login info join!
Forums > General Industry > GWC vs GWB Search   Reply
12last
Photographer
JOEL McDONALD
Posts: 608
Portland, Oregon, US


So, a model friend and I were talking today and this came up half in jest....

...If a guy with a cursory ability with a camera who just likes shooting (naked) women is called a GWC (Guy With Camera),

then shouldn't a "model" with a cursory ability in modeling that has a good body (Experience: No Experience/Compensation: Paid Assignments Only) that poses for said GWC, ostensibly for cash, be referred to as a GWB (Girl With Body)?

Just a thought. big_smile
Mar 18 13 11:20 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
M Pandolfo Photography
Posts: 12,113
Tampa, Florida, US


Girl With Body sounds a little redundant. But if you're looking for an acronym for the type of model who is only interested in getting paid with no modeling intent, and no interest in image quality, then maybe GWF is a better one.

Girl With Facebook.

Because that's usually the only place the photos from their shoots ever emerge.
Mar 18 13 11:32 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
JOEL McDONALD
Posts: 608
Portland, Oregon, US


Michael Pandolfo wrote:
Girl With Body sounds a little redundant. But if you're looking for an acronym for the type of model who is only interested in getting paid with no modeling intent, and no interest in image quality, then maybe GWF is a better one.

Girl With Facebook.

Because that's usually the only place the photos from their shoots ever emerge.

That's true. Maybe so. smile

Mar 18 13 11:38 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Nor-Cal Photography
Posts: 2,558
Walnut Creek, California, US


JOEL McDONALD wrote:
GWB (Girl With Body)?

How 'bout Guy With Body?????  Some of them too!

But just one worthless opinion.    smile

Mar 18 13 03:20 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Christopher Hartman
Posts: 53,780
Buena Park, California, US


Michael Pandolfo wrote:
Girl With Body sounds a little redundant. But if you're looking for an acronym for the type of model who is only interested in getting paid with no modeling intent, and no interest in image quality, then maybe GWF is a better one.

Girl With Facebook.

Because that's usually the only place the photos from their shoots ever emerge.

Don't forget Instagram!!

Mar 18 13 03:24 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
CSDewitt Photo
Posts: 608
Atlanta, Georgia, US


Michael Pandolfo wrote:
Girl With Body sounds a little redundant. But if you're looking for an acronym for the type of model who is only interested in getting paid with no modeling intent, and no interest in image quality, then maybe GWF is a better one.

Girl With Facebook.

Because that's usually the only place the photos from their shoots ever emerge.

I like this!!!  Girl Wants Pretty Photos, for her Friends.... (GWPP) is also a good acronym.

Mar 18 13 03:27 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Photographic Adventures
Posts: 207
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, US


JOEL McDONALD wrote:
So, a model friend and I were talking today and this came up half in jest....

...If a guy with a cursory ability with a camera who just likes shooting (naked) women is called a GWC (Guy With Camera),

then shouldn't a "model" with a cursory ability in modeling that has a good body (Experience: No Experience/Compensation: Paid Assignments Only) that poses for said GWC, ostensibly for cash, be referred to as a GWB (Girl With Body)?

Just a thought. big_smile

I can't take credit for it, But I heard it as GWD (Girl with Dream) smile

Mar 18 13 04:42 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
DougBPhoto
Posts: 37,606
Portland, Oregon, US


*RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE*
Mar 18 13 11:43 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Dumas Photography
Posts: 869
Allen, Texas, US


What about HOGTPCTTAGW?

Horny old guy that purchased a camera to try and get women?
Mar 19 13 12:04 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Robert Winn Photography
Posts: 2,067
Virginia Beach, Virginia, US


Photographic Adventures wrote:

I can't take credit for it, But I heard it as GWD (Girl with Dream) smile

I prefer GWA

Girl With Aspirations

Mar 19 13 12:09 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Fashion and Flesh
Posts: 36
CARDIFF BY THE SEA, California, US


And just like boats passing in the night can make for an amazing experience, occasionally a great or at least interesting photo shows up.
Mar 19 13 12:36 am  Link  Quote 
Model
Caitin Bre
Posts: 1,798
Naperville, Illinois, US


95% of what I see on MM qualifies as the ugly term GWC. Guy with camera. Girl without clothes.
I do not like the term as it is used to degrade people. I really think its hilarious to see GWC call others GWC because they think they spent more money on there lens and camera they can.
I happen to notice in both cases when either is shooting me and my clothes come off they begin to sweat and there voice changes and there pitching a tent.
So at what point does it become a GWC by MM terms? The photographers that do not have these responses (there has been a couple) what are they called? MDDW=My doink dont work. Or ISNSMTIDGEA= I shoot nudes so muchthat I dont get excited anymore. Or ISNBICTBNFFIMA= I shoot nudes because I celebrate the beautiful nude female form in my artwork. or finally IWNAWISN= I will never admit why I shoot nudes.
I think The term sucks! Its just a hypocrisy.
Mar 19 13 07:15 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Ed Woodson Photography
Posts: 2,644
Savannah, Georgia, US


Michael Pandolfo wrote:
Girl With Body sounds a little redundant. But if you're looking for an acronym for the type of model who is only interested in getting paid with no modeling intent, and no interest in image quality, then maybe GWF is a better one.

Girl With Facebook.

Because that's usually the only place the photos from their shoots ever emerge.

Somehow, I don't think the photos that a "GWC" would take would very likely end up on Facebook.

I'm also not sure that there's a good acronym for the girls who pander to the GWC's

I also think that many of the models who do pander to the GWC's get just as much of a charge from being nude as the guy does taking their photo.

Mar 19 13 07:27 am  Link  Quote 
Model
Caitin Bre
Posts: 1,798
Naperville, Illinois, US


Ed Woodson Photography wrote:

Somehow, I don't think the photos that a "GWC" would take would very likely end up on Facebook.

I'm also not sure that there's a good acronym for the girls who pander to the GWC's

I also think that many of the models who do pander to the GWC's get just as much of a charge from being nude as the guy does taking their photo.

GWC's ROCK! smile

Mar 19 13 07:42 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Dumas Photography
Posts: 869
Allen, Texas, US


Caitin   wrote:

GWC's ROCK! smile

Why do you hide your port?

Mar 19 13 08:16 am  Link  Quote 
Model
Danielle Reid
Posts: 3,872
Las Vegas, Nevada, US


NVM
Mar 19 13 08:25 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Dumas Photography
Posts: 869
Allen, Texas, US


Dumas Photography wrote:

Why do you hide your port?

Nevermind, just read why.  And by the way, that was not meant as it may sound...  it was not meant as a snappy comment.  I was just curious.  Liked your avatar wanted to see what you had in your folio....

Mar 19 13 08:28 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Sophistocles
Posts: 21,320
Seattle, Washington, US


I call them MySpace models.

Most often, I love 'em.  They listen.
Mar 19 13 08:31 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
salvatori.
Posts: 3,720
State College, Pennsylvania, US


JOEL McDONALD wrote:
So, a model friend and I were talking today and this came up half in jest....

...If a guy with a cursory ability with a camera who just likes shooting (naked) women is called a GWC (Guy With Camera),

then shouldn't a "model" with a cursory ability in modeling that has a good body (Experience: No Experience/Compensation: Paid Assignments Only) that poses for said GWC, ostensibly for cash, be referred to as a GWB (Girl With Body)?

Just a thought. big_smile

This is pretty good, though I admit that when I saw the thread title, I thought it meant 'guy with boner' and I was gonna sign up.

smile

Mar 19 13 10:02 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
TallPix
Posts: 215
Miami Springs, Florida, US


Dont forget......  gwc- wabl.        With a big lens
Mar 19 13 10:10 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jackson frontier photos
Posts: 531
Joplin, Missouri, US


JOEL McDONALD wrote:
So, a model friend and I were talking today and this came up half in jest....

...If a guy with a cursory ability with a camera who just likes shooting (naked) women is called a GWC (Guy With Camera),

then shouldn't a "model" with a cursory ability in modeling that has a good body (Experience: No Experience/Compensation: Paid Assignments Only) that poses for said GWC, ostensibly for cash, be referred to as a GWB (Girl With Body)?

Just a thought. big_smile

Self delete

Mar 19 13 10:23 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
M Pandolfo Photography
Posts: 12,113
Tampa, Florida, US


Caitin   wrote:
95% of what I see on MM qualifies as the ugly term GWC. Guy with camera. Girl without clothes.
I do not like the term as it is used to degrade people. I really think its hilarious to see GWC call others GWC because they think they spent more money on there lens and camera they can.
I happen to notice in both cases when either is shooting me and my clothes come off they begin to sweat and there voice changes and there pitching a tent.
So at what point does it become a GWC by MM terms? The photographers that do not have these responses (there has been a couple) what are they called? MDDW=My doink dont work. Or ISNSMTIDGEA= I shoot nudes so muchthat I dont get excited anymore. Or ISNBICTBNFFIMA= I shoot nudes because I celebrate the beautiful nude female form in my artwork. or finally IWNAWISN= I will never admit why I shoot nudes.
I think The term sucks! Its just a hypocrisy.

In order to think the term sucks, you should probably first understand the term. That's a good start.

GWC was never meant to imply any level of expertise, or lack thereof. It was meant to convey the INTENT of the photographer.

GWC describes a male who's only motivation for picking up a camera is to get attractive young women out of their clothes. They're using the camera much the same way a man with a small penis uses a Corvette.

GWC is NOT describing a skill level. Just because someone lacks talent doesn't mean they are a GWC. Nor does it mean someone who is talented can't be a GWC.

Now, would you like to start over?

Mar 19 13 10:34 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
M Pandolfo Photography
Posts: 12,113
Tampa, Florida, US


Caitin   wrote:
95% of what I see on MM qualifies as the ugly term GWC. Guy with camera. Girl without clothes.
I do not like the term as it is used to degrade people. I really think its hilarious to see GWC call others GWC because they think they spent more money on there lens and camera they can.
I happen to notice in both cases when either is shooting me and my clothes come off they begin to sweat and there voice changes and there pitching a tent.
So at what point does it become a GWC by MM terms? The photographers that do not have these responses (there has been a couple) what are they called? MDDW=My doink dont work. Or ISNSMTIDGEA= I shoot nudes so muchthat I dont get excited anymore. Or ISNBICTBNFFIMA= I shoot nudes because I celebrate the beautiful nude female form in my artwork. or finally IWNAWISN= I will never admit why I shoot nudes.
I think The term sucks! Its just a hypocrisy.
Caitin   wrote:
GWC's ROCK! smile

Ummm...do you even listen to yourself? Or did your opinion change in the matter of 2 posts?

Mar 19 13 10:38 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Amul La La
Posts: 793
Plymouth, England, United Kingdom


SNAP!!!!!
Mar 19 13 10:56 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
The F-Stop
Posts: 1,436
New York, New York, US


A  M  U   L  wrote:
SNAP!!!!!

Some Nasty Ass Pictures? SNAP...?

Mar 19 13 11:42 am  Link  Quote 
Model
Caitin Bre
Posts: 1,798
Naperville, Illinois, US


Michael Pandolfo wrote:

In order to think the term sucks, you should probably first understand the term. That's a good start.

GWC was never meant to imply any level of expertise, or lack thereof. It was meant to convey the INTENT of the photographer.

GWC describes a male who's only motivation for picking up a camera is to get attractive young women out of their clothes. They're using the camera much the same way a man with a small penis uses a Corvette.

GWC is NOT describing a skill level. Just because someone lacks talent doesn't mean they are a GWC. Nor does it mean someone who is talented can't be a GWC.

Now, would you like to start over?

The term is very abused though a lot wouldn't you agree?

What you described I just call creep.

Mar 19 13 11:47 am  Link  Quote 
Model
Caitin Bre
Posts: 1,798
Naperville, Illinois, US


Michael Pandolfo wrote:

Caitin   wrote:
95% of what I see on MM qualifies as the ugly term GWC. Guy with camera. Girl without clothes.
I do not like the term as it is used to degrade people. I really think its hilarious to see GWC call others GWC because they think they spent more money on there lens and camera they can.
I happen to notice in both cases when either is shooting me and my clothes come off they begin to sweat and there voice changes and there pitching a tent.
So at what point does it become a GWC by MM terms? The photographers that do not have these responses (there has been a couple) what are they called? MDDW=My doink dont work. Or ISNSMTIDGEA= I shoot nudes so muchthat I dont get excited anymore. Or ISNBICTBNFFIMA= I shoot nudes because I celebrate the beautiful nude female form in my artwork. or finally IWNAWISN= I will never admit why I shoot nudes.
I think The term sucks! Its just a hypocrisy.

Ummm...do you even listen to yourself? Or did your opinion change in the matter of 2 posts?

Nope was being facetious. lol

Mar 19 13 11:49 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
AJScalzitti
Posts: 12,286
Atlanta, Georgia, US


Well a GWC isn't some noobie photographer with dream of making it big, the term was always used to talk about "photographers" only interested in getting alone with nude girls.  They have no desire to be good at or get better at photography.  There are also girls who service that market, but I would not call them models.

The aspiring photographer who isn't very good yet or model with only one expression don't deserve to be lumped in with those folks.

Now as for the delusional folks who think they will be models... Well I got nothing
Mar 19 13 11:52 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
RKD Photographic
Posts: 3,263
Iserlohn, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany


Caitin   wrote:
The term is very abused though a lot wouldn't you agree?

What you described I just call creep.

Agreed - GWC is usually used as an implication not only of 'creepiness', but a lack of talent to boot... I'm not sure which is worse...

How much creepiness do you tolerate if the photographs are simply awesome?
I think we all know some famous horror-stories of photographers whose personal habits were quite unsavoury, but who had no trouble finding either llamas or clients, simply because they were so good.

Mar 19 13 11:53 am  Link  Quote 
Model
Caitin Bre
Posts: 1,798
Naperville, Illinois, US


RKD Photographic wrote:

Agreed - GWC is usually used as an implication not only of 'creepiness', but a lack of talent to boot... I'm not sure which is worse...

How much creepiness do you tolerate if the photographs are simply awesome?
I think we all know some famous horror-stories of photographers whose personal habits were quite unsavoury, but who had no trouble finding either models or clients, simply because they were so good.

I think it depends on there personality. Terry got a bad deal because he is so well known. Don't believe everything you read. I would shoot with him without a doubt.
I have modeled for all kinds of shooters. A very very small number in 22 years have been total creeps that wouldn't take no for a answer. If it is a problem I just call the shoot and leave. I get paid for the shoot upfront so its there loss. I explain my limits right up front. When I was younger in my early years I put up with a lot more.
I have modeled for photographers that have been called GWC and they were perfect gentlemen.
I don't care if they want to shoot while they are nude themselves makes no difference to me I'm nude so what. I have been in that situation a few times and found it comfortable.
But I have my bubble. My personal space. If you ask to come into my personal space and I say no you better believe I mean no.
If you barge into my personal space then you deserve what you get. smile

Mar 19 13 12:17 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Caitin Bre
Posts: 1,798
Naperville, Illinois, US


AJScalzitti wrote:
Well a GWC isn't some noobie photographer with dream of making it big, the term was always used to talk about "photographers" only interested in getting alone with nude girls.  They have no desire to be good at or get better at photography.  There are also girls who service that market, but I would not call them models.

The aspiring photographer who isn't very good yet or model with only one expression don't deserve to be lumped in with those folks.

Now as for the delusional folks who think they will be models... Well I got nothing

I think it is a natural normal thing for a photographer to be attracted to the beautiful image he is trying to create. I think that artistic drive and passionate drive are from the same part of the brain. I think it is normal for a man to get excited in the presence of a naked woman if they are strait.
I think where creep comes in is if they can not contain themselves. If they do not respect me.

Mar 19 13 12:28 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
M Pandolfo Photography
Posts: 12,113
Tampa, Florida, US


Caitin   wrote:
I think it is normal for a man to get excited in the presence of a naked woman if they are strait.

George Strait?

Mar 19 13 02:29 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Stray Kat
Posts: 90
Morris, Illinois, US


nvrmnd
Mar 19 13 02:35 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
NYC fine art nudes
Posts: 151
New York, New York, US


May as well throw in GWP

Guy (or gal) With Photoshop ....because so many people qualify themselves as professional retouchers.
Mar 19 13 02:53 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
The F-Stop
Posts: 1,436
New York, New York, US


A retoutcher is the second toucher... the GWC was first touching?

who's worse?
Mar 19 13 06:58 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
End of the Road Studio
Posts: 160
Albuquerque, New Mexico, US


Grandpa With Camera ?
Mar 19 13 07:06 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
JOEL McDONALD
Posts: 608
Portland, Oregon, US


GWD = Girl With Delusions

or maybe,

DWC = Diva Without Cause?

big_smile
Mar 20 13 12:43 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Barry Kidd Photography
Posts: 2,378
Red Lion, Pennsylvania, US


Mar 21 13 01:17 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Art of the nude
Posts: 11,781
Olivet, Michigan, US


JOEL McDONALD wrote:
So, a model friend and I were talking today and this came up half in jest....

...If a guy with a cursory ability with a camera who just likes shooting (naked) women is called a GWC (Guy With Camera),

then shouldn't a "model" with a cursory ability in modeling that has a good body (Experience: No Experience/Compensation: Paid Assignments Only) that poses for said GWC, ostensibly for cash, be referred to as a GWB (Girl With Body)?

Just a thought. big_smile

I was thinking "GWB" was "Guy With Brush."  I don't understand why "GWC" types, or at least the ones who aren't making a living from photography, don't just buy paintbrushes or drawing pencils.  It's cheaper than a camera, and models do that sort of work much cheaper than photographic modeling.

Mar 21 13 03:36 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Mcary
Posts: 1,803
Fredericksburg, Virginia, US


Barry Kidd Photography wrote:
Mar 21 13 04:13 am  Link  Quote 
12last   Search   Reply



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

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

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