|
I've sort of signed with an agency (Shot, it's small NYC agency) and they gave me a temporary profile on their site but they said my portfolio was not good and I need to work with better photographers. Here is my portfolio- http://akdebellis.weebly.com Can someone tell me what is wrong with the photos there? Please?? Thank you!! <3 Mar 16 16 10:54 am Link I would suggest that you need to work with a better TEAM, not just a better photographer. It's a little tough to critique a slide show but I'll have a go at it. Overall, there is a harshness to the look of most of the photos. This is partly the "wedding photographer lighting", it appears a single flash was used on a bracket above and to the left of the camera in many shots. This should have been used as a fill rather than a main light. The red lipstick seems too brilliant and is a distraction rather than an enhancement. There are stray hairs, a tough one when you are "winging" it which is how most of these shots appear to have been made. Also, it is difficult to see what your body really looks like with so much clothing. You might do well to get some studio shots with sleeker outfits, more time spent on posing you, better hair and makeup and smoother, cleaner lighting. Mar 16 16 11:08 am Link I looked at Shots Management Agency website and noticed the categories under women - most of the images were headshots. Main Board, Runway and Life Style. Maybe they are looking for headshots but rather then asking us what is wrong with your portfolio, why not ask them what type of images they are looking for and what would be more suitable for them. Just a suggestion, otherwise you will get a number of critiques but none of us know what Shots wants. Mar 16 16 11:12 am Link Shadow Dancer wrote: Thank you! Mar 16 16 11:21 am Link In looking at your images versus the ones on that agency's board, there are distinct differences that even I can see. Few of the models on the main board have environmental or lifestyle photos; it's just a focus on the model with a seamless paper or simple backdrop. Many of yours are in the city, with many competing elements. In yours, for several images, the lighting on your face is dim and/or there are much brighter distracting elements elsewhere in the photo that draw the eye away from you as the main subject. Finally, it seems like you should be able to ask the agency specifically what is missing in your images that they need or desire beyond "work with better photographers". To an outsider, it would appear that that is their job. Unless of course their "job" is to funnel you towards particular associated photographers at a price. Mar 16 16 11:32 am Link AgX wrote: You are right. Very true about the environment. Mar 16 16 11:37 am Link I also noticed that most of your photos are very dark (e.g. blue dress against black fur jacket) and don't really show you. The agency normally wants head shots showing your face with expression, an outfit showing your body, and a shot showing vitality or beauty. The Polaroids are usually taken at the agency. P.S. the photographers on MM are probably a lot safer than your cab drivers Mar 16 16 11:49 am Link Roy Nelson Photos wrote: I'm too poor to take cabs lol. Mar 16 16 11:51 am Link Amy there is nothing 'wrong' with what you have. Photography is subjective. http://www.shotagencymgt.com/ The models have very simple images. Yours are more stylized. Agencies need images that clients can look at and see the model and focus on the person. The work they display is again very simple. My guess is they want you to work with a recommended photographer. As the photos all look the same. I found some curious things though. If you're asked to lay out some serious cash for those images proceed with caution. The unfortunate part about starting out is its often hard to get the kind of photos you'll need for trade. The photographers who do agency level work charge. They tend to not do trades. Again your photos are fine but the agency isn't able to use them. What are they suggesting? Mar 16 16 12:00 pm Link Get them to give you a specific shot list of what they'd like to see you do, they should have a very good idea how they want to market your look to potential clients . . . I'm sure there's quite a few photographers in NYC that would be willing to shoot with you, and get you what you need . . . check with a few MM members that are local to you, and see who they recommend, especially ones connected with the agencies and fashion industry . . . my offer still stands, if you're ever in Florida, you've got an open invite to shoot . . .  SOS Mar 16 16 12:00 pm Link Tony Lawrence wrote: I think they are suggesting that I do shots with simple backdrops (like in a studio), better lighting, more focus on my face, sleeker clothing, maybe less makeup as well. Mar 16 16 12:09 pm Link if they have you as part of their "runway" category then you should have more images that show how you can present the outfits to the client/consumer. Actual runway images would be ideal but another good avenue to explore is too setup some sort of editorial shoots with a full team. if their exact language was "you need to use a better photographer", this would be a reg flag for me... images are the result of teamwork and not from one particular person. Since you mentioned they are steering your towards a specific studio, this is another red flag. if you want to pay someone for their services, by all means find them on your own. if you have to use their photographer, try to ensure that these expenses are picked up by the agency. Mar 16 16 12:11 pm Link If you want my advice (and it's the same advice I give to everyone) it's to look at Mary duPrie's vimeo page. https://vimeo.com/marydupriestudios/videos She has 39 videos there, and a bunch don't apply (like how to gold leaf furniture), but the ones on sitting, use of hands, posing, use of props, etc are extremely valuable. They tend to be the older videos, so start at the last page of her videos and work your way forward. I think the "Introduction" is on page 4. She's on MM as well, and sells DVDs and workshops, but take a look at the free stuff she offers on vimeo. I have no connection to her. https://www.modelmayhem.com/142234 As far as how I would apply the above to your photos -- 'pose' less and just 'be' more. Don't turn your face away from the camera and then look back with your eyes. Don't press your hands flat onto surfaces but caress them lightly. Don't present the flat back (or front) of your hand to camera. And I would remove that photo with the purple feathers. Mar 16 16 12:15 pm Link Amy DeBellis wrote: Google: Portfolio mills. Before you invest in anything look into who, what and where. Is the agency getting actual paid work. Who are their clients? Are the models displaying tear sheets? Look here: www.dnamodels.com You'll notice a difference between model portfolios. They are using a variety of photographers. You will also see published tear sheets in the models on-line book there. So before you invest any cash look further. Are their models booking work and if so where. Can you see tear sheets or catalog work they are getting for them. Runway? Which shows? Were their models at Fashion Week. Don't be afraid to ask questions. Mar 16 16 12:40 pm Link Tony Lawrence wrote: As usual, Tony, excellent advice. I really appreciate the way you provided it - guiding not pushing. Amy, please take what Tony is saying to heart before you sink a bunch of money into shots that one agency wants. Mar 16 16 01:08 pm Link Tony Lawrence wrote: Thank you!! I definitely need to look into this Mar 16 16 01:16 pm Link Some good advice here. I looked at the Shot page you linked. Those headshots aren't exactly scintillating. Check out what Ford does for their models instead: http://models.fordmodels.com/models/431 That's the new faces page, which is what you are for Shot. Bottom line is you need an arresting headshot, some full-body shots that show your figure and some in-between shots that make you look fashion-worthy. It's hard to do that and not make the pictures boring as all hell. Over the years I've known a few guys in NYC who were good at it. All of them are now in Europe, so I can't throw out any names to help now. What you might do is approach Ford or one of the best agencies to see who they use for their photos. Getting something better ... or confirming that Shot is giving you good info ... would go a long way in improving your chances. It never hurts to review http://www.newmodels.com/ for tips and strategy. Mar 16 16 01:58 pm Link Think of the photos in terms of production values and your contribution to the value of the product. Your portfolio is mostly an attempt at an editorial style, but your photos aren't really as compelling as they would need to be published. Or at least that's how I see it. What may work on Model Mayhem doesn't necessarily work for the industry you want to work. You have to figure out how to make yourself look the way your potential clients want models to look. You have a great look. You seem able to express yourself facially in a way that works for fashion photos, but your posturing and body language are not quite there. Also, your clothing is not depicted well. That's partly a matter of styling in your photos, and partly the photographers' sense for lighting (or lack of it). You can probably do better yourself if you want to get it rolling with your own snapshots, but you will need to get specific advice to do it well. I suggest going to a bookstore and sifting through all the 'heavy' quarterly fashion mags. They are the ones that usually sit at the back of the top rack and have pricetags of $10 to $20. Z!NK, i-D, Muse, Vs, LOVE, etc. Those magazines are editorial-rich and provide plenty of visual cues. Use your phone for snapshots of magazine editorials, or even ask hair salons to take their outdated lobby magazines and tear sheets out that you like. The model's editorial 'look' is the same season after season. Mar 16 16 04:06 pm Link Amy DeBellis wrote: DO NOT pay money to photographers for your portfolio. It's not supposed to work that way. If the agency says you need pics then ask them to send you to some test shoots. Mar 16 16 04:10 pm Link Amy DeBellis wrote: The "safety reasons" are not at all obvious. How do you imagine that a photographer could accumulate an impressive profile while being simultaneously predatory to models? Word does get around about bad behavior. Mar 16 16 04:13 pm Link Carl Herbert wrote: Its often very hard for fashion or even commercial models to get what an agency needs through trades from sites like these. Weeks and months are often wasted and a fashion model needs to not waste time. She will usually need to pay working pros to get marketable photos to show to clients. Most models have no idea what works for the market they live in as the OP wonders currently what is wrong with what she has. There is a difference between glamour photos which are often very nice and strong fashion or commercial work. The photographers that the OP needs to connect with likely charge. What she doesn't need is the cookie cutter images that some port mill will give her. Mar 16 16 05:02 pm Link Tony Lawrence wrote: Thank you. I don't think I am thin enough/pretty enough (seriously my face is way not symmetrical) for FORD or Elite or something, but I'll try. The last thing I want is to shell out $450 (that's the asking price for one of the photographers that Shot recommended) and end up with pics that don't get me anywhere. If, however, I end up with some pictures like the ones on the photographer's website, I will be happy...and maybe have a better chance at a more prestigious agency Mar 16 16 05:35 pm Link Rob Photosby wrote: Some of them have a long introduction and claim to have shot for famous magazines, and have gorgeous pics in their portfolios, but have no verified credits whatsoever. That seems sketchy to me Mar 16 16 05:36 pm Link Carl Herbert wrote: But all the trades (free) I've been doing have resulted in photos like the ones in my portfolio Mar 16 16 05:37 pm Link Thanks for your help everyone but it doesn't matter anymore. I just contacted the agency and let them know that I can't get a photographer for hire (as I have literally got $60). (My mother won't help me pay anything, I just found out.) So they will take my profile down. Pretty embarrassing as I just signed up today and told people about it. Mar 16 16 05:54 pm Link Amy DeBellis wrote: It's more than just photo styling. You need to be able to show some high-caliber stuff for it to be worthwhile. Anybody who would take your money at this point and give you great photos would have to give you a level of direction you shouldn't really need as a model worth your fee. That might be considered cheating a bit. Or they wouldn't be able to give you the photos you really need, which seems the more likely outcome. Mar 16 16 05:54 pm Link Amy, I commented on your portfolio on here since your link is a slideshow. I have modeled since I was five and spent a TON of time working behind the scenes and I can tell you it is NOTHING PERSONAL. Portfolios need to highlight YOU with great eclectic shots of you in different looks, body shots that highlight your pros and workability, product placement images and should illustrate range. There should be NO NO NO photographer errors. This means the little things that most would oversea (lighting, pose, reflection, leading lines, midtones...) must be spot on. A great photo with bad light just reads as a bad image and therefore is not flattering to the eye and the industry says it is not flattering to you. You want impeccable images and then your portfolio can be adjusted for each go-see. Mar 17 16 12:17 pm Link You don't have to pay money to find great photos - you have some in your portfolio that could be amazing if edited right. Don't think quantity either (you can tell agencies that you are unable to have paid images in the book due to rights) and take out 9 ify shots for 3 great shots. Hang in there - if it were easy, everyone would do it. Whatever you do - don't do the nude thing, it ruins CAREERS Amy DeBellis wrote: Mar 17 16 12:19 pm Link Amy DeBellis wrote: LITTLE MONEY Mar 17 16 12:40 pm Link Amy, very few shooters on MM do actual agency tests. Those who do charge. They don't ever need to look for models here and tend to have portfolios here just to showcase their work. You can buy similar outfits to what you are seeing the other models wear but you are not likely to get free tests and your agency and most others won't pay for your photos. Agencies large and small especially in NY have more models then work. They aren't paying for things and those who on occasion do, overcharge and its a type of loan and comes with interest. While $450.00 (I think that's what you said) isn't bad you still need to know if its a decent investment. What you can do is what I suggested for the basic shots. Take those to the open calls for every agency that has one. You do not have time to waste running around doing tests for results that won't help you. In my view you should focus on a commercial book. This is more life style in feel. Yoga, playing with a puppy, running, etc. Is it possible to get a part time job? Spring is almost here try these folks: http://www.pushmodels.com/ Not sure if they have work in NY but other promo companies do. Nothing wrong with looking here for people with the simple style you need. Go to those open calls. A friendly booker may have some newer shooters willing to do free tests. You won't know until you try. Mar 17 16 01:07 pm Link ParanormalSarah wrote: Thank you for all the comments!! I appreciate it Mar 17 16 01:43 pm Link Tony Lawrence wrote: I got another offer for $250 and I think I will go with that--as both places were recommended by my agency. I did some running shots the other day so maybe they will turn out OK for commercial, it's unlikely as it was a trade shoot therefore probably not great image quality, but I will see. Mar 17 16 01:45 pm Link Toto Photo wrote: I have some similar clothes already -- most of my shoots I think I overdid it with the "fancy" clothes, a ton of makeup and jewelry, etc. I didn't go with tank tops etc because I thought it would be too plain. But this is a mistake obviously as I am trying to advertise myself, not my wardrobe lol Mar 17 16 01:46 pm Link My feeling is anything the OP comes up with that wasn't provided by the photographers recommended by the agency may be rejected. The work I saw all had the same style, feel and lighting. A member has said that nudes ruin careers and while I did read the OP views on nudes. They do NOT. In fact I would say that most fashion models do nudes. Certainly not erotic or explicit nudes but they do. Fashion photography is often about sexuality. Again and this is for other members as well. In many cases new models will end up paying for agency level tests. You won't find them here. Let your agency suggest photographers. Learn to spot portfolio mills. One clue is every model has similar looking photos. Others are things such as runway models who are 5'6" or those who to be frank aren't that attractive. Mar 17 16 02:13 pm Link Lots of replies, so this may have already been said. You need some studio pictures. I like the outside pictures, but the indoors is missing. Mar 17 16 06:51 pm Link Roy Nelson Photos wrote: Plus to this, just truly trust your gut and be willing to cancel a shoot if anything doesn't feel right. It has been very rare for me and I've only done this once, (just last Thursday.) Mar 17 16 09:56 pm Link If you want to succeed with your agent and this agency, you need to ask them these questions. They alone know their clients and market best and will provide you with specific advice on what photos you need to get bookings. Asking here is simply irrelevant. Most likely, they will want you to have photos very similar to their other existing talents and shot by the same photographers. Mar 17 16 10:11 pm Link Amy DeBellis wrote: It's a crappy free website. obnoxious banner. mostly mediocre photography. Mar 18 16 01:39 am Link Amy DeBellis wrote: You have your answer right here: Mar 19 16 02:34 pm Link I think the biggest thing your photos are lacking is emotional impact. You should be willing to take risks and let yourself get lost in your own emotion. Mar 22 16 09:43 pm Link |
And no, I would never do nude, as it goes completely against my personal morals.
