Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 21526
Chicago, Illinois, US
Melodye Joy wrote:
You pay a model for the following;
-their services
-their talent
-their ability
-their look
If you have a concept that YOU want for your portfolio, to submit to magazines, to submit to agencies, then YOU pay the model THEIR services. Otherwise, the model has input, can cancel last min, call off the whole thing, never show up, ect....
Does paying someone stop flakes from happening? No. But it does help because one is more enticed to show up, knowing they have something in return. Especially if it concerns a genre in which they don't feel they want to excel, or a genre in which they may have TOO MUCH (beauty, fashion, nude/implied)...
Why else do you pay a model?
Well, you pay a particular model so that you get THAT model, not her sister, not her aunt, not her best friend, not another model that kinda sortta maybe looks like her.
As someone else mentioned, payment also can help when editing comes. The model can't necessarily ask for more edits or particular edits if she is being compensated by cash/food/clothing (whatever the case). Does it prevent them asking? No. But an agreement in terms should have been made long ago, x payment for x time and x edits provided/not provided.
Just my thoughts. Happy photographing! I'm sorry you feel this way. I believe in keeping my word payment or not. It occurs to me that some of our past and present fashion and art pro shooters paid few if any models. This even at the start of their careers. Guys like Helmut Newton and David Bailey and Penn and Avedon. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with paying models but having to pay every model you shoot can get expensive very quickly. Photographers need to shoot all the time. Unless their is a client or he/she has a trust fund paying may not be a option. The photographers I mentioned shot a lot of models. Practice, practice and more practice.
The key is to find models who want to shoot and who enjoy the process of shooting. Several years ago a current Elite model agreed to shoot with me. I don't think she even cared so much about the results as much as she loved being in front of that camera and the creation of art. The OP and others should seek those models out. I would much rather shoot models who value my work and being a part of it then someone who's only concern is what I can pay. Don't get me wrong I have and will pay models and photographers with real clients should or if the plan is to market that work or its going to used for commercial purposes. Not seeing much of that on MM.
Model
Melodye Joy
Posts: 545
Rancho Cucamonga, California, US
As my previous post was apparently confusing; If you have a concept and you cast a llama for "negotiable" or "paid" work, then that is what a llama expects. If the previous agreement was TF/TFP. That's okay. But remember, some llamas are here to be hired and paid. Others, like myself llama for hobby, the experience (typically trade work). I have paid photographers, stylists, makeup artists. Does that make me perfect and does that prove that I should be paid? No. I have also worked TF/TFP projects that have been published just the same. That isn't the price of llamaing either. The bottom line is, it is between the llama and photographer as to what form they will collaborate (paid or tf). As I stated before though, money talks and for some llamas, it says a lot. They will do work they are not normally inclined to do, work they don't need for their particular portfolio/profile and they will travel a greater distance perhaps. Sorry if my first statement was lacking the first time. Just my thoughts 
Photographer
Garry k
Posts: 30129
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Art of the nude wrote:
There's a lesson here somewhere. ![https://horiwood.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/katemossnobotox.jpg?w=950]()
Photographer
Lovely Day Media
Posts: 5885
Vineland, New Jersey, US
Melodye Joy wrote:
As I stated before though, money talks and for some models, it says a lot. They will do work they are not normally inclined to do, work they don't need for their particular portfolio/profile and they will travel a greater distance perhaps. Why would a model (or really anyone) agree to shoot anything TF if they don't need or want it for their portfolio (or any other reason) and rather than just say "no", they'll say "yes" and then not show up at all? I understand that money talks. I also understand that some models have profiles that say "paid assignments only". It doesn't make sense to me to contact these models looking for a TF shoot (even if they say they have no experience).
Does TF = license to flake? What do you call it when someone is to be paid in cash and they still don't show up or call?
Photographer
Charger Photography
Posts: 1731
San Antonio, Texas, US
I'm late on this silly thread.... But just to put my 2 cents here.. before 2012 is over....
99% of the time I shoot TFCD.... but I want to shoot Jordan Bunniie.... she is coming to Texas... I don't have anything to add to her already awesome port... I'm going to hire her... Why ????? BECAUSE I WANT TO SHOOT WITH HER !!!! Sorry for the caps... but what kind of person asks questions like this ....
I said it before.... Seems that people lose their common sense once they join MM....
Photographer
Bill Tracy Photography
Posts: 2322
Montague, New Jersey, US
Lovely Day Media wrote:
Does TF = license to flake? What do you call it when someone is to be paid in cash and they still don't show up or call? Exactly! TFP/CD is the model being PAID with photos. A flake is a flake is a flake, period.
Model
K_G
Posts: 2930
Detroit, Michigan, US
r4u wrote:
They say " every work must be paid"
I don't consider art as a work.
And a photograph (true one;) ) works too, no?
If there 's no commercial issue, don't pay models please! Sometimes I do tfp. Other times I am paid. Why? Some photographers tell me their time is worth money and when models dont show up, it wastes the photographer's time. The money they pay their models ensures they are still able to shoot. Thats just one example
Likewise, there have been times I have paid photographers too like for my profession portfolio that i use for my agency castings. So it just depends on what you are trying to accomplish in your "hobby." Do you want shots that are for work purposes? Then you better be prepared to pay.
Photographer
Image Works Photography
Posts: 2890
Orlando, Florida, US
Lovely Day Media wrote:
Does TF = license to flake? Models that do that don't last long on MM or in the industry. All they do is hurt their credibility and reputation. They don't know that there are a community of photographers out there with connections. They put their picture out there for everyone to see.
Model
orias
Posts: 5187
Tampa, Florida, US
Caveman Creations wrote:
Darlin, I like you! You are on a ROLL!
What say, I pick you up, shoot you, and take you back home with a 30 Lbs Brisket in yer back pocket? You know how we Texans are.....Smoke anything that'll stay lit long enough!  You are somethin' else. hahaha my default is making jerky out of everything that moves, but a brisket'll do.
There must be a pound per hour correlation though to make it fair for everyone in these trade arrangements
it can't be too much though as i'll start developing self worth
Photographer
Caveman Creations
Posts: 580
Addison, Texas, US
orias wrote:
hahaha my default is making jerky out of everything that moves, but a brisket'll do.
There must be a pound per hour correlation though to make it fair for everyone in these trade arrangements
it can't be too much though as i'll start developing self worth Well, you can't weigh much over 30 Lbs! LOL The ride here and back may be where the "Value", or lack thereof, starts to come in......... It would have to be on a 34 year old Milwaukee Vibrator! I'm not pitching in for a Limo, darlin'...... 
Model
Melodye Joy
Posts: 545
Rancho Cucamonga, California, US
Lovely Day Media wrote:
Why would a llama (or really anyone) agree to shoot anything TF if they don't need or want it for their portfolio (or any other reason) and rather than just say "no", they'll say "yes" and then not show up at all? I understand that money talks. I also understand that some llamas have profiles that say "paid assignments only". It doesn't make sense to me to contact these llamas looking for a TF shoot (even if they say they have no experience).
Does TF = license to flake? What do you call it when someone is to be paid in cash and they still don't show up or call? Everyone is different. Some prefer to go ahead and TF a shoot, wither they need it or not. Some will flake no matter the payment (photos, food, cash, clothes)...
I have noticed that many llamas post Paid Only or Depends on Assignment, rather than basing their work solely on TF projects. I personally inquire with artists who will work TF or paid because honestly, you never know...if the project is of interest, they may make an exception to their "paid only" status and work with you TF.
Like I said before, what was originally stated was not to offend fellow artists...I have just seen that paid assignments tend to get you the results you seek. But to each their own.
I will continue to pay for services when I have a concept. I can do it cheaper or TF but I know the quality of images, clothing, accessories, styling I want for said concept.
Have a happy New Years, all!
Model
P I X I E
Posts: 35440
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Garry k wrote:
![https://horiwood.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/katemossnobotox.jpg?w=950]() It's called makeup. You seriously think all models look flawless sans maquillage? Honest to god?
Photographer
Michael Broughton
Posts: 2288
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
P I X I E wrote:
It's called makeup. You seriously think all models look flawless sans maquillage? Honest to god? what?! you mean they don't? come on! next you'll be telling us that getting caught off-guard by paparazzi, squinting under harsh midday sun and having your wrinkles accentuated by sharpening artifacts isn't flattering.
Photographer
Art of the nude
Posts: 12067
Grand Rapids, Michigan, US
Michael Broughton wrote:
what?! you mean they don't? come on! next you'll be telling us that getting caught off-guard by paparazzi, squinting under harsh midday sun and having your wrinkles accentuated by sharpening artifacts isn't flattering. Some people realize that, which just increases the irony.
Model
orias
Posts: 5187
Tampa, Florida, US
Caveman Creations wrote:
Well, you can't weigh much over 30 Lbs! LOL The ride here and back may be where the "Value", or lack thereof, starts to come in......... It would have to be on a 34 year old Milwaukee Vibrator! I'm not pitching in for a Limo, darlin'...... ;P
Model
CRIMSON REIGN
Posts: 842
Baltimore, Maryland, US
indefinite anomaly wrote:
It may not be a commercial project at the time, but if a model release is signed and someone wants to exhibit and/or buy your work, then it does become commercial (or in some cases you don't even need a model release).
I prefer to be hired to model except with good friends or for use of images for my portfolio. Why? The photographer/artist is not obligated to provide me with images, and I'm able to focus on whatever the photographer/artist is envisioning.
I will never justify being hired to someone who doesn't understand the benefit of hiring a model. If you get what you need in terms of models from trade, then that works for you.
When I want to shoot or draw someone that isn't interested in TF, I set a budget for myself if it's worth it to work with them. Sometimes it really is worth it to hire the right person and get exactly what I need, vs. shooting 10 different people and not getting what I need in the end. +1
Photographer
JohnEnger
Posts: 868
Jessheim, Akershus, Norway
r4u wrote:
They say " every work must be paid"
I don't consider art as a work.
And a photograph (true one;) ) works too, no?
If there 's no commercial issue, don't pay models please! Have less to drink before your next post please!
Photographer
Lost Coast Photo
Posts: 2691
Ferndale, California, US
r4u wrote:
They say " every work must be paid"
I don't consider art as a work.
And a photograph (true one;) ) works too, no?
If there 's no commercial issue, don't pay models please! Perhaps there's a good reason that economics is called the dismal science. But I seriously doubt you're going to overturn the law of supply and demand anytime soon.
Photographer
robert b mitchell
Posts: 2218
Surrey, British Columbia, Canada
I pay when the model is worth my time. And it's worth it!!!
Photographer
Sidney Kapuskar
Posts: 876
Paris, Île-de-France, France
r4u wrote:
They say " every work must be paid"
I don't consider art as a work.
And a photograph (true one;) ) works too, no?
If there 's no commercial issue, don't pay models please! Bonjour Frank.
One day model X walks up to you and says:
Let's create art!
You don't really like the model, but since she is asking for non-commercial art, you will do it for free, did I get this right?
Photographer
tonyfromsyracuse
Posts: 374
Syracuse, New York, US
I'll say one thing. anyone who books a traveling model and stiffs them....is evil.
they are putting themselves out there, traveling,hoping but not knowing if that photographer who booked them is actually going to follow thru.
it has to be stressful. God bless the traveling models. its so nice to sort of pick what model you think is really good, and she will come to you.
the thought of stiffing one at the last minute, you know as they get into a strange town...and not being able to get into contact with the photographer...that moment when she or he realizes they traveled all that way for nothing....heartbreaking. there should be a special room in hell for people who do that.
Photographer
Natural Means
Posts: 936
Yamba, New South Wales, Australia
Tony Lawrence wrote:
I'm sorry you feel this way. I believe in keeping my word payment or not. It occurs to me that some of our past and present fashion and art pro shooters paid few if any models. This even at the start of their careers. Guys like Helmut Newton and David Bailey and Penn and Avedon. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with paying models but having to pay every model you shoot can get expensive very quickly. Photographers need to shoot all the time. Unless their is a client or he/she has a trust fund paying may not be a option. The photographers I mentioned shot a lot of models. Practice, practice and more practice.
The key is to find models who want to shoot and who enjoy the process of shooting. Several years ago a current Elite model agreed to shoot with me. I don't think she even cared so much about the results as much as she loved being in front of that camera and the creation of art. The OP and others should seek those models out. I would much rather shoot models who value my work and being a part of it then someone who's only concern is what I can pay. Don't get me wrong I have and will pay models and photographers with real clients should or if the plan is to market that work or its going to used for commercial purposes. Not seeing much of that on MM. Now it my turn to be in love! Oh, your a dude. Well said anyway.
Never really got the concept of the photographer pays model or model pays photographer thing myself. If theres a client involved that makes sense but unless theres a drastic discrepency in quality i just dont see it.
Photographer
Risen Phoenix Photo
Posts: 3779
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US
Natural Means wrote:
Now it my turn to be in love! Oh, your a dude. Well said anyway.
Never really got the concept of the photographer pays model or model pays photographer thing myself. If theres a client involved that makes sense but unless theres a drastic discrepency in quality i just dont see it. +1,000,000.
Almost went broke paying models 2 years ago. Now with rare exception I never pay models.
And I never hire traveling models. I do in fact work with models that are excited to work with me and be a part of my art. I work with a team of about 10 models half of which are not on MM and at lest 4 that work exclusively with me.
I shoot app 200 shoots a year averaging 4 a week. It is great to be able to shoot these wonderful and artistic models.
BTW . If any of my work sells the models in the image receive 50% of the profit after printing and framing, 30% to the gallery and 20% to support women's causes.
A model just received $600 from my most recent show
Also they receive up to 15 prints ( if there are that many) for their book as well as non watermarked high, low and tiff images on a jump drive.
Model
angel emily
Posts: 1020
Boston, Massachusetts, US
Natural Means wrote:
Never really got the concept of the photographer pays model or model pays photographer thing myself. If theres a client involved that makes sense but unless theres a drastic discrepency in quality i just dont see it. "Drastic discrepancy in quality" is one of the most poignant reasons this occurs.
Also, I've paid photographers for commercial style images and headshots, that are of NO benefit to their portfolios. I've been paid by photographers for workshops and project work that is of NO benefit to my portfolio.
Plus, when there's a client involved, photographer and model aren't paying each other. The client is paying for the photographer and model.
The concept of almost going broke due to paying models doesn't make sense to me. Neither does paying models just to be "kind".
It's not personal, it's business.
Photographer
Jhono Bashian
Posts: 2464
Cleveland, Ohio, US
When a photographer is making pictures, isn't he/she working and should be paid?
When a model is modeling and doing her/his thing and should be paid?
When there is a collaboration between the two and the images might benefit both the no one gets paid and the work goes to a common goal?
Photographer
Image Works Photography
Posts: 2890
Orlando, Florida, US
Garry k wrote:
![https://horiwood.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/katemossnobotox.jpg?w=950]() I think now I wouldn't shoot her for free. My fruit loops got spoiled.
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 21526
Chicago, Illinois, US
If you have actual clients then you should pay your llamas but for practice??? Fashion photographers need fashion llamas and they are at fashion agencies. Can't get larger agencies to send new faces then contact smaller ones. Commercial photographers should seek out solid life style llamas. Just imagine being a young Steven Meisel and contacting llamas from MM. This before he was famous and hearing. 'Paid only' You will go broke paying llamas to practice. Could a Michael Jordon exist if he had to pay to practice all the time?
Most of the time the results may not be useable. Its the chance you take with tests. If you do the same work from shoot to shoot then somethings wrong. Improve on old ideals and try out new ones. There are lots of beautiful women and men who will work with you for free. Many will shoot nude. If you do gallery work and have a track record for selling work then paying is fair. I also understand llamas who want to be paid. However most photographers can't or won't pay. Clients pay. If you are lucky enough to find enough work from photographers to pay your bills then you are very fortunate.
Photographer
Hank Shiffman
Posts: 384
Mountain View, California, US
I pay most of the models with whom I shoot. When I contact a model, I ask about their rates and indicate my need for a commercial release. I submit to microstock agencies, which gives me both a way to cover my expenses and a way to have my work evaluated by actual paying customers. They don't pay much, but they do pay, and that tells me a lot about what works and what doesn't.
I enjoy shooting, and have enjoyed TF shoots. But I'd rather be able to do more with the results than just look at them. That's why I want the commercial release, and that almost always means paying. I also feel like I can exercise more control over the shoot when I'm paying. I'll make sure to get some shots the model wants, but I'm still the one in charge. Golden Rule and all that.
As an aside, I've had flakes from both TF and paid models. Paid models don't flake nearly as often as trade, but it does happen.
Photographer
Darren Brade
Posts: 3351
London, England, United Kingdom
r4u wrote:
They say " every work must be paid"
I don't consider art as a work.
And a photograph (true one;) ) works too, no?
If there 's no commercial issue, don't pay llamas please! Only if you show us some "art"?
Photographer
FBY1K
Posts: 956
North Las Vegas, Nevada, US
r4u wrote:
They say " every work must be paid"
I don't consider art as a work.
And a photograph (true one;) ) works too, no?
If there 's no commercial issue, don't pay models please! It depends on what we shoot. I like shooting feet and most models don't need and/or want this type of work in the ports. So...I pay for it.
FBY1K
Photographer
Blue Mini Photography
Posts: 1703
Tempe, Arizona, US
Why should a photographer be paid to create art?
Why should people buy art?
People need to earn a living. Some do it by modeling, painting, photography etc.
That's why people get paid.
And sure some will work for "free", but in reality they are working for artwork. Typically photos on here.
I've yet to see a photographer of model do a shoot and get nothing.
Photographer
FBY1K
Posts: 956
North Las Vegas, Nevada, US
Risen Phoenix Photo wrote:
Almost went broke paying models 2 years ago. I know the feeling and payment policy is one of the things I plan to revise.
FBY1K
Photographer
Francisco Castro
Posts: 2629
Cincinnati, Ohio, US
Yan Tan Tethera wrote:
Interesting. Why would it concern you what I or any other photographer on here does?
I'm currently paying llamas in order that I'm under no obligation to provide images.
It works for me. I'm with you there.
Every llama I work with either gets paid in cash, or images, regardless of if there is a commercial aspect to the project. Never both. When I pay a llama cash, I tell her upfront when we're making arrangements, that images are not part of compensation. If I give her images, it's out of me just being nice, and not because she's entitled to it.
Some llamas will lower their rate if they want copies too; sometimes I agree, sometimes I don't.
Whatever the situation, I try to make it clear what she can expect.
Photographer
ArtisticGlamour
Posts: 3846
Phoenix, Arizona, US
I'm a total amateur shooter...and I only shoot TF*. I have found with a couple of paid shoots (they paid me) I didn't enjoy the shoots as much, and it changed the energy. It wasn't as "relaxed" and natural feeling as a typical "collaboration" trade shoot. There was suddenly a pressure to perform.
Since I do this for artistic fun (I already have a REAL photography job) I would rather get better (more relaxed/natural expressions) images by not involving money in the mix, and keeping it an "equal" artistic investment. I enjoy working with newer models so that's not an issue.
But, I sure don't fault any professional models (or Photographers) from trying to make a buck. I just can't justify the expense (for me). I'm sure the "amateur-amateur" collaboration probably shows in my work...and so be it.
Model
Modell T
Posts: 767
San Diego, California, US
Most Models show up for paid shoots...cash incentive.
Photographer
Marin Photo NYC
Posts: 7348
New York, New York, US
Not paying models...ok, that is a new one! Good luck with that!
Photographer
Ty Lockhart
Posts: 107
Louisville, Kentucky, US
I love this feed.
I took some time away from this site to build up a small studio. Finally got it up, got back on this site about a week ago amped! And suddenly realized many of the experienced models I'd like to photograph are charging $100-$300?! for a photo shoot.
Even some of the less experienced ones are charging $50.
It's like every lady who has a portfolio on here is charging, regardless of skill set or looks.
I admit I have a long way to go with creating glamour images similar to what some of you guys are doing. But paying each girl to model for me as I work to get there seems not a good business move, I'd have to close my studio to do so.
But after reading this feed, I do understand now why models (some of them) should be paid by the photographer. The problem I think is there are now a WHOOOOLE LOT of ladies on here who think just because they have a few pictures showing t&a they should be paid. I can't do it. There's about 3 models in Louisville, Ky. who really stand out and I might fork over cash to have photo shoots with them one day.
Ideally, I don't think a photographer should have to pay a model. I think it should be a tf situtation.
Or, I like when models are just getting started and they pay photographers who helped develop them.
I wonder what's the percentage of each of those categories on this site? Is it more photographers who pay models, models who pay photographers, or equal trade. I just got back on this site, but it seems to me there are more photographers who are paying models. And, there's nothing wrong with that, I just can't afford to do it and keep my studio.
Model
Lynn Elizabeth
Posts: 1336
Palm Beach, Florida, US
If you don't want to pay models that's your choice and your choices will be limited.
Don't tell others what to do. That's just rude!
Photographer
Danel Photography
Posts: 124
New York, New York, US
for the same reason you pay anything in life.
Rent, Coffee,,,,,,,
Have a nice day
Photographer
DAN CRUIKSHANK
Posts: 1786
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
r4u wrote:
They say " every work must be paid"
I don't consider art as a work.
And a photograph (true one;) ) works too, no?
If there 's no commercial issue, don't pay models please! Nikon should send me a free camera then... Seeing how it will only be used for making art!
|
You are somethin' else.
