side, the photographer needs to take control of the shoot as well. If you don't want to Photoshop out certain things, make it clear and state that you are looking for models with minimal acne, no large scars, etc. Make sure they know that you do not just edit these things away as many models assume that all photographers do in fact edit away all imperfections. I have had photographers let me know that they don't edit retouch photos in the past and I was fine with that. And I've had some photographers just flat out ask me how my skin is, if I have acne and to what degree, and if I have any noticeable scars. I didn't find it offensive, but I'm also pretty laid back about that sort of thing and I understand why they are asking. Not all models seem to understand why this is important or they feel it's too personal.

I think your best bet is to state in the casting that you prefer models with clear skin as you do minimal editing. Then reiterate that again in PMs and ask if they have any noticeable scars or blemishes.

You are simply wonderful! 


No one is perfect, and models ... although they can be close, they are human and thus not excluded from some imperfections.  This topic should not be avoided or found to be offensive to discuss.  I love shooting with models who have nice skin, but things like tattoo, scars, acne and stretch marks are issues that a model should let the photographer know about without feeling embarrassed.  I think photographers should be kind about their responses because often times it is a personal issue with the model.  If the photographer does not wish to go forward with working with that model, it is the photographers prerogative. 

That said, I don't often get to shoot with models that don't have at least some minor flaws.  I don't know if it would be true of so called Super Models of the 1980's being perfect, but "touch ups or air brushing" have been done before digital photo shop became available.  I used to shoot for institutional or corporate portrait studios, and I found it challenging to work with so many varieties of people in attempting to capture their best features, as well as reduce the flaws seen.  I think it would be hypocritical of me to put down the looks of a model when I am not all that confident of my own looks.  In fact, I hate getting my own picture taken!  There are very few pictures of me out there, so if you have one, it's valuable! Not all photographers are like me though.

hayleyjohnsen wrote:
As a "model" (i'm not, I am not signed to an agency nor have i ever been paid to work, so I am NOT a model ) I do not think you're being a jerk. What that person said about them basically being narcissistic assholes is right. I think you are being real and upfront. I am an aspiring + model, aspiring being the extremely operative word here, and even I know better than to think I can simply be transformed on camera. The most I would rely on my photographer to do would be to adjust the lighting in a photo to get rid of that "glisten" (or sweat, whatever) or to balance my complexion slightly, maybe even whiten up teeth a bit, but never to remove actual physical landmarks from my body.  That's truly bordering on stupidity and you shouldn't feel a lick of remorse for telling it to them like it is.

Personally, I have stretch marks (from growing to the height of 5'8 by 11 years old) but they are kind you can't really even see ( the "white" kind) and I still inform photographers well ahead of time that they exist. Regardless that they have never posed a problem and are truly barely noticeable, it's a professional courtesy. If I know this, no other "Model" has any excuse.

Sweat ... glistening is an issue that all photographers of the human species must be aware of!   My God!  I kept boxes of tissue paper and also a bottle of baby powder in the studio for that reason.  If the photographer is using studio lighting with modeling lamps, they should be able to see it.  Outdoors, it should be even easier to notice.  If it's hot, and the model is sweating that much, maybe it's time for a makeup retouching sort of break?  The beads of sweat and the glistening effect is just one aspect of skin I needed to be aware of as a model, wedding or portrait photographer.  Now if it's some rock star on stage with sweat dripping off their face from performing a great concert, then I hear "Dude, that was a gnarly shot!" 

East Coast Pose wrote:
Hi everyone, 

(I might sound like a complete jerk here)....

I just do photography as a hobby but do a few shoots here and there. Lately I have been improving my editing skills using various programs on my Mac.

I have had a few lingerie and swimwear shoots during the last few months which I have paid models and supplied clothing as it seems most models around my city will not do TFP or at least not with me...

I must ask you all why do some models attend lingerie/swimwear shoots with stretch marks, scabs on their feet and masses of pimples on their butt?  Not only that but I have had a few models with scars on their wrists from self-cutting when they were younger.  I mean we are all human and these things happen but why respond to listings if you have these imperfections to this level?

Also, I know I can't discriminate but if a model is a mum and has stretch marks all over her body why would she apply for a swimwear/lingerie shoot in the first instance without informing the photographer first?

A model recently said to me "I know I have stretch marks and pimples but you can just photoshop them out right"?

I mean do people in general know how long it takes to 'photoshop' a single photograph?  I can't work miracles.  A few blemishes? Not a problem... 

I don't want too but I am going to have to ask models how their skin is before I shoot again.  This is where I am making my mistakes I think.

How do more experienced photographers handle these situations?

Thanks

I don't think you are a jerk. If you are paying these models and they do not show up in a ready state and haven't discussed this with you before hand then Iwould not do the shoot.
Jen

Patrick Walberg wrote:
You are simply wonderful! 

Well, thank you ^_^ Although to me I just approach these things with common sense and a little compassion (for both "sides").

No one is perfect, and models ... although they can be close, they are human and thus not excluded from some imperfections.  This topic should not be avoided or found to be offensive to discuss.  I love shooting with models who have nice skin, but things like tattoo, scars, acne and stretch marks are issues that a model should let the photographer know about without feeling embarrassed.  I think photographers should be kind about their responses because often times it is a personal issue with the model.  If the photographer does not wish to go forward with working with that model, it is the photographers prerogative.

I agree that it shouldn't be offensive or avoided. I feel that models who are uncomfortable talking about their body are probably in the wrong hobby/career. At the same time, I also agree that it should be handled kindly as we're still only human and just because our body is our "product," that does not mean we aren't subject to sensitivities and such about it. I know I still feel a little hurt when people tell me I'd look better with bigger breasts since that's something I've struggled with since I was probably 12 and I only came to accept my breasts as a result of being a model (starting at age 25).

That said, I don't often get to shoot with models that don't have at least some minor flaws.  I don't know if it would be true of so called Super Models of the 1980's being perfect, but "touch ups or air brushing" have been done before digital photo shop became available.  I used to shoot for institutional or corporate portrait studios, and I found it challenging to work with so many varieties of people in attempting to capture their best features, as well as reduce the flaws seen.

I think we all have flaws. I have at least a half dozen things I can name of the top of my head, some of them I can correct by being mindful of my posing, some are scars (small, but relevant at times), etc. As an example: My right eye is slightly more hooded than my left, which can make it look a little more closed at times and also makes applying certain type of makeup a bit more challenging. Most people don't notice unless I point it out, but it's there.

East Coast Pose wrote:
Hi everyone, 

(I might sound like a complete jerk here)....

I just do photography as a hobby but do a few shoots here and there. Lately I have been improving my editing skills using various programs on my Mac.

I have had a few lingerie and swimwear shoots during the last few months which I have paid models and supplied clothing as it seems most models around my city will not do TFP or at least not with me...

I must ask you all why do some models attend lingerie/swimwear shoots with stretch marks, scabs on their feet and masses of pimples on their butt?  Not only that but I have had a few models with scars on their wrists from self-cutting when they were younger.  I mean we are all human and these things happen but why respond to listings if you have these imperfections to this level?

Also, I know I can't discriminate but if a model is a mum and has stretch marks all over her body why would she apply for a swimwear/lingerie shoot in the first instance without informing the photographer first?

A model recently said to me "I know I have stretch marks and pimples but you can just photoshop them out right"?

I mean do people in general know how long it takes to 'photoshop' a single photograph?  I can't work miracles.  A few blemishes? Not a problem... 

I don't want too but I am going to have to ask models how their skin is before I shoot again.  This is where I am making my mistakes I think.

How do more experienced photographers handle these situations?

Thanks

I see...  You don't want to communicate with the models.  You just want them to know what you want and don't want.  That approach doesn't seem to be working.

Gianantonio wrote:

I see...  You don't want to communicate with the models.  You just want them to know what you want and don't want.  That approach doesn't seem to be working.

My thoughts exactly. You are paying the models. You should make it clear you expect relatively clear, undamaged skin if that is what you want from your models. If they show up and look vastly different from the pictures you've seen of them, either send them home or work out a different rate in appreciation of the time you'll need to take retouching.

I deal with more clients (boudoir) than models in this regard. Older women, moms, etc where there is plenty of stretch marks especially. I simply ask them how heavily they want the pictures retouched. Some prefer au natural, some want perfection. If it's a trade situation with a model, depending on the style of shoot, I'll discuss the edits with them during or after the shoot...usually it's just cleaning up some acne or blemishes, which works for me. Personally, retouching is extremely quick for me so I don't sweat it unless the level of editing needed would look ridiculous.