Julie Ann NYC wrote:
Real talk:

I love this job and I love shooting but sometimes seeing how I look at high-resolution with no retouch can be a little...blech. I think we all know that feeling. That weird photo where you have a double chin, or your eye looks lazy, or that pimple looks huge.

I can't be the only one!

Just wait........I think you are in for a shock in the future.

I didn't even start modelling until I was considerably older than you are now, in fact I was 35 at the time, and have been specializing in art nudes and other genres of nude modelling all this time. I will be 65 in a few months, and I have never been a fan of having my photos retouched very much, preferring the reality of how I actually look at any given age.  Yes, the changes over the past 30 years have been quite dramatic and I look a lot different now than I did before.  Some photos are just bad, and I don't want them used, but overall I would still rather present reality and not pictures which have had a lot of retouching. When I see the unretouched photos, I do see things that I probably wasn't aware were going to be so easy for others to see in them.

VasilisA Photography wrote:
One thing to keep in mind is that not all photos from a shoot are keepers. I usually tell my models to relax when I'm taking test shots to adjust lighting and all that... that is when the "lazy eye", "double chin", etc pop up and most models ignore those photos. What I would advise though is to use such photos to determine what poses, expressions and angles work best for you.

I usually cringe when I see overly modified skin tones & textures in the final images.

IMHO excessive photoshopping to achieve that slick magazine look is kinda like ordering a hot fudge sundae but without the nuts, fudge,  and the cherry on top.  Waddaya got left?  A bowl of plain vanilla icecream, which is not necessarily bad, mind you but it is kinda boring.

All IMHO as always, of course.

Rays Fine Art wrote:

IMHO excessive photoshopping to achieve that slick magazine look is kinda like ordering a hot fudge sundae but without the nuts, fudge,  and the cherry on top.  Waddaya got left?  A bowl of plain vanilla icecream, which is not necessarily bad, mind you but it is kinda boring.

All IMHO as always, of course.

I also cringe when I see the over-processed junk that comes back (presumably) from all those overzealous retouchers out there. You see stuff now where there's no eye socket-- the eye is just sitting there in a completely smoothed-out face. Why buy good optics if you are going to turn the output into "Barbie"?

Koryn wrote:
Oh yeah. But then again, there are unflattering photos of me all over the Internet. Some of the bad raws aren't half as awful as the edited ones that some people have considered the "keepers."

True story right there.

Julie Ann NYC wrote:
All valid points. Thank, you all. Appreciate the feedback.

I also hate overprocessed images, especially when the photographer or retoucher uses liquify to give me a skeletal arm or elongate my neck, etc. I still want to look like "me" However, I do like it when they use the tool to clean up stray hairs and lighten my undereye circles. Just little things like that.

I did a couple shoots a few months back, where both the photographers went way too crazy on post production. One was for a fitness shoot and for some reason he made me skeletal by literally drawing in chest bones, adding crazy shadows to my collarbone, etc. I looked like a death camp inmate. The other smoothed out my face and added his own makeup effects around my eyes. I looked like a very smooth raccoon. Ugh! Never again...

Amy DeBellis wrote:
I did a couple shoots a few months back, where both the photographers went way too crazy on post production. One was for a fitness shoot and for some reason he made me skeletal by literally drawing in chest bones, adding crazy shadows to my collarbone, etc. I looked like a death camp inmate. The other smoothed out my face and added his own makeup effects around my eyes. I looked like a very smooth raccoon. Ugh! Never again...

Yikes, I just had something similar happen for the first time...the photographer smoothed out my skin to the point of looking like a porcelain doll, added a bunch of makeup effects that looked totally unnatural, and added sharp shadows on my cheek to create the illusion of cheekbones.  I didn't think any of them looked even slightly better than the unretouched images.  It was laughable, but also kind of depressing...Like, do you honestly think I look better with all of the overprocessing?

Julie Ann NYC wrote:
Do your raw images ever make you cringe?

Yes, and not always over the Model.

I recently shot a set in which My strobe failed so We worked with the available light, ugh.

The images rattled My confidence...

Julie Ann NYC wrote:
Real talk:

I love this job and I love shooting but sometimes seeing how I look at high-resolution with no retouch can be a little...blech. I think we all know that feeling. That weird photo where you have a double chin, or your eye looks lazy, or that pimple looks huge.

I can't be the only one!

You are not! But that is where the trust in your photographer weights in. It is not about what he/she will fix in post, but the trust you should have that he/she will select the best possible images and will deliver the best possible results and... like in my case, I NEVER post anything anywhere without the model's approval.

So yeah, trust your photographer, and if you don't trust him/her be super upfront about the things you are worried/concern about you or the photos.

Koryn wrote:
Oh yeah. But then again, there are unflattering photos of me all over the Internet. Some of the bad raws aren't half as awful as the edited ones that some people have considered the "keepers."

This. 1 million x this.

Lieza Nova wrote:

This. 1 million x this.

Honest question, having bad photos of yourself floating around the internet, does really affects your work?

When a traveling model contacts me, I check her port, not the random awful photos of her that may exist. I know that is inevitable. I wonder how many bookings (if any) people lose because of bad photos.

I don't have any data, but I'd say not that many. Am I mistaken?

Roberto Inetti wrote:

Honest question, having bad photos of yourself floating around the internet, does really affects your work?

When a traveling model contacts me, I check her port, not the random awful photos of her that may exist. I know that is inevitable. I wonder how many bookings (if any) people lose because of bad photos.

I don't have any data, but I'd say not that many. Am I mistaken?

Short answer: I don't know either, to be honest.

Long answer: Nobody's ever told me that they didn't book me because of it, but there's no real way to know who saw the images and didn't contact me because of it. Or who saw them and it was the tipping point between a yes and a no, when there were other factors working against me (hair color, height, etc.) So, I don't have any real data either, although I suspect that you're probably right, more or less. One or two unfortunate shots aren't really going to hurt a model that much. Same goes for photographers, when models post horrible proofs. Anyone, model or photographer, who understands the process knows that not every shot is going to be a winner. Having it happen a lot could call in to question why the model or photographer continues to work with people who do this sort of thing but I don't know how strongly that would weigh in deciding whether to hire someone or not. For some, it may be a big deal while others may not care.

I wouldn't book again with someone who did this and I can't imagine that a photographer would either,  unless it's paid work and sometimes not even then. It did lead to some uncomfortable conversations about why I didn't put the images into my port. Not fun.

Roberto Inetti wrote:

Honest question, having bad photos of yourself floating around the internet, does really affects your work?

When a traveling model contacts me, I check her port, not the random awful photos of her that may exist. I know that is inevitable. I wonder how many bookings (if any) people lose because of bad photos.

I don't have any data, but I'd say not that many. Am I mistaken?

To be completely honest, when you are a traveling model (and I was one for about ten years, on and off), a large portion of your paying work is coming from people who are beginners and/or have an extremely limited skillsets. Nearly every photo they take and use of you is going to be bad....or mediocre at best. Models who travel for more than a year or two - especially those who live on the money from it - probably 75% of the images that are distributed of that model will be straight up awful, in one way or another.

You can actively mitigate it by being mindful of what you post in your own portfolio, as well as how you present yourself in other social media. But, it's an inevitable part of being a professional model; people are paying you because they don't have the photo skills to get TFP yet.

Koryn wrote:
To be completely honest, when you are a traveling model (and I was one for about ten years, on and off), a large portion of your paying work is coming from people who are beginners and/or have an extremely limited skillsets. Nearly every photo they take and use of you is going to be bad....or mediocre at best. Models who travel for more than a year or two - especially those who live on the money from it - probably 75% of the images that are distributed of that model will be straight up awful, in one way or another.

You can actively mitigate it by being mindful of what you post in your own portfolio, as well as how you present yourself in other social media. But, it's an inevitable part of being a professional model; people are paying you because they don't have the photo skills to get TFP yet.

Yeah...there are exceptions to that, but often it's true.  I imagine if someone is considering hiring a model and comes across one or more awful pictures of them in a photographer's portfolio, different people are going to have different reactions...but I think in general, if a model has a fabulous portfolio and a fabulous social media presence, but appears in an unflattering way in someone else's portfolio, it kind of suggests that the model is capable of doing awesome work, but worked with someone at one point who had a different or questionable view of what was aesthetically pleasing.  After all, I've gotten plenty of awkward photos back from shoots, but I chose not to post them...doing so would have spoken negatively about my own vision of my modeling.

Risen Phoenix Photo wrote:
I like how some models, many of whom aren't really even modeling anymore, have terrible things to say about the work of photographers they posed for.  It's surprising to me that they decry and slam their efforts but have no problem taking their money.

I would have hoped that some models would be kinder to the clients who have helped them maintain their way of life.

By the way those models who start right out of the gun demanding to be paid and never shoot trade with good photographers usually have very weak portfolios and those are the portfolios I review when I consider hiring a model on a casting.  So I think a weak portfolio does impact some models from getting work.

But I thought you never paid models?

What do you do for a living? I doubt there is an occupation that one side doesn't make fun/ have war stories about the other side.

That is two posts in a row where you disparage models a lot more harshley then the ops of the threads did photographers.

You really shouldn't take these things so personal.

Dan K Photography wrote:
But I thought you never paid models?

What do you do for a living? I doubt there is an occupation that one side doesn't make fun/ have war stories about the other side.

That is two posts in a row where you disparage models a lot more harshley then the ops of the threads did photographers.

You really shouldn't take these things so personal.

Sir Knight,
Oh I have paid many models and in 2011 I paid over $6,000 paying models. That is why in 2012 I decided to shoot almost entirely on a trade basis.

Even now when  I travel to California where I do almost every year I always find one or two upcomming models and pay them.  But I would say that about 95% of my shoots are on a trade basis.

What I do or did for a living is none of your business, but I will tell you if I caught an subordinate bad mouthing a client or a fellow employee I would terminate them.

I am not disparaging models at all.  But I think a numbers of these folks with "war stories" as you put it are a bit jaded in their opinion of this site and photographers. 

Your last point is your opinion , which you are free to have, however I am entitled to mine.  And I dont stand alone in that opinion. You should be willing to accept a diversity of opinion.

As far as your last sentence that is a not so veiled personal attack which I dont appreciate.  Nothing personal.

Risen Phoenix Photo wrote:
Sir Knight,
Oh I have paid many models and in 2011 I paid over $6,000 paying models. That is why in 2012 I decided to shoot almost entirely on a trade basis.

Even now when  I travel to California where I do almost every year I always find one or two upcomming models and pay them.  But I would say that about 95% of my shoots are on a trade basis.

What I do or did for a living is none of your business, but I will tell you if I caught an subordinate bad mouthing a client or a fellow employee I would terminate them.

I am not disparaging models at all.  But I think a numbers of these folks with "war stories" as you put it are a bit jaded in their opinion of this site and photographers. 

Your last point is your opinion , which you are free to have, however I am entitled to mine.  And I dont stand alone in that opinion. You should be willing to accept a diversity of opinion.

As far as your last sentence that is a not so veiled personal attack which I dont appreciate.  Nothing personal.

Sir  defender of all things Tog,

Everything we both write is an opinion. Why the need to point it out?

Yoyu are disparaging models more then your imagination that they are disparaging togs.Heck you think that being a client is bad. You have a problem here with a model who thinks some outtakes are not flattering. lol

My question was rhetorical and I don't really care what you do or pretend to do. If you caught an imaginary subordinate saying that a certain client liked to stay on the phone too long to a coworker and asked for advice you would terminate them? lol.

I don't care if you think a benign statement is a personal attack. Take it to someone who does

Dan K Photography wrote:

Sir  defender of all things Tog,

Everything we both write is an opinion. Why the need to point it out?

Yoyu are disparaging models more then your imagination that they are disparaging togs.Heck you think that being a client is bad. You have a problem here with a model who thinks some outtakes are not flattering. lol

My question was rhetorical and I don't really care what you do or pretend to do. If you caught an imaginary subordinate saying that a certain client liked to stay on the phone too long to a coworker and asked for advice you would terminate them? lol.

I don't care if you think a benign statement is a personal attack. Take it to someone who does

Well you have one thing right, we could both care less about what the other one thinks. 

Interesting comments though,when did I ever say that I had a problem with a model that was un happy about outtakes.  I never said that.  Howver every client is different and if a client needs a little more handholding to make them happy and continue to work with them then you do it.  Clearly you have never had to win contracts and take care of clients even the dificult ones.

Risen Phoenix Photo wrote:

Well you have one thing right, we could both care less about what the other one thinks. 

Interesting comments though,when did I ever say that I had a problem with a model that was un happy about outtakes.  I never said that.  Howver every client is different and if a client needs a little more handholding to make them happy and continue to work with them then you do it.  Clearly you have never had to win contracts and take care of clients even the dificult ones.

Maybe I assumed wrongly? Why then did you write your original post on this thread? If not the OP, who were you referring to?

Risen Phoenix Photo wrote:
I like how some models, many of whom aren't really even modeling anymore, have terrible things to say about the work of photographers they posed for.  It's surprising to me that they decry and slam their efforts but have no problem taking their money.
.

Are you referring to me? Now that I no longer need to sugar-coat things in order to get jobs, I have opted to drop the marketing persona and answer people's threads and queries in completely honest, upfront and bare bones kind of ways. Professional modeling has its high points, as well as its low points. I had many wonderful experiences, many mediocre ones, and a few that were straight up awful. I'll talk honestly, no filters, about all those experiences.

Having unflattering pictures of oneself displayed all over the internet isn't innately bad, or good - but it is a REALITY of modeling for revenue. There's no use to lie about that reality to anyone. newbie models need to understand that's absolutely going to happen before they begin to pursue modeling, even as a serious hobby. We have almost zero control over use or display of our personal likenesses after a shoot. Models need to know that and fully understand its implications from the get go.

Risen Phoenix Photo wrote:
Clearly you have never had to win contracts and take care of clients even the dificult ones.

I most certainly have. I used to own a high end cleaning company had had a few extremely difficult clients that I handled quite successfully. I have no problem talking privately about how difficult they are and how much I hated dealing with them. I also went in and did my best work for them every time. Until they moved, I moved or they stopped being worth the hassle and I fired them. As a dancer, the locker room is where we share information about who's obnoxious, smells bad, is spending money or gets handsy. I have no problem with that either. It keeps us safe and prevents us from wasting time.

In every service related business, there are annoying clients. Acknowledging this is not a bad thing, but merely accepting reality. I'm sorry it bothers you.

Julie Ann NYC wrote:
All valid points. Thank, you all. Appreciate the feedback.

I also hate overprocessed images, especially when the photographer or retoucher uses liquify to give me a skeletal arm or elongate my neck, etc. I still want to look like "me" However, I do like it when they use the tool to clean up stray hairs and lighten my undereye circles. Just little things like that.

Koryn wrote:
To be completely honest, when you are a traveling model (and I was one for about ten years, on and off), a large portion of your paying work is coming from people who are beginners and/or have an extremely limited skillsets. Nearly every photo they take and use of you is going to be bad....or mediocre at best. Models who travel for more than a year or two - especially those who live on the money from it - probably 75% of the images that are distributed of that model will be straight up awful, in one way or another.

You can actively mitigate it by being mindful of what you post in your own portfolio, as well as how you present yourself in other social media. But, it's an inevitable part of being a professional model; people are paying you because they don't have the photo skills to get TFP yet.

I’d never really thought about this before but I think you’re right.

I guess it all stems from the need to earn a living and IMHO professional photographers can have similar problems.

Not every photograph any one of us takes is perfect.  One can obviously try to make sure that the less than prefect ones never see the light of day but one often has the added pressure of real world deadlines.

In the old days, if one hated a particular photograph or regretted doing a particular job, one could hope that it would only ever be seen once then quickly forgotten.

These days, everything gets interminably shared around social media and constantly retweeted.

Bad work has nowhere to hide any more.

Derek Ridgers wrote:

I’d never really thought about this before but I think you’re right.

I guess it all stems from the need to earn a living and IMHO professional photographers can have similar problems.

Not every photograph any one of us takes is perfect.  One can obviously try to make sure that the less than prefect ones never see the light of day but one often has the added pressure of real world deadlines.

In the old days, if one hated a particular photograph or regretted doing a particular job, one could hope that it would only ever be seen once then quickly forgotten.

These days, everything gets interminably shared around social media and constantly retweeted.

Bad work has nowhere to hide any more.

Yes and it definitely goes both ways. I know someone who photographs engagements, weddings, family portraits and commissioned work - a female photographer who has a steady stream of income-earning work. She's mentioned that she tries not to do "cheesy" stuff, but sometimes the client wants cheesy and that's what you have to give them. Because clients who're happy refer you to their friends and family, and call you back when they have another major life event they need photographed.

I have turned my focus in recent months to photography, and have just started photographing other people. One of the first "requests" I got was for an image with selective color; I hate selective color. But, it's a chance to practice pleasing someone for the greater good. I also might have an opportunity to do some promo photos for a salon; I'm pretty sure they'll want certain things I think is corny. But whatever....once people start to "sell" an art, they do so at the expense of their own aesthetic sensibilities sometimes. I was okay with it as a model, and I will be absolutely okay with it as a photographer.