Lisa Berczel wrote:
If the shoot is a trade, then the model should be willing to go for different looks as it is very common for the model, mua and photographer want to emphasis something different in their port.

This particular shoot was a trade on all accounts (Photog, Model and MUA). Photographer made the request for a brighter lip on set, unfortunately, Model wasn't willing to experiment.

Ionalynn wrote:
If the model is being hired to do a job, you might reminder her of that.
Or you can have the hiring client remind her of this fact.

If the "model" is the one doing the hiring as for a boudoir session, it is the client's choice of how she wishes to look.

It was a trade agreement, so everyone involved portfolios would be positively affected. The photographer and I agreed that a bright lip and cheek were necessary to show up better in outdoor light. No one was paid for their work, so I felt the request to change lip and cheeks wasn't going too far as it wasn't only the models portfolio the pics would be for.

Monroe1984 wrote:
...doesn't want to have color on her lips or cheeks but you KNOW it'll be beneficial to the shoot? How do you tell the model that it isn't up to her or her personal preferences when it's part of a trade shoot that is to go in everyone's portfolio?

It is up to the model what gets put on her face regardless trade or paid.  The easiest way to solve your problem is find another model.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:
Part of working with a team is respecting the knowledge of the professional who is executing that component of the project. In this case the makeup artist. As long as their execution doesn't conflict with the vision of whomever is in charge of creative direction.

1+  John speaks with Tenured Wisdom...

However for test creatives the narrative, storyboard and particulars need to be on the table long before the session... concept imagery is sterling... Once the team members are in agreement then and only then should the project move forward... Experience is a brutal teacher here...

Those who lack tenure would be well advised to assist seasoned talent (this is germane to all craft services)
My experience has shown that a session benefits from a single member being placed in responsible charge... They need to appreciate the agreed upon parameters and see that the aforementioned occurs seamlessly...

Word to the wise... Never complain about the actions of another team member (even anonymously) as the case here... if you do you likely may not be invited back to collaborate with any of those team members again...  Ours is a very small industry, compliment when appropriate but avoid anything that even approaches negative...

Hope this helps are is at least food for thought...

Images by MR wrote:

It is up to the model what gets put on her face regardless trade or paid.  The easiest way to solve your problem is find another model.

+1
I once had a model (on a test shoot) tell me that a particular dress wasn't her style and she hated the color. Even though it was unprofessional, I chose not to make a deal about it. I wish someone would have told me that the model had certain color preferences beforehand, though.

Thomas Van Dyke wrote:
However for test creatives the narrative, storyboard and particulars need to be on the table long before the session... concept imagery is sterling... Once the team members are in agreement then and only then should the project move forward... Experience is a brutal teacher here...

However even the best laid and detailed planning can go by the wayside if conditions at the shoot site end up different than anticipated, which is very common with outdoor shoots. Unless the model had concerns about allergic reactions or something, an absolute refusal to experiment with what seems to be a pretty minor adjustment to makeup and lipstick to better fit the conditions seems pretty extreme to me. That kind of prima donna attitude will not serve her well in the long run.

Eye of the World wrote:

However even the best laid and detailed planning can go by the wayside if conditions at the shoot site end up different than anticipated, which is very common with outdoor shoots. Unless the model had concerns about allergic reactions or something, an absolute refusal to experiment with what seems to be a pretty minor adjustment to makeup and lipstick to better fit the conditions seems pretty extreme to me. That kind of prima donna attitude will not serve her well in the long run.

Exactly, it was an outdoor shoot. Sometimes the light was good. Sometimes it wasn't. We had her in the water a little. Photographer shot from a distance in some and we bother expressed concern on her lips and cheeks looking dull in shot. Adding just a hint of color to the lip and cheek, I feel, wasn't an out of control request to fit the moment and to "hopefully" aid in a beautiful shot for everyone. I wasn't bashing the model, she's wonderful! I was simply asking how some of you would deal with it under certain circumstances. Thank you all for the input.

Images by MR wrote:
It is up to the model what gets put on her face regardless trade or paid.  The easiest way to solve your problem is find another model.

Actually it's not, and this is the type of advice that creates schisms on shoots where a full team is in place. If the model is also handling art direction for the shoot, is the one paying for her make-up to be done, is allergic to certain products, and/or notices unsanitary practices (none of which was conveyed by the OP) then she has a say, otherwise it's not her job to dictate make-up (or wardrobe, or hair) and presenting that it is undermines the other individuals on set. The reality is that unless a model shoots nothing but selfies or only works with people who will cater to her whims that at some point she's going to come across a make-up look that she wouldn't do on herself, or a garment that she doesn't like the color or, or a hairstyle she thinks is ugly...welcome to modeling, where the goal isn't to appease the model (or any one member of the team in particular), but instead to get a finished image that looks good.

TerrysPhotocountry wrote:
See ya! < Good-by

ha! I had to think about that one! Pretty much spot on.

Monroe1984 wrote:
...doesn't want to have color on her lips or cheeks but you KNOW it'll be beneficial to the shoot? How do you tell the model that it isn't up to her or her personal preferences when it's part of a trade shoot that is to go in everyone's portfolio?

Unfortunately she sounds like an absolute amateur not used to working with others.

The best planned shoots changes and adapts as it goes along to suits the team members, a model os there to bring the concept to life.

In that situation I would ask the model to try it or discontinue the shoot rather then continue getting sub par pictures because you weren't allowed to do you job.

Monroe1984 wrote:
...doesn't want to have color on her lips or cheeks but you KNOW it'll be beneficial to the shoot?

The answer is that you don't "know" - you have an opinion. A trade shoot is a collaboration; it should consist of each party doing only things they are comfortable with. You don't get promoted to God because you can afford to buy a camera or a make-up box.

How do you tell the model that it isn't up to her or her personal preferences when it's part of a trade shoot that is to go in everyone's portfolio?

I think that translates into everyday English as "Me have MAC! You now slave!"

No, of course her personal preferences matter.

Adding just a hint of color to the lip and cheek, I feel, wasn't an out of control request to fit the moment and to "hopefully" aid in a beautiful shot for everyone. I wasn't bashing the model, she's wonderful! I was simply asking how some of you would deal with it under certain circumstances. Thank you all for the input.

Did you try asking the model why she didn't want to do this? That's what I'd do if I have what I thought was a good idea but a collaborator didn't like it. And I would not assume, as you do, that she or he was wrong. Once I knew her reason then I could discuss it with her. This doesn't seem like a mysterious process to me - why does it require a thread?

And if you think you're right once you've heard her reason and you can't convince her, then you can make a decision about future shoots based on that reason and how she responded to your attempts to communicate. Right now you can't, because you tried to treat a creative partner as a puppet.

Monroe1984 wrote:
...doesn't want to have color on her lips or cheeks but you KNOW it'll be beneficial to the shoot? How do you tell the model that it isn't up to her or her personal preferences when it's part of a trade shoot that is to go in everyone's portfolio?

MUA always think color on lips and checks are beneficial...even when the look is "natural no-makeup" look

rick lesser wrote:
...  I had been on a few TFP shoots I got nothing out of because one, I didn't care for the photographer's style, or two the model did not inspire me.  Next time you do  TFP make sure you like your team.  R-

Me too,

Sadly I've even been on shoots I paid for where I got zilch, (three times and two were with the same photographer and a HEFTY cost, to me.) Definitely learned my lesson. Ouch, seriously.

Yep, communicate clearly and get confirmation back from all parties that the plan is understood and agreed.

Jen

Wigs and Makeup Allison wrote:
I'm sorry, but unless the model is also the client, her preferences don't matter.

....

On a trade shoot, everyone is equal and mutual collaborators, right?

Jen

Jen B wrote:
On a trade shoot, everyone is equal and mutual collaborators, right?

Jen

Yes, which means that the MUA should also get something useful and representative of their work. Part of shooting with a team is trusting that team to get good images for everyone involved and not coddling one person who may feel that their opinion is somehow more valid, or their role is somehow more important. Models need to understand that when they're on set the shot isn't about them as an individual it's about the image as a whole, this is why there are some brilliant shots of models who are literally wearing trash bags (images where it's clear there was a group of people working together) and some lackluster shots of models wearing more expensive pieces (images where it's likely someone on the team dropped the ball).

In the situation the OP presented the model didn't seem to trust everyone as equals or view it as a collaboration, instead she behaved poorly by being unwilling to try something different then what she wanted and potentially wasted the time of everyone else there.

Yosh Studio wrote:
MUA always think color on lips and checks are beneficial...even when the look is "natural no-makeup" look

And they're generally right hence why they're make-up artists. Fun fact: even well known make-up schools teach their students to do this...because it works.

So many people hear the word color and erroneously assume something bold or unnatural rather that thinking about it in more subtle terms. For example a bit of blush (similar to what happens naturally when a person is excited) can help add dimension to a "natural-no make-up" look. Beyond that if it wasn't beneficial or it didn't look good, people wouldn't ask make-up artists to do these types of looks, they'd just tell the model to show up barefaced and shoot as is...but that'd be a disaster in most cases.

Jen B wrote:

On a trade shoot, everyone is equal and mutual collaborators, right?

Jen

Yes.  Did you read my next sentence?

Tiffany_B wrote:
And they're generally right hence why they're make-up artists. Fun fact: even well known make-up schools teach their students to do this...because it works.

So many people hear the word color and erroneously assume something bold or unnatural rather that thinking about it in more subtle terms. For example a bit of blush (similar to what happens naturally when a person is excited) can help add dimension to a "natural-no make-up" look. Beyond that if it wasn't beneficial or it didn't look good, people wouldn't ask make-up artists to do these types of looks, they'd just tell the model to show up barefaced and shoot as is...but that'd be a disaster in most cases.

8 times out of 10 if I have to reshoot a paid agency test its because of makeup, and its usually too much color, too much eye, too much check and too much lip. Makeup artist want to see makeup...always.

Note: A magazine fashion editorial with a full team is a different animal all together. The model really has no input at all and agencies models know this so there is never a problem

Yosh Studio wrote:

8 times out of 10 if I have to reshoot a paid agency test its because of makeup, and its usually too much color, too much eye, too much check and too much lip. Makeup artist want to see makeup...always

This is why I always engage the MUA myself rather than use one the model already knows or is tasked to find. It gives me reasonable influence over the MU which I might otherwise not have. MUA can be very head-strong and selective in their hearing so it's not good to have another party involved in the engagement to muddy the waters.

K I M I L Y wrote:
This is why I always engage the MUA myself rather than use one the model already knows or is tasked to find. It gives me reasonable influence over the MU which I might otherwise not have. MUA can be very head-strong and selective in their hearing so it's not good to have another party involved in the engagement to muddy the waters.

Spot on!!!

Yosh Studio wrote:
8 times out of 10 if I have to reshoot a paid agency test its because of makeup, and its usually too much color, too much eye, too much check and too much lip. Makeup artist want to see makeup...always.

Note: A magazine fashion editorial with a full team is a different animal all together. The model really has no input at all and agencies models know this so there is never a problem

Maybe the make-up artists you shoot with want to see make-up always but this hasn't been my experience, the people I've had the pleasure of working with have always worked to do what was best for the image and as such were skilled at doing more natural looks if they were called for. Perhaps part of this issue lies in the right people not being hired for the task you needed.

K I M I L Y wrote:
This is why I always engage the MUA myself rather than use one the model already knows or is tasked to find. It gives me reasonable influence over the MU which I might otherwise not have. MUA can be very head-strong and selective in their hearing so it's not good to have another party involved in the engagement to muddy the waters.

If going into a situation you think you need to have influence over another party then you're not in a collaborative mindset which is key in relation to this thread because according to the OP this was a TF shoot and in such instances everyone involved should get useful images. Beyond that the statement that MUA's can be very head-strong and selective in their hearing comes off as combative. Consider that it's possible that what you're viewing as being headstrong may simply be a person wanting to do what they've been brought onto do without interference or micromanagement. I respect the people that I work with to do the jobs they've been assigned and as such I make it a point to only step in and say something in instances where I notice something is actually wrong.

Tiffany_B wrote:

Maybe the make-up artists you shoot with want to see make-up always but this hasn't been my experience, the people I've had the pleasure of working with have always worked to do what was best for the image and as such were skilled at doing more natural looks if they were called for. Perhaps part of this issue lies in the right people not being hired for the task you needed.

Perhaps you could post some examples of your team experiences (images) you are referring too. Like a mood board of your work that you can consider clean & natural or no-makeup?

Tiffany_B wrote:
If going into a situation you think you need to have influence over another party then you're not in a collaborative mindset which is key in relation to this thread because according to the OP this was a TF shoot and in such instances everyone involved should get useful images. Beyond that the statement that MUA's can be very head-strong and selective in their hearing comes off as combative. Consider that it's possible that what you're viewing as being headstrong may simply be a person wanting to do what they've been brought onto do without interference or micromanagement. I respect the people that I work with to do the jobs they've been assigned and as such I make it a point to only step in and say something in instances where I notice something is actually wrong.

There's nothing combative about my shoots but I note that you chose to ignore my reference to 'reasonable influence' in order to portray my agenda as something else. I'm afraid that kind of monkey business means I would never engage you on any kind of shoot, TF or otherwise. The whole team needs to pull together in a common endeavour, managed by the photographer [or the client's AD], and not be railroaded by someone who seems to think they have a superior mindset. So, I'm afraid, you're OUT!