Looknsee Photography wrote:
Source?

http://www.bls.gov/ooh/sales/models.htm

Looknsee Photography wrote:
So?

to help bring some REALITY

Hero Foto wrote:

http://www.bls.gov/ooh/sales/models.htm


to help bring some REALITY

Many models earn more than that.

Hero Foto wrote:
but NOT on average, they are the exception not the standard (median)

That is the problem with those statistics.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:

That is the problem with those statistics.

.I am assuming this stat includes the "models" who do the less glamorous modeling jobs.

Most of the models on MM seem to be art photography or commercial print models, which is a specific niche...as opposed to models who model for things like: all those stock photos, or medical diagrams in textbooks, etc.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
A few years ago a popular MM member said she had made around $24,000 that year.

Yes, $24,000 sounds about right.

But you have to take into account that, in order to make that, the model will still have to charge in the $50-75/hr range, due to the fact that she's not shooting every day and there's almost no way on earth a freelancer will be working daily.

In other to make 24,000 per year (before taxes), one must work for $12.50 per hour, 40 hours per week, five days per week. To make $24,000 per year requires earning $500 per week. Realistically speaking, a lot more models are going to be able to accomplish that by getting 2 sessions weekly that both lay $250 per session, OR a couple of sessions paying $150 each, then a third that pays $200.

That ^^ is where the $24,000 (or $500/week) comes from broken down into freelance modeling scenarios.

Koryn wrote:

Yes, $24,000 sounds about right.

But you have to take into account that, in order to make that, the model will still have to charge in the $50-75/hr range, due to the fact that she's not shooting every day and there's almost no way on earth a freelancer will be working daily.

In other to make 24,000 per year (before taxes), one must work for $12.50 per hour, 40 hours per week, five days per week. To make $24,000 per year requires earning $500 per week. Realistically speaking, a lot more models are going to be able to accomplish that by getting 2 sessions weekly that both lay $250 per session, OR a couple of sessions paying $150 each, then a third that pays $200.

That ^^ is where the $24,000 (or $500/week) comes from broken down into freelance modeling scenarios.

I know models who have a rate of $100 to $125/hour.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:

I know models who have a rate of $100 to $125/hour.

Do you not understand how the law of averages works?

KungPaoChic wrote:

Do you not understand how the law of averages works?

I know!

Isis22 wrote:
Keep in mind not everyone reports when they pay models and not every model reports their pay. Those statistics are meaningless to me and most people.

+1   True!

Grayscale Photo wrote:
The hourly average rate ($9.02) is misleading.  It's a calculated by dividing the reported annual income by the standard 2000+ working hours in a year.  Very few models are working 40 hours/week at modeling.

For example, a model that earns $18,000/year working 100 modeling gigs, each of which lasts 4 hours is making about $45/hour.  Adjust any of those numbers to reach any hourly rate you want to justify.

I understand what you are saying, but how do you know this data was made up?  They either had a reported annual income which was crunched, or they had a reported hourly income.  The site clearly states that models have unreliable hours, so it seems odd they would assume a 2000 hour/year schedule.  Why can't the raw data be reported hourly wages?  *** I compared the 2012 and 2014 numbers, and the annual/hourly wage change ratios were almost identical, so yes, I'm guessing the hourly wage was calculated form the annual.

And the 2014 data is posted, not sure why this thread has the 2012 numbers.  Interestingly the updated info calls for 0% growth in the next decade.  So in the supply and demand market, does that mean models will be less expensive and more readily available?

Pictures of Life wrote:
The site clearly states that models have unreliable hours, so it seems odd they would assume a 2000 hour/year schedule.  Why can't the raw data be reported hourly wages?

$18,750 / $9.02 = 2078.7 hours, which is almost exactly the number of hours the government uses for standard work year calculations.

Besides, nobody reports hourly income to the government, but almost everyone reports annual income via tax returns.

Isis22 wrote:
Keep in mind not everyone reports when they pay models and not every model reports their pay. Those statistics are meaningless to me and most people.

Yep and they're typically contractors. It's the same thing with photographers and someone always posting this meaningless crap based on full-time federal/state employment wage information. It's meaningless because the photographers making the money aren't salaried employees. In fact they usually are wrapped in some type of corporate entity. Same with models making real money, they're wrapped in an entity that contracts their services, but sure enough there's always someone posting this dribble.

Grayscale Photo wrote:

$18,750 / $9.02 = 2078.7 hours, which is almost exactly the number of hours the government uses for standard work year calculations.

Besides, nobody reports hourly income to the government, but almost everyone reports annual income via tax returns.

Bureau of Labor Statistics is simply taking the annual reported income and placing in perspective of an hourly wage.
$19,970/52 = $384.04/wk
$384.04/40 = $9.60/hr
Flawed on two counts: all models do not report all income, and most models do not work 40 hours a week, every week.

This should be a wake up call to photographers, not a reality check to models. Models do not have big budgets to pay photographers for shoots. If you are trying to make your living off of charging models, you not likely be living well.

Lastly, if you want to shoot the average model, go for it. Models come in all shapes, sizes, and beauty. Models represent society as a whole, so the average model would as well. You might want to google the average height/weight, and rethink if you really wish to use average models for your next project.

Hero Foto wrote:
the data isn't flawed, maybe a little outta whack for the "adult/porn" standards, but not that far off.

I've worked on commercial projects with major corp's where folks were paid in this range. It is not uncommon as many here would like to spin.

Models, extras, actors and actresses along with the "help" aren't paid well if at all in some cases.

I have paid models much more than that when I've had shoots in your state.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
Many models earn more than that.

No duhhh. Half make more; half make less. That's how it's a median.

Vindictive Images wrote:

No duhhh. Half make more; half make less. That's how it's a median.

They may be accurate because the data that they use to compile them is incomplete.  Those statistics are useless for me.
I have my own statistics for models that I work with.

Koryn wrote:
Here is what would happen if models charged $9/hour.

- Model books 4 sessions for the week.
- Each photographer she/he books with wants four hours.
- Model does 4 x 4hr sessions at $9/hour.
- Model has a takehome pay of $144 for the week.
- $144 for a week doesn't even begin to cover living expenses, though for some lucky models, it might help them break even on commute costs to and from shoots.
- Model is not able to afford out of state travel at all, and must stay in hometown area.
- Due to limitations on travel, model is unable to develop an outstanding portfolio. She shoots with the same three people, over and over again, producing low or average quality work.
- Model is not able to cover the cost of any outfits or props photographers might request.
- Model starts to get bored.
- Model soon stops being able to shoot at all, because a four hour shoot ACTUALLY requires all day, when prep and commute time is taken into account.
- Model quits modeling, because she can't afford it and can't waste the days in her life, gets desk job and disappears forever.
- Amen

Yep, this. The thing is, for every hour we spend shooting, we've spent some number of hours preparing outside of that time. This could include things like body/personal care (above and beyond what we would normally do), shopping for wardrobe/makeup/etc, doing prep at home (as in packing, doing hair and makeup at home, etc), networking, discussing the shoot as well as obvious things like travel and such.

I look at it like this: Modeling is a supply and demand market. Rates vary dependent upon the market as well as how much the model can or is willing to negotiate. Unfortunately, if a photographer can't pay those rates and can't offer the model something model finds of appropriate value, they're not going to be able to shoot with that model. It's like when I want these awesome organic and natural brand lipsticks. I LOVE makeup, especially the more natural and organic stuff. I feel like I deserve it and it would look good on me. I can use it for my beauty blogging, too. But if I can't or won't spend the money on it, I can't have it unless I can convince the company that my blogging about it would benefit them. Since I'm just getting started in beauty blogging and I don't have much of a following, they're not likely to send me free product. But that's okay. I get it. I don't get mad at them and tell them to drop the prices or quote them median lipstick prices. They can set their prices at whatever they want and as long as they're making enough, they'll keep going.

Models are sort of a unique situation. What we do isn't really like other small businesses, but you can draw some similarities. As for that median number... I can't explain it, but I'd would say that it likely wasn't focused around traveling and art and glamour models or more serious/professional freelance models in general.

Hero Foto wrote:
Model - Occupation
"A model, is a person with a role either to promote, display, or advertise commercial products or to serve as a visual aide for people who are creating works of art or to pose for photography."

Median pay (annual): 18,750 USD (2012)
Median pay (hourly): 9.02 USD (2012)
Entry level education: Less than high school
Projected 10-year growth: 15% (2012)
Number of jobs: 4,800 (2012)

and NOW you know ...

They simply divided 18,750 by 2080, which is the standard hours for an employee/contractor job all year. (A 40 hour work week).

It isn't a separate statistic based on any real data.

BLS gets the data from people reporting their taxes and designating model as the occupation. So they only have an annual figure, and then extrapolated that second figure.

The reality, as we all know, is that models book jobs on an adhoc basis for $35 - $175 an hour, for a few hours.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:

Yep and they're typically contractors. It's the same thing with photographers and someone always posting this meaningless crap based on full-time federal/state employment wage information. It's meaningless because the photographers making the money aren't salaried employees. In fact they usually are wrapped in some type of corporate entity. Same with models making real money, they're wrapped in an entity that contracts their services, but sure enough there's always someone posting this dribble.

I agree this is dribble, those stats are worthless. Also i hope Jerry maybe know understands what median means.

D a v i d s o n wrote:
I agree this is dribble, those stats are worthless. Also i hope Jerry maybe know understands what median means.

I have always understood!

If I told models that I work with I was going to pay her the median rate she would probably hit me!   

Looknsee Photography wrote:
So?

Hero Foto wrote:
to help bring some REALITY

1)  I'm sure if you factor in all the TF* sessions, the median number will be low.
2)  So-called "REALITY" is relative and subjected to local supply & demand.
3)  Let's be honest, photographers have a vested interest in convincing models to have low rates.
4)  Of the models surveyed, how many of them are modeling for 40 hours a week?
5)  Like many, I suspect the OP doesn't understand the difference between "average" & "median".

My bottom line: 
...  A model can ask for whatever compensation she wants.
...  A photographer can accept, decline, or make a counter offer.

Hero Foto wrote:
Model - Occupation
"A model, is a person with a role either to promote, display, or advertise commercial products or to serve as a visual aide for people who are creating works of art or to pose for photography."

Median pay (annual): 18,750 USD (2012)
Median pay (hourly): 9.02 USD (2012)
Entry level education: Less than high school
Projected 10-year growth: 15% (2012)
Number of jobs: 4,800 (2012)

and NOW you know ...

I already knew, statistics can be very flawed.

Statistics will show that the less time you spend driving, the less likely you are to be in an accident.
Statistics will show that the faster you drive, the less time you will spend driving.
The logical conclusion from these two points is that the faster you drive, the safer you will be. Therefore you should drive at 75 miles per hour in a school zone, in order to be as safe as possible.

The modeling stats above are of a similar value, except worse because they have the possibility of deceiving people into believing they have any validity. They don't.

There are lies, damn lies and statistics.

Dekilah wrote:
... It's like when I want these awesome organic and natural brand lipsticks... But if I can't or won't spend the money on it, I can't have it unless I can convince the company that my blogging about it would benefit them. Since I'm just getting started in beauty blogging and I don't have much of a following, they're not likely to send me free product. But that's okay. I get it. I don't get mad at them and tell them to drop the prices or quote them median lipstick prices.

This is a perfect analogy and I love it.

Unfortunately, all the wisdom in the world won't change the underlying idea this thread (and others like it) are built upon:

"Freelance models should work for $10 per hour, or nothing at all. Additionally, we will refuse to acknowledge the tremendous amount of prep time, commute distance and expenses often required just to get to the shoot. We will continue to deny the emotional investment these people make in our work, and we will insist that all it takes to model is just to 'look pretty.' If we offer them trade, then fail to send images, they should just butt out. We won't answer calls or emails. Just drive 300 miles to get to our shoots, bring your own wardrobe, pay for the MUA, take your $30 and leave promptly afterwards." - Sincerely, Internet Photographers