|
Forums >
Model Colloquy >
Glamour model heavily tattooed and peirced?
I'm just wondering out of pure curiosity how glamour models that are tattooed and have alot of peircing viewed in glamour photography? Does it matter to some photographers? Do some photographers not shoot with models that do have tattoos and peircings? Nov 08 11 06:43 pm Link See the little button that says "Search" up at the top right of the screen, next to "Reply"? You can use that to read approximately 3,498,376 other people asking that exact same question! Yes! You can!!!! Nov 08 11 06:45 pm Link this is a frequent topic. for my part i prefer unmarked but the reality is most of my models (and customers) have tattoos and/or piercings. with large-coverage tattoos i feel like i'm shooting for a tattoo magazine. paying customers frequently ask me to remove the tattoos in post. Nov 08 11 06:47 pm Link For "mainstream" glamor - such as what you see in Playboy, or Maxim - obvious ornamental body modifications are not particularly well received. Nov 08 11 07:41 pm Link If your goal is to make money simply by posing for photographers, it's likely they don't care about you having tattoos. They just want to see naked or scantily clad women in person. If you want to make money being hired by clients for mainstream advertisements, editorials or magazine covers, then you aren't very observant. If you study ads and magazines as part of your modeling you wouldn't have asked this question in the first place. Nov 08 11 07:58 pm Link BMI Studio wrote: +1 Nov 08 11 08:16 pm Link In answer to your questions. Yes and Yes. Some photographers will not shoot with tattooed or pierced models. Some will. It's all preference. Nov 08 11 08:18 pm Link BMI Studio wrote: So where do you fit in when shooting nudes? Getting them all to publication I trust? Nov 08 11 08:18 pm Link I and I think others consider that more alternative modeling then glamour modeling. I don't normally shoot glamour but the last time I did the client cast a unmodified model. Nov 08 11 08:26 pm Link Cherrystone wrote: I pay models to pose nude for a variety of reasons. Some of the resulting images are published in books or magazines. Others are sold as prints. Some of my nudes are from lighting classes I took or from workshops I led. Hope that answers your question dude. Nov 08 11 08:28 pm Link I used to edit out tattoos as I am of the generation that women did not have tattoos. However they are acceptable to young men, and that is who looks at the bikini work I do, so they don't bother me anymore. My problem with tattoos is one of symmetry. Only showing part of a tattoo in a photograph really bothers me, like if you shoot part of a painting. Nov 08 11 08:43 pm Link This post isn't about how I'm modeling or what I'm doing, or not doing... It's strictly off what the photographer thinks... Please, take all your rudeness somewhere else, as I am trying just to see what opinions are. It’s starting to seem to me, like every one on here has a huge ego trip, and think they are better than every one else, and can put other people down. When the fact of the matter is, you’re really not that great. I’m not saying I’m good in any way. But, I also stay mature, and don’t post my negative thoughts in threads. If this thread bothers you so much, please leave. You don’t have to post in every thread. Nov 09 11 06:21 am Link Jerry, I think you have a really great veiw on it. I never really thought of it like that. You wouldn't shoot only one part of the painting, so why shoot only half a tattoo? Nov 09 11 06:23 am Link Glamour modeling is hard for those heavily tattooed and pierced. I have 3 tattoos and am currently researching getting one removed because it costs me so much work. As most glamour people say, why would you put a bumper sticker on a benz? Nov 09 11 06:32 am Link If I want a model without tattoos I seek one out. If I want a model with tattoos I seek them out too. I appreciate the fact that models put on their portfolios that they have a tattoo or two, three, etc. I won't edit out a tattoo ever because it isn't a true representation of the model. I shoot for tattoo magazines internationally and I agree with the poster who wrote about shooting part of the tattoo, it drives me nuts too. Sometimes when a model has a large tattoo that wraps around her/his body it can be very challenging to shoot it. that's my 2¢ Nov 09 11 06:44 am Link In as much as personal expression goes. Great, a model has made the decision to have a tattoo.. Where do they fit in for glamor or ad work? They don't. Seriously look through any publication and see if there are inked models. And that's not to say Bar & Biker MAY 2011 issue. To shoot a model with tattoos, they are too hard to remove and not effect your lighting in Photoshop (most times) and where there are large tattoos, you end up shooting 1/4 of it and then the images make no sense. All you see if 'Loving Lif' running across someone's rib cage. Nasty. Piercings, just pop them out, a tiny hole can be fixed Nov 09 11 07:00 am Link Sugar Couture wrote: Looking at your port, it's a little late to be asking that question, or thinking about it. Nov 09 11 07:08 am Link Good thing it's not what I want to shoot.  Nov 09 11 07:24 am Link ONCE AGAIN: NOT about my port, just thoughts!!! For the third time... Nov 09 11 10:52 am Link Sugar Couture wrote: People don't read anymore... Nov 09 11 11:04 am Link Sugar Couture wrote: I am not sexy enough to be a glamour model... but consider that especially in cheesecake photography and fetish, alternative and others, there is/was always quite a demand for. Nov 09 11 11:08 am Link Sugar Couture wrote: Some photographers love tattoos & body mods. Nov 09 11 11:36 am Link When clients come to me to find glamour models, they are more likely to book models that are young with beautiful faces, long hair, big boobs, tight stomachs, round butts, and long legs. They are less likely to book models that are older with short hair, small boobs, flabby stomachs, large tattoos, large piercings, or stretch marks. Real women are often some combination of all of the above during their lives. I see more successful models with tattoos in California than the East Coast or Midwest. Nov 09 11 12:10 pm Link Loki Studio wrote: Moi? Nov 09 11 12:26 pm Link Sugar Couture wrote: Some do avoid it, some don't, some seek it out. Nov 09 11 12:26 pm Link yes BodyartBabes wrote: Cool - that was me! Nov 09 11 12:28 pm Link Natasha Ferguson wrote: So true! Nov 09 11 03:24 pm Link I think it's mostly a generational thing... Younger photographers are more used to hanging with inked and pierced friends almost daily and so,perceive those things as pretty normal...and even beautiful... Older shooters have a different vision of beauty and glamour. I think the definition/tradition of beauty has changed a lot in the last few years. Will Suicide Girl types being doing Ralph Lauren ads anytime soon??? Probably not! Is there regular work for inked and pierced models? Yes there is with more and more each day... Joanna Angel is almost single handedly changing the "Adult" publishing scene with her magazine...slowly though... Most of the art directors I work with are very old school...absolutely no tats... or at most 1-2 tiny ones (usually "shopped" out by the art dept.) On a personal note...I have turned down 2-3 models for paid shoots because of thier ink... Great face,physique,portfolio didn't matter...and I think you'll find many models like one of the previous posters here will tell stories about having lost gigs because of thier body art... Ask 100 photographers and you'll likely get 99 1/2 opinions! Nov 09 11 04:13 pm Link OG Foto wrote: that makes it sound like it's a 50/50 ratio, which could be deceiving. Nov 09 11 04:21 pm Link I tend to avoid models with tattoos if shooting glamour. However I shoot models with tattoos in other genres. Nov 09 11 04:32 pm Link BMI Studio wrote: Many photographers who shoot for either gallery submission or their own artistic purposes pay models. They may or may not like tattoos, but they don't "just want to see scantily clad women." Nov 09 11 06:05 pm Link OG Foto wrote: dave phoenix wrote: Plus, the OP was about "heavily tattooed models." I've shot plenty of times with models who have tattoos that aren't relevant to the shot. Nov 09 11 06:19 pm Link mcdevittphotos wrote: FWIW, several men have told me that they enjoyed imagining the *rest* of the tattoo that is covered by clothing -- both the subject as well as the extent of coverage:) Nov 09 11 07:49 pm Link Ashley Graham wrote: +1000. Exactly how I feel. Nov 09 11 07:57 pm Link Although, some times it seems if you cover up a tattoo, people wonder about what the rest of the tatto is, and they keep looking back at the photo. It keeps the veiwer wondering about the image. If it's a good tattoo. Nov 10 11 10:30 am Link Sugar Couture wrote: Most professional models with tattoos (more than you think) carry their own Dermablend make up with their specific skin tone to cover it up. Nov 10 11 10:52 am Link Thank you for that thread. I bought alot! Nov 10 11 06:06 pm Link |
