Brooklyn Bridge Images wrote:
OP should cut out the middle man and do self portraits
Much better for everyone

I'm sayin'

But I thought maybe some of the images in her portfolio were self-portraits -- especially since she stamped her own copyright symbol on them.

Caitin   wrote:
If it takes a photographer 6oo clicks to get ten pictures what does that say?

If the 10 pictures are great then it says he's a good photographer with a keen eye who is ruthless about selecting only his best images.

If the 10 are average or worse then it probably means he's an average or worse photographer.

From what I can see in your posts Caitin you seem to be falling into many of the classic newbie photographer traps here - confusing equipment and number of shots with talent.

I would suggest you post a thread in the Critique forum from your photography account so that you can get some objective feedback on the stuff you seem to think you know so much about.


Ash.

RKD Photographic wrote:

It's full of something, that's for sure...

Sure is!

Caitin   wrote:

Isn't technical quality also based on art as well?
Example: I was reaching for a 70's kinda uneven soft focus look. trying to mimic the film look as well using a 5d mk2. to do that I took a stocking with a small hole in it place id over a 50mm 1.8 and shot at 6400 iso. (something I learned by watching a "old school" friend of mine).
It was perfect for what I was trying to create. some critiques said wow you need to learn how to use your camera? didn't have a clue!

I've already done that with real film in the 70's.  There is a photo in my portfolio.

Caitin   wrote:

Darren Brade wrote:
I do think your OP is a little misleading, maybe you should revise it to mention that you require the RAW images because you are also a retoucher?

Not misleading. More of a discussion to learn ideas from each others on a new concept of how to look at TF Images. We can all learn from each other!

Misleading. The OP and your follow ups were almost all telling people that they were doing it wrong. As you did a few minutes after you posted the above.

Caitin   wrote:

RKD Photographic wrote:
If the model wants RAWs then we start talking money - if she has a concept she want to shoot and edit herself then she hires me - pure and simple.

Then I say forget TF and you don't complain about paying her fee she asks for a release. If the level of recognition is level and talent is matched then the value of time is equal. Not to hard to understand.

If the parties involved find things equitable, it's not too hard to understand why they'd be satisfied. What is harder to understand is how a third party, without any knowledge of the people involved, can determine that such an agreement is unfair and why they then continue to make blanket statements about why it's unfair--even if all the people involved are satisfied.

KonstantKarma wrote:
This thread has a lot of open mouth, insert foot going on.

Kinda like the train wreck...can't look away.

I wish I'd stayed logged-on last night - I haven't had this much fun in ages...

RKD Photographic wrote:

I wish I'd stayed logged-on last night - I haven't had this much fun in ages...

c_h_r_i_s wrote:
Real Meaning of TF vs What You get!

And the answer...... look at the photographers port.

Lately I've had a model get upset because I didn't smear our her skin with a blur filter and make her into a shiny ball of wax "like other photographers". I got really annoyed.  If you'd looked at my port you should realize my retouching doesn't involve that.

Decay of Memory wrote:
By now the op is on the radar of, and has probably cornered the market in, shoots with masochistic photographers who have some secret sin that they need to atone for through suffering. Negotiating the demands and dealing with the concepts that the op has put forward in this thread would have all the pleasure of having an avaricious ferret in the final stages of rabies gnawing on your ankle.

Hmm... that good, eh?

RKD Photographic wrote:

Hmm... that good, eh?

I'm a country boy. I'm going with the ferret if forced to a choice.

Photo by Jasangas wrote:
I am a Photographer and I don't think its fair for a photographer to hand over 5 images at 72dpi, what can the model do with that besides use it as a Profile Pic on Facebook.  In my case, when I say TFP I mean TFP - Model gets ALL IMAGES in a CD with of course 10 of which is enhanced - I always have a model sign a release form so that I can use their images and post them on my website, at the same trade, I sign a Copyright release to the model to use her or his images as long as I continue to get credit of the images used.

Models - When speaking to a Photographer, they know the business, and if you stumble upon one that you feel, does not have the knowledge, you need to step back.  You are who you hang out with, and trust me, its not a myth.

Just because someone conducts business different than yours doesn't mean their practices are unfair. If both parties are happy that 5 quality images from a trade shoot, so be it. You may not agree with the choice, but you still have to respect the decision they made.

As for the OP, it's clear she either need to choose better photographers or pay one if she want to avoid any further issues down the line. It shouldn't 8 pages to find a simple answer.

Caitin   wrote:
I would never ask for ALL the images. only 10 out of 200 or more from a shoot of my choice. I find that fair.
As models become more educated about how things work, you will see it more and more.

I'll preface by saying all parties involved in any negotiation should try to get as much out of the deal as possible. Period. Having said that...

A) What if my particular style of photography takes me 2-4 hours to edit 1 single photo? I have a job and a life thank you very much.

B) Kinda seems like you don't really care about artistic rights. And IMO thats not the role of a model. If you wish to make it so then your portfolio will in all likelihood never progress. A photographer of self-worth would almost never give away the RAW files.

C) About editing... why would I want someone else to edit my work? A lot of photographers do it but I view it as disingenuous so I keep it to an absolute minimum. I cannot use a shot you edit because of my work ethic.

I only work with models that are focused on improving themselves. Not worried about if they can sell a photo. Since you seem to know so much you already know you can't even sell a photo without a paying client waiting in the wing. This is about artistic respect-- respecting my work as a photographer. I'm just glad I live in Cali where the casting pool is deep and we actually have somewhat of an industry. So a model like you is thankfully avoidable.

This boils down to models (like yourself) trying to make an industry where there isn't one. I will, in all likelihood, never have a client that requires a model like yourself. Its the reality of the industry.

Caitin   wrote:
I would never ask for ALL the images. only 10 out of 200 or more from a shoot of my choice. I find that fair.
As models become more less educated about how things work, you will see it more and more shitty photos.

Fixed it for you, Caitin.

Caitin   wrote:
I would never ask for ALL the images. only 10 out of 200 or more from a shoot of my choice. I find that fair.
As models become more less educated about how things work, you will see it more and more shitty photos.

KonstantKarma wrote:
Fixed it for you, Caitin.

OUDAME wrote:
...I'm just glad I live in Cali where the casting pool is deep and we actually have somewhat of an industry. So a model like you is thankfully avoidable.

Ouch! Harsh, but ultimately quite funny...

Caitin   wrote:

What if the person you can clearly see isn't that educated in business? Would you educate them and then negotiate? Protect them from there ignorance?

"YES" ... I truly believe "you reap what you sow' ... and I agree with your OP ... time is worth something. I am so disappointed with folks "ticking" and being "tricked".  I give hi-res jpegs all models ... even to models that do paid shoots with me.

KonstantKarma wrote:
It's a simple process.

1) New/aspiring model signs up for MM

2) Aspiring model reads MM forum threads to learn more about what to expect

3) Aspiring model reads models saying things like "10+ photos per shoot" or "all photos from the shoot" and expects it

4) Aspiring model approaches photographers with that expectation, photographers who do careful retouching laugh at her

5) Aspiring model has a few shoots with photographers who give her *all* the images, etc., which look like shit

6) Aspiring model has terrible portfolio, feels bad, and gives up.

Pretty spot on in many cases -

Here's another scenario

Model who is serious about building their portfolio pay really good photographers to help them and is thrilled to get one or two images per look from someone who knows what they are doing

Model gets a steady stream of paying work, raises rates to find a price point

Model is flexible about rates when it is to her advantage, ie due to location,  or possiblity of getting good images

Model says "no TFP" so she does not have to defend rejecting stupid TFP offers from people who could not help her book, but in fact, she *does* trade with photographers who can build her port or keep it fresh -  because it means more income.  Again one or two images per look from a great photographer - it's all she really has use for

at the end of the day, which path is more successful?

Studio Gregor wrote:

Pretty spot on in many cases -

Here's another scenario

Model who is serious about building their portfolio pay really good photographers to help them and is thrilled to get one or two images per look from someone who knows what they are doing

Model gets a steady stream of paying work, raises rates to find a price point

Model is flexible about rates when it is to her advantage, ie due to location,  or possiblity of getting good images

Model says "no TFP" so she does not have to defend rejecting stupid TFP offers from people who could not help her book, but in fact, she *does* trade with photographers who can build her port or keep it fresh -  because it means more income.  Again one or two images per look from a great photographer - it's all she really has use for

at the end of the day, which path is more successful?

Now you're just talking sense - this is MM - stop it at once!

Studio Gregor wrote:

Pretty spot on in many cases -

Here's another scenario

Model who is serious about building their portfolio pay really good photographers to help them and is thrilled to get one or two images per look from someone who knows what they are doing

Model gets a steady stream of paying work, raises rates to find a price point

Model is flexible about rates when it is to her advantage, ie due to location,  or possiblity of getting good images

Model says "no TFP" so she does not have to defend rejecting stupid TFP offers from people who could not help her book, but in fact, she *does* trade with photographers who can build her port or keep it fresh -  because it means more income.  Again one or two images per look from a great photographer - it's all she really has use for

at the end of the day, which path is more successful?

That's the best way to go. Unfortunately, many aspiring models aren't going to realize this is an option - When other models are giving them poor TF advice and they're getting TF requests from every guy out there when they first sign up.

Caitin   wrote:

For the exception of maybe 5 photos I own all rights. And the ones that I don't own all the rights to I do have the correct permissions for. I would never use a photo I didn't. I always get approval of my edit and protections of the photo before I post anything.
There are plenty of photographers that will work out these agreements. The number of willing photographers is growing.

Have you ever considered that demanding all the rights to the images effects the quality of the photographer willing to work with you? I live in LA, I could throw a rock and hit 10 "models" with more coming in each day, doesn't mean they are models who are going to benefit me or my work should i shoot with them.

Too many people confuse quantity with quality, and the work they show suffers for it.

1k-words-photograpy wrote:
I mean is it possible that someone here has an image worth millions sitting in their catalogue? Sure. Is it probable that they do? OH HELL NO!

you know a member of MM has lived for the last few decades off his photos of Jimi Hendrix setting fire to his guitar?

I mean, setting aside the possible worth of one of my celebrity images to the right clients, there are dozens of photographers on MM with huge catalogs of celebrity work that sell through their agents every day.

Maybe if you spelled catalog correctly you would know that people on MM have some very expensive licensing agreements in place on their existing photographs.

Caitin   wrote:

Nothing was said about all the Images. Just 5 or 10 from the shoot.
And it is like paying for them if I am not charging for my time. A trade!

so for me to shoot an image and release all rights would be around $1200 an image+ shoot fee. I seriously doubt you charge an equal amount. therefor it is not an equal trade.

Caitin I have never heard of you, why should i give you $7,000 in services for 4 hours of your time?

April Hunter wrote:
TF should be an outright exchange of ALL that was shot in the day.

When you buy bags of fruit, do you expect it to include all the rotten fruit that that was also produced, or just the fruit deemed appropriate for consumption?

Almost everyone who produces anything has some quality control and most producers only provide a finished product.  Why do you expect photographers to be any different?  I don't keep most images myself.  Why would I give them to someone else?

While you are certainly free to work with photographers based on any criteria you wish, I think you will find that if you are only willing to work with photographers that will give you every image shot, you will be putting the vast majority of photographers off limits.

April Hunter wrote:
TF should be an outright exchange of ALL that was shot in the day.

Photographers may offer only a few edited photos, but you should be receiving all the shots in general. If you're giving your time, your wardrobe, your body, you're doing your hair and makeup...then you'd better damn well get EVERY shot. Sans the blinks and blurs, that is.

Don't let anyone get away *not* doing that. Perhaps some photographers don't like llamas using lesser shots, but then if that's the case, maybe they should edit them all.

After all, the llama is usually eating the majority of expenses for the TF shoot--from travel to getting her hair colored and nails done.

I'm a female photographer. I color my hair, get my nails done, own nice clothes. I have to travel to the location as well.

GUESS WHAT- whether you are a llama or just a girl working in a bank you are going to do all those things. I doubt that if you weren't a llama you would stop grooming yourself and walk around in the same sweats every day.

Gyms are not filled only with llamas, most people want to be found attractive. Most young people will continue to do basic grooming and all that so that they can be found attractive. Girls who are already on their way to becoming attractive spend more time and money on being attractive so that they can get into clubs, date and or screw attractive partners etc...

Attractive people get paid more, and can work at better jobs than their equally qualified less attractive counterparts.

So maybe you need to stop thinking of doing your nails and getting your hair cut and colored as a business expense and think of it as a life expense.

sheesh!

Star wrote:
Attractive people get paid more, and can work at better jobs than their equally qualified less attractive counterparts.

!

So why are all the incredibly rich people fat, bold and or ugly.

April Hunter wrote:
TF should be an outright exchange of ALL that was shot in the day.

Photographers may offer only a few edited photos, but you should be receiving all the shots in general. If you're giving your time, your wardrobe, your body, you're doing your hair and makeup...then you'd better damn well get EVERY shot. Sans the blinks and blurs, that is.

Don't let anyone get away *not* doing that. Perhaps some photographers don't like models using lesser shots, but then if that's the case, maybe they should edit them all.

After all, the model is usually eating the majority of expenses for the TF shoot--from travel to getting her hair colored and nails done.

I'd gladly give you all the pictures from the shoot as long as you got your pose right in 1 shot! No blinking, warming up, etc.

Seriously, why say "ALL" and then contradict yourself by removing the defects?

Why not try better photographers then you won't have to make such useless demands?

Photo by Jasangas wrote:
In my case, when I say TFP I mean TFP - Model gets ALL IMAGES in a CD with of course 10 of which is enhanced

No, in your case, when you say TFP you mean TFCD.

If, when you say TFP, you meant TFP, you would provide what the "P" in TFP actually stands for...Prints. If you're providing a CD with images you're doing a TFCD.

Those letters actually have meaning. Crazy right?

April Hunter wrote:
TF should be an outright exchange of ALL that was shot in the day.

Photographers may offer only a few edited photos, but you should be receiving all the shots in general. If you're giving your time, your wardrobe, your body, you're doing your hair and makeup...then you'd better damn well get EVERY shot. Sans the blinks and blurs, that is.

Don't let anyone get away *not* doing that. Perhaps some photographers don't like models using lesser shots, but then if that's the case, maybe they should edit them all.

After all, the model is usually eating the majority of expenses for the TF shoot--from travel to getting her hair colored and nails done.

I'm a photographer but for the most part I'm on the models side of this argument. I think models should get more and I conduct my TFs to give them more. However I think your idea is way out there.

I used to give every keeper just like you say, everything but the blinks and blurs. I spent tons of time dealing with requests to edit something other than the package I was interested in or do a redit or etc. Just on and on.

Decay of Memory wrote:
Negotiating the demands and dealing with the concepts that the op has put forward in this thread would have all the pleasure of having an avaricious ferret in the final stages of rabies gnawing on your ankle.

April Hunter wrote:
After all, the model is usually eating the majority of expenses for the TF shoot--from travel to getting her hair colored and nails done.

AND you have to spend all that time taking your makeup off when it's over, while the photographer is just sitting leisurely around eating bonbons at home. Once the shoot is over, he's done, over, the end; but you have to keep working! You models ought to unionize and avoid this terrible disparity in amount of work required.

April Hunter wrote:
TF should be an outright exchange of ALL that was shot in the day.

Photographers may offer only a few edited photos, but you should be receiving all the shots in general. If you're giving your time, your wardrobe, your body, you're doing your hair and makeup...then you'd better damn well get EVERY shot. Sans the blinks and blurs, that is.

Don't let anyone get away *not* doing that. Perhaps some photographers don't like models using lesser shots, but then if that's the case, maybe they should edit them all.

After all, the model is usually eating the majority of expenses for the TF shoot--from travel to getting her hair colored and nails done.

What? lol.



I get why *you* as a model want the other shitty 85% of the photos, but what about us who don't want those photos out there representing us as photographers?

April Hunter wrote:
TF should be an outright exchange of ALL that was shot in the day.

Photographers may offer only a few edited photos, but you should be receiving all the shots in general. If you're giving your time, your wardrobe, your body, you're doing your hair and makeup...then you'd better damn well get EVERY shot. Sans the blinks and blurs, that is.

Don't let anyone get away *not* doing that. Perhaps some photographers don't like models using lesser shots, but then if that's the case, maybe they should edit them all.

After all, the model is usually eating the majority of expenses for the TF shoot--from travel to getting her hair colored and nails done.

Oh Good God!
Ok, I started by writing something rather long, but condensed it to this:
You will get little sympathy for your 'majority of expenses for the TF shoot" comment from the photographers.
We know what we bring to the shoot.  It starts long before we start the first picture and will continue long after you are done with your "majority of expenses" for the shoot.

And no, I will never give out 'all' the shots taken that day.
Did it one time.  Thought I was being nice and respectful.
It was a disaster. 
NEVER again.

But, for the models with this attitude: it is my camera, so my rules. 
Dont like it, there are plenty of other photographers out there. 

Good Luck!

My two cents, YMMV,

Daeda1us

April Hunter wrote:
TF should be an outright exchange of ALL that was shot in the day.

Photographers may offer only a few edited photos, but you should be receiving all the shots in general. If you're giving your time, your wardrobe, your body, you're doing your hair and makeup...then you'd better damn well get EVERY shot. Sans the blinks and blurs, that is.

Don't let anyone get away *not* doing that. Perhaps some photographers don't like models using lesser shots, but then if that's the case, maybe they should edit them all.

After all, the model is usually eating the majority of expenses for the TF shoot--from travel to getting her hair colored and nails done.

You just convinced me not to photograph you!   
There are many other models to shoot!