Kevin Connery wrote:

Then why, oh why, did you start a thread to tell other people that their way of doing things is taking advantage of novices, and to repeatedly insist  that your way is really the best wAy to do things?

There are models I'd be happy to provide with Raw files, but it's a very small set. Would it make sense for me to insist that doing so is THE Right Way to do a Trade? Or insist that NOT doing so was? Neither is a defensible "rule"

A good trade is one where the parties involved both feel they got good value. Beyond that, mandating how others do 'business' is presumptuous--and few people respond well to that.

You noticed the irony in that post too?

Kevin Connery wrote:
Then why, oh why, did you start a thread to tell other people that their way of doing things is taking advantage of novices, and to repeatedly insist  that your way is really the best wAy to do things?

There are models I'd be happy to provide with Raw files, but it's a very small set. Would it make sense for me to insist that doing so is THE Right Way to do a Trade? Or insist that NOT doing so was? Neither is a defensible "rule"

A good trade is one where the parties involved both feel they got good value. Beyond that, mandating how others do 'business' is presumptuous--and few people respond well to that.

So Kevin, where do you get all that from?  Did she edit her OP?  Because here it it;

Caitin wrote:
What does TF mean?
I see it as Trade For something, anything, everything.

For sure the trade should be something worth your time.

That's a question followed by a statement I can agree with.

Caitin wrote:
One thing that drives me crazy is when I get an offer for 5 edited photos with only rights for self promotion. So you get 5 picked and edited by photographer, 800x 533p 72dpi. 

Really how much is that worth?

Now that is her personal preference, followed by a question.

Caitin wrote:
Well if your a new model needing port pics and the photographer isn't keeping 500 nude erotic images of you for it then its worth getting you started.

But if you have plenty of self promotion pics its worthless.

You have to see the value in the time. If the offer is 10 raw images from the shoot of your choice and all rights to those ten, then you might have something. For sure if they are of value on the market.

What do you think about this practice?

Certainly I think it is why when you 1st sign up on a site why you get pounded left and right for TF until you figure it out.

Do you think its taking advantage of a persons lack of experience?

Again she is stating personal preferences with questions.  Where is the irony?  Maybe further in the thread, but I'm not going to read all the replies.   I'm glad that she was able to shoot with Bob, and that he came back to post.  Other than that, I guess I'll get back to work.

Patrick Walberg wrote:

Kevin Connery wrote:
Then why, oh why, did you start a thread to tell other people that their way of doing things is taking advantage of novices, and to repeatedly insist  that your way is really the best wAy to do things?

There are models I'd be happy to provide with Raw files, but it's a very small set. Would it make sense for me to insist that doing so is THE Right Way to do a Trade? Or insist that NOT doing so was? Neither is a defensible "rule"

A good trade is one where the parties involved both feel they got good value. Beyond that, mandating how others do 'business' is presumptuous--and few people respond well to that.

So Kevin, where do you get all that from?  Did she edit her OP?  Because here it it;

Caitin wrote:
What does TF mean?
I see it as Trade For something, anything, everything.

For sure the trade should be something worth your time.

That's a question followed by a statement I can agree with.

Caitin wrote:
One thing that drives me crazy is when I get an offer for 5 edited photos with only rights for self promotion. So you get 5 picked and edited by photographer, 800x 533p 72dpi. 

Really how much is that worth?

Now that is her personal preference, followed by a question.


Again she is stating personal preferences with questions.  Where is the irony?  Maybe further in the thread, but I'm not going to read all the replies.   I'm glad that she was able to shoot with Bob, and that he came back to post.  Other than that, I guess I'll get back to work.

You obviously did not read the thread.

Caitin   wrote:

I don't feel the need to prove anything to you.

Well actually, you do...

I guess I missed a couple of posts before they were removed... pity...

I'll reiterate my position one more time for the sake of clarity.

Why would I choose to relinquish control of my images after a TF shoot? What's in it for me?

I choose the model (usually), I choose the location, I choose the camera and the lenses to use. I choose the lights and where to put them, what intensity and what quality: hard, soft etc. (light-formers). I choose the aperture and shutter speed.
I tell the model what clothes to wear and I direct the MUA to create the make-up and hair effects that I want. I tell the model where to stand, how to stand, where to turn, where to look and finally most importantly, I decide when to press the shutter.

Why after all that would I then abdicate any further control over those images by handing RAWs to the model 'to practice with'?

In the past I have supplied RAW files to clients for third-party (professional) retouchers to finish, but the price I charge the client reflects that.
If a model wants RAW images then she can commission me to shoot for her, but it'll cost money as the resulting images are likely to be of no further use to me.

On a TFP shoot? What's in it for me? Unless the retouching is of so high a standard that  I could not possibly achieve those results by myself, there is no benefit to me whatsoever.

The OP consistently maintains that she would provide evidence of her retouching skills and has failed to do so. Now all of a sudden she's the 'victim'... well tough-titty: you started this.

RKD Photographic wrote:
Well actually, you do...

Actually ... NO she does not have to prove herself. There are no set rules as to creating, and working with other artists, or models.  This is not some exact science.  As long as she follows the forum rules, she can promise you all she wants, but that does not mean much at all since you will never work with each other, now will you? 

RKD Photographic wrote:
I guess I missed a couple of posts before they were removed... pity...

I'll reiterate my position one more time for the sake of clarity.

Why would I choose to relinquish control of my images after a TF shoot? What's in it for me?

Good question!  There is no right or wrong answer. Every single shoot I do is slightly different, so what you do might not be what I will do and so on. It's senseless to carry on with this argument.  Everyone does things at least slightly different.

RKD Photographic wrote:
I choose the model (usually), I choose the location, I choose the camera and the lenses to use. I choose the lights and where to put them, what intensity and what quality: hard, soft etc. (light-formers). I choose the aperture and shutter speed.
I tell the model what clothes to wear and I direct the MUA to create the make-up and hair effects that I want. I tell the model where to stand, how to stand, where to turn, where to look and finally most importantly, I decide when to press the shutter.

Interesting!  I give direction too, but I don't take as much control as you do perhaps because most of the models I work with already know how to pose.  I'm not a control freak, but I'm awesome at negotiation! 

RKD Photographic wrote:
Why after all that would I then abdicate any further control over those images by handing RAWs to the model 'to practice with'?

Another good question!  I don't even shoot RAW!    I don't give "control" of images by sending reduced files.  Giving a model copies of RAW files or not ... it's a choice that each photographer makes.

RKD Photographic wrote:
In the past I have supplied RAW files to clients for third-party (professional) retouchers to finish, but the price I charge the client reflects that.
If a model wants RAW images then she can commission me to shoot for her, but it'll cost money as the resulting images are likely to be of no further use to me.

Sure!  That makes sense!  I agree with you on that!

RKD Photographic wrote:
On a TFP shoot? What's in it for me? Unless the retouching is of so high a standard that  I could not possibly achieve those results by myself, there is no benefit to me whatsoever.

Another point that I agree with ... with the point being made that the TFP should be mutual or benefit both parties.  I don't "retouch" ... any sort of adjustments are minimal on my part. I've been shooting film too long, and shoot digital the same way ... as in wanting to get as complete a capture as possible.  Photoshop can get so fake sometimes! 

RKD Photographic wrote:
The OP consistently maintains that she would provide evidence of her retouching skills and has failed to do so. Now all of a sudden she's the 'victim'... well tough-titty: you started this.

What do you care?  It's obvious that there is no love between you and her.  You're never going to shoot with her, so why not just leave her threads alone?  She doesn't know every thing. and you don't either.  I don't either!  I'm just a dumb hack trying to keep the peace.  Compared to some of the real artists on here, I sometimes feel like I can't take a decent picture to save my life!  Maybe I'm a just a GWC!  It happened when I gave up film.    Digital is just too damn easy, and everyone thinks their an expert.  I'm just here for the cookies and to have fun!  Enjoy life! 

IBS wrote:
You obviously did not read the thread.

No, I didn't read all of the thread.  I expect it to die soon.  I'm a thread killer.  Don't worry. 

Patrick Walberg wrote:
Actually ... NO she does not have to prove herself. There are no set rules as to creating, and working with other artists, or models.  This is not some exact science.  As long as she follows the forum rules, she can promise you all she wants, but that does not mean much at all since you will never work with each other, now will you?

Actually she said she could retouch 'better' than many photographers she worked with - I and a few others here would just like to see some evidence of that as it's pretty central to her view that getting RAW images should be part and parcel of a TFP shoot from the model's perspective.

Several times she's been asked to show us the goods and she said she would be happy to do so, but has as yet failed to provide said evidence. Now is saying she doesn't have to.

Well no, of course we can't compel her to do anything she doesn't want to, but failing to do so pretty much voids her entire argument.

I don't really have an issue with the OP other than the issues I have with any other person who spouts utter bollocks and expects other to take it as gospel - but if they can't back up their arguments effectively they should expect a drubbing.

RKD Photographic wrote:
Well actually, you do...

No, she doesn't, I let her off the hook on that one, I advised her to no longer post in her own thread. I told her that no matter what she did, when dealing with bullies, they would never be satisfied until the final post was about them and their victory. Since you and your minions are determined to cow her into submission, regardless of any truth she might be able to posit, she should quit while her dignity is still intact. I believe her dignity is intact... I can't say the same thing for some of the respondents in this thread.

RKD Photographic wrote:
I guess I missed a couple of posts before they were removed... pity...

That is a pity, and also very confusing. I don't use foul language like some are prone to (well, at least not very often). I didn't attack anyone's abilities, although I did point out a few discrepancies between what has been stated as fact and what I perceive to be fact. About the only reason I can think of that might have forced their hand was my assessment of the "business" model a lot of you guys go on about... that was a good one. Too bad you didn't get to read that one, but I can understand why they wouldn't want you to.

RKD Photographic wrote:
I'll reiterate my position one more time for the sake of clarity.

I believe your position is very important, and needs to be very clearly understood, so please... iterate once more.

RKD Photographic wrote:
Why would I choose to relinquish control of my images after a TF shoot? What's in it for me?

This is the crux of the matter for me, and why I think your position is so vexing. I don't believe there is anything in it for you. I don't believe there is anything in it for you before a TF shoot, nor do I believe there is anything in it for you after a TF shoot. As far as to why you would relinquish control? You're never truly free until you do. I'm not the first, nor the smartest guy to ever say that, but I do believe it with all my heart. I would advise you to try it sometime, but you don't seem like that type of guy.

RKD Photographic wrote:
I choose the model (usually), I choose the location, I choose the camera and the lenses to use. I choose the lights and where to put them, what intensity and what quality: hard, soft etc. (light-formers). I choose the aperture and shutter speed.
I tell the model what clothes to wear and I direct the MUA to create the make-up and hair effects that I want. I tell the model where to stand, how to stand, where to turn, where to look and finally most importantly, I decide when to press the shutter.

I believe this speaks to your control issues, and I am more than adamant in my belief that you are telling the truth. As a matter of fact, I insist you are telling the truth!

RKD Photographic wrote:
Why after all that would I then abdicate any further control over those images by handing RAWs to the model 'to practice with'?

At this point, I think everyone can agree there is no reason for you to hand over your raw files.

RKD Photographic wrote:
In the past I have supplied RAW files to clients for third-party (professional) retouchers to finish, but the price I charge the client reflects that.
If a model wants RAW images then she can commission me to shoot for her, but it'll cost money as the resulting images are likely to be of no further use to me.

My response could be dicey here, so I think I'll pass on this one.

RKD Photographic wrote:
On a TFP shoot? What's in it for me? Unless the retouching is of so high a standard that  I could not possibly achieve those results by myself, there is no benefit to me whatsoever.

I believe you asked this one already.

RKD Photographic wrote:
The OP consistently maintains that she would provide evidence of her retouching skills and has failed to do so. Now all of a sudden she's the 'victim'... well tough-titty: you started this.

This is the one I'm really confused by, because by all standards you seem to be an incredibly smart guy, yet this fundamentally simple issue evades you. When she started this thread, she made a very simple statement... she felt her retouch skills were better than those of some of the photographers she has worked with. I looked at her folio and decided she might be right, because some of the retouch efforts on her images are beyond horrible. So, the possibility exists that she is telling the truth. I don't recall anywhere in this thread where she said she was better than you, although she might be, we simply don't know. I don't recall anywhere in this thread where she said she was better than any of the other  respondents, although there is a distinct possibility she is (my thoughts, not hers). Additionally, she never offered to show anyone any of her retouch work, because that wasn't the purpose of the thread. You, and a few other highly skilled and very intelligent professional photographers, bullied her into saying she would show you some of her retouch work. And to boot, you forced an arbitrary time frame on her submissions. Very strange behavior!

Caitin is a wonderfully charming person, and she may have a great career ahead of her as either a model or a retoucher, or possibly both. She may also fall completely on her face and disappear from the on line photo scene. While all of this is possible, I feel it's incumbent on me to help her, and anyone else that needs my help, if help is what I can offer. Apparently, you feel the need to disparage her.

RKD Photographic wrote:
Actually she said she could retouch 'better' than many photographers she worked with - I and a few others here would just like to see some evidence of that as it's pretty central to her view that getting RAW images should be part and parcel of a TFP shoot from the model's perspective.

Several times she's been asked to show us the goods and she said she would be happy to do so, but has as yet failed to provide said evidence. Now is saying she doesn't have to.

Well no, of course we can't compel her to do anything she doesn't want to, but failing to do so pretty much voids her entire argument.

I don't really have an issue with the OP other than the issues I have with any other person who spouts utter bollocks and expects other to take it as gospel - but if they can't back up their arguments effectively they should expect a drubbing.

I just wanted you to know that I won't be posting in here any longer, which is what I said at the end of the novel they took down last night (go ahead, call me a liar). My purpose on MM is to meet models, not to tilt at windmills. My personal "Business" model in here is to offer TF, or testing, to as many people as I think have something to offer in trade for my time. I will never charge them, and periodically I will give them Raw files to play with. How this practice could possibly hurt you is way beyond my ability to reason, but if it does, I'm terribly sorry.

Again, it is a pity that you didn't get a chance to read the post they removed, it might have been one of my more epic posts. But it should warm your heart to know you've made a new friend, and I'm certain, as I browse the forums, that you and I will have some wonderful CAM opportunities!

Robert Randall wrote:
How this practice could possibly hurt you is way beyond my ability to reason, but if it does, I'm terribly sorry.

Thanks for taking the time to respond. Since this and your previous response were nothing if not thoughtful, polite and articulate, I have no reason to suppose the deleted post was otherwise.
I do take slight issue with the thought that you seem to believe anyone holding the same opinion as I do with regard the matter of RAW file give-aways is somehow in league with me, that they are minions or cohorts of mine (or I of theirs) or that some dark, behind-the-scenes cabal of evil troll-tographers exists, lying in wait ready to pounce on the unsuspecting newbie model.

I think the OP was unlucky in her timing: as you know some topics go round and round ad nauseum and it was perhaps her misfortune to propose her cunning scheme at a time I (and maybe some others) was feeling particularly overwhelmed by models 'demanding' all the images or RAW images at TF shoots.
She was doubly unfortunate in that she took umbrage at being disagreed-with.

I also didn't say the practice 'hurts' me - it just offers no particular value. I am amenable to almost anything if the compensation is adequate, but in the case of giving files away for TF jobs, I see no benefit - that's all.

Caitin   wrote:
What does TF mean?
I see it as Trade For something, anything, everything.

For sure the trade should be something worth your time.

One thing that drives me crazy is when I get an offer for 5 edited photos with only rights for self promotion. So you get 5 picked and edited by photographer, 800x 533p 72dpi.

Really how much is that worth?

Well if your a new model needing port pics and the photographer isn't keeping 500 nude erotic images of you for it then its worth getting you started.

But if you have plenty of self promotion pics its worthless.

You have to see the value in the time. If the offer is 10 raw images from the shoot of your choice and all rights to those ten, then you might have something. For sure if they are of value on the market.

What do you think about this practice?

Certainly I think it is why when you 1st sign up on a site why you get pounded left and right for TF until you figure it out.

Do you think its taking advantage of a persons lack of experience?

first bold - you've answered your own question - the photographers works isn't valuable to you. In this case I would suggest you not enter into a TF arrangement and ask the photographer to pay you the rate you can negotiate. If you really want to shoot with him/her, then you do see value.

Like you, I don't need to shoot TF to fill my portfolio. My potential value is the release you sign. This in itself is not intrinsic value. It has the potential of value. If the images are marketable, if i chose to invest in post, if i chose to invest in marketing them, all of this takes considerable time.  So - just because the photographer has images and a release doesn't mean there is any more value in those images than you have of them  - just the potential. And it doesn’t mean there is any real money in it. In many cases – if the photographer’s image is published, he won’t make much or any money off it anyway. The value for the photographer is that it was published. For that, he needs the release.

Overall - I think the initial premise is flawed. ie -  Somehow, models feel that “all these photographers are shooting trade, then selling all the “their”  images and making a bunch of money”. Just isn’t happening. As with any business a few fundamentals need to exist – a market and a willing buyer. The market for stock has been decimated (sure people are still making some money - but look at the comp on these stock sites – it’s nothing). So where’s the market for a bunch of model photos, of a model that is unknown shot by an unknown photographer?

2nd bold. your second question - I would not enter into this agreement. I would not sign over copyright. I consider an agreement, where you receive limited rights to use/sell the final product produced by me, terms to be negotiated. you do all the leg work of marketing and selling it.... (see my comments above regarding market)

My TF arrangement is 2-3 images per look.  I’ll provide prints as well if you keep a book. I get a release. If I get it published – good on both of us. 
Comes down to this
- Do you value the photographer’s work or he doesn’t ‘need you - pay him
- You don’t see value of his work or he “needs” you  – he pays you
- You both want to collaborate? - negotiate whatever trade each of you value. I’ve known models who have traded for clothing, airline tickets, etc
- If it’s a commercial shoot – everyone should be getting paid.

Caitin   wrote:

No problem there! If for trade for some raw images in return with releases of equal value. Its like splitting the deal. It would have to be with someone that can give you that quality as well. And something I need.
Like there are a few things I am looking for right now that I need to complete a gallery for Art exhibitions. (for profit)

I'm also working on a book. If there is something that would contribute to the value.

wrt the Art Gallery - good luck. but not impossible. We'd split it. But I would agree to the same if i were to trip over someone who wanted to hang a naked image of a stranger  in their place

wrt the book - assuming it is legitimate (a publisher and all that). I would grant a usage license for the image(s), and receive monatary compensation from you prior to publication. No we won't do a trade shoot for your book or web site content. I wouldn't expect you to to do it either.