|
Forums >
Model Colloquy >
Are tattoos THAT big of a deal?
Rob Photosby wrote: Agreed on this point. Mar 07 16 04:54 pm Link I hate them. I think a person has the right to do anything they want to their body and if they want ink that is fine. But as a photographer I find them very distracting. Unless I was doing a shoot that required the tat I would never hire a model who had one that would be visible in the picture. The only exception would be some tiny little thing that I could easily remove in photoshop. That is one thing but a large tat or a sleeve is too much. I have had some models who would have been perfect not get selected because of their ink. Of course in these situations it was the client who said no to the model. Mar 07 16 07:21 pm Link NO tattoos. Mar 07 16 07:35 pm Link So, so many beautiful women I pass over because of this ink thing. Mar 07 16 09:07 pm Link yes. Mar 07 16 09:38 pm Link As a photographer and magazine publisher who is interested in fine art figure photography It boggles my mind that a model male or female is tattooed. The object of my photography is the human form. Why would I want to publicize another artist work? I believe the human form to be lovely as it is. Yes do I shoot different types of the form. As a publisher I might do a tattoo series or issue yes. But why would models who are selling their bodies cover themselves with tattoos of someones else's art? To set the subjects straight about tattoos I have three myself but am not offering my body for pay. Oh well just my 2 cents jene Mar 07 16 11:16 pm Link Personally, I like tattoos, I might even have one  But looking through my port, I see out of almost 60 shots, I have 3 with models that have tattoos (and 2 of those are the same girl), and that's all. While I personally have no problem with them, and I actually like them, for this visual medium we're in, I find they limit options for me too much. It's much more difficult to pull off an elegant look in an evening gown, or even, *anything*, with a coloured tattoo sleeve down one arm. I can see far more reasons to pass over a model with tattoos than I can think of reasons to specifically get a model with a tattoo. Therefore, purely for the options alone, there's your answer. Limit yourself, or don't. Hope that helps. Mar 08 16 12:45 am Link If you are doing alternative or nude, etc. mixed results. Fashion or mainstream, you bet it will matter. Mar 08 16 04:59 am Link No problem here, I shoot a wide variety of styles, for a wide variety of clients . . . for sk8, urban, biker chic, surf and a buncha other "stuff" they're actually a plus . . . just need to match the "tats" to the project . . . you're welcome in front of my lens anytime . . .  SOS Mar 08 16 05:24 am Link Jene Youtt wrote: Thank you so much for making models sound like prostitutes. Mar 08 16 07:25 am Link None of the hundreds of people I've worked with in the past ten years - both photographers and classical artists - really had that big of a problem with my tattoos. So, really, the answer here is that it - like so many other things - doesn't matter that much. People just want what they want, and talk about what they want - but the reality is they will happily work with whomever is most reliable, communicative and professional. The criteria so many photographers love to lay out in the MM forums is a reflection of their fantasy situations, not the reality of finding models day-to-day for personal projects. Mar 08 16 07:43 am Link Preferably a 'blank' canvas is my choice.. If I can't see the tattoo, I could care less.. If it covers arms and legs, that's a deal breaker. I would never hire a model for a lingerie shoot who came with her own 'art'. Mar 08 16 08:08 am Link A tattoo is an automatic rejection when I look for a model. The only exception is when it's small, out of the way, and I'm doing erotic work. Not that it aids in the photo, it's that it seems the mindset for doing erotic and for having tattoo's are many times found in the same person. Mar 08 16 08:15 am Link It all depends on the intended outcome. As a person, I love tattoos and think they are incredibly interesting, autobiographical, great conversation pieces, etc., but as a photographer they can be limiting and hard to work with if you're trying to draw focus to a pose, an expression, a composition...because tattoos, by nature, are distracting. They are outward expressions on your body that you want to be seen. When that factors in to a photograph, things such as bright colors, or intricate designs, or words all pull the viewers attention away from the primary subject, unless, of course, the primary subject is that tattoo. If you go into a museum, and there is a beautiful sculpture with amazing detail and unique features, you're going to have a completely different perspective of that artwork as compared to the exact same sculpture that suddenly has a small painting somewhere on the surface of it. My guess is that you'll be primarily focused on that small painting as opposed to the sculpture as a whole. It's not good or bad, it just is. Mar 08 16 08:21 am Link What follows can not be scientifically verified, merely personal opinion. The acceptability of tattoos for models depends entirely on the purpose and market the work is produced for. An individual models self opinion is not the decisive factor when casting for client assignments. Acceptability: Not a deal breaker for most glamour and alternative work. Genuine mass market fashion assignments much less accepting. Fine art as defined by gallery owners, publishers, curators and print collector markets rarely invest in works of tattooed models. Unfair, perhaps, but then what industry is? Mar 08 16 08:40 am Link I'll also note that the OP is listed as in Las Vegas, where finding any model without a tattoo is very difficult (with one reasonably popular exception). If people are looking for a tattooed model there, she's going to have an extremely large field of competitors, whereas, the opposite is true if she markets herself as "tattoo-less". Just an observation. Mar 08 16 09:35 am Link Basically if you are going to go big, get them everywhere, and make sure they are damn good. There is a huge market for tattoo's out there. Yes it may be niche, but you can easily tell just by the massive amount of tattoo Instagram pages with millions of followers, that people are into it. I work with tattoo's a lot, and sell the photos a lot, but you will definitely be putting yourself into a corner and won't be able to do a lot of things you might want to. Mar 08 16 10:15 am Link My take - I see the tattoo artist as just that, an artist. If I'm photographing a model, I don't want to document another's art work. I want to create my own art work. Mar 08 16 10:26 am Link Jene Youtt wrote: Isis22 wrote: Thanks Isis, you are absolutely correct on all counts! Mar 08 16 01:10 pm Link It is easier to put fake tats on then to remove it or cover it if someone wants model with tats. Mar 08 16 01:51 pm Link ChanStudio - OtherSide wrote: lol yeah right.. look up how long it took them to put on the fake tattoos for prison break. They eventually built into the story that he got them removed because it was such a pain in the ass. They also made makeup that will cover tattoos if its a huge problem, look up what they did to Kat Von D Mar 08 16 05:40 pm Link Tattoos are an automatic plus for me. No problem incorporating them into Fashion, Beauty and Glamour style shots. They are like any other difference between models. If I want a Redhead for a specific look, I'm not going to bother with a Blond or Brunette. If I need a model who is 5'4", a model who is 5' 8" isn't going to cut it. Shoe size is also somewhat limiting. Find your niche and work hard to be reliable. Mar 08 16 05:43 pm Link MoniqueWie wrote: The answer usually depends on a number of factors: Mar 09 16 03:43 am Link If someone is paying me for the shoot and they have tattoos? who cares, If I have a choice on a tfp shoot? I won't choose a model with tattoos.. see my pic there to the left this is the same girl as below.. she wrecked her whole modeling career with nose rings tats.. she did pretty good locally until she got all into this.. so it is your own choice.... http://i.imgur.com/BX7TScM.jpg Mar 10 16 07:46 am Link I agree they can be a distraction and draw away from a set design so I prefer not to use them. That or Dermablend them away by the MUAH person. However, there are rare times they can be useful. I did one with a model who had a pair of love bird tats on her stomach. Luckily, the customized Shoei helmet had almost the same design on the white chin area as well as the upper sides of the helmet. A bit of tilt-lens effect to confuse the mix a bit, but the symmetry of her tats along with those of the helmet worked out.  Don't know if they added or not to the effect overall, but one possible incorporated use - maybe. Mar 10 16 08:31 am Link Tattoos will be a problem for many shoots. Large ones are difficult and time consuming to photoshop out. It's not easy to "remove" tats for a shoot in which they are problematic. If desired, it's much easier to add a fake one specific to the needs of a shoot. Mar 10 16 09:23 am Link Thanks so much for the input, everyone! I actually feel much better about my tattoos. I love my ink, they're a part of me, and I'll just have to find photographers who will roll with that, and accept that there are a lot that won't. Mar 10 16 08:51 pm Link If they are coherent, from the same artist, it can be beautiful....But if they are like stickers that you would place on a refrigerator.......They may result in a long, time consuming Photoshop job!.... Mar 12 16 01:50 pm Link While a tattoo is a very personal thing to the person who has it, to everyone else it means very little. Some will appreciate it, others won't. Mar 13 16 12:06 am Link When in doubt, there is always Dermablend. Mar 13 16 08:28 pm Link MoniqueWie wrote: Exactly Mar 14 16 11:54 am Link I think they can detract from my images so I prefer my models not have any showing. Mar 14 16 03:05 pm Link MoniqueWie wrote: In my opinion, honestly it depends. Mar 14 16 03:38 pm Link If it is a cool looking, well done tattoo, I generally don't mind them. I can't say anything about your particular tattoo because this is not the critique forum. Mar 15 16 05:10 am Link Tats " within reason" are OK but once it gets to "Suicide Girl" candidate I pass. Mar 17 16 07:04 am Link Imagine wearing the same T-shirt for the rest of your life. It might be the coolest T-shirt ever and totally rock at the concert of your favourite band but it will not be the best fashion choice for most of other social situations. That's what you'll be doing as a tattooed model, showing up to the job with the same shirt every time. The best models have -among many other qualities- a versatile image that allows them to pull many looks with little help. Tattoos will reduce that range of looks to only one or two concepts. At best, tattoos are like annoying fashion accesories that you can't take off nor replace easily, thus becoming a distraction. At worst, they're tacky interventions that ruin, not enhance, the natural beauty of the human body. Mar 17 16 09:48 pm Link Many don't like them. Mar 18 16 01:41 am Link TATs can distract. Mar 22 16 02:48 am Link depends on where are the tattoos. most of the time winter clothing can cover up!! and sometimes street brands asking for models with tattoos!! and sometimes they do temp tattoos on models!! Its really depend on the cup of tea that clients want. Its better NOT to have any tattoo. Cheers Mar 22 16 10:40 pm Link i love tattoos, but they limit how much i can do with a single model. Mar 23 16 03:17 pm Link |
