Photographer
r T p
Posts: 3511
Los Angeles, California, US
Jeremiah Cash Caress wrote:
How is this of any help to the thread? irrelevant questions are irrelevant ..
vis-a-vis motives of photographer (under discussion) seeking TF
Photographer
r T p
Posts: 3511
Los Angeles, California, US
Tony Lawrence wrote:
She charges for her time and is asking that others shoot her daughter for FREE. p a o n e wrote:
per OP.. "Paid only photographer asking for TF for daughter"
she wasn't/isn't asking to have her daughter photographed for FREE Tony Lawrence wrote:
TF is free in my view. you are entitled to a *warped* view..
where a trade transaction is equated to FREE
consequently.. your *warped view* is doing this community (including photographers) a disservice.
Photographer
Eagle Rock Photographer
Posts: 1286
Los Angeles, California, US
If someone would post pics of the girl at issue, we could say as to TF:
- Heck, yes;
- Yes;
- No; or even
- Heck, no
Without seeing the girl under discussion, the arguments verge on niggling rather than cogent.
Photographer
r T p
Posts: 3511
Los Angeles, California, US
Eagle Rock Photographer wrote:
If someone would post pics of the girl at issue, we could say as to TF:
- Heck, yes;
- Yes;
- No; or even
- Heck, no
Without seeing the girl under discussion, the arguments verge on niggling rather than cogent.
irrelevant ..
to anyone other than the parties who decide to engage in a TF transaction
Photographer
Mike Collins
Posts: 2880
Orlando, Florida, US
p a o n e wrote:
irrelevant ..
to anyone other than the parties who decide to engage in a TF transaction Good lord. So what? It's just forum members discussing an issue. MOST things discussed in this forum are irrelevant. But we are bored and want to talk about...anything.
Photographer
r T p
Posts: 3511
Los Angeles, California, US
Mike Collins wrote:
Good lord. So what? It's just forum members discussing an issue. MOST things discussed in this forum are irrelevant. But we are bored and want to talk about...anything.
so i (too) am talking about it
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 21526
Chicago, Illinois, US
p a o n e, there is real irony in your defense of TF when your profile indicates Paid Only. Unless you define Paid Only as trade for photos. Years ago a member couldn't make a shoot with a model and asked if I could work with her. He wasn't being paid but he offered to pay me. I will repeat this. He offered me money. He respected my time. Here is a photographer who advertises that she is Paid Only like you. Instead of offering to pay others says shoot my daughter for trade. It doesn't matter what genre of photography she shoots. She charges.
In a another post I mentioned a former female model member who was a Paid Only model who did a casting to shoot her wedding TF. Respect for others who work or are trying to in the industry should mean in my mind that if you charge to model or shoot and don't do TF then you shouldn't then ask others to do TF. You notice I didn't call your views warped or stupid or make an ad hominem attack.
Photographer
r T p
Posts: 3511
Los Angeles, California, US
Tony Lawrence wrote:
p a o n e, there is real irony in your defense of TF when your profile indicates Paid Only. i fail to see the irony.. by pointing out that TF does NOT equal FREE
Tony Lawrence wrote:
You notice I didn't call your views warped or stupid or make an ad hominem attack. nor did i call your views "stupid"
i do consider your view on this specific point to be warped
(..which, as best as i can tell, is NOT an ad hominem)
ad ho·mi·nem
1. (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 21526
Chicago, Illinois, US
p a o n e wrote:
Tony Lawrence wrote:
p a o n e, there is real irony in your defense of TF when your profile indicates Paid Only. i fail to see the irony.. by pointing out that TF does NOT equal FREE
nor did i call your views "stupid"
i do consider your view on this specific point to be warped
(..which, as best as i can tell, is NOT an ad hominem)
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 21526
Chicago, Illinois, US
Again your profile says Paid Assignments. So why are you defending something you yourself don't do. If TF isn't free then why don't you do it. Is it because you want to paid in cash??? In many ways I agree with writer Harlan Ellison: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE So once more with gusto. A photographer who charges wants others to work for free... errr. I mean trade and photographers on this site who bitc% about not being paid or offered paid work defend that and we wonder why so many models thing we're goofs. Because we are.
Photographer
Patrick Walberg
Posts: 45198
San Juan Bautista, California, US
Francisco Castro wrote:
** This is a rant/throw my hands up in the air, post. Other than the initial post, I probably won't add anything.
A photographer in my area has always said that doesn't do TF shoots; paid shoots only. She also has a daughter who is trying her hand in modeling. Needless to day, all the photos in her daughter's port are all shot by her. So far, so good,
Yesterday, she posts on a FB group that her daughter wants to update her port and is looking for photographers who could do a TF shoot for her daughter. Of course, with her daughter being a minor (16), the photographer-mother will have to be present on the shoot. There has been no takers on her generous offer of a TF shoot for her daughter.
When someone posted/commented that with her "paid shoots" only policy, it would only be fair if she offered to extend the same courtesy to another photographer and offer to pay them for their services, she replied that it wasn't for her, but for her daughter and there is no reason for her daughter to have to pay when she could get all the free shoots she needs from Mom. (Apparently, she forgot that she was asking other photographers to shoot with her daughter, so really, there was a need. Otherwise, she wouldn't have asked.)
No one has said another word about it.
:-) I LOVE Facebook and all the entitled people it brings out. Francisco! Sir, you drop this rant in here like a bomb then run away? Come out, come out OP where ever you maybe hiding! I have some questions for you!
You said that this is from a Facebook Group. You profess LOVE for Facebook, so why do you let something like this bother you? It's really none of your concern what other photographers ask for as for "pay or TFP" .... you only need to be concerned with yourself. I'd like to know what the daughter looks like because maybe I'd like to TFP with her. Don't be so quick to call others hypocrites.
Photographer
Patrick Walberg
Posts: 45198
San Juan Bautista, California, US
Tony Lawrence wrote:
Again your profile says Paid Assignments. So why are you defending something you yourself don't do. If TF isn't free then why don't you do it. Is it because you want to paid in cash??? In many ways I agree with writer Harlan Ellison:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE So once more with gusto. A photographer who charges wants others to work for free... errr. I mean trade and photographers on this site who bitc% about not being paid or offered paid work defend that and we wonder why so many models thing we're goofs. Because we are. I think the OP threw a hand grenade in here and left! Tony, this alleged "photographer" looking for a potential TFP for the daughter is from a "FB Group" if you read the original post. He brought a hypothetical "rant" over from Facebook and left it here like a smelly turd! 
Does anyone really hold people accountable for what they say on Facebook, let alone anywhere on the 'net including here? The problem is that people who state that they do "Paid Only" shoots are painting themselves into a corner. That is why I say "it depends" or I'm "negotiable" because I'm flexible that way. Sure, I'd like to get paid, but I also like to keep busy too. There are models I'll pay, and some that I'll TFP with, but I'm not going to sit around waiting to get paid.
Photographer
r T p
Posts: 3511
Los Angeles, California, US
Tony Lawrence wrote:
Again your profile says Paid Assignments. So why are you defending something you yourself don't do. If TF isn't free then why don't you do it. Is it because you want to paid in cash??? none of the above has any bearing on nor alters the fact that ...
TF, a mutually-acceptable & beneficial trade arrangement, does NOT equal FREE
Photographer
SAND DIAL
Posts: 6688
Santa Monica, California, US
Gerardo Martinez wrote:
Links? Screenshots of group? This sounds funny. +1
Photographer
SAND DIAL
Posts: 6688
Santa Monica, California, US
Patrick Walberg wrote:
I agree! It's an apples to oranges ... two different issues. Also, "rants" do not belong in General Industry. General Industry. Is that the forum this is in?
Photographer
3rd Stream Photo
Posts: 71
Cleveland, Tennessee, US
J O H N A L L A N wrote:
It's not remotely hypocritical, which has already been pointed out.
And your attorney example is a completely false and misleading equivalency. Its a little arrogant to think that just because you've "pointed something out" everyone should take that as the Gospel. Its just an opinion and as such is no more or no less valid than anyone else's. In this case it may or may not be hypocritical, depending on the level of photographer the mom is asking to work for free. If she expects someone of equal or greater skill to herself, then I think it is hypocritical. Also, the child is underage and depends on the parents to provide for her, and its the mother that's asking for the help, so this falls solely on the mom. If the daughter had been the one asking it would be a different story.
Photographer
thiswayup
Posts: 1136
Runcorn, England, United Kingdom
Tony Lawrence wrote:
Again your profile says Paid Assignments. So why are you defending something you yourself don't do. He's not. That he doesn't want to be bothered by people asking for trade doesn't mean that he has to condemn people offering or asking for it. Everyone should make the decision that best suits them and it's this right that he is defending.
Nor is it "hypocritical" for a model who marks her profile no-trade to propose a trade shoot with a photographer or for a photographer whose MM profile is no-trade to shoot trade with selected models from a local agency.
This isn't complicated and it isn't a moral issue at all: people who put paid-only on their profiles are saying "Don't bother me with this stuff; the ratio of good to bad offers makes it too much of a headache" and nothing more.
Photographer
thiswayup
Posts: 1136
Runcorn, England, United Kingdom
MC Miller Photography wrote:
Its a little arrogant to think that just because you've "pointed something out" everyone should take that as the Gospel. Its just an opinion and as such is no more or no less valid than anyone else's. No, some opinions are just wrong - because they are based on bad logic or incorrect facts.
In this case it may or may not be hypocritical, depending on the level of photographer the mom is asking to work for free. If she expects someone of equal or greater skill to herself, then I think it is hypocritical. This is an example of bad logic. The mom's skill relative to that of the other photographer is irrelevant. If she doesn't find it useful to shoot trade, that her decision. If a better photographer does, that's hers. One thing has absolutely no logical connection with another. You might as well say that a cook who doesn't like spinach shouldn't serve it or that a non-smoker shouldn't sell cigarettes to adults.
Photographer
Karl Blessing
Posts: 30911
Caledonia, Michigan, US
Seems like a test, TF, or such and such would be a good way for the daughter to break out of a comfort zone of having a family member shoot you, especially if you're aspiring to get into the industry with working professionals.
And who knows, perhaps there are some aspiring photographers in the region who are breaking their way into shooting aspiring models and/or professional models.
In which case a TF* makes perfect sense. Now if the mother was handling all the photographer selections for her and being very choosy only to work with photographers that may need to be paid for their demand, then well that's a different scenario altogether.
In general it's not a bad thing to want to break out from familial dependency and get some variety going as well as working experience with others in the real world. So for that sake I wouldn't fault the daughter for the mother's way of doing business.
Now if it was something like my kid needs senior pictures style of work, and they were hoping to use a TF as a means to get that accomplished, then that's something I feel would be a bit overplayed.
Photographer
3rd Stream Photo
Posts: 71
Cleveland, Tennessee, US
thiswayup wrote:
MC Miller Photography wrote:
Its a little arrogant to think that just because you've "pointed something out" everyone should take that as the Gospel. Its just an opinion and as such is no more or no less valid than anyone else's. No, some opinions are just wrong - because they are based on bad logic or incorrect facts.
Yes, some opinions are incorrect factually as well as logically. My point here was that the person whose post I quoted felt that they had settled the issue by stating their opinion, when in fact all they had done was stated their opinion. If a person's opinion is based on bad information or logic, you can point it out to them and possibly change their opinion. The original post, however, was based on motive, not fact, and as such is left up to each individual to decide what they think.
This is an example of bad logic. The mom's skill relative to that of the other photographer is irrelevant. If she doesn't find it useful to shoot trade, that her decision. If a better photographer does, that's hers. One thing has absolutely no logical connection with another. You might as well say that a cook who doesn't like spinach shouldn't serve it or that a non-smoker shouldn't sell cigarettes to adults. Hopefully (apparently) you missed the point of my logic here, because your examples aren't anything close to what I'm saying. If a photographer (the mother in this case) will not agree to shoot TF because of the value they place on their own work (a perfectly valid thing to do), yet they ask another photographer (assuming the value of said photographer is equal or greater than that of the mom) to work TF then it is acceptable to see this as hypocritical. Some people will, some people won't. If you are willing to place demands on another person that you would not agree to it is hypocritical in my opinion. You're welcome to yours.
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 21526
Chicago, Illinois, US
Some of the responses here illustrate what's wrong with the current state of photography and modeling. The mother who shoots and doesn't offer TF is asking strangers to provide free images for her daughter. I know of no profession where a person who also works in the same profession asks other professionals to work free. If the mother had any respect for what we do then she would offer to pay. Hey, I'm a plumber and I don't have time to do a job so I ask other plumbers to do a plumbing job for free. Most people would laugh at that as they should. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuLr9HG2ASs The linked video is about a writer but is relevant for photographers. Why are so many shooters who do good work so willing to give that work away and in this case to a person who also works for payment. Sigh... and folks defend that foolishness.
Photographer
Karl Blessing
Posts: 30911
Caledonia, Michigan, US
Guess the kicker is what people are defining as 'free'.
I see it as bartering, free is when I get absolutely nothing out of it.
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 21526
Chicago, Illinois, US
Once you reach the point where you know how to take good photos and can provide viable work its time to set fees. Nothing wrong with test shoots but don't allow yourself to be used. Several years past I shot a project where the person was involved with a charity. I along with other shooters shot the models free. What we didn't know was the organizer made money. If this were a mom who wasn't a paid only photographer I might see this differently. Lets say her child gets signed and starts working. Will you get a few bucks later? I get trade. I do it myself. A few weeks past a new model asked if I would do some head shots as trade. I said, no. First that's not really what I do. I suggested she seek out some of the local commercial shooters and pay one.
Consider that signed agency models are given photographers the agency recommends, Most of these folks charge. The make-up artists charge. Once you as a photographer have a competent solid book then its time to be choosy for models you shoot and set fair and reasonable fees for your time. Some of you may have noticed make-up artists, even very new ones set fees. While some may value your work their supplies are expensive. People trying to become professionals have to at least break even. If all you want to do is be a hobbyist then who cares but even there consider that what you give away errr.... barter has a real world value. Something many models understand right away.
Photographer
27255
Posts: 975
San Diego, California, US
Francisco Castro wrote:
** This is a rant/throw my hands up in the air, post. Other than the initial post, I probably won't add anything.
A photographer in my area has always said that doesn't do TF shoots; paid shoots only. She also has a daughter who is trying her hand in modeling. Needless to day, all the photos in her daughter's port are all shot by her. So far, so good,
Yesterday, she posts on a FB group that her daughter wants to update her port and is looking for photographers who could do a TF shoot for her daughter. Of course, with her daughter being a minor (16), the photographer-mother will have to be present on the shoot. There has been no takers on her generous offer of a TF shoot for her daughter.
When someone posted/commented that with her "paid shoots" only policy, it would only be fair if she offered to extend the same courtesy to another photographer and offer to pay them for their services, she replied that it wasn't for her, but for her daughter and there is no reason for her daughter to have to pay when she could get all the free shoots she needs from Mom. (Apparently, she forgot that she was asking other photographers to shoot with her daughter, so really, there was a need. Otherwise, she wouldn't have asked.)
No one has said another word about it.
:-) I LOVE Facebook and all the entitled people it brings out. Why the F do you even care about what someone else wants to do to try to organize their own lives?
What business is this of yours?
Don't be a busybody. It's beneath your dignity as a professional photographer and it makes you sound like a small-minded fool.
Work on improving your own life. Starting with apologizing for this thread, for example. Don't worry about what someone else is doing to improve theirs.
Sheesh.
And who revived this zombie thread from June 27th anyway?
Photographer
Karl Blessing
Posts: 30911
Caledonia, Michigan, US
27255 wrote:
And who revived this zombie thread from June 27th anyway?
That would be very easy to find out.
|
