Photographer
R Byron Johnson
Posts: 767
Norman, Oklahoma, US
Just my opinion, which may or may not get me flamed, but I at least half see where the OP is coming from. Granted, it's kind of dumb to just flat-out say that no one should EVER pay models like never ever.
Personally, I think that modelling is a creative venture in and of itself, as legitimate as any other creative effort. And photography is a collaborative effort between the photographer and the model, or at least I think it should be. So I have a really hard time understanding why someone would pursue anything creative solely to "supplement their income." And even if I weren't a broke bastard noob, I would still be hesitant to work with a model who was only in it for the money. Seriously, it's hard to put your heart into something when you're motives are so superficial. And, at least to me, a model posing just for the pay is pretty much just behaving like an object, and if I wanted to photograph objects, I'd go find some pretty rocks or something. Rocks are very cooperative and they're free.
BUT there's nothing wrong with wanting to make money at doing something you do enjoy for other reasons as well. Everybody who does something creative would like to eventually make money doing it, and anyone who says otherwise is just trying to sound "cool".
And it's obvious why photographers pay models if they can: Because being able to pay gives the more options of models to work with. Simple as that. When you're a beginner who's unable to pay (like myself), you pretty much have to take what you can get. Plus, if you can't pay, you better get used to "no-shows" because it happens a lot. If every model who agreed to pose for me actually showed up, my portfolio would be huge.
Lastly, let's be honest, only fools pursue something creative (be it photography, modeling, writing, painting, and so on) with the sole intention of becoming rich and famous. Be realistic, it's just not gonna happen for most, talented or no. There's nothing wrong with hoping for that, but if that's your primary motive, you're probably better off doing something else.
Photographer
Art of the nude
Posts: 12067
Grand Rapids, Michigan, US
Shaun Tia wrote:
You get what you pay for. Just because you label something as "art" does not mean those involved shouldn't be compensated for their work.
If you don't want to hire a professional you are more than welcome to use the 'trade' models and hope you get what you need.
But those looking for quality over frugality can choose to book someone who can deliver art in motion. "You get what you pay for" is nonsense.
If you do a trade with me, you get the same results as if you pay me. I hope you put the same efforts into a trade that you do a paid shoot. I've done trade shoots with models who were 10 times as accomplished as models who have quoted me rates.
Photographer
ArtisticGlamour
Posts: 3846
Phoenix, Arizona, US
Shaun Tia wrote:
You get what you pay for. Just because you label something as "art" does not mean those involved shouldn't be compensated for their work.
If you don't want to hire a professional you are more than welcome to use the 'trade' models and hope you get what you need.
But those looking for quality over frugality can choose to book someone who can deliver art in motion. Art of the nude wrote:
"You get what you pay for" is nonsense.
If you do a trade with me, you get the same results as if you pay me. I hope you put the same efforts into a trade that you do a paid shoot. I've done trade shoots with models who were 10 times as accomplished as models who have quoted me rates. +1
There are just too many new models that think this is easy money just to show up, and don't have the skills, and you pay for a model who isn't a bit invested in the shoot.
Photographer
Julian W I L D E
Posts: 1831
Portland, Oregon, US
I've never paid a model for personal work. Am I doing something Wrong???
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 21526
Chicago, Illinois, US
Shaun Tia wrote:
You get what you pay for. Just because you label something as "art" does not mean those involved shouldn't be compensated for their work.
If you don't want to hire a professional you are more than welcome to use the 'trade' models and hope you get what you need.
But those looking for quality over frugality can choose to book someone who can deliver art in motion. Wow... this is a vicious dig at trade models. Many of whom later charged. I would hope that any model puts forth the same efforts for trade as pay. Or did you mean 'trade' models don't have the same worth as paid ones.
Photographer
Drew Smith Photography
Posts: 5214
Nottingham, England, United Kingdom
Julian W I L D E wrote:
I've never paid a model for personal work. Am I doing something Wrong??? Julian - that's because they're too busy paying YOU! 
Photographer
I am Jason
Posts: 25
Irwin, Pennsylvania, US
Julian W I L D E wrote:
I've never paid a model for personal work. Am I doing something Wrong??? Ditto
+1
Model
Rachael Bueckert
Posts: 1122
Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
r4u wrote:
+1 This thread.is retarded...and your a dumbass...
So according to your logic, no photohraphers should be paid either. If you are a photographer doing weddings you should not be paid cause your doing for a lovong not for the art.
Plumbers shouldnt be paid cause they are doing their work for money and not for the love of pipes and toilets.
fuckn idiots....and this is why some photographers never progress in their talent or portfolios...
Model
Rachael Bueckert
Posts: 1122
Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
Art of the nude wrote:
"You get what you pay for" is nonsense.
If you do a trade with me, you get the same results as if you pay me. I hope you put the same efforts into a trade that you do a paid shoot. I've done trade shoots with models who were 10 times as accomplished as models who have quoted me rates. well this is because someone who understands trade knows that its equal talent for talent, so both may gain. but for a non-super epic photographer someyimes its easier to pay a model who know what shes doong so he can focus on his side of things, not th models pose or expression. Its easier to hone your skills when you can focus on just the photographer. so thats why people will pay models of a higher skill set.
Also, if its a commercial project or somethibg with a client/budget.
Photographer
ArtisticGlamour
Posts: 3846
Phoenix, Arizona, US
Rachael Bueckert wrote:
This thread.is retarded...and your a dumbass...
~
fuckn idiots....and this is why some photographers never progress in their talent or portfolios... Wow, anger issues much? LOL!...I don't think that post is going to fly.
And by the way...the proper spelling is "you're a dumbass". 
Photographer
ArtisticGlamour
Posts: 3846
Phoenix, Arizona, US
Art of the nude wrote:
"You get what you pay for" is nonsense.
If you do a trade with me, you get the same results as if you pay me. I hope you put the same efforts into a trade that you do a paid shoot. I've done trade shoots with models who were 10 times as accomplished as models who have quoted me rates. Rachael Bueckert wrote:
well this is because someone who understands trade knows that its equal talent for talent, so both may gain. but for a non-super epic photographer someyimes its easier to pay a model who know what shes doong so he can focus on his side of things, not th models pose or expression. Its easier to hone your skills when you can focus on just the photographer. so thats why people will pay models of a higher skill set. A trade shoot is RARELY equal talent for equal talent.
And it's rare to find an "experienced" model that "knows what she's doing" or that's that's worth paying. Often they are the "travelling" models that make a living with -proven- skills.
Sadly, there are just too many model "wannabes" that feel they deserve to be paid for just showing up. That's why I lean toward the older models...who have more experience AND usually a more POSITIVE outlook.
Photographer
Jerry Nemeth
Posts: 33355
Dearborn, Michigan, US
Shaun Tia wrote:
You get what you pay for. Just because you label something as "art" does not mean those involved shouldn't be compensated for their work.
If you don't want to hire a professional you are more than welcome to use the 'trade' models and hope you get what you need.
But those looking for quality over frugality can choose to book someone who can deliver art in motion. +1
Photographer
ArtisticGlamour
Posts: 3846
Phoenix, Arizona, US
Shaun Tia wrote:
But those looking for quality over frugality can choose to book someone who can deliver art in motion. Yes, but...paying a model does not guarantee someone who can deliver.
(or who "wants" to deliver!) I'm guessing about 1/10 are worth payment.
It's "hit-or-miss" here on Mayhem, because too many "models" will give you "rates" but that's no guarantee of experience or professionalism.
Too many "wannabes" think they should be paid just to show up, and don't really give a shit, or have a real investment in the shoot or the "art" (and it shows in their expressions).
No thanks. I made that mistake once. Too many models show up thinking you should pay their "gym membership", or their "new shoes"...and don't really give a shit about the images...in a paid shoot.
I have MUCH better luck with collaborative "trade" shoots with more mature models, where BOTH model and photographer are "invested" in the shoot.
Photographer
kitty_empire
Posts: 864
Brighton, England, United Kingdom
Ty Lockhart wrote:
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. Agreed. It's sort of killing the motivation for me.
Had about 6 discussions with models this week - I found them, or they found me. Not very experienced models and not exactly agency looks, but it's fun to meet and work with all sorts, right?
So, ideas flow back and forth, we agree a concept and a look and then they send me their rates.
*sigh*
I don't see the situation improving.
Photographer
Select Model Studios
Posts: 818
Tempe, Arizona, US
If they are going to benefit my portfolio, then why the hell not?! They have bills also.
Photographer
R Byron Johnson
Posts: 767
Norman, Oklahoma, US
ArtisticGlamour wrote:
Yes, but...paying a model does not guarantee someone who can deliver.
(or who "wants" to deliver!) I'm guessing about 1/10 are worth payment.
It's "hit-or-miss" here on Mayhem, because too many "models" will give you "rates" but that's no guarantee of experience or professionalism.
Too many "wannabes" think they should be paid just to show up, and don't really give a shit, or have a real investment in the shoot or the "art" (and it shows in their expressions).
No thanks. I made that mistake once. Too many models show up thinking you should pay their "gym membership", or their "new shoes"...and don't really give a shit about the images...in a paid shoot.
I have MUCH better luck with collaborative "trade" shoots with more mature models, where BOTH model and photographer are "invested" in the shoot. That's one thing that does worry me about the prospect of paying a model. Many (though obviously not all) seem to feel that they deserve to be paid simply for being "hot", and thus feel that their only real task during a shoot is to just stand there looking hot, and everything else is the photographer's problem.
Photographer
WIP
Posts: 15973
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom
ShotbyRon wrote:
If they are going to benefit my portfolio, then why the hell not?! They have bills also. Even if they don't benefit they'll still like the money.
Photographer
Yan Tan Tethera
Posts: 4185
Biggleswade, England, United Kingdom
Garry k wrote:
my understanding is that many of the great Artists ( and by that I mean Painters ) paid their models a sitting fee Yes, but it was below minimum wage and often involved semen.
Photographer
kl-photographics
Posts: 296
Lemgo, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
im not an artist, im a tecnician. tecnicians need to eat, models too. i don' t want to be a poor artist, i prefer being a rich tecnician. guess models a pretty equal to that.
Photographer
WIP
Posts: 15973
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom
kl-photographics wrote:
im not an artist, im a tecnician. tecnicians need to eat, models too. i don' t want to be a poor artist, i prefer being a rich tecnician. guess models a pretty equal to that. So the model pays you and you pay the model..... seems fair.
Digital Artist
ShuttingDown
Posts: 68
Crystal Lake, Illinois, US
At the end-of-the-day, it only matters to the parties involved if cash trades hands.
Sometimes a trade agreement is perfectly ample; sometimes money would be involved.
Personally, I have no issues in paying models or any other people that would be working on a project. I also subscribe to "time is money", so I will definitely pay for other aspects such as travel costs.
I also mostly agree with the "you get what you pay for" statement. However, that can be a double-edged sword. In a perfect world, those who charge more would produce higher quality work. But alas, that's not always the case.
Photographer
AJ_In_Atlanta
Posts: 13053
Atlanta, Georgia, US
c_h_r_i_s wrote:
Even if they don't benefit they'll still like the money. Why would you shoot someone who doesn't benefit your portfolio (beyond client assigments)?
Photographer
WIP
Posts: 15973
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom
I wonder is R. Avedon or S. Meisel paid for models when they were building their portfolios.
Photographer
WIP
Posts: 15973
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom
AJScalzitti wrote:
Why would you shoot someone who doesn't benefit your portfolio (beyond client assigments)? So are you saying from your portfolio of 15 models only they've benefited you.
Photographer
robert b mitchell
Posts: 2218
Surrey, British Columbia, Canada
Well.. I had my laugh for today. 
Photographer
Garage Photography
Posts: 273
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
The models I work with aren't doing it for fun. In large part, they make a large portion of their income from modeling. Since they need to rely on their craft for that money, they are more motivated to provide a quality product. Like someone said earlier - you get what you pay for.
+100
Photographer
Camerosity
Posts: 5805
Saint Louis, Missouri, US
The only reason I can think of is... to get something you need or want that you can't get without paying for it.
Photographer
WIP
Posts: 15973
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom
Camerosity wrote:
The only reason I can think of is... to get something you need or want that you can't get without paying for it. That's deep.
Photographer
AJ_In_Atlanta
Posts: 13053
Atlanta, Georgia, US
c_h_r_i_s wrote:
So are you saying from your portfolio of 15 models only they've benefited you. I am saying I don't do shoots on my own unless the model is going to benefit my book.
Photographer
WIP
Posts: 15973
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom
AJScalzitti wrote:
I am saying I don't do shoots on my own unless the llama is going to benefit my book. I try to benefit the llamas book too.
Photographer
AJ_In_Atlanta
Posts: 13053
Atlanta, Georgia, US
c_h_r_i_s wrote:
I try to benefit the models book too. Well I leave that decision up to the models or their booker to decide
Model
Ashley Graham
Posts: 26822
Saint Petersburg, Florida, US
ArtisticGlamour wrote:
Art of the nude wrote:
"You get what you pay for" is nonsense.
If you do a trade with me, you get the same results as if you pay me. I hope you put the same efforts into a trade that you do a paid shoot. I've done trade shoots with models who were 10 times as accomplished as models who have quoted me rates. A trade shoot is RARELY equal talent for equal talent.
And it's rare to find an "experienced" model that "knows what she's doing" or that's that's worth paying. Often they are the "travelling" models that make a living with -proven- skills.
Sadly, there are just too many model "wannabes" that feel they deserve to be paid for just showing up. That's why I lean toward the older models...who have more experience AND usually a more POSITIVE outlook. Hey I rarely travel anymore except to LA and NYC. I'm still really experienced and making a living while at home. However, I still shoot trade for certain things and with various people. At least 3 a month
Photographer
my_other_profile
Posts: 666
Ankeny, Iowa, US
This thread is still here.
Photographer
Art of the nude
Posts: 12067
Grand Rapids, Michigan, US
Art of the nude wrote:
"You get what you pay for" is nonsense.
If you do a trade with me, you get the same results as if you pay me. I hope you put the same efforts into a trade that you do a paid shoot. I've done trade shoots with models who were 10 times as accomplished as models who have quoted me rates. Rachael Bueckert wrote:
well this is because someone who understands trade knows that its equal talent for talent, so both may gain. but for a non-super epic photographer someyimes its easier to pay a model who know what shes doong so he can focus on his side of things, not th models pose or expression. Its easier to hone your skills when you can focus on just the photographer. so thats why people will pay models of a higher skill set.
Also, if its a commercial project or somethibg with a client/budget. I don't object to the idea of paying models. I've done it plenty of times, and if I had the money, I'd do it more. But I *DO* object to the idea that paying automatically means you get better results, and models who do trades are somehow second rate.
Photographer
Art of the nude
Posts: 12067
Grand Rapids, Michigan, US
Shaun Tia wrote:
But those looking for quality over frugality can choose to book someone who can deliver art in motion. ArtisticGlamour wrote:
Yes, but...paying a model does not guarantee someone who can deliver.
(or who "wants" to deliver!) I'm guessing about 1/10 are worth payment.
It's "hit-or-miss" here on Mayhem, because too many "models" will give you "rates" but that's no guarantee of experience or professionalism.
Too many "wannabes" think they should be paid just to show up, and don't really give a shit, or have a real investment in the shoot or the "art" (and it shows in their expressions).
No thanks. I made that mistake once. Too many models show up thinking you should pay their "gym membership", or their "new shoes"...and don't really give a shit about the images...in a paid shoot.
I have MUCH better luck with collaborative "trade" shoots with more mature models, where BOTH model and photographer are "invested" in the shoot. Ovariancyst wrote:
That's one thing that does worry me about the prospect of paying a model. Many (though obviously not all) seem to feel that they deserve to be paid simply for being "hot", and thus feel that their only real task during a shoot is to just stand there looking hot, and everything else is the photographer's problem. Choosing who to pay, and who NOT to pay, is part of your job. I get all sorts of models who may have never SEEN an image as good as my work asking for pay. I decline. But that has nothing to do with the potential value of hiring a fantastic model, such as Ms. Shaun Tia. As it happens, I know plenty of people who have worked with her. While I'd love to trade, if I could pay, and she was available, I have no doubt that she'd be worth it.
Photographer
Art of the nude
Posts: 12067
Grand Rapids, Michigan, US
AJScalzitti wrote:
Why would you shoot someone who doesn't benefit your portfolio (beyond client assigments)? c_h_r_i_s wrote:
So are you saying from your portfolio of 15 models only they've benefited you. WHAT????
He said he only shoots people who benefit him. Not that he does shoots that ONLY benefit him.
Photographer
Art Silva
Posts: 10064
Santa Barbara, California, US
Models with Benefits! ... LOVE when that happens.... Oh wait, y'all meant something else, oops  
Photographer
Beautifully Soft Focus
Posts: 533
Plano, Texas, US
Op ... your post seems to be textbook "Trolling." Whether, I pay a model ... is mine and my muse's alone "Business". That said: I have no problem paying a professional model or even a good rookie. I find the pro models I have worked with to be worth every penny. I do have a problem with folk who don't want to compensate people for their time. Reminds me of when churches didn't want to pay musicians and singers ... hiding behind ... "You aren't suppose to be paid ... you're singing for God" and all the while pocketing the tithe and offering for themselves. Really not cool to hid behind the "ART" shield either  Bottom-line ... I could care less about whether shoot is for commercial work or not it's about getting the images I want to create
Photographer
Jerry Nemeth
Posts: 33355
Dearborn, Michigan, US
Art of the nude wrote:
"You get what you pay for" is nonsense.
If you do a trade with me, you get the same results as if you pay me. I hope you put the same efforts into a trade that you do a paid shoot. I've done trade shoots with models who were 10 times as accomplished as models who have quoted me rates. She is a great model!
Photographer
Jerry Nemeth
Posts: 33355
Dearborn, Michigan, US
Ashley Graham wrote:
Hey I rarely travel anymore except to LA and NYC. I'm still really experienced and making a living while at home. However, I still shoot trade for certain things and with various people. At least 3 a month No wonder I haven't seen you for awhile.
|
