Kari lee Peterson wrote: Just to throw out a model's point of view-
... the shots that appeal to or improve a photographers portfolio are not always the same ones that are advantageous to a model. In a model's portfolio the technical merits are more or less afterthoughts- in a photographer's they are paramount. This makes perfect sense since your portfolio is meant to be representative of your mastery if your craft. It seems only fair that both party's have some say in the final editing process. Trade implies mutual benefit.
... why do we want unedited shots? 1) Some of us would like to practice our photo-shopping skills- not a criminal offense last time I checked. That said I never post any of my edits without getting the okay from the photog...unless of course they do not have the due dilligence to have me sign a release. 2) Everyone in here seems to be a competent if not a phenomenal photog/ photoshop wizard... you are the exceptions - not the rule. I've gotten some truly horrendous edits on what were decent shots...
...can we please refrain from the superiority complexes? You put a lot of time into your craft- so do many of the models. You spend hours editing- she spends hours at the gym. You spend money on equipment- she spends money on appearance and wardrobe. It takes two to tango...
as for the OP's situation... did you ask the model in question if she liked the shots or your edits? If the answer is yes- then you have more than fulfilled your part of the TF arrangement...if not perhaps ask her if she'd like to choose and image or two for you to edit- or you may discover that what she wants is a little extra editing. I have two scars on my stomach that I'm incredibly self conscious of- photogs don't always edit them out...see my point?
thats enough drivel for the evening....
I would only add that some models like to see all the pics so they can work out which poses work best for them and which ones should be forgotten.
This is a copy of my "stock" TF* policy that I communicate (email) to the models that ask about it:
Sure, I may lose the model who's looking for a bazillion random images (good or bad) to include the RAW files and such, but that's okay. Many new models confuse "quantity" with "quality".
The models that do follow up are the ones that like my portfolio enough to trust me and desire to "collaborate", and I always show them my "favorite" images as we shoot (on the back of the camera) so they have an idea of how we're doing and what's working/coming in the final edits. 15-20 "good" images are more than a fair trade of your time.
I don't buy the idea that because "she spends hours at the gym" that I owe her hours of my editing time. She maybe spent (maybe) 2-3hrs getting "ready" for the shoot...now you spend 2-3hrs cropping/editing/resizing 15-20 images...a VERY fair trade.
GNapp Studios wrote: If you want to be successful, you need to meet or beat customer expectations.
I would agree in most industries this would be true...however, in internet modelling you have to be careful of the new GWC (Girl With Cellphone-pics) "model" who's unrealistic expectations of YOUR time would drive an ordinary business into the GROUND if you satisfied their unrealistic "expectations".
Often they have expectations of 150 images from a 2hr "trade" shoot...or "oh, and my boyfriend wants the RAW files too, if you don't mind...he knows photoshop..." or "I spend hours in the Gym, so... " LOL! The logic is often pretty comical.
You cannot be sucessful if you "give away the farm"...and so you have to "negotiate/modify" (as you said "agree") the customer's "needs" back to TF* reality. Or, charge $$$ for your extra time/RAW files like a successful business.
Kari lee Peterson wrote: ...why do we want unedited shots? 1) Some of us would like to practice our photo-shopping skills- not a criminal offense last time I checked.
There is the problem, Keri.
THIS photographer doesn't want his name attached to someone else's photo-chopping of (legally) HIS image. You can "practice your photoshopping skills" on something else (or go to school for it like many of us). Or, PAY for the images, and chop away. But, that's not part of the usual photographer's TF* package.
Most serious photographers don't want to "give away" control of their "final" images to a model or anyone else, (model's significant other, etc) but instead want to maintain control over exactly what their final images (that have our name attached) end up looking like. You choose that photographer because you like and trust their work.
It would be like the model asking the artist "could I just come around and add a few brushstrokes" to his final painting.
The model comes to the "artist" to paint them...and gets copies of that finished artwork in exchange for their time...not for the artist to provide a bunch of half-done signed "sketches" for the model (or someone else) to finish painting later.
Margaret Hope wrote: I don't think I have a happy model. I refuse to give her all the photos taken at the scheduled TF shoot... I gave her 8 edited photos!... She tells me all the photographers she has worked with have given her edited and unedited photos.
This is what I told her:
So... what is your definition of a TF shoot?
Any model that wants all images from a shoot: A) has not been doing this long enough to know what's useful B)will probably not be at this long
That said, you need to settle this beforehand.
A lot of models feel entitled, but don't express their expectations until after they're upset. Knowing this, you should go into all shoots stating either a specific number, or a ballpark number.
I, personally, never ask, but that's because I trust the people I do trade with to only choose what is best. I haven't accepted any new trade work in years (just the same people for fun/art), so that's not the norm. Most models need to be told what to expect.