LA StarShooter wrote:
You look awesome but basically I'm doing photographers and llamas. So Sorry.

Thank you anyway, its been an entertaining read! 

Wysiwyg Photography wrote:
sure.

Sorry, I almost missed you. I want to reiterate that websites are very cheap for photographers these days. You can get a slideshow playing one for around $25 for a year, with lots of storage.

When I clicked on your website I went to Model Insider and I went: they must have a real cool slideshow. I didn't experience it. Even tumblr is better in that sense. You can just scroll down as you know. If you make it quick, people can look at even more of your work.

I think you have good conceptual ideas, however, often the execution is not excellent. I don't think you're getting models who can really ramp it up for you. Also, the lighting. I think natural light is great and there was one that I thought you had a wicked shadow running across the sand from the naked model, posed on the right. But overall, I feel that models could be better lit and I know this a stylistic choice, and also I think sometimes the human figure is diminished in shots of landscapes in some art nudes, instead of the scenery framing their extraordinary beauty.  It's a challenge, I know.

I saw a reflection shot that could have benefited from speedlights or monolights.

Now you may report that you have sold all your nudes for millions of dollars. The market is always right? 

$20,000 old pro but come here and you would starve if you went full-time.

Jorge Kreimer wrote:
Sure, I'll play this fantasy.

https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/p … 5#28967485 18+ is an example of an edgy art nude. Love the bracelet. It give oomphs and breaks up the flow of skin. The pose is excellent. Her eyes are dark pits but this has a powerful fashion feel all over it.

I liked that you linked to tumblr. It was easy to scroll the images and you have a lot of shots up there.

I saw some paid models on there, and hope you didn't have to pay them as you're just too good. They may have paid you. I hope so.

I think you could reduce your portfolio considerably here and still attract interest. I also clicked on the web for the PhotoVogue site.

I don't think your portfolio is strong in editorial and in fashion. I mean you do have fashion in your tumblr and but you could grow it a bit but I would prefer a section put aside for fashion called "The Fashion style of ..  ." Branding. Some of the nudes are awesome. You could be bold and name them: "Icon 1", "Icon 2" or "Kreimer Icon 1" or "Jewelry plus model" People will them naturally look for the jewelry.

After all,  this is L.A.

If you're not a pro: WHY? It's time to introduce yourself to agencies if you haven't already.

$60,000 per annum. You're-almost-a-monster-now-Award.  The studio rental is eating you alive. Everything is eating you alive. You're almost very good. If you don't become great the sheriff is going to kick you out of the house. The foreclosure notice is in the mail.

LA StarShooter wrote:

-snip-

Now you may report that you have sold all your nudes for millions of dollars. The market is always right? 

$20,000 old pro but come here and you would starve if you went full-time.

Thank you very much for the critique..

and man.. if only I sold my stuff for "millions"

I have sold some stuff, but definitely not for millions (only "hundreds")... I don't think I have even broken the 'thousands' mark on my stuff.. which your critique might help me bump me up to that 'next level'.

The important thing I look for is composition.. so If I have that, then there is hope for improvement

LA StarShooter wrote:

https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/28863246

I think this one, presuming I linked to the right one, shows you advancing down the right path, but with some issues. The cleavage region looks too hot. It looks like you were trying to light the hair around the cleavage which you did a great job on, but you also zapped the cleavage and she is lit up there like a neon sign. A suggestion: two hair lights with snoots? Now you may have just pushed highlights up, but I think it's a directional lighting issue. Did you consider also placing a strobe about four or five from around her feet and bouncing light up so he lighting values are not so far off on the figure? It's good to have variance in lighting, particularly if you want a dramatic look but I think the lack of lighting on the legs because it isn't in show doesn't quite make it.

There was a woman who did her own makeup and hair Rus or something and technically I thought that was your most successful shot.

Photoshop. I think eyes and some faces were just a bit over-shopped.

$40,000 GOOD:you're good, but we are flooded with good and how can you become great is the burning economic question.

I believe you will solve all technical lighting and post-work issues. I also believe you should bring your muse back into the studio and try and do a comp card for her and work out solving those issues with her. She really is great.

Thank you for the very useful input -

part of the issue is that what you usually see on Model Mayhem is "culls" from series that I have out for publication or work shot for portfolio development, or for practicing certain techniques or genres.

In the case of the image of Yvonne -  this was lit with a Mola Setti (white). I like this approach because I like the falloff, and the definition of the body that you loose with too much light bouncing around.  Actually the hot spot was an unpleasant surprise - I *rarely* get these with the mola softlights....

I am lighting most of my work with a single light - there again the Mola Setti or Euro.  I am working on getting that technique the way I want it before adding back into the mix separate  fill /hair / rim / kicker lights.   

As you have well said, I am a work in progress -  after shooting photojournalism, travel, nature and wildlife since the late 60s,  my foray into studio work with models began in April of 2011.....

Cheers 

Select Models wrote:
Cool... OK...

https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/p … 3#19242723 shows that you can frame quite well. You don't always have to shoot from the way down and up and foreshorten their bodies. You have a tendency to do that. I feel this has the potential to be a great photo. She's advancing through the waves. The light is nice but I am not sure about your processing of her face or if the lens wasn't sharp enough. Her left side forehead has a highlight of light and I went and looked and wondered: Has that highlight been processed so that the shadow line is uneven or its it just the hairline shadow meeting that natural highlight? 

Here's what I think you should consider. Layering. Take that figure and give it omph. I so wish the breeze had cooperated and blown that hair out bit. It's gorgeous hair. I think you can make the photo more intense in layering.

You have a great studio by the way. Just awesome and this is what I found interesting, you promote the studio, a wonderful studio, and you promote your great gatherings, and your wonderful trips, and you're drinking on cruises and you're forming life long friendships and. . . whatever happened to your photography?

You're shooting not the best kind of models. They are nice. They are happy. But better a drama queen who's got it. Better a model who snarls: "Where's the food," but when you roll she's just starts rocking and sends gorgeous particles waves right into your lens and you think your eyes are bleeding from the encounter with intense modelling beauty and her legs are long. 

You shot a model who was really rocking a look. She was next to a truck. You had nice colours to play with and you instincts were good and then what do you do? You went down, maybe kneeled, and foreshorten her and what I thought was not a good angle. Yeah, let's make her legs shorter because we prefer dwarves? Oh, no. Oh, no. She had so much potential. So much. She could have had a great full-length portrait and she might have got a mag cover for one of those car cult or bike cult magazines. 

I found strange things. A mermaid by a khoi pond. Come on. Put her back in the ocean. That's where they are happy? 

You have 200 photos and you're a veteran and you don't have a website? A nice website so models can see fine work and easily review it in a slideshow. Is it against the law in Upland? Why haven't you organised the 200 photos into theme folders on MM?


I know, you're busy collecting the money for trips, for group model shoots, but this review is really about your photography, which I think you may have forgotten about.

I think you need to work on your angles. I think you're good enough to bang shoots right out of the camera, with little processing. Just put a little more time into the setup.

I'm sure you have better photos but this is what you showed me. I think you would make money in L.A. with your group shoots, going down to Mexico's fine beaches, drinking and shooting. You do have some good shots in there but it's overwhelmed but lots of under-performance.

If you up for headshots, fashion work, commercial, based on what you displayed, how would you roll? This is not about renting out a studio empire to photographers.

$40,000 per annum.  GOOD:you're good, but we are flooded with good and how can you become great is the burning economic question.

Paul Tirado Photography wrote:
Take a look and let me know. Thanks

You have a website with a section for events but nothing is in that section. Why not just take it out? Until you have some events? 

You label yourself as a fashion photographer, but your mag credits don't quite add up to that.  I think a flaw with some of your fashion work is the background. In some shots it's solid and a bit dull. Just some.

Congratulations on being a photography director for Hombre Magazine. I think men are lucky to have you shoot them--I think you show some flair with men in the shots in your portfolio. I imagined Hombre soaks up a lot of time, hence it's difficult to line up a lot of fashion work? 

I don't feel you're quite executing your concepts. Maybe you feel rushed:

https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/14032796 18+ is a photo that I think could have been even more powerful. The makeup kit on the table is really just a mess of stuff and it detracts rather than adds. Also, you can see a lot of the back down to the legs but in the mirror she is cut off higher. On the left buttock lactite? Or stretch marks? NO! You were so rushed that makeup couldn't be applied? No time in post to fix it? Those magazine deadlines are killing you?  It looks like you did a little photoshop on her face though?

The shot is a great idea but maybe you don't have to time to fully execute the concept. You do have good ideas! You can shoot! And light, but the drama is missing.

I am just going to review you on the basis of your photographic work. Overall: solid, with some flair but doesn't really pop. There was a headress of snakes and it was good on the model but the shot was not as good as it could be.

Maybe you shoot models at house with a pool. Just get out of the studio environment so you play with a different palette of background colours.

$60,000 per annum. You're-almost-a-monster-now-Award.  The studio rental is eating you alive. Everything is eating you alive. You're almost very good. If you don't become great the sheriff is going to kick you out of the house. The foreclosure notice is in the mail.

Andrea Cronshaw wrote:
Yes please.

https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/p … 8#28174648 is very, very good, bordering on great. It set me up with an expectation that greatness is just a click away and then I went, "Not there yet."

I went to your blog. I think you should put up a website. I hated clicking on the pages and loading different pages of your blog.

You have shots that don't really evoke fashion on MM and I think you should delete them and, on the profile drop weddings and pets, and even that you're a photography student about to do her honours. Pitch your passion. On your blog what you thought of as hot pants I thought of as Walmart horrors.

So, the blog is a mix of stuff and it would be preferable to have a website with sections for themes and categories and no hot pants. 

Think about processing from your blog a good shot of a male model and female model holding some fabric. Wow. It has potential. The male model who's lean pale chest is exposed has a necklace that breaks up that block of skin and now we have ignition Houston. Tonally, I think it's photoshop time for the image. Layering. It's work that says you're a fashion photographer and you're so lazy it's not on MM. You don't think models deserve to see it. You work on that. You polish that up and you'll have models from all over the world wanting you to shoot twith you.

Have you not developed your critical abilities to recognise your great work, or work of great potential, from what should be discards? 

You deserve your own category.

You actually sold a photo to a collector. You could sell many more.

Here's your award: Come to L.A. and you would be living in your car but it would be a nice car with helllo kitty bags and it would have a fridge in the boot, and it would have lots of marijuana in the glove box, and the cell phone would be charged, and it would ring, and some mag would want you and you could go to a hotel and it was that one photo that you worked on, after some crazy dude told you to on the crazy Internet, that got you the gig, and your award is $30,000 per annum because you're The SHOCKER. You shock us when you're good and you shock us a lot because you put irrelevant discards up for the whole world to see. After you've slept in your car a few times you'll become big.

GMM Photography wrote:
I'll have a go at this one. I've already started gathering the cardboard for my new shelter under the 405.

I feel that you don't know what you really want to shoot for a living or what would make you money. Sometimes at the Old Zoo in Griffith Park you have models that don't work well for you.

I think with Ashleigh Mir you were at that Paramount Ranch shoot starting to enter the territory of fashion.

To give an example of focus, I went to your website and then was a statement about emailing for rates but there was no statement of what you do. That's important. Crucial.

If you can get better models you might get interest in art but I think you need implied and nude to really get going economically.

I found your work interesting to look at but I didn't feel that you burnished the presence of models, generally speaking.

$10,000 per annum.  Maybe you've-got-steam award. Still part-time but starting to occasionally dazzle. But can you afford new tires? The roads are tough on cars here.

LA StarShooter wrote:

https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/p … 8#28174648 is very, very good, bordering on great. It set me up with an expectation that greatness is just a click away and then I went, "Not there yet."

I went to your blog. I think you should put up a website. I hated clicking on the pages and loading different pages of your blog.

You have shots that don't really evoke fashion on MM and I think you should delete them and, on the profile drop weddings and pets, and even that you're a photography student about to do her honours. Pitch your passion. On your blog what you thought of as hot pants I thought of as Walmart horrors.

So, the blog is a mix of stuff and it would be preferable to have a website with sections for themes and categories and no hot pants. 

Think about processing from your blog a good shot of a male model and female model holding some fabric. Wow. It has potential. The male model who's lean pale chest is exposed has a necklace that breaks up that block of skin and now we have ignition Houston. Tonally, I think it's photoshop time for the image. Layering. It's work that says you're a fashion photographer and you're so lazy it's not on MM. You don't think models deserve to see it. You work on that. You polish that up and you'll have models from all over the world wanting you to shoot twith you.

Have you not developed your critical abilities to recognise your great work, or work of great potential, from what should be discards? 

You deserve your own category.

You actually sold a photo to a collector. You could sell many more.

Here's your award: Come to L.A. and you would be living in your car but it would be a nice car with helllo kitty bags and it would have a fridge in the boot, and it would have lots of marijuana in the glove box, and the cell phone would be charged, and it would ring, and some mag would want you and you could go to a hotel and it was that one photo that you worked on, after some crazy dude told you to on the crazy Internet, that got you the gig, and your award is $30,000 per annum because you're The SHOCKER. You shock us when you're good and you shock us a lot because you put irrelevant discards up for the whole world to see. After you've slept in your car a few times you'll become big.

Thanks a lot You made me laugh, smile and think. I know I haven't found myself in this photography world and I agree I am still trying to work out what is 'good' and what isn't. I appreciate the time you took to look at everything and say so much.

Glen Berry wrote:
Ok. I'm in the rare mood to play along with one of these reviews. This might be interesting.

And you're playing with a tiger, because I prowled through the jungle of your photos. Occasionally, I growled at the model. "Are you going to eat me," she said sweetly. "Why are you so small," I asked. She said "I, I, don't know, why I wasn't put right in front of the waterwall, cause I was in the mood to romp and play but he wanted to get higher because he was really interested in the whole waterfall. It's nice don't you think. It's manmade."

Maybe you should have sent her home because I think you liked the waterfall better than her. I think you can't get excited about the models because you're cutoff from civilisation apparently and there's a shortage of models in your area and you can't get a fashionista.  So, you tell us.

You're an artist but I didn't feel it. It was commercial shooting without the pizzaz. Your website has ads and I understand being an artist is tough but I don't think your galleries should have ads running underneath.

On occasion you had me excited. You had this splendid drapery fabric, red and she is lying down and you're higher up shooting down at her, and it's a good place. Nicely picked location and yet it is not great. You're not mastering the photo into outstanding. You're not thinking it through, the entire pose. The processing.

I don't think you're bad, but while I applaud your spirit of adventure and you do explore processing and try ghostly images, composition and pose, you don't quite tie it together. But you're exhibiting in your town.

But this is about coming to L.A. They want hot here.

$20,000 old pro but come here and you would starve if you went full-time.

LA StarShooter wrote:

I feel that you don't know what you really want to shoot for a living or what would make you money. Sometimes at the Old Zoo in Griffith Park you have models that don't work well for you.

I think with Ashleigh Mir you were at that Paramount Ranch shoot starting to enter the territory of fashion.

To give an example of focus, I went to your website and then was a statement about emailing for rates but there was no statement of what you do. That's important. Crucial.

If you can get better models you might get interest in art but I think you need implied and nude to really get going economically.

I found your work interesting to look at but I didn't feel that you burnished the presence of models, generally speaking.

$10,000 per annum.  Maybe you've-got-steam award. Still part-time but starting to occasionally dazzle. But can you afford new tires? The roads are tough on cars here.

Thank you for taking the time and looking not only at my mm account but my website as well. I have a to agree 100% that I need to sit down and revamp that statement and good advice all around.

Holly Summers wrote:
I'd love your oppinion

This photo sings quite well:

https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/p … 5#28836295

On your nudes, the sheer fabric ones. You have a great athletic body. I would like to see the expression a little different but still, I think you could make it as a nude model.

You have a potentially electric presence. I think nudes work so well with a sheer fabric. I would like to see some different processing, some locations for the implied and nude work, some dramatic lighting. I think you could book some work and all you need to do is add great quality work to the portfolio and then you establish your website and you're rocking. Your MM profile doesn't need your warning scammers about your father, an attorney. Keep it to business. Be warm and welcoming. You may be able to pick up fitness work but I think your metier and moolah moments will be nudes.

$40,000 GOOD:you're good, but we are flooded with good and how can you become great is the burning economic question.

LA StarShooter wrote:
Intriguing. I suspect there is a repressed glamour photographer in you just waiting to claw his way out. At night he's tunnelling through your mind, shouting, "Kill the gold paint/white plaster stuff. Let me loose." He broke out of the asylum of your mind on one photo and just took over. I think he knocked you out. The Vargas and Candace photo is my case for you becoming a glamour photographer with an art edge. Yeah. You can see her pubic hairy region and yet her expression and interaction with the Vargas lifts it right out of glamour into your own special turf. It's you starting to rock, you wild crazy man.

You're so tame the way  with your regular stuff you smother female beauty and that white paint or plaster or whatever goo it is trying to enter them while they work for you. I know it's not that bad. But: NO, I SAY!!!! 

Pour the art into glamour and I think you're in business. Forget urns. Say after me: I don't know what an urn is, and infrared photography, I've never heard of it. I need to look at Vargas but bring my artistic vision which soars beyond that silly strange thing: infrared. Next you'll be saying I should smother a model with plaster and gold paint. NO! I am going to go to the bank with glamour art nudes. Yeah."

You get two different awards which befits someone with a multiple personality disorder. The Suppressed guy, who breaks out, we will Eddie Superstar. He makes Terry Richardson look like a naughty schoolboy.

And then there's you. You go first.

$1000 per annum.  Stop doing crack and meth. It means that you may have one really good shot in that portfolio, but, baby, you're in trouble.  Your car is about to get repossessed. See, sleeping in your car is not fun when they are towing you away. Put the pipe down!

Eddie Superstar: Time to take over Eddie. $60,000 per annum. You can do it Eddie, baby. You're-almost-a-monster-now-Award. The studio rental is eating you alive. Everything is eating you alive and there's this crazy guy in your head who wants to smother models with plaster and gold paint and call art. But you do drugs so you can't hear him because you're art with capital A, Eddie Superstar. You're almost very good. If you don't become great the sheriff is going to kick you out of the house. The foreclosure notice is in the mail.

Go Eddie Superstar.

Do you read crystal balls too.....don't do the drugs but I do have multiple traumatic brain injuries... Too many head injuries jumping out of planes.  People hire me to be plastered with makeup - will change my MM handle to "surpressed Eddie." keep up the great and creative writing....thanks

Brad albertson wrote:
Where do you think I would fit in?

You have a great physique. I think you look older than 25, in lot of the photos, closer to 40 and that's tough. It's the way you were photographed I think. So far you're more interesting shot at a forty-five degree angle than straight on, and that is because I think the photographers are not framing you and angling you right.

That tattoo at times needs to be covered up with makeup. So you think a jean manufacturer paying you to show off the jeans wants your fearless tattoo on your chest?  There is makeup that can cover tattoos up. And you should have some shots for your book without that. You should bring the makeup with you.

For fashion we need to see you in great threads. You're going to have to buy a wardrobe, stunning boots, etc. At times during the day you should look like you're ready to walk on set. 

For fitness modelling you need some shots that make you look like a god of muscle.

Modelling is tough for men. You need to practice posing and expressions.

$5000 Part-timer.  It's great-that-you're-keeping your day job-award. You can do this part-time and you may be doing it part-time. You can pick up extra work in a movie, and, you'll get nude offers.  But to score fitness you need to know the field and to score fashion you need to know fashion. It's a dream so far, not an educated chase for glory.

LA StarShooter wrote:
Here's some more: $100,000 per annum. Shark alert! Oh my God, you could eat anyone alive it seems but still you're not elite. You're making the cash but for how long? You're not quite a flavour, but you're eating well for now.

Just great work but you know that. You just want more publicity and that smart and you're just so, so smart.

You have a definite style and it attracts great models and it is really working. Congratulations.

Well... at least you made my wife laugh!  With MY expences... 100 grand has me on foodstamps!!  ;-)

MB-2 wrote:
Great critiques.  I'd like to know what I'm worth.

You're over processing but you have glorious moments. You come across as a real pro because the website is there, and you fly through the images and there's a lot of hot work. On some images I thought the eyes were just pushing the boundaries of believability and then going into fantasy and the skin too, but again, you're great.

Great poses, great expressions. $100,000 Shark alert! Oh my God, you could eat anyone alive it seems but still you're not elite. You're making the cash but for how long? You're not quite a flavour, but you're eating well for now.

I will resume this tomorrow evening. I want to wish everyone a good night!

LA StarShooter wrote:

You're over processing but you have glorious moments. You come across as a real pro because the website is there, and you fly through the images and there's a lot of hot work. On some images I thought the eyes were just pushing the boundaries of believability and then going into fantasy and the skin too, but again, you're great.

Great poses, great expressions. $100,000 Shark alert! Oh my God, you could eat anyone alive it seems but still you're not elite. You're making the cash but for how long? You're not quite a flavour, but you're eating well for now.

I will resume this tomorrow evening. I want to wish everyone a good night!

Wow, thank you!

I just put the website together, so I'm glad to hear you like it!  I'm working on making my post work cleaner as well: pushing towards unreal, but in a less obvious way.

Thanks again for the critique. Much appreciated!

LA StarShooter wrote:
You anticipated well that I would have zero dollars for you. You have six photos on you MM portfolio. My apologies if I missed a folder. Went to your website. Nothing was there. Nothing! I don't understand. Your website is "MY Panties," and you have no panties. But you're a guy so. . . You want to have panties? See how confusing things are?

That's subpar work on your MM portfolio. That's why you get this: 0.  You'll never make it here award. It means that your work couldn't sell in Los Angeles.

But you have nothing on your website to sell. Maybe it's just not working?

Really disappointed in the lack of an attempt at humor in our review. At least there are plenty of gorgeous beach shots on your port to enjoy still. And since we won't be able to sell our work in LA, we'd like to apply to your assistant position. $50 a day should be enough to afford the tank of gas it will require to get to the location and back. But we will need to crash on your couch. Sorry but we snore a bit as well, if it bothers you we know a really nice pier you can sleep under. That way you'll also be closer to work. And you'll have plenty of studio lighting to keep you warm in the cold LA winter nights.

Also for the record, it's 8 photos not 6. Any more than 8 and we'll have to charge you. And this site is llama mayhem yet you are not a llama, do you see how confusing that also is for yourself. Don't worry we'll explain it all to you one day.

LA StarShooter wrote:

You have a great physique. I think you look older than 25, in lot of the photos, closer to 40 and that's tough. It's the way you were photographed I think. So far you're more interesting shot at a forty-five degree angle than straight on, and that is because I think the photographers are not framing you and angling you right.

That tattoo at times needs to be covered up with makeup. So you think a jean manufacturer paying you to show off the jeans wants your fearless tattoo on your chest?  There is makeup that can cover tattoos up. And you should have some shots for your book without that. You should bring the makeup with you.

For fashion we need to see you in great threads. You're going to have to buy a wardrobe, stunning boots, etc. At times during the day you should look like you're ready to walk on set. 

For fitness modelling you need some shots that make you look like a god of muscle.

Modelling is tough for men. You need to practice posing and expressions.

$5000 Part-timer.  It's great-that-you're-keeping your day job-award. You can do this part-time and you may be doing it part-time. You can pick up extra work in a movie, and, you'll get nude offers.  But to score fitness you need to know the field and to score fashion you need to know fashion. It's a dream so far, not an educated chase for glory.

Brad albertson wrote:

Thank you a lot for the great advice! I am just starting out and I needed that!

LA StarShooter wrote:

You have a head shot of a child actor who had a big part in a big film. Wow. That would turn heads here. A lot of actors and actresses need great headshots in this town.

I went to your website and it was more pleasing than MM because it just had a commercial focus. I think your talents are wide-ranging as in here:
https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/p … 6#25653686 that you shot for a hauture collection. But for L.A. you could pick up work in headshots, it's just need more examples than what you're currently flourishing.

$60,000 per annum: You're-almost-a-monster-now-Award. The studio rental is eating you alive. Everything is eating you alive. You're almost very good. If you don't become great the sheriff is going to kick you out of the house. The foreclosure notice is in the mail.

Thank you very much for the time and effort you have put into these crtiiques.
Fun, a bit wacky, and quite insightful. Now I'm off to work to ward off that foreclosure notice...

Egle Damulyte wrote:
curious

You hover on the border of greatness already. The blog is not worthy of a potentially great model. It doesn't promote you. It needs to have shots of you smoking holes in camera lens. An entry on getting ready to go to Berlin or Paris is valid. Stuff about your mother's shoes and Breakfast Tiffany's isn't going to sell you. That is only appropriate when you're booking big campaigns and everything you do is responded to with the word "great," and after the while you start think that you may be really interesting because all you hear is "Great. Fabulous."

I think you have the look for "print", for campaigns, but with this caveat, you don't really know until you present yourself to top agencies. A fashion model sometimes makes her mark at 16 and thus you're going too slow because a model's working life can be short and brief but glorious. 6 months and your portfolio is small and you don't have an agency? Life is lovely. Modelling is like a dream? 

Where is your passion?  Replace that blog with a website promoting you. Promote yourself. Here's your profile entry rewritten. You're no longer just interested in print but will consider anything.

"Vogue. Paris. London. New York. Please contact me with concepts and plans for shoots that will give my portfolio shots Vogue-style and also campaign work. About me? See the photos, please. They should tell you everything. MUA is important."

It's okay to make them interested. You can't be fooled and you have to project confidence and self-worth. You can still be sweet and a kid who has dolls, and "Hello Kitty" stuff, but you keep "Hello Kitty," a secret, right? Because Dolce and Gabbana don't want to know about that, and fashion designers like it if you are interested in fashion and can talk about it with them. Hint: YOU ARE FASHION.

Post a casting call in Berlin if you can get a train to there. Those Germans make great lenses and they also have a lot of GREAT PHOTOGRAPHERS. See hot it works? Line up 5 or six shoots over a three-day weekend. Go to Agencies there when you have your book and comp card done. I know the challenges of travel for you, but I think you may just have the look.

$60,000 Photographer and model: You're-almost-a-monster-now-Award. You don't get elite because of that blog. And you haven't booked work yet but you could run hot in a town like L.A. if you have the look and if understand that it is not dreaming that pays, but doing that pays.

LA StarShooter wrote:
https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/p … 0#28884850 shows that you have potential and so do two other images. The rest I think could be considered for deletion.

You need some more shoots under your belt and so this rating is just based on your very small portfolio.

In better pictures a great range of expressions, looks and poses is vital for your future as a model. Photographers can take a little longer to develop as their career span is usually much longer than a model's. Usually. You need to get out of the gate fast.

I don't think you should pay anybody to photograph you yet. Instead make sure you bring makeup to each shoot. Spend the money you would spend on a wardrobe on killer wardrobe. Boots, mid-calf, etc. short dresses to emphasize the long legs. You need on shoots to get great full-length shots. Tell the photographer this. Once you build up shots that show ability, get a pro to do the book/comp cards but see if you can get him to drop price. Starting up as professional model can be very expensive--great wardrobe and great makeup are not cheap. I think you should train yourself to do your makeup for photography so you can keep the initial shoots simple. When you do the book bring in hair and MUA. Good luck.

Also try dressing in your daily life as if you're goal is to stop traffic. Obviously practicing poses and expressions every day will great improve your chances.

You could make money in nudes but I think your ambition is fashion/commercial.
The rating only reflects now and what you have in your portfolio and I think in a few months if you're determined you'll have much better:

$500 Homeless-stop-begging award. It means that your work would have a tough time doing well here and you might become homeless. Come on, you're homeless, admit it.

Thanks.
I've always planned to have a 2nd/3rd job.

And i'll take your advice! I have another shoot friday.

LA StarShooter wrote:

Let's start with headshots. You're price is too low. You should be charging $300 bucks and provide MUA and hair for actresses. One concern with headshots is in L.A., as you know you have to keep headshots low on the photoshop scale. Fix photo issues yes, but people have to feel they are looking at someone who can fill a HD video frame and doesn't need a lot of post-work. Expressions for headshots? 

Moving into your metier, where you do magazine work and model portfolios, I think many photographers can learn from you composition, makeup and hair.  And you do tutorials for them. Some of the hair is imaginatively brilliant and you deliver in framing.

Lighting. I detected on some photos where the highlights had been too high from the strobes on the face. In your post work (and I apologize if you don't do post work it just looks very heavy at times) on one photo you went a little unreal and managed to obscure the lighting issue. So on many images I think on the face you're heavy-handed in photoshop. Eyes at times seized my eye with their over-retouching.

In many ways conceptually, you have few rivals. You really are extraordinary.   I would suggest this: Adjust the lighting or buy new lights or a different modifier. I don't think it's a bulb issue per se. Of course you could just be loading a preset that pushes highlights up?

Two: your website. It sat weird on my screen in front of MM and I had to scroll up and down to see all of an image. Maybe you have a tech issue there.

$100,000 per annum.  Shark alert! Oh my God, you could eat anyone alive it seems but still you're not elite. You're making the cash but for how long? You're not quite a flavour, but you're eating well for now.