login info join!
Forums > Photography Talk > Flakes Search   Reply
first123
Photographer
Looknsee Photography
Posts: 20,470
Portland, Oregon, US


Tony Lawrence wrote:
I don't know if your suggestions are better or worse then anyone else's.   They work for you.   They may NOT be practical for others.   Many of whom do NOT belong to a circle of photographers they can reach out too for info on a new model who is likely not to have worked with anyone they know.

That's all fine.  Before you go too far, I'll remind you that I've said that forming a local photographic community is work -- it takes some effort, especially in the beginning, but it's benefits are many.  These benefits include...
...  Sharing references,
...  Better yet, sharing recommendations,
...  Sharing locations,
...  Sharing resources,
...  Group projects,
...  Event announcements,
...  and so forth.

Yes, it's not for everyone -- there are photographers in this area who choose not to participate.  I remind you -- the OP asked what other people do to vett their candidate models; I shared mine.  Perhaps you've shared yours.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
There you go with Passive Aggression.   " I'm betting you get more flakes than I do, and since that doesn't seem to bother you, then all is good".

So, are you saying that your flake ratio is better than two flakes in nearly twenty years?

Tony Lawrence wrote:
We just don't know what steps others take to protect themselves but clearly if they don't follow your ideals then they deserve what they get.

Now, you made that up.  I've simply said what I do.  I never insisted that people have to follow my "ideals" -- I simply said that if they are unsatisfied with the results they are getting & if they further refuse to protect themselves, then they deserve what they get.  "Protect themselves" can mean lots of different things, including strategies that I don't follow. 

Your paraphrasing my position is consistently inaccurate.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
You don't mean that, right?   It does appear I'm irritating you based on your long winded replies.

Pot, meet kettle.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
In a nut shell I accept that sometimes models on sites like this won't follow through or call or arrive on time or come prepared.   I don't accept that their failure is my responsibility or that I should have CHECKED up on them.

To your credit, you don't start flake threads.

But there is much here that I disagree with:
...  I believe that sometimes, it directly is the photographer's fault:
     ---  Sometimes the photographer flakes & blames the model,
     ---  Sometimes the photographer wasn't clear in his communications,
     ---  Sometimes the photographer shows up late.
     ---  Sometimes the photographer creeps the model out,
     ---  Sometimes the photographer make the model feel unsafe,
     ---  Sometimes the photographer refuses the model's manager / escort
           when it is the manager / escort that keeps the model from flaking.
     ---  etc.

...  I like my example earlier:  if you run a daycare center & you hire a pedophile (because you couldn't be bothered doing a background check), you, too, will be held liable if that pedophile assaults a child.

But you don't have to check references.  As I said, I gave about a dozen recommendations that don't include checking references.  Heck, the last several models I worked with, I didn't check references a) because models were recommended to me by people I trust, and b) because the models were well known & experienced traveling models who depend on modeling for their income.

Jun 13 13 09:16 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 18,911
Chicago, Illinois, US


Looknsee Photography wrote:

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I don't know if your suggestions are better or worse then anyone else's.   They work for you.   They may NOT be practical for others.   Many of whom do NOT belong to a circle of photographers they can reach out too for info on a new model who is likely not to have worked with anyone they know.

That's all fine.  Before you go too far, I'll remind you that I've said that forming a local photographic community is work -- it takes some effort, especially in the beginning, but it's benefits are many.  These benefits include...
...  Sharing references,
...  Better yet, sharing recommendations,
...  Sharing locations,
...  Sharing resources,
...  Group projects,
...  Event announcements,
...  and so forth.

Yes, it's not for everyone -- there are photographers in this area who choose not to participate.  I remind you -- the OP asked what other people do to vett their candidate models; I shared mine.  Perhaps you've shared yours.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
There you go with Passive Aggression.   " I'm betting you get more flakes than I do, and since that doesn't seem to bother you, then all is good".

So, are you saying that your flake ratio is better than two flakes in nearly twenty years?

Tony Lawrence wrote:
We just don't know what steps others take to protect themselves but clearly if they don't follow your ideals then they deserve what they get.

Now, you made that up.  I've simply said what I do.  I never insisted that people have to follow my "ideals" -- I simply said that if they are unsatisfied with the results they are getting & if they further refuse to protect themselves, then they deserve what they get.  "Protect themselves" can mean lots of different things, including strategies that I don't follow. 

Your paraphrasing my position is consistently inaccurate.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
You don't mean that, right?   It does appear I'm irritating you based on your long winded replies.

Pot, meet kettle.


To your credit, you don't start flake threads.

But there is much here that I disagree with:
...  I believe that sometimes, it directly is the photographer's fault:
     ---  Sometimes the photographer flakes & blames the model,
     ---  Sometimes the photographer wasn't clear in his communications,
     ---  Sometimes the photographer shows up late.
     ---  Sometimes the photographer creeps the model out,
     ---  Sometimes the photographer make the model feel unsafe,
     ---  Sometimes the photographer refuses the model's manager / escort
           when it is the manager / escort that keeps the model from flaking.
     ---  etc.

...  I like my example earlier:  if you run a daycare center & you hire a pedophile (because you couldn't be bothered doing a background check), you, too, will be held liable if that pedophile assaults a child.

But you don't have to check references.  As I said, I gave about a dozen recommendations that don't include checking references.  Heck, the last several models I worked with, I didn't check references a) because models were recommended to me by people I trust, and b) because the models were well known & experienced traveling models who depend on modeling for their income.

Hiring people too take care of children at a daycare is miles away from any of this...   Let me break down your list:   If for any of the reasons you gave a model decides she doesn't want to shoot she should CALL or email to cancel.   Its just that simple.   If she's uncomfortable or can't bring a escort or scared or has a bad case of gas.   Call or email to cancel.   Call or email to cancel.   Call or email to cancel.   Anything else and you're a flake.   I've been on this site since 2005 and I've yet to flake on any model.   I'm clear about times, payment if any and concepts.   I've had flakes.   I've been at paid groupshoots where models had all the details and they just didn't show.   We couldn't reach them by text, call or email.   If I hired someone to take care of my child I would check their background as I would hope and expect that they would have some sort of positive work history and no criminal background.

Booking models for a few hour usually unpaid shoot isn't the same.   Should I call her last or current employer?   What if she hasn't had a job or worked with any photographers or those I might know.   In any event if she can't make the shoot for any reason and doesn't let me know.   She's a flake and that's on her not me.   Confused about time. location, concept or anything else... call.   The truth is many of the models we want to shoot are young.   Sometimes decades younger then we are.   Unless and even if you are paying they may decide your shoot doesn't sound like as much fun as hanging with friends, shopping or a date.   What's important to me may not be too others.   Free photos and even some cash may not be something they want at that moment.

I've watched tons of shooters who are frantically calling and trying to find out where the model is.   Several in this thread alone have talked about it and they seem reasonable and intelligent.   Can't make a session.   let us know.   Change your mind let us know.   I don't make excuses for what others do.   I don't check up on them either.   I accept that people do what they want and I am in no way responsible for those choices.

Jun 13 13 09:51 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Looknsee Photography
Posts: 20,470
Portland, Oregon, US


Tony Lawrence wrote:
Hiring people too take care of children at a daycare is miles away from any of this...   If I hired someone to take care of my child I would check their background.

Booking models for a few hour usually unpaid shoot isn't the same.   

I accept that people do what they want and I am in no way responsible for those choices.

There you go.

In response to the OP's request for vetting processes, it is Tony's position that flakes are always the model's fault, that there is nothing a photographer can do to prevent flakes.  So, basically, Tony has no advice to anyone who wishes to avoid flakes.  At best, he's in the "just hang in there" crowd.

Others (including myself) feel otherwise.  Many photographers have better "flake ratios" than others, and we have shared some suggestions.  All boil down to the concept of filtering out the unreliable models.  Tactics include the following (note:  this is not what I recommend; it is a summary of some of the ideas I've heard here

Jun 13 13 11:15 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Drew Smith Photography
Posts: 5,112
Nottingham, England, United Kingdom


Guys - back away from the keyboard.
Jun 13 13 11:23 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
All Yours Photography
Posts: 2,188
Toledo, Ohio, US


Damien Design wrote:
Well I gave her two confirmation calls last week. She did not respond to either, I sent her a message on Thursday which she replied to on Friday stating "yep I'll be there tomorrow".

Didn't respond to phone calls, but sent you a message.

Messages are much less personal than a phone conversation.  Much easier to promise anything without a second thought.

I always tell models that if I can't do a confirmation call the day before, I won't go.  Sometimes I'll want to confirm again on the day of, when it is time to get in the car if I'm not feeling secure about her showing or it's a very far distance). 

On those cases where I couldn't confirm by phone, sometimes I'll get an apology message a day or two later and sometimes I'll never hear from them again.

Of course, there are no guarantees, but this greatly improves my odds of having a shoot once I arrive at the location.

Jun 13 13 11:27 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 18,911
Chicago, Illinois, US


Looknsee Photography wrote:

There you go.

In response to the OP's request for vetting processes, it is Tony's position that flakes are always the model's fault, that there is nothing a photographer can do to prevent flakes.  So, basically, Tony has no advice to anyone who wishes to avoid flakes.  At best, he's in the "just hang in there" crowd.

Others (including myself) feel otherwise.  Many photographers have better "flake ratios" than others, and we have shared some suggestions.  All boil down to the concept of filtering out the unreliable models.  Tactics include the following (note:  this is not what I recommend; it is a summary of some of the ideas I've heard here & on similar threads):
...  Check references
...  Pre-shoot meetings
...  Deposits, refunded when the model shows up
...  Avoid younger models
...  "Make it more fun"
...  Avoid escorts & managers
...  Confirmation calls (the week before, the day before, the morning of...)
...  Network with local photographers (and models)
...  Pay them
...  Offer gas money
...  Work with models who have good track records of reliability
...  View portfolios; work with models who have worked with photographers
     multiple times and/or with models who have worked with multiple
     photographers
...  Pay traveling models
...  Post a "not recommended" list on your own profile
...  Treat models with more respect than they expect
...  Produce superior images
...  etc.

I reiterate -- these are not necessarily my suggestions; these are a summary of the suggestions I've heard.


So, to the OP:  Tony says there's nothing you can do & it's always the model's fault.  I say that there are tons of ideas for you to try.

Why do models pose at all?   Examine why and you'll have some answers.   Most aren't interested in having middle aged men ogle them in their panties.   Many don't care about 'superior  images'    and yes when someone flakes its always on them because they can call or email to cancel.   Models pose because they are looking for some money or because they want to try modeling out.   Most quit when they see how hard it is to make money.   Its a very small number including the traveling ones who stick with it for any length of time.   So how do you make someone reliable?   I have no ideal.   You can offer incentives like the OP has thrown out.   Sometimes they may work but I guess the models who wanted too shoot would still come in anyway.

So what do you suggest, since you know every freaking thing, Tony.   Cast a larger net for models.   Approach women when you are out.   Hand cards out.   Go to fashion shows and fashion themed events.   Network with MUA and designers and stylists.   Paying may help.   Understand that some of these folks aren't telling the truth when they say they have no flakes.   One of the best commercial shooters on MM recently wrote about his experiences with some of the models here.   Looknsee has his way of vetting models.   It seems to work for him.   It may for others also.   My ideal is to arrange a day via a call or email with a model.   Offer days and times that are convenient for you.   Ask that they call to confirm or you can.   No confirmation, no shoot.   Don't drive to a location without that call.   

Photographers are free to vet models anyway they see fit and your ideals are sound for some.   My point is twofold.   Flakes are not my responsibility.   A model who cannot make a shoot and does not let me know is a flake.

Jun 13 13 11:39 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Looknsee Photography
Posts: 20,470
Portland, Oregon, US


Tony Lawrence wrote:
My point is twofold.   Flakes are not my responsibility.   A model who cannot make a shoot and does not let me know is a flake.

In short, you have no suggestions for a photographer who wishes to improve his personal flake ratio.  There's nothing he can do?

Jun 13 13 12:04 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 18,911
Chicago, Illinois, US


Looknsee Photography wrote:

In short, you have no suggestions for a photographer who wishes to improve his personal flake ratio.  There's nothing he can do?

lets focus on the OP for a moment.   He allows escorts.   His work is good.   He has some positive tags and seems like a decent dude.   If a few models flake, so what.   Its a pisser but the majority don't seem to be.   We tend to focus on failure rather then success.   I've had plenty of nude models shoot in filthy sketchy spots for free.

The key is keep rolling.   Your work is what it is.   As you improve you may have less flakes.   You may have more.   Paying sounds good but I can't afford it very often.   I'm also not interested in asking other shooters about past models or new to me faces and I don't belong to any groups and my experience is that most shooters don't want to either.   

I understand that unless I am paying or I'm Phillipe or Wilde I may get flakes.   However when awesome cats like Chip get them.   Those who aren't as good...http://www.modelmayhem.com/82933 are in trouble.   Its a bit of a conceit to think you can control what others do.   These are grown women who make their choices based on things largely outside of your control.   Learn not to make or take what others do personally.   We debate a lot yet I don't dislike you nor do I take what you say personally.   It may seem like I do but I don't.   I don't know you and we just disagree.   No biggie.   Photographers make your offer or accept shoots but understand that sometimes they won't happen.   Its not your fault.   Don't accept responsibility for flakes.   

My comment about personally was because things seemed to be getting a bit heated.   I can be a pit bull about things.

Jun 13 13 12:28 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Looknsee Photography
Posts: 20,470
Portland, Oregon, US


Tony Lawrence wrote:
lets focus on the OP for a moment.   He allows llama herders.   His work is good.   He has some positive tags and seems like a decent dude.   If a few models flake, so what.

Great.  Let's focus on the OP.  In it, he said...

Damien Design wrote:
People have mentioned perfecting your vetting process but I can not find any information on what that process should be. Can anyone help with an effective vetting process. As it stands right now I have had enough and I'm about ready to give this up.

So, "so what?" -- he has explicitly requested a process he can try to vett models with the objective of having fewer flakes.  That's what.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Its a pisser but the majority don't seem to be.   We tend to focus on failure rather then success.

So, STFU -- he asked for help for his "failures", or is your "help" to advise him to focus on his successes?

Tony Lawrence wrote:
The key is keep rolling.   ...    Paying sounds good but I can't afford it very often.   I'm also not interested in asking other shooters about past models or new to me faces and I don't belong to any groups and my experience is that most shooters don't want to either.

So, we now know what you are not interested in doing.  You ain't the OP -- he asked for recommendations, he got some.  Also, I don't think you are in a position to represent what "most shooters" want, and I don't think what "most shooters" want is overly relevant -- the OP asked for ideas, he got several, and it's up to him to decide which (if any) he wants to try.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Its a bit of a conceit to think you can control what others do.   These are grown women who make their choices based on things largely outside of your control.

But a person has total control over what that person does.  I'm not trying to control anyone -- I'm just saying if flakes bother you, you can take steps to protect yourself by attempting to filter out the unreliable people.  Further, if one is unwilling to protect himself  or herself, I don't see any reason to be sympathetic to her or him getting flakes over

Jun 14 13 02:35 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 18,911
Chicago, Illinois, US


Looknsee Photography wrote:

Tony Lawrence wrote:
lets focus on the OP for a moment.   He allows escorts.   His work is good.   He has some positive tags and seems like a decent dude.   If a few models flake, so what.

Great.  Let's focus on the OP.  In it, he said...

Damien Design wrote:
People have mentioned perfecting your vetting process but I can not find any information on what that process should be. Can anyone help with an effective vetting process. As it stands right now I have had enough and I'm about ready to give this up.

So, "so what?" -- he has explicitly requested a process he can try to vett models with the objective of having fewer flakes.  That's what.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Its a pisser but the majority don't seem to be.   We tend to focus on failure rather then success.

So, STFU -- he asked for help for his "failures", or is your "help" to advise him to focus on his successes?

Tony Lawrence wrote:
The key is keep rolling.   ...    Paying sounds good but I can't afford it very often.   I'm also not interested in asking other shooters about past models or new to me faces and I don't belong to any groups and my experience is that most shooters don't want to either.

So, we now know what you are not interested in doing.  You ain't the OP -- he asked for recommendations, he got some.  Also, I don't think you are in a position to represent what "most shooters" want, and I don't think what "most shooters" want is overly relevant -- the OP asked for ideas, he got several, and it's up to him to decide which (if any) he wants to try.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Its a bit of a conceit to think you can control what others do.   These are grown women who make their choices based on things largely outside of your control.

But a person has total control over what that person does.  I'm not trying to control anyone -- I'm just saying if flakes bother you, you can take steps to protect yourself by attempting to filter out the unreliable people.  Further, if one is unwilling to protect himself  or herself, I don't see any reason to be sympathetic to her or him getting flakes over & over again.


Look -- if someone has a high flake ratio, then it makes sense to me that they examine what they are doing.  Are they turning the model off?  Are they making her uncomfortable?  Are their demands more than what most photographers in the area demand?  Are they offering the model something that the model wants?  There is a whole list of things a photographer can examine about their own behavior.  Without a little self-examination, how does a photographer know what (if anything) they are doing that contributes to a model's reluctance to show up?

And let's be clear -- at some point a person who doesn't take precautions can be held responsible for the actions of others.  We've gone over examples:  not locking your car, leaving your front door open, hiring a pedophile to work in a day care center, etc.  At some point, insurance companies won't pay, and in some points, a person can be held liable in civil court if they failed to take reasonable precautions.

So, "Don't accept responsibility for flakes" is just one way of telling the OP that there's nothing he can do, so he might as well quit.  He's had dozen of suggestions -- he should try some of those.

Think I said he's welcome to try your methods.   The aforementioned Scooby gang.   Just kidding.   The point I was making is the OP IS working with MM models.   Sometimes things happen and models flake.   Put your big boy panties on and keep trucking or do what you suggest.   Pay and track down their references and grill them like salmon about their reliability.   Wow you seem to love your pedophile example.   Again if I hire someone to take care of children or at many part time or full time jobs a background check is in order.   Didn't I say that?   Not sure about where your going with civil court, etc.

I looked at your website and its not been updated since 2010.   So maybe you don't shoot all that much.   Many here do.   They can't pay.  These are guys working out of their garages or basements or living rooms and they ask a lot of models too shoot.   If a few flake so be it.   If it really bothers them then they can listen to listen to your suggestions or mine.   Yes, we all can examine what we say and do and clearly I'm a idiot for debating a point with you when I've said the same things countless times.   I am not responsible for what others do.   A model who does not call or email to cancel a shoot is a flake.   There is NO excuse for that.   Change your mind, call.   Can't come, text and email.   That's the crux of it.   Unless you have some sort of mind control you and we are not responsible for their actions.

Jun 14 13 02:51 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Looknsee Photography
Posts: 20,470
Portland, Oregon, US


Tony Lawrence wrote:
I looked at your website and its not been updated since 2010.

Oh, yeah?  Well, you should stop clubbing baby seals & bringing guns into elementary schools.

If you look at the home page of  my web site, you'll see, right under the "News & Notes" section, that my web site was last updated on April 25, 2013.  Further, I have three additional sessions "in the queue".  So, STOP MAKING CRAP UP & ATTRIBUTING IT TO ME!!!! 

If you want to compare credits, let's do so.  You can't afford or don't want to pay models.  You work with cheap, old equipment.  You think of other photographers as "competition" even though you are not bringing in significant revenue with your photography.  What makes you feel like you can act superior to me?  And why is the frequency of my web site updates relevant to this discussion at all?

Tony Lawrence wrote:
So maybe you don't shoot all that much.   Many here do.   They can't pay.

So don't pay them!  No one (including especially me) is saying that anybody has to pay anyone else.  The terms between two other people are none of my or your business.  All I am saying is that if you don't want to work with unreliable people, learn how to filter out the unreliable ones.  Suggestion:  work with people with a proven track record of reliability.  Observation:  models who depend on modeling fees for their income often have a superior track record of reliability.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
These are guys working out of their garages or basements or living rooms and they ask a lot of models too shoot.   If a few flake so be it.   If it really bothers them then they can listen to listen to your suggestions or mine.   Yes, we all can examine what we say and do and clearly I'm a idiot for debating a point with you when I've said the same things countless times.   I am not responsible for what others do.   A model who does not call or email to cancel a shoot is a flake.   There is NO excuse for that.   Change your mind, call.   Can't come, text and email.   That's the crux of it.   Unless you have some sort of mind control you and we are not responsible for their actions.

You are responsible for what what YOU do.  You chose to work with the model.  You chose not to check the model's reference.  You chose not work with models with proven records of reliability. 

So, as before, you pays your money & you takes your chances.  If you accept that your process will result in a good number of flakes, then we have no problem.  But if you want to reduce your flake ratio, and if you ask for suggestions on these forums, your first step is to examine what you are doing with the objective of doing something different.

Good for you for not caring whether you have flakes.  But the OP is interested in reducing the number of flakes he gets, so your "I'm not responsible" mantra is of no help whatsoever.

Jun 15 13 11:12 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 18,911
Chicago, Illinois, US


Looknsee Photography wrote:

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I looked at your website and its not been updated since 2010.

Oh, yeah?  Well, you should stop clubbing baby seals & bringing guns into elementary schools.

If you look at the home page of  my web site, you'll see, right under the "News & Notes" section, that my web site was last updated on April 25, 2013.  Further, I have three additional sessions "in the queue".  So, STOP MAKING CRAP UP & ATTRIBUTING IT TO ME!!!! 

If you want to compare credits, let's do so.  You can't afford or don't want to pay models.  You work with cheap, old equipment.  You think of other photographers as "competition" even though you are not bringing in significant revenue with your photography.  What makes you feel like you can act superior to me?  And why is the frequency of my web site updates relevant to this discussion at all?

Tony Lawrence wrote:
So maybe you don't shoot all that much.   Many here do.   They can't pay.

So don't pay them!  No one (including especially me) is saying that anybody has to pay anyone else.  The terms between two other people are none of my or your business.  All I am saying is that if you don't want to work with unreliable people, learn how to filter out the unreliable ones.  Suggestion:  work with people with a proven track record of reliability.  Observation:  models who depend on modeling fees for their income often have a superior track record of reliability.


You are responsible for what what YOU do.  You chose to work with the model.  You chose not to check the model's reference.  You chose not work with models with proven records of reliability. 

So, as before, you pays your money & you takes your chances.  If you accept that your process will result in a good number of flakes, then we have no problem.  But if you want to reduce your flake ratio, and if you ask for suggestions on these forums, your first step is to examine what you are doing with the objective of doing something different.

Good for you for not caring whether you have flakes.  But the OP is interested in reducing the number of flakes he gets, so your "I'm not responsible" mantra is of no help whatsoever.

Man you don't get it do you?   Is a women responsible for being assaulted if she wears a short skirt and walks down a strange street?   Of course not.   We can all use better judgment.   Are models who get conned by the send the balance of the money rip offs?   Yes, they should educate themselves about the industry but in every case they are victims.   Most of the photographers who post about flakes are venting.   The OP has I noted has worked with lots of MM models.   More then I in a less amount of time.   I don't know if he's paying but if he isn't he and others and I will have some who will just not show or call or act responsible.

Being angry about that is silly.   Maybe your methods might reduce that number.   Maybe they won't.   My ideal is too spend zero time worrying about things and people you can't control and focus on being positive and moving forward.   Cast a larger net.   Want two models book four.   Its difficult to debate with you though because you vacillate between being mature and logical and being butt hurt.  I've never I said I was better then you or anyone.   I never said  your methods won't or don't work.   I have said they aren't practical for many of us.   

These are guys who can't pay traveling models.   They rely on trade and that doesn't always work out.   What bothers me is you look down on your fellow shooters.   Saying for example they choose to work with unreliable people.   Just like that women who was assaulted as she wore a reveling outfit isn't responsible nor is the person who leaves their car unlocked as is the person scammed by a con artist.   We aren't responsible for the actions of others.   Yes, taking precautions is a good thing but if I ask a model to shoot and she agrees that's it for me.   I expect her to show.   Call to confirm and that's it.   Some follow up and some don't and no I don't get all that upset about sessions that don't happen.

So, I'll repeat my point.   If you aren't paying models and sometimes when you do.   Many from sites like this will flake.   Don't be upset about that.   Focus on those who follow through.   Accept that you can't control anyone but yourself and how you feel about things.   This is especially true if you are getting models to shoot.     Don't leave for a location session if a model hasn't confirmed.   I've run my mouth long enough though.   The OP can adopt your ideals or mine.   He seems to be doing fine though.   People sometimes complain and its more about letting off steam then solutions.   You get the last word.   I'm done.

Jun 15 13 06:10 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Looknsee Photography
Posts: 20,470
Portland, Oregon, US


Tony Lawrence wrote:
Man you don't get it do you?   Is a women responsible for being assaulted if she wears a short skirt and walks down a strange street?   Of course not.

YOU don't get it.  You are responsible for the choices you make, including the choice to work with a model who a) is likely to be unreliable, and b) who has an unknown reliability track record.  If flakes don't bother you, don't change a thing.  However, if flakes both you (like it does the OP), stop working with flakes.  Maybe you can't stop a flake from flaking, but you certainly can take steps to avoid working with flakes.

It's like playing craps -- you put your own money on "red" and you lose -- whose fault is that?  Is it the wheel's fault?  Is it the house's fault?  No, it's your fault, because you should have known the odds, and despite having less than a 50% chance, you went ahead & took the gamble. 

Take some responsibility for choosing to work with a flake, man!

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Most of the photographers who post about flakes are venting.   The OP has I noted has worked with lots of MM models.   More then I in a less amount of time.   I don't know if he's paying but if he isn't he and others and I will have some who will just not show or call or act responsible.

Read the gosh-darn original post again.  The OP isn't just venting.  He's asking for suggestions for a vetting process, hoping to improve his flake ratio.  It doesn't matter how many sessions he has had.  What matters is that he wants to improve his techniques.  Help him or get out of the way!

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Being angry about that is silly.

Not as silly as speaking about other people's techniques in derogatory terms.  Not as silly as grossly misstating other people's positions.  Not as silly as exaggerating or making up other people's motivations.  Not as silly as bringing up irrelevant stuff, like how often one updates one's website.  Not as silly as getting facts grossly wrong (like when one's website was last updated).  You want a non-silly discussion, speak logically & respectfully, Scooby-Do.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Maybe your methods might reduce that number.   Maybe they won't.   My ideal is to spend zero time worrying about things and people you can't control and focus on being positive and moving forward.

Fine.  Do what you want.  But I fail to see how your method helps a person who asked for improved ways of vetting potential models. 

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Cast a larger net.   Want two models book four.   Its difficult to debate with you though because you vacillate between being mature and logical and being butt hurt.  I've never I said I was better then you or anyone.   I never said  your methods won't or don't work.   I have said they aren't practical for many of us.

So, explain to the forum how the frequency of posting on my web site is relevant to a discussion of how to vett models.  It's difficult to debate with me because you tend to use logical fallacies, like ad hominem attacks.  (And I still maintain that the effort to check a reference is an order of magnitude less than the effort you've devoted to this thread).

Tony Lawrence wrote:
These are guys who can't pay traveling models.   They rely on trade and that doesn't always work out.

SO DON'T PAY MODELS!  Paying models is no guarantee of a model's reliability, and I never said that it was. 

Tony Lawrence wrote:
What bothers me is you look down on your fellow shooters.

Bullcrap.  Prove it.  Fellow shooters can do whatever they want, including working with newbie models with no track records.  I just don't have patience for people who complain about flakes, who want to do something about flakes, but who refuse to take steps to avoid flakes. 

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Saying for example they choose to work with unreliable people.   ...   Yes, taking precautions is a good thing but if I ask a model to shoot and she agrees that's it for me.   I expect her to show.

Make up your mind.  If it's important, take precautions.  If you don't care, go ahead & wing it.  But when someone asks for help in improving his flake ratio, it's of no help to tell him that there is nothing he can do, when we both know that there is plenty he can do.

So, what's your flake ratio?  When a model & I agree to work together, I, too, expect her to show up.  And almost always, they do.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Call to confirm and that's it.   Some follow up and some don't and no I don't get all that upset about sessions that don't happen.

See, I don't bother with the call & confirm.  What are you, chicken?

So, is that your advice to the OP?  Don't bother with precautions & don't get upset about the sessions that don't happen?

Tony Lawrence wrote:
So, I'll repeat my point.   If you aren't paying models and sometimes when you do.   Many from sites like this will flake.   Don't be upset about that.

So, we're doomed?  DOOOOOOOOOOOMED?

I like how you blithely ignore the fact that some of us have significantly better flake ratios than others.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Focus on those who follow through.

Ah, so you do filter out the unreliable ones?

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Accept that you can't control anyone but yourself and how you feel about things.

Doomed?  DOOOOOOOOOOOMED?  Again, you are not addressing the OP's request.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I've run my mouth long enough though.

At last, you've said something that I agree with.

Jun 16 13 09:31 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Bare Essential Photos
Posts: 3,143
Upland, California, US


Just got another flake right now. I did a shoot with her before.

Texted her earlier today, didn't get a timely response so I didn't set anything up at my house ... thank goodness. It's now past our shoot time and very little was lost except for the fact that I could of contacted another model to do a shoot ... oh, well : (

I was actually entertaining the possibility of doing a location shoot with her today in Santa Monica. I live in Upland!
Jun 16 13 11:05 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
TOODARKPARK PHOTOGRAPHY
Posts: 37
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada


You wouldn't wanna flake in  Singapore....I think they Cane there...Yikes
Jun 16 13 11:13 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 18,911
Chicago, Illinois, US


Bare Essential Photos wrote:
Just got another flake right now. I did a shoot with her before.

Texted her earlier today, didn't get a timely response so I didn't set anything up at my house ... thank goodness. It's now past our shoot time and very little was lost except for the fact that I could of contacted another model to do a shoot ... oh, well : (

I was actually entertaining the possibility of doing a location shoot with her today in Santa Monica. I live in Upland!

This is what I'm talking about.   You are being mature about things.   You certainly wouldn't deserve to hear you are at fault because you choose to work with unreliable people.   You texted her and received no reply.   You didn't set up your equipment.   I've looked at your work.   Wonderful images and you've shot lots of MM members.   Sometimes things just don't work out but it does no one any good to add insult to injury by saying its your fault.   Your model could have let you know she couldn't come and you could have contacted another model.   She didn't.   That's on her.

Going forward you know how she may act and you can plan accordingly.   We should look at people based on our own experiences with them.   Sorry things didn't work out today.

Jun 16 13 11:36 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Looknsee Photography
Posts: 20,470
Portland, Oregon, US


Tony Lawrence wrote:
This is what I'm talking about.   You are being mature about things.   You certainly wouldn't deserve to hear you are at fault because you choose to work with unreliable people.   You texted her and received no reply.   You didn't set up your equipment.   I've looked at your work.   Wonderful images and you've shot lots of MM members.   Sometimes things just don't work out but it does no one any good to add insult to injury by saying its your fault.   Your model could have let you know she couldn't come and you could have contacted another model.   She didn't.   That's on her.

Going forward you know how she may act and you can plan accordingly.   We should look at people based on our own experiences with them.   Sorry things didn't work out today.

So much for Tony being "done".

For the record, I've always said that it is sometimes the photographer's fault.  Sometimes the photographer tells the model the wrong date, the wrong time, the wrong location.  Although rare, we can find some "photographer flakes" threads, and there is the always popular "where are my images" threads.  It's not always the model's fault.

I didn't say that it was the photographer's fault.  I said that if flakes bother a photographer, he/she could learn how to filter out the unreliable people.

You don't like my analogies -- fair enough.  How 'bout this new one, that is closer to The Real:

You agree to photograph a client's car with a bathing beauty on its hood.

The day arrives.  Let's say you got your confirmation call.  The car has been detailed.  The MUA is set up in the model's changing tent.  The stylist has three bathing suits ready.  You have the appropriate permits.  The weather is cooperating; indeed, the light is becoming perfect.  But, the model doesn't show.

Whatcha gonna do?  Tell the client that it's not your fault?  Do you think the client will agree with you?  You are fooling yourself -- the client is going to blame you.


I can imagine that you might hem & haw and say that maybe this time, for a shoot that important, you might take precautions.  You might arrange for four models to show up (which could mean that three models will think you've wasted their time).  You could hire models, but we both agree that paying models is no guarantee of reliability.  Or you may decide to filter out models with unknown track records and choose to work with models who are more likely to show up -- in which case you would be doing what I am advocating.  If avoiding flakes is important to you, take appropriate precautions.

Jun 16 13 12:07 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jay Farrell
Posts: 12,904
Nashville, Tennessee, US


Just work on your vetting process, don't throw the baby out with the bath water smile
Jun 16 13 12:20 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 18,911
Chicago, Illinois, US


Looknsee Photography wrote:
So much for Tony being "done".

For the record, I've always said that it is sometimes the photographer's fault.  Sometimes the photographer tells the model the wrong date, the wrong time, the wrong location.  Although rare, we can find some "photographer flakes" threads, and there is the always popular "where are my images" threads.  It's not always the model's fault.

I didn't say that it was the photographer's fault.  I said that if flakes bother a photographer, he/she could learn how to filter out the unreliable people.

You don't like my analogies -- fair enough.  How 'bout this new one, that is closer to The Real:

You agree to photograph a client's car with a bathing beauty on its hood.

The day arrives.  Let's say you got your confirmation call.  The car has been detailed.  The MUA is set up in the model's changing tent.  The stylist has three bathing suits ready.  You have the appropriate permits.  The weather is cooperating; indeed, the light is becoming perfect.  But, the model doesn't show.

Whatcha gonna do?  Tell the client that it's not your fault?  Do you think the client will agree with you?  You are fooling yourself -- the client is going to blame you.


I can imagine that you might hem & haw and say that maybe this time, for a shoot that important, you might take precautions.  You might arrange for four models to show up (which could mean that three models will think you've wasted their time).  You could hire models, but we both agree that paying models is no guarantee of reliability.  Or you may decide to filter out models with unknown track records and choose to work with models who are more likely to show up -- in which case you would be doing what I am advocating.  If avoiding flakes is important to you, take appropriate precautions.

I didn't quote you or respond to you.   I was done with you was my point.   This is a amateur site filled with amateurs.   If you want professional models you go to actual modelling agencies.   I accept as a consequence of who's here that if their is no money some, maybe most at times won't show or cancel or come late or act goofy.   Right now Garry K has this thread:   http://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=894810   Is he at fault?

You don't get flakes.   Bully for you.   Your methods work for you, great.   You let us ALL know every post.   Your ideals aren't practical for other photographers.   Lets be candid though.   The OP is long gone from this debate which has become a pissing match between us.   I have no desire to check up on any model for a few hour photo session and I can't pay most.   I don't start flake threads and when others do or mention they had one or some as the person I quoted did won't start in with how its their fault or how I don't hear about it if they didn't take the proper precautions.

I'll leave that to you.

Jun 16 13 12:27 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
AVD AlphaDuctions
Posts: 10,481
Gatineau, Quebec, Canada


Looknsee Photography wrote:
So much for Tony being "done".

For the record, I've always said that it is sometimes the photographer's fault.  Sometimes the photographer tells the model the wrong date, the wrong time, the wrong location.  Although rare, we can find some "photographer flakes" threads, and there is the always popular "where are my images" threads.  It's not always the model's fault.

I didn't say that it was the photographer's fault.  I said that if flakes bother a photographer, he/she could learn how to filter out the unreliable people.

You don't like my analogies -- fair enough.  How 'bout this new one, that is closer to The Real:

You agree to photograph a client's car with a bathing beauty on its hood.

The day arrives.  Let's say you got your confirmation call.  The car has been detailed.  The MUA is set up in the model's changing tent.  The stylist has three bathing suits ready.  You have the appropriate permits.  The weather is cooperating; indeed, the light is becoming perfect.  But, the model doesn't show.

Whatcha gonna do?  Tell the client that it's not your fault?  Do you think the client will agree with you?  You are fooling yourself -- the client is going to blame you.


I can imagine that you might hem & haw and say that maybe this time, for a shoot that important, you might take precautions.  You might arrange for four models to show up (which could mean that three models will think you've wasted their time).  You could hire models, but we both agree that paying models is no guarantee of reliability.  Or you may decide to filter out models with unknown track records and choose to work with models who are more likely to show up -- in which case you would be doing what I am advocating.  If avoiding flakes is important to you, take appropriate precautions.

for the record can you just shut up already? my hand is sore from scrolling through your arguments with Tony. he wasnt talking to you. he said he was done. do I have to CAM this?

Jun 16 13 07:13 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Cherrystone
Posts: 35,315
Columbus, Ohio, US


This is why we can't have nice things. lol
Jun 17 13 06:54 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
TheKhulis
Posts: 3
Killeen, Texas, US


Marin Photography wrote:
It gets better, just hang in there. I still get flaked on every now and again, it happens...

I do know for myself, when my shots improved I got fewer flakes. So, not to critique you or anyone for that matter. Make  sure whatever you are doing is "kick ass'! That will cut down the flakes but it's not a promise! LOL

.True! .Partnered with, the Circle of people you're penetrating. .While the statement comes to mind 'If you want to know Who you are, look at your five closest friends.' .With that being said, "Flakes" and faulty or fake people, bring about "Flakes" and faulty people.

.Like, how I just recently relocated to a city where people who Call themselves "models," they dont take it Serious here - On of Off MM. .Contact these people in this city browsing MM all you like, you'll just be talking to yourself (ha!ha!) cause 99% of them wont even respond.

Jun 18 13 03:01 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Happy Guy Photos
Posts: 1,089
Upland, California, US


To TheKhulis --

TheKhulis wrote:
.True! .Partnered with, the Circle of people you're penetrating. .While the statement comes to mind 'If you want to know Who you are, look at your five closest friends.' .With that being said, "Flakes" and faulty or fake people, bring about "Flakes" and faulty people.

.Like, how I just recently relocated to a city where people who Call themselves "models," they dont take it Serious here - On of Off MM. .Contact these people in this city browsing MM all you like, you'll just be talking to yourself (ha!ha!) cause 99% of them wont even respond.

How true!

Just this week, after approx. 6 yrs. of using models on MM, my well has run dry in regards to getting a new face to shoot. Just been getting flakes, no responses, or I can't because it's my cousin's dog's birthday. May need to contact someone to shoot for the seventh time.

A sad state of affairs, unfortunately : (

Jun 19 13 11:18 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Phoenix Designz
Posts: 20
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, US


UPDATE to my original question

Just wanted to update everyone on my original question about preventing flakes. I took the advice about changing the wording in my profile. I also went back on previous emails and realized the ones that flake, even after having a phone conversation, always has real short replies aka no enthusiasm. The models I have shot always leave very detailed responses and the tone of the email seems sincere. I am currently working out a shoot with a model here and I believe it will happen. The thing I wanted to point out, someone gave me advice to use Craigslist. I was nervous about using it, heard some bad things and never used the site before. Well I've since had two great shoots with models who responded on there and a third will hopefully happen next week. So that seems to be a real option to get models.
Jul 17 13 04:34 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 18,911
Chicago, Illinois, US


Damien Design wrote:
UPDATE to my original question

Just wanted to update everyone on my original question about preventing flakes. I took the advice about changing the wording in my profile. I also went back on previous emails and realized the ones that flake, even after having a phone conversation, always has real short replies aka no enthusiasm. The models I have shot always leave very detailed responses and the tone of the email seems sincere. I am currently working out a shoot with a model here and I believe it will happen. The thing I wanted to point out, someone gave me advice to use Craigslist. I was nervous about using it, heard some bad things and never used the site before. Well I've since had two great shoots with models who responded on there and a third will hopefully happen next week. So that seems to be a real option to get models.

Great!   I note you worked with two of our best known members so you are doing something right.   Sometimes these things happen.   Like I said I take as part of working with MM models that some will flake or cancel last minute or be crazy.   Its not your fault if they do.   I don't know your vetting process beyond what you've written but its working for you.

Jul 17 13 06:12 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
NickRichards
Posts: 9
Livingston, Montana, US


What you are dealing with here is human nature, and humans by default are going to take the path of least resistance.

Thus when they change their minds, many are not going to tell you, it is simply going to be a no call no show.

I have been in business for a long time, and one thing I have learned is that it is going to happen, it is not just models, people are going to flake, that is what people do. As a rule of thumb unless someone has a really good reason, they flake on me, I simply never work with them again.

As well it sounds to me like you are getting too emotionally invested in whether or not they show. I don't I really look at it like if someone blows me off that it is their loss because I will continue to take pictures, I will continue to do what I enjoy, they will not get to be a part of it.

You are going to find that flaky people are the ones who talk a lot about what they are going to do or have done, but that really is all they are. In the end they are going to have a lot of regrets, and they are going to get passed up by the rest who are more ambitious and willing to be on time.

Modeling is one of those careers that many want to be in, but a lot less can actually do it, it is a lot like race car drivers, sure there are a lot of folks out there who want to be one, sure they might even own a fast car, but if all it ever does is sit in the garage or ride on a trailer to shows, then really are they going to get there? or are they just going to sit around and talk about how fast their car is while other people are out winning trophies?

A very wise and very successful man told me once "When you see someone who is angry all the time, it shows you they are not very good at what they do." That is great advice that I took to heart, and I have always done things in a way that makes me happy, and a big part of that happiness is not getting myself too emotionally invested in the actions of others.
Jul 17 13 10:11 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
AG Media 13
Posts: 201
Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia


Don't set up critical shoots with new talent - pick a lazy Saturday afternoon with a plan b:  picnic, golf or alternate subject matter.
Jul 18 13 01:00 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
JeffTabb Photography
Posts: 61
Brooklyn, New York, US


I think this is my all time record for MM flakes, 32 flakes for the month of August! So far Facebook and Craigslist have been the BEST way to book a TF shoot.
Aug 25 13 04:15 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Randall D
Posts: 259
Helena, Alabama, US


PashaPhoto wrote:
at some point this will become almost an instinct, and your "flake radar" will start spotting them a little better...

as a rule, the more they talk about how reliable they are, the less likely they are to show smile

This!

People who *talk* about having a quality (such as reliability) never have it.

Aug 25 13 04:26 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
fullmetalphotographer
Posts: 2,541
Fresno, California, US


I think MM needs to bite the bullet and start a flake section.
Aug 25 13 04:36 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
altSWANK
Posts: 63
Maplewood, New Jersey, US


You can vet all you want to, and that will help but it's never a guarantee.  I don't get a lot of flakes in general, but I was caught totally off guard with the latest one.

This morning, an agency repped model (Red Model Management in NYC) with experience flaked on me.  Everything was fine up until yesterday, constant communication.  I went to pick her up at her place in NYC, texted and called, waited out side her place even...nothing.  You would never expect that behavior from an agency repped model, but I guess it happens with them too.

Soldier on.
Aug 25 13 01:25 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
JeffTabb Photography
Posts: 61
Brooklyn, New York, US


fullmetalphotographer wrote:
I think MM needs to bite the bullet and start a flake section.

Agreed. MM sorta prides it self on quantity of users but not quality. 32 flakes and the month isn't over yet is kinda ridiculous. I go on Facebook meet new models and they actually show up to the shoots but I can't get a model on a modeling website to show up. There should be a flake / caution page and when a model or photographer get a certain amount of negative reviews it should red flag them and either put a possible flake warning on their account or cancel the account all together.

Aug 25 13 04:04 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
AG Media 13
Posts: 201
Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia


It's like wild life photography  - you don't always get a result
Aug 25 13 04:49 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
David Stone Imaging
Posts: 509
Seattle, Washington, US


I  had gone a long time without any flake outs, when a couple of weeks ago it happened twice in the same week.  My out-of-pocket costs totaled $300.  Looking back, and being honest with myself, there was little different I could have done.

As far as FLAKE warning signs...I find that if you get a one or two word answer to a 2 or 3 paragraph PM or email, and no questions, that is a key warning sign.  And if you have to ask a question twice, this is a red flag, and if a third time, best move on.
Aug 25 13 05:08 pm  Link  Quote 
first123   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