Shei P wrote:

This has too much MU & looks really dated

LOL! Actually it isnt alot of mau and not dated.,

BUT...thanks for the critque

Swank Photography wrote:
LOL! Actually it isnt alot of mau and not dated.,

BUT...thanks for the critque

Without looking at the shot and not to critique: photos don't have to have been shot a decade ago to look dated. A style of posing, lighting, props or even coloring can give something a feeling of a certain period in time. You could shoot this tonight and it will still look like a portrait from the 19??'s:


(not my photo - pulled from google images)

Swank Photography wrote:

LOL! Actually it isnt alot of mau and not dated.,

BUT...thanks for the critque

It is too much make-up for a commercial headshot.

The majority of the people on MM don't know what  headshot is. Just because a photo is of someone's face that  does not make it a headshot.

VeronicaValentyne wrote:
[ur=ulr name]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RhipIhubdc&feature=fvsr[/ulr]

This is a simple example of the miracle of photoshop, there are tons more, elaborately, done on YouTube.

This is why, for better or worse, I post no photoshopped images in my port.  I know that my flaws are easily erased with a few tools - and from the extreme time-lapse videos I have seen, I could even wind up entirely transformed.

And although I am no expert, I work with photoshop regularly for other projects, it has never occurred to me to alter my photos.  As for make up, well, I love color, but that doesn't mean it's my only "look".



I recently met a photographer at a designated airport.  He had no difficulty recognizing me from the images he'd seen - of course, over 6' tall in my platform heels, the only person in the crowd taller, was he himself!

.......................what does this photo have to do with the thread?

Mi Do wrote:




Headshots of the future....
(by me, of course!)

I like!   

                                             

Mi Do wrote:




Headshots of the future....
(by me, of course!)

cute!

Frances Jewel wrote:
.......................what does this photo have to do with the thread?

No Make up, no Photoshop....not a traditional "headshot"....
The point I make is that anyone with the right photo editing software can alter any facial image to the point that it hardly resembles the person, or original photo.
Were you having a brain cramp?  Or do you simply have a hard time correlating the minor points of each contribution to the thread?

If you read what I wrote, you see I make mention of the fact that I include no "retouched" or Photoshopped images in my portfolio.  What you see there, is what you get....as there are comments made in the thread by photographers stating they hardly recognized the model they booked upon meeting in person.

When I work with ANYONE, I get the details of what they need, in terms of preparation, prior to arrival.  Make up, no make up, or (hahahahaha!) clown make up.  It's not rocket science!

Mi Do wrote:




Headshots of the future....
(by me, of course!)

very cute/cool, but how do you take this on casting?

Star wrote:
a lot of that isn't true.

yes, it is true.  your argument against what i wrote was from the narrow scope of actors, probably from your relationship with hollywood.  the points i made were universal in markets well beyond.  even for actors in chicago for example, where industrial videos are churned out regularly.

true, actors often have several on hand to submit based on certain roles, but generally outside that realm in markets without the intensity of television and film roles the rules of thumb i stated are applicable.

Yosh Studio wrote:

very cute/cool, but how do you take this on casting?

Duh! It's the headshot of the future? So just beam it up to the casting directors teleporter....

Christine Rose wrote:

It is too much make-up for a commercial headshot.

The majority of the people on MM don't know what  headshot is. Just because a photo is of someone's face that  does not make it a headshot.

Merry Christmas Christine

Yosh Studio wrote:

very cute/cool, but how do you take this on casting?

If she's going on a casting, she won't need an animated headshot. She'll be there in person to do the smiling and winking.

DennisRoliffPhotography wrote:

If she's going on a casting, she won't need an animated headshot. She'll be there in person to do the smiling and winking.

oh...cool....but what my girl going to leave behind,

i guess she could leave herself.

Mi Do wrote:




Headshots of the future....
(by me, of course!)

Adorable

Love your avi too

Yosh Studio wrote:

oh...cool....but what my girl going to leave behind,

i guess she could leave herself.

She doesn't need to leave anything behind. The people doing the casting will have hard copy (if they even require that) from the agency before the casting. If not, leave behind a composite card.

DennisRoliffPhotography wrote:
She doesn't need to leave anything behind. The people doing the casting will have hard copy (if they even require that) from the agency before the casting. If not, leave behind a composite card.

All the castings that I know down here the models or actors leave behind a headshot or a comp card.

All of them.

Christine Rose wrote:

All the castings that I know down here the models or actors leave behind a headshot or a comp card.

All of them.

It's not necessary but it is certainly a good business practice.

DennisRoliffPhotography wrote:

It's not necessary but it is certainly a good business practice.

The commercial agencies here won't let you go to a casting without having something to leave behind (the ones that I have experience with won't send or put actors/ models on the boards without them). Fashion is different.

Unless it is extra work and they work off of snapshots -- also one of the kids agencies will allow young children to leave 4 x 6's.

291 wrote:

yes, it is true.  your argument against what i wrote was from the narrow scope of actors, probably from your relationship with hollywood.  the points i made were universal in markets well beyond.  even for actors in chicago for example, where industrial videos are churned out regularly.

true, actors often have several on hand to submit based on certain roles, but generally outside that realm in markets without the intensity of television and film roles the rules of thumb i stated are applicable.

for whom?

90% of people who need a headshot are actors. Have you looked at a playbill lately to see what theater actors are using? And models don't even necessarily use a headshot.

Models often use beauty shots, lifestyle, etc... as the cover of their ZED cards. The rules you stated were true in like 1985, but headshots have evolved and what you are stating just isn't correct information.

Since i have been involved in theater my entire life (granddaughter of a theater critic, photographer for several companies) i think I can back up what i am stating with the knowledge that I have the chops to understand the industry.

Star wrote:
90% of people who need a headshot are actors. Have you looked at a playbill lately to see what theater actors are using? And models don't even necessarily use a headshot.

we can agree to disagree but that is incorrect.  but again, your perspective is coming from a major market that includes a fashion base and an actor on every corner.  however, that isn't all inclusive in every instance throughout the land.  what applies in a major market does not apply in in smaller markets.

you can certainly test what is displayed (through the many models displaying headshots) by reviewing the imaging from mid-major agencies such as donna balwin - denver, or helen wells - indianapolis where the rules of thumb i stated are applied.

it is also the first shot an agency needs/requires from a "new face" as more often than not clients will choose those from a pull for go-sees based on the headshot.

291 wrote:
we can agree to disagree but that is incorrect.  but again, your perspective is coming from a major market that includes a fashion base and an actor on every corner.  however, that isn't all inclusive in every instance throughout the land.  what applies in a major market does not apply in in smaller markets.

you can certainly test what is displayed (through the many models displaying headshots) by reviewing the imaging from mid-major agencies such as donna balwin - denver, or helen wells - indianapolis where the rules of thumb i stated are applied.

it is also the first shot an agency needs/requires from a "new face" as more often than not clients will choose those from a pull for go-sees based on the headshot.

donna baldwin, 4 people no smiles (one kinda smile, but 3 definitely not smiling). Many of the images used as headshots are just not workable and I bet if you looked though you could tell who is and is not working



the second agency you mentioned

1. also sells their photographic services
2. has a lot of problem headshots
3. 25% or more are not smiling, nor looking inviting

I have to ask, do you think that because someone is in Denver they shouldn't get the headshots that are seen as Industry standard in NYC, los Angeles, Chicago et all? It is better if they look dated? Do you really think the casting people don't know what is in vogue for headshots and are not aware if someone is submitting inappropriately?

btw- if you want to see working Denver actors look no further
http://www.denvercenter.org/aboutdenver … ctors.aspx

Star wrote:
donna baldwin, 4 people no smiles (one kinda smile, but 3 definitely not smiling).

give it a rest, star.  http://www.donnabaldwin.com/female/fema … ory=Female

Star wrote:

a lot of that isn't true. Trying going to nowcasting and really looking through commercial headshots for actors to better understand what a standard headshot should include.

Smiling- not really necessary. It depends on who you want to portray. many actors have several headshots and submit certain ones depending on the casting.

Auditioning for the part of a sexy but tough NYC cop, use something like this



Auditioning to be a sweet milf use this


Violin playing genius



crazy fundamentalist


and so on and so forth. The point of a headshot is to get the actor work, but to do that the casting director has to see them in the roll even before the first audition. The only real rule for expression is LOOK IN THE CAMERA. I have never seen a successful headshot that didn't do that.

Beyond that you need to see the entire face, 2 eyes, the mouth, no hiding behind hair.

The background shouldn't be busy, nor too colorful (like a bright bright green,) there are exceptions but they are exceptions.

You should look comfortable.

There are certain clothes to wear, etc... I made a detailed posting once upon a time. People can search if they like.

Very well said, especially since my girlfriend is a commercial talent agent in Los Angeles and that's what she looks for in a headshot.  It's how I approach shooting headshots.

291 wrote:

give it a rest, star.  http://www.donnabaldwin.com/female/fema … ory=Female

30\8= 36.66% of the images are non smiling

First 30 alone has 8 non smiling images. Give it a rest.

Reminder, the headshots on that page could not be correct and not be getting the actors work.

Your rules are wrong. Look at the headshots from the Denver theater I posted earlier to see real working actors in the area and you will see what a real working actors headshots look like. This is not your field. This is not what you do. You are wrong in what you think a headshot is.

From my ipad

Star wrote:
The point of a headshot is to get the actor work, but to do that the casting director has to see them in the roll even before the first audition.

BINGO!!!

I used to do a lot of headshots for character actors in NYC. Most of them were working actors. The key was that they showed something that would result in the casting director saying "I want to see this person".

That's the point of commercial/acting headshots. Whatever does that? Is what works. And that applies to ALL castings, not just acting castings.

Mi Do wrote:




Headshots of the future....
(by me, of course!)

Very cool.

Star wrote:

Reminder, the headshots on that page could not be correct and not be getting the actors work.

Exactly. Just because a headshot is up there doesn't mean the actor is working. I don't know how many times my gf complains about certain clients who need new headshots bc the ones they have are bad and she can't get them work.

291 wrote:
give it a rest, star.  http://www.donnabaldwin.com/female/fema … ory=Female

Star wrote:
30\8= 36.66% of the images are non smiling

First 30 alone has 8 non smiling images. Give it a rest.

Reminder, the headshots on that page could not be correct and not be getting the actors work.

Your rules are wrong. Look at the headshots from the Denver theater I posted earlier to see real working actors in the area and you will see what a real working actors headshots look like. This is not your field. This is not what you do. You are wrong in what you think a headshot is.

From my ipad

star, you keep going on about actors and the link i provided was for models.  quit referring to actors in this argument and quit trying to "act" as knowing what is required for "models" in markets/genres you obviously know nothing about. 

you should give some realization that models do in fact need headshots and they are not just exclusive for actors.  to think otherwise shows more about your lack of knowledge than mine.  where a headshot for a model is most needed (commercial lifestyle) you will notice the most effective are those following the requirements i stated.

you also seem to be hung up on the "smile" requirement.  here is where that becomes important, it's a pleasing introduction.  most often when a new model is accepted they don't have a portfolio and there's nothing to present/leave behind to the client.  the first step is usually, "get him/her a headshot so we can have the client add it to their agency book until we can start building a book/comp."

the reason for that works two-fold.  one, it keeps the agency line of communication open to clients.  the introduction of a new model provides a reason to stay front and center with the client rather than being out of sight - out of mind.  it's how agencies hustle for business.  two, it begins the process for the new model to start building comfort/confidence at the client level and they don't walk into the introduction go-see empty handed.

for the more established model working commercial lifestyle more often than not you'll see how the rules i stated have been applied to the headshot on their comp.

what you fail to realize is modeling is local, agencies serve local clients.  most of those local clients are conservative in nature and their messaging follows that form.  with that, sure there may be instances where a more brooding fashion shot might be most applicable when directed to local boutiques, etc., but the vast majority of local work is commercial lifestyle.  that's the bread and butter of agency billings, that's what the agencies in mid-major markets are hustling.

that is the essence in the model headshot.  are they required for other genres?  not really, hence why in terms of a "model' headshot where they become most important they should be done correctly per how they will be presented for gaining assignments.  that's no different than any other genre presentation, as in getting the imaging done right.

is there a difference in an actor headshot and model headshot?  absolutely.  and considering that difference was the basis for certain requirements for models who might choose to work in a genre where a headshot can be used for competing via freelance vs the agencies. 

this is also an across the board discussion applicable to more than just major markets (where models are more established and client standards are more wide and varied).  what is applicable in the major market backyard does not mean it is applicable in mid-majors.  with that said however, one would be hard-pressed to find an established commercial model in any market not presenting what i stated.