|
Forums >
General Industry >
Question for brilliant photographers
There is a (or yet another) thread active asking why models who say they pose nude don't include nudes in their portfolios. I was thinking of this as I was browsing local photographers, something I do a couple of times a year just to see who is around. A question occurred to me: according to a few (definitely not all!) of these profiles, their work is original, even transformational, stunning, brilliant, dramatic, deeply personal, and, my favorite, "edgy," and so on and so on. So I wondered why don't they include any of those images in their portfolios? EDIT: For those of you who tend toward the literal, jump down to the 10th entry where I comment on a comment and explain myself. Feb 04 16 01:02 pm Link Ivan123 wrote: Those words are subjective. Nudity is pretty much..being naked. Feb 04 16 01:08 pm Link It's not my place to judge or critique what others post or write unless they ask me to do so. Feb 04 16 01:20 pm Link Some people are just a legend in their own mind. Feb 04 16 01:26 pm Link Ivan123 wrote:
Feb 04 16 01:40 pm Link It's not my fault that you cannot see how wonderful my body of work is. Feb 04 16 02:14 pm Link Ivan123 wrote: Snort. Giggle. Feb 04 16 02:45 pm Link Ivan123 wrote: So if I'm understanding you correctly; you (a self-proclaimed amateur photographer) are asking why others (who claim they create brilliant work) don't post those images? Feb 05 16 01:25 am Link I know of many photographers that keep their personal work separated from their professional work. Many will hide their artistic personal works as it could harm their professional business. Feb 05 16 04:43 am Link My profile doesn't say much. I let my mediocre images speak for themselves. I post my mediocre edgy material in a separate profile. Feb 05 16 06:37 am Link Eros Fine Art Photo wrote: Golly, I think have been put in my place. There was a time, long, long ago, when people on the forums had a sense of humor and recognized it in others. Those times are long gone. So, let me be explicit this time: The main motivation for my post was that I get tired of people complaining about models doing this or not doing that in their portfolios or profiles. One can find a few examples per week on the forums, going back to the beginning of MM. My point was that, all anyone has to do is page through a few dozen photographers' profiles to see that there is at least as much to complain about there. I think there are two main reason for this imbalance: First, on MM there are more photographers looking for models than models looking for photographers (and I mean actively LOOKING, not waiting to have someone contact you) so far fewer people even SEE photographers' profiles so they go unnoticed and therefore unremarked upon. Many popular models have told me that they get dozens of emails a day while I get...hold on a sec while I check...none. I suspect that these models are not scouring photographers' profiles looking for people to work with. The result is that photographers' profiles are, in general, seen far less often. (I often notice that models who post my photos of them get many, MANY more comments than the same photo gets if I post it.) Second, most photographers on MM are male and most models female and men just feel more confident about complaining. So my motivation was primarily to defend models in general by calling the kettle black but irony is such an unreliable tool. (BTW, I know my photography is worthless crap, but I do it simply for myself.) Feb 05 16 03:14 pm Link Ivan123 wrote: Well, I thought it was funny as hell! Feb 05 16 03:22 pm Link Shadow Dancer wrote: I did too. The rule of thumb is that the quality of a photographers images is inversely proportional to how good he says they are. Feb 05 16 04:01 pm Link On MM while models do have posts directed at those who don't show up etc., to my mind what is noticeable is the disappearance of a number of professional photographers from the forums. If you don't like one forum's styles, the MM forums, such as photographer talk and digital retouching are good places still. As for your critique of those who describe themselves in inflated ways, ego is important, particularly, if you're going to have the nerve to charge people rather than work for "exposure" and "credit." One MM member called me and offered me the glory of shooting her wearing her friends jewelry and it would be sold this jewelry on the internet and I could have "credit." That was a few years ago. She calls me still but now expects a price quote. Southern California is a such a tough market for commercial photographers. And you need confidence to survive, an intense belief in your abilities. I realize that you want to rebuke photographers for the error of their ways but those posts don't really help you grow. They past the time but that is about it. Feb 05 16 04:04 pm Link Lieza Nova wrote: My images are the absolute worst - pure garbage! Feb 05 16 04:16 pm Link Top Gun Digital wrote: ^^^ THIS. ^^^ Feb 05 16 06:50 pm Link Caitin Bre wrote: I don't think enough people understand the truth in this statement. Feb 05 16 08:07 pm Link What is your port here for? To attract potential models? To attract potential Newbie models? In my experience, new models want to see good quality, conventional work; it's safe and reassuring. But they say that they want to shoot sexy, edgy, trendy word of the year pics. If you have a port of your edgy work, many/most will make a snap judgement that you can't shoot what they are interested in. If you have 10 pictures in 10 different styles, you look like you're lost. It's easy for others to assume that you don't have a style. It seems most productive to have a conventional port to connect with new models. Who is your audience? What is their level of appreciation for creative/edgy work? Are your images showcasing the photographers skill, the editing skill or the model? TLDR ?? Models probably want to see a port that showcases the model, not the photographer's creative lighting or editing skills. Feb 05 16 08:51 pm Link Ivan123 wrote: Probably because they pose nude under a pseudonym. Feb 05 16 08:58 pm Link Caitin Bre wrote: This is one hundred percent true. I happen to work with a lot of very conservative clients who do business with clients who are even more conservative. It's amazing how much you sometimes have to shoot to make sure you have options when they approve the model's swimwear themselves, but then later suddenly decide it is "not family friendly enough." Feb 05 16 10:42 pm Link I would just as soon a model interested in doing nudes just post three nude images, one from the front, the side, and the rear all standing just to give an exact view of what their body looks like. I don't need to see what they have done with other photographers but rather get an idea of what I might would want to include them in. And I would like for the images to be current. They don't have to be perfect at all. I just like to know ahead of time how they are built so I can be thinking of how to work with them when the time comes. Feb 08 16 03:20 pm Link Ivan123 wrote: Ivan, I think I made the last complaint about Nude Models without Nudes in their port. My reasoning is: It’s a PORT-folio as in a portal to what you do. I want to know what a model looks like nude. Clothes can hide a multitude of things. When you are nude you can’t hide a flabby belly (trust me I know, mirrors are so unkind). I think if I am going to hire them I need to know what I am getting. I guess there are all different kind of considerations that I never thought about but learned via that thread. Feb 10 16 10:56 pm Link Gary Melton wrote: the rule of thumb doesn't apply to you Feb 10 16 11:14 pm Link I don't have naked pictures in my port. Why bother when I can look at your(s)? Feb 10 16 11:45 pm Link Dark Magus wrote: With this I agree. I have found, though, that most models who are willing to pose nude, even if they do not post nudes in their portfolios, will check out the photographer's work and, if the work shows serious intent, will then send examples of nudes directly through email. Even that is not a perfectly reliable measure of what you will see on the day but usually works. Feb 11 16 08:44 am Link I make no claim regarding the quality of my work, nor do I promote myself as an "ARTIST". It hardly matters if members believe they are producing works of art, what makes or breaks careers is if publishers, curators, gallery owners and collectors think it is. Feb 11 16 10:01 am Link the lonely photographer wrote: I enjoy photographing nude models. You just enjoy looking at nude models. Feb 11 16 10:24 am Link 
Photographer Posts: 4288 Amundsen-Scott - permanent station of the US, Unclaimed Sector, Antarctica I'm naked under my clothes. Not much to do with the thread, but it does display my brilliance, which is often overlooked  Feb 11 16 10:27 am Link Mike Collins wrote: Feb 12 16 10:50 am Link Lieza Nova wrote: I tend to agree. There's so many people who don't think they're very good, and it's like....are we looking at the same thing here?! Feb 13 16 02:00 pm Link I'm just a normal GWC. I just put in my worst photographs here on MM. I kept my most unnormal photographs in a vault so one day I might sell some large format prints in an art gallery and I don't want people to say they have seen my photos/arts somewhere in a seedy corner of internet. Feb 13 16 02:16 pm Link To be honest I see the same thing in quite a few model's portfolios. They talk about wanting their images to "tell a story" or be "unique" and "edgy". Then when you look at what they have in their portfolio is no where near where they see themselves. So there are plenty of inflated egos to go around Feb 14 16 04:03 am Link |
