login info join!
Forums > Model Colloquy > Models: How many of your shots should be 'usable'? Search   Reply
Photographer
PR Zone
Posts: 765
London, England, United Kingdom


Watching a recent Creative Live programme and they had on a former winner of America's Next Top Model (ANTM)

They got onto a discussion about the quality of models, how much they're worth and the gap between the different levels

The conclusion was that if you shoot a supermodel, then you'll finish with anything up to 90% of the shots taken in a sequence being 'usable'

With the ANTM winner (and other models with that level of experience/ability/natural assets), they said that the 'usable' percentage would drop to between 30% and 40%

Do any of the models on here have an opinion about what 'Uasable Shot Ratio' they'd achieve?


Usable: You're shooting for an advert/portfolio etc - how many of the 'clicks' can/are/could be converted into 'shots you could retouch and use'... IF you have a decent set up/MUA/Photographer
Oct 18 12 11:15 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Darik Datta
Posts: 118
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada


This is a horrible metric to use because it depends as much, if not more, on the photographer as it does on the model.

I think they were just making stuff up, trying to come up with a number they can assign that says how good a model you are.
Oct 18 12 11:24 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
PR Zone
Posts: 765
London, England, United Kingdom


Darik Datta wrote:
...I think they were just making stuff up...

I'm not so sure. It 'resonated' with me, because we organise big shooting events around once a month (MEGASHOOT) and it gives you an opportunity to work with 8 models or more in a single day.

I always know when a model is 'on it' from the moment we start shooting...  And the Delete/Overhaul/'Light Retouch'/'Perfect as is' decisions when editing after seem to bear that out

Shot a catalogue with 9 models a while back (nothing fancy - honest!) and I noticed with one of the models that she was totally oblivious to the 'beep' for focus, 'click' of the shutter AND the burst of a set of Bowens going off. She would randomly change pose whenever she thought it was a good idea - shot or not :-)

Last weekend, we had 2 professional dancers (who happened to be trained actresses and part time models) and OMG... Shot after shot was usable. They just DROPPED into the shoot.

Does that make sense?

Oct 18 12 11:33 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Darik Datta
Posts: 118
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada


PR Zone wrote:
Shot a catalogue with 9 models a while back (nothing fancy - honest!) and I noticed with one of the models that she was totally oblivious to the 'beep' for focus, 'click' of the shutter AND the burst of a set of Bowens going off. She would randomly change pose whenever she thought it was a good idea - shot or not :-)

Last weekend, we had 2 professional dancers (who happened to be trained actresses and part time models) and OMG... Shot after shot was usable. They just DROPPED into the shoot.

Does that make sense?

Totally makes sense and I do think there's some truth to it. But what I'm saying is, in the digital age, the style of the photographer has a huge impact on this as well. And then there is the photog / model chemistry which I know for me has a big effect on the number of shots I shoot and the ratio of good shots.

I think there is some validity to the idea, but its oversimplified and IMO a bad way to rate a model. I'm generally more concerned with how quickly and reliably I can get the shot I'm looking for than I am with how good my rejects are.

Oct 18 12 11:36 am  Link  Quote 
Model
Chad Sterling
Posts: 38
College Station, Texas, US


PR Zone wrote:
I'm not so sure. It 'resonated' with me, because we organise big shooting events around once a month (MEGASHOOT) and it gives you an opportunity to work with 8 models or more in a single day.

I always know when a model is 'on it' from the moment we start shooting...  And the Delete/Overhaul/'Light Retouch'/'Perfect as is' decisions when editing after seem to bear that out

Shot a catalogue with 9 models a while back (nothing fancy - honest!) and I noticed with one of the models that she was totally oblivious to the 'beep' for focus, 'click' of the shutter AND the burst of a set of Bowens going off. She would randomly change pose whenever she thought it was a good idea - shot or not :-)

Last weekend, we had 2 professional dancers (who happened to be trained actresses and part time models) and OMG... Shot after shot was usable. They just DROPPED into the shoot.

Does that make sense?

Aren't you answering your own question? There are too many uncontrollable variables to get an accurate "30-40%" or "90%" range of statistics. Do higher end and more experienced models know how to position themselves better in front of a lens? Of course. But you can't draw a models output ratio neglecting photographer individuality.

Oct 18 12 11:38 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
LMG Images
Posts: 673
Nashville, Tennessee, US


Chad Sterling wrote:
Aren't you answering your own question? There are too many uncontrollable variables to get an accurate "30-40%" or "90%" range of statistics. Do higher end and more experienced llamas know how to position themselves better in front of a lens? Of course. But you can't draw a llamas output ratio neglecting photographer individuality.

I certainly think the photographer contributes.  Even fantastic llamas can be butchered by photographers and happy faces turn sour @ the creep factor. Some can push it back but even the best llamas shoot poorly will be shoot poorly.

Oct 18 12 11:42 am  Link  Quote 
Model
Dekilah
Posts: 4,883
Detroit, Michigan, US


When I shoot with photographers the ration varies a lot. It varies on the posing style significantly. If we are shooting a specific shot, say me in lingerie looking demure sitting in a chair, a lot of the shots may be usable and it is just a matter of narrowing it down to which is best. If we are shooting something more dynamic such as me flowing art nude poses in slow motion and the photographer capturing various moments, the ration may be less simply because there are transitions. In that case there is good and bad. The bad is that you may get many shots that just look too awkward to use, but the good is that you may catch a shot in that perfect moment that you may not have gotten otherwise. Then there are things in the middle such as static art nude poses where I take a pose and they shoot all around me at different angles. In this case it is most likely that only a couple of the angles may work.

And one more scenario: shooting myself. I tend to get way more usable images when I shoot myself because once I get the lighting and such right, I know exactly what I am going for. Often I only have to hit the pose once. Or I work at something with tiny details in which case all the shots might be usable, but usually I like one or two the best.

I think, aside from self portraits, it tends to be more about the model and photographer dynamic and both of their styles, plus their goal that determines the ratio of usable photos.
Oct 18 12 11:52 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Toto Photo
Posts: 2,602
Belmont, California, US


Fantastic question, wrong forum. Why do I say that? Most of the models I shoot have no idea what percentage of poses are "on" as they never see the results, but photographers' proofs certainly tell the tale.

My experience is very similar to the statistics you relate from the article, the more experienced being worth their lithesome weight in gold for giving me many more good poses to choose from.
Oct 18 12 11:59 am  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
Rays Fine Art
Posts: 6,065
New York, New York, US


PR Zone wrote:

I'm not so sure. It 'resonated' with me, because we organise big shooting events around once a month (MEGASHOOT) and it gives you an opportunity to work with 8 models or more in a single day.

I always know when a model is 'on it' from the moment we start shooting...  And the Delete/Overhaul/'Light Retouch'/'Perfect as is' decisions when editing after seem to bear that out

Shot a catalogue with 9 models a while back (nothing fancy - honest!) and I noticed with one of the models that she was totally oblivious to the 'beep' for focus, 'click' of the shutter AND the burst of a set of Bowens going off. She would randomly change pose whenever she thought it was a good idea - shot or not :-)

Last weekend, we had 2 professional dancers (who happened to be trained actresses and part time models) and OMG... Shot after shot was usable. They just DROPPED into the shoot.

Does that make sense?

Yep, and though I don't shoot in those rarefied atmospheres, I've had similar experiences.

Not to hijack the thread, but this is where a model's skill and training come in.  I've noticed that the guys who shout most loudly in the forums that there's no skill in modeling and that "The Look" is the only thing that matters tend to be the same ones that proclaim proudly that they're happy to only get one or two good shots per look.

IMHO, as always.

Oct 18 12 01:39 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Julia Francesca
Posts: 2,357
Maumee, Ohio, US


depends on the photographer tbh, at least for me. with some i seriously can't find one image i hate. with others i'm grappling to find one image i love lol.
Oct 18 12 02:06 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Dannielle Levan
Posts: 12,857
New Westminster, British Columbia, Canada


A useless metric. Portrait/model photography is a collaboration, and you cannot control every aspect of the process.
Oct 18 12 03:46 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Rob Photosby
Posts: 2,439
Brisbane, Queensland, Australia


PR Zone wrote:
Do any of the models on here have an opinion about what 'Uasable Shot Ratio' they'd achieve?

How many models have the patience to sit with the photographer and analyse a whole shoot (and even then our judgements may not co-incide)?  In my experience, the answer is somewhere between very few and none, so this part of the question is basically unanswerable.

Oct 18 12 05:56 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Rob Photosby
Posts: 2,439
Brisbane, Queensland, Australia


Percentage of useable photos = (model's skill + photographers skill) x (difficulty of shoot + other shoot factors) x (photographer's taste) x (model's taste).

Conclusion - too many subjective factors to allow reliable conclusion

That being said, I work regularly with one model where about 30% of the images are worth shortlisting and that is the high tide mark for me (we also have a sufficiently good working relationship that I let her have the raw images so that she can make her own interpretations and she tells me that she pretty much concurs with my views as to what is worth shortlisting).
Oct 18 12 06:02 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Rachael Bueckert
Posts: 1,121
Red Deer, Alberta, Canada


Caustic Disco wrote:
depends on the photographer tbh, at least for me. with some i seriously can't find one image i hate. with others i'm grappling to find one image i love lol.

Yesss

Oct 18 12 06:07 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Bravoscape
Posts: 259
Frederick, Maryland, US


Depends on the photog. I try to guarantee at least 20% usable in a TFP shoot. I usually come out with 50% depending on what the shoot is for.
Oct 19 12 02:29 am  Link  Quote 
Model
SANREYEM
Posts: 45
Den Helder, Noord-Holland, Netherlands


natural beauties of qld wrote:

How many models have the patience to sit with the photographer and analyse a whole shoot (and even then out judgements may not co-incide)?  In my experience, the answer is somewhere between very few and none, so this part of the question is basically unanswerable.

I would love to sit down next to the photographer and see every picture smile .
Maybe it's even better to be with the two us you. I ones had a photographer that used shot's that i wouldn't use....

Oct 19 12 09:54 am  Link  Quote 
Model
Zandrea
Posts: 2,306
New York, New York, US


Agreed.. it depends on the photographer and the model.

I've shot with photographers who could make a 50year old look like she was 17. Then I've shot with photographers who use harsh lights that cast unpleasant shadows and who get bad angels.

Its not always the models fault, but if we're talking primarily about if her posing is 90% usable then it can be. I've seen new models who do the three basic poses, smile, no smile, and hands on hips. However, sometimes it takes the photographer to help the model become inspired for the emotion that is required for the shoot. Its not like the model has a mirror, so we need a little direction. smile
Oct 19 12 11:26 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Toto Photo
Posts: 2,602
Belmont, California, US


Zandrea wrote:
Agreed.. it depends on the photographer and the model.

I've shot with photographers who could make a 50year old look like she was 17. Then I've shot with photographers who use harsh lights that cast unpleasant shadows and who get bad angels.

Its not always the models fault, but if we're talking primarily about if her posing is 90% usable then it can be. I've seen new models who do the three basic poses, smile, no smile, and hands on hips. However, sometimes it takes the photographer to help the model become inspired for the emotion that is required for the shoot. Its not like the model has a mirror, so we need a little direction. smile

I concur. This was what I tried to say earlier regarding experience being so useful for more useable poses per shoot. Glad to hear a model chime in!

Oct 19 12 01:37 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Art of the nude
Posts: 11,864
Olivet, Michigan, US


PR Zone wrote:
Watching a recent Creative Live programme and they had on a former winner of America's Next Top Model (ANTM)

They got onto a discussion about the quality of models, how much they're worth and the gap between the different levels

The conclusion was that if you shoot a supermodel, then you'll finish with anything up to 90% of the shots taken in a sequence being 'usable'

With the ANTM winner (and other models with that level of experience/ability/natural assets), they said that the 'usable' percentage would drop to between 30% and 40%

Do any of the models on here have an opinion about what 'Uasable Shot Ratio' they'd achieve?


Usable: You're shooting for an advert/portfolio etc - how many of the 'clicks' can/are/could be converted into 'shots you could retouch and use'... IF you have a decent set up/MUA/Photographer

I've done shoots where 90% could be used, and others where 10% could.  Depends on a lot of things, and often, the predicable things that mean nearly every shot is usable mean that none are fantastic.  Many, many, of my best shots where from sessions where 2/3 or more of the shots were totally worthless, because I was trying to do something difficult with light or focus, or because the model was doing something difficult with pose or expression.

Oct 19 12 01:44 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Neil Snape
Posts: 9,456
Paris, Île-de-France, France


I am not that good yet to get a 90% usable range. I know you asked models but can't help it.

I am confident that I get a much higher return from most models than someone else.

Yet I shoot like a maniac and a lot are waste. Frankly I could care less with digital, so I let it go.

I watched the Creative thing with Matthew, but missed this part.

It is true a good model hits it often. And it's not what the model looks like but how they know what looks good. Where as I shot a beginner the other day ( in my port still I think) and it was a hard go to get anything fluid there.
Oct 19 12 01:54 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jeff Fiore
Posts: 9,220
Pelham, New York, US


Dekilah wrote:
When I shoot with photographers the ration varies a lot. It varies on the posing style significantly. If we are shooting a specific shot, say me in lingerie looking demure sitting in a chair, a lot of the shots may be usable and it is just a matter of narrowing it down to which is best. If we are shooting something more dynamic such as me flowing art nude poses in slow motion and the photographer capturing various moments, the ration may be less simply because there are transitions. In that case there is good and bad. The bad is that you may get many shots that just look too awkward to use, but the good is that you may catch a shot in that perfect moment that you may not have gotten otherwise. Then there are things in the middle such as static art nude poses where I take a pose and they shoot all around me at different angles. In this case it is most likely that only a couple of the angles may work.

And one more scenario: shooting myself. I tend to get way more usable images when I shoot myself because once I get the lighting and such right, I know exactly what I am going for. Often I only have to hit the pose once. Or I work at something with tiny details in which case all the shots might be usable, but usually I like one or two the best.

I think, aside from self portraits, it tends to be more about the model and photographer dynamic and both of their styles, plus their goal that determines the ratio of usable photos.

Yes, it all depends on what you are shooting. When i shoot an experienced model, I get a lot more keepers and it becomes hard to pick out the best ones.

When I shoot an inexperienced model, I get a lot more "clunkers" so I only get a couple that are good. It's hand and foot poses that generally kill a shot.

When I shoot my movement images, I will shoot about 500 or more images just to get a couple I really like and experience level generally doesn't matter.

Oct 19 12 02:28 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
liddellphoto
Posts: 1,800
London, England, United Kingdom


A big part of how good a model is (for me) is how many usable frames there are. Yes you only need a few but it becomes much higher risk (and time consuming) using someone if this is the case.

Part of this is look. A better model looks good from more angles and expressions. I have noticed for some their look only 'works' in a very narrow range and this is harder to work with and means less usable frames.

Part of this is awareness. This means really listening and internalising all elements of the concept and embodying it, not just turning out model poses 101 indiscriminately (frustratingly common).
Oct 19 12 03:25 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Amelia Talon
Posts: 1,470
Los Angeles, California, US


Percentages will differ between commercial work, which works on getting 'the shot' in a couple seconds in hundreds of outfits/scenes, versus tf that might shoot an outfit to death.
Oct 19 12 04:01 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Jules NYC
Posts: 16,096
New York, New York, US


I am very convinced when a photographer is very skilled at their craft it's actually difficult to choose down to a few:)
Oct 19 12 04:09 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Elegance And Chaos
Posts: 599
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada


Keep in mind it has less to do with the number of usable shots and more about the time it takes to get "the shot" for the client.

The take away from the course you referenced should have been that a photo shoot is a collaboration between a photographer and the model. The more experienced the model and the photographer are and the more they have worked together the less time it takes to get "the shot". A  model that knows a range of poses and knows her angles is going to help the photographer get the final image a lot faster than a model that needs a lot of direction from the photographer. Most of the models on that course struggled to project emotion in front of the lens. The challenge for the photographer was to get  that some way. There is a famous shot  by Avedon of the Duke and Duchess of York (former King of England and his wife). He had to get the expression he wanted by telling them about a pup that got run over by a car. It was just a made up story but he got the reaction he wanted. A model needs to project the desired emotion and pose on cue without all the tricks on part of the photographer.

One other point which Mathew Jordon Smith, the photographer for the course, referred to was that even if you get the shot in the first frame your client is going to want you to keep shooting, so whether you get the shot in the first frame or in the 100th frame is going to be irrelevant on a commercial shoot where the objective is only to get that one shot for the advertising campaign.

Where the number of images it takes to get the shot is more important is for a look book or an editorial where you have to get a set number of images in a day. In that situation time is money and again it less about the number of usable shots but a process where you are going to get the shot for each look in a reasonable amount of time.

I still remember watching Gregory Heisler work in one of his videos. He pre-visualizes his shot and then works till he gets the composition he wants then he clicks the shutter. Typically he gets what he wants in a few frames  and sometimes one frame. Obviously every photographer has  a different process. For Gregory Heisler's processthe  model has to ask themself whether they are good enough as a model to get what the photographer wants in one shot and strive to be that good while the photographer is looking for the model with the "look" and with that level of skill.
Oct 19 12 05:15 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
AJ_In_Atlanta
Posts: 12,662
Atlanta, Georgia, US


Rays Fine Art wrote:
Yep, and though I don't shoot in those rarefied atmospheres, I've had similar experiences.

Not to hijack the thread, but this is where a model's skill and training come in.  I've noticed that the guys who shout most loudly in the forums that there's no skill in modeling and that "The Look" is the only thing that matters tend to be the same ones that proclaim proudly that they're happy to only get one or two good shots per look.

IMHO, as always.

I think you may be consfused with that, being happy to get one or two per look that are portfolio worth is not the same as getting usable images that the clients likes.  In the case of this creative live the photographer was Matthew Jordan Smith and I would suspect being good enough for his book is a far higher bar then being good enough to publish.

Second point, all that matters to the client is the "look" they are correct about that.  The clients doesn't care if it's easy or what percent of publishable images you get so long as its as many as they want and its on time.

Oct 19 12 05:17 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Select Models
Posts: 35,703
Upland, California, US


Models: How many of your shots should be 'usable'?

How bout 100% of them bein usable... those that aren't... delete'm... borat
Oct 19 12 05:50 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
-JAY-
Posts: 6,498
Las Vegas, Nevada, US


One.

Or if shooting a 6 page story: 6

Family portraits where they expect 4-8: 4-8

Boudoir with a 14 page book: 14
Oct 19 12 07:17 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
PR Zone
Posts: 765
London, England, United Kingdom


Neil Snape wrote:
...It is true a good model hits it often. And it's not what the model looks like but how they know what looks good...

Traditional 'good looks' are definitely irrelevant to achieving a killer shot

natural beauties of qld wrote:
...too many subjective factors to allow reliable conclusion... That being said, I work regularly with one model where about 30% of the images are worth shortlisting and that is the high tide mark for me

Me too.  That's EXACTLY my experience. There are some models where you 'click' and everything just works. They understand the creative you're looking to put together - and nail the poses/expressions

Rays Fine Art wrote:
..Not to hijack the thread, but this is where a model's skill and training come in...

Not hijacked at all...  This is EXACTLY what I'm focused on with this thread

Put 2 great models, 2 average ones and 2 good looking girls with no experience/aptitude in front of a range of photographers - and I think ~all the togs would come to the same conclusion...

It's not what you have (as a model) as much as how you use it

Might kick off another thread, asking models what constitutes 'good practice'

Oct 20 12 03:08 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
howard r
Posts: 492
Los Angeles, California, US


the better the model, the higher the percentage of usable shots and, more importantly, the higher the percentage of amazing shots (which is all that i care about).

also - the better the model, the more she is capable of tuning out the distracting variables . . . cold weather, staring bystanders, etc.
Oct 22 12 08:36 am  Link  Quote 
Model
NolaChick
Posts: 337
New Orleans, Louisiana, US


It definitely depends on the photographer and what they are looking for.  If you are asking for a model's perspective, I'm pretty picky.  If I get 12 edited shots from a photographer, there will be maybe 3 that I will really adore.
Oct 23 12 01:11 am  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Model
Anna Adrielle
Posts: 18,762
Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium


Chad Sterling wrote:

Aren't you answering your own question? There are too many uncontrollable variables to get an accurate "30-40%" or "90%" range of statistics. Do higher end and more experienced models know how to position themselves better in front of a lens? Of course. But you can't draw a models output ratio neglecting photographer individuality.

how do you know that's how the model always performs?
I have photographers that I have more of a connection with than with others, and when working with someone that "clicks" with you, you're "useable ratio" goes way up, trust me.

my boyfriend was shooting a commercial plusmodel a while ago. I was there to help with styling, and most of the shots were horrible, no matter what we tried. But she seems to be producing far better results with other photographers, which is good for her. It sucks, but it happens sometimes.

Trust me, if you put Kate Moos (random famous model name) in front of the lens of a GWC you definitely wouldn't get the same "useable ratio" as when she would shoot wit Steven Meisel.

Oct 23 12 06:37 am  Link  Quote 
Model
I-dont-know-I-forgot
Posts: 134
London, England, United Kingdom


dunno one very good photographer sent me about 64 useable images
re touched /edited whatever ..

some people only sent me 4 or so just stuff that works for them  not especially usefull for me . but  just depends & i couldn't care about image numbers

If i only got one good shot it would be worth it & a good shot is a good shot i guess ..

i think  some people you just really click with .
Oct 23 12 06:51 am  Link  Quote 
Model
I-dont-know-I-forgot
Posts: 134
London, England, United Kingdom


Zandrea wrote:
Agreed.. it depends on the photographer and the model.

I've shot with photographers who could make a 50year old look like she was 17. Then I've shot with photographers who use harsh lights that cast unpleasant shadows and who get bad angels.

oh yea that too ^

Oct 23 12 07:15 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
PR Zone
Posts: 765
London, England, United Kingdom


LEA 2 wrote:
...some people you just really click with...

Agreed. I'm wondering if the weaker models 'click' according to nature/chance and the best models 'click' at will

howard r wrote:
...the better the model, the higher the percentage of usable shots and, more importantly, the higher the percentage of amazing shots (which is all that i care about). Also - the better the model, the more she is capable of tuning out the distracting variables . . . cold weather, staring bystanders, etc

I think you have the position exactly Mr Howard :-)

Photographers will have varying amounts of natural ability - then spend a variable amount of time WORKING those ablities (and their equipment) to become as good as they can. I regularly meet models who seem to spend no time developing their range at all. 

To the ones who do spend time improving on what mother nature gave them... APPLAUSE!

Oct 24 12 03:01 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
udor
Posts: 22,063
New York, New York, US


PR Zone wrote:
The conclusion was that if you shoot a supermodel, then you'll finish with anything up to 90% of the shots taken in a sequence being 'usable'

With the ANTM winner (and other llamas with that level of experience/ability/natural assets), they said that the 'usable' percentage would drop to between 30% and 40%

Do any of the llamas on here have an opinion about what 'Uasable Shot Ratio' they'd achieve?

I don't think that it's the llama you should be asking!

Simply, if you are talking from a professional's POV, it's the photographer and creative director that really make the choice.

From my own experience, and I am coming originally from film, I have a ratio of 20 frames and 16/17 useable. Useable means to me that they are distinctly different poses and looks. Even with digital is that ratio very similar.

The difference in working with a NYC agency llama, vs. a rather inexperienced one is the speed of the shoot.

The experienced one, knows her poses and need little direction, while the inexperienced one takes much more time, because I am posing her.

Otherwise, ratio is the same.

Also... ANTM is not reality!

Oct 24 12 03:29 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Libertad Green
Posts: 478
Los Angeles, California, US


I've been told by photographers they get a lot of good images with me.
Now what magic number that is, I don't know.
Oct 24 12 03:38 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
TallPix
Posts: 222
Miami Springs, Florida, US


I like the formulas above....... just like SETI's Drake Formula

The answer can be anywhere from billions to only one (Earth)

If I get 5 great shots that the model absolutely loves, then it was a fantastic shoot.
Oct 24 12 08:44 pm  Link  Quote 
  Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers