Grin Without a Cat wrote:
I am probably in the minority on this, but when I do a shoot, the model always gets the exact same number of shots as I do.  That is, however many I decide are decent and worth editing.  It could be 10 or it could be 50 or more...just depends on how the shoot goes.
The only difference between what I end up with and what the model ends up with is that mine are full-res and the model's are resized to portfolio res (800 px).

This is exactly what I do - it seems the fairest solution for non-commercial shoots...

R.EYE.R wrote:
Besides, what patronising approach to creative partner is questioning their intelligence?
It would be obnoxious of me to assume that people I shared the idea with will start choosing random fail shots, would it not?

In all seriousness, I understand and respect what you're saying.

However, I think that with time you will come to see that you can respect the choices and intelligence of your team while still ensuring that only the shots you feel represent you well are released for public consumption.

Are you telling me that if you shoot 100 images then 100 will be "good enough" by your standards to be uploaded to a public site like Tumblr with your name associated with them? If so, then you're either deluded or you're a much better photographer than anybody whose work I've ever seen!  Even the "greats" of photography shooting on film never published all their images.

Editing (and by this I mean photo-selection and culling) is an integral step in the workflow that results in your finished body of work, and IMHO one of the most important. You can shoot 100 images but the 2, 10 or 20 you (and in your case your team) choose to retouch and publish are the images that will be associated with your name forever and upon which you will be judged as a photographer. Why would you willingly hand over your reputation to the whim of a model or a stylist who, regardless of how much you respect her intelligence and taste, might choose a shot that represents her well but you rather poorly?

This is why serious photographers always cull the sub-par shots (and I don't just mean OOF) before presenting their 'selects' to the client (or team in the case of a creative test) for final selection.

As I mentioned, I generally cut my rough images down to about 10% of what I shot - that means I effectively throw away 90 out of 100 images before anybody else ever sees them! That may sound extreme, but it works for me and if I shot 250 images of a look, that still gives around 25 images to choose from.

And please, don't use the term "spray and pray" to describe shooting a lot of images. Every image I shoot is the result of something in my head telling me to press the shutter; I don't put the camera on "motor" and spray off 10fps in the random hope of getting a good image. I shoot a lot, yes, because I like to have lots to choose from and because when shooting models every frame is always different (even if subtly) from the next. If you try to constrain the model (and yourself) to, say, 10 shots per look then you will inevitably end up with static, lifeless images, and that's never something I want to shoot! I'd rather shoot 1000 frames and come away with 3 or 5 outstanding images than shoot 10 and come away with 10 perfectly focused but ultimately boring shots.

Shoot more. Edit ruthlessly. Only show your best images. It works.

R.EYE.R wrote:
Plus my ego is not size of Windsor Castle

Dude, my ego makes Windsor Castle look like a Lego toy!



Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

Images by MR wrote:
So if you do a 3 hr TF shooting you're just giving one photo?

From an unpaid shoot, 1/2 is about the norm. That's all I really set-out to create, that's all I need. Why more? Create one look with one model in one outfit. I've been doing 2 looks & outfits lately, and I'll go with whichever works out better. Whether I'm testing or shooting a creative, I've either got the raw data I needed for my testing in an hour or more, or created the scenes and captured them as I'd intended to in well-under 2 hours. 2&1/2 including the Makeup Artist, actually

I've come to believe over the years what I've heard some others say, that overwhelming the viewer with more images simply devalues all of the images. If I shoot with a model unpaid and give her 20/30/120 photos, what are they all worth? Jackkkkkkkkkk shit I give her copies of 6? (My usual) I usually see 1/2 up on here and on Facespace within the hour. And they tend to stay there. Not always, but usually. I've had models tell me they would rather get less,but get better ones. I conducted a shoot this afternoon, 152 captures in all. I got what I wanted, and was about 2 hours.

IMHO alone;

Ðaniel A Betts
DBIphotography Toronto (Blog On Site) 
DBImagery Toronto (Website)

“The critic has to educate the public; the artist has to educate the critic.”
~Oscar Wilde

D Smyre wrote:
How many edited images would you offer models  for a tf casting???

There is no correct answer! It's all a personal preference. Decide what works for you and put it into your workflow. Being upfront and clear before hand will reduce 99% of any problems.


For me, I don't TF 1-2-1 with models very often, for TF I prefer shooting with a team that are all working towards the best pictures and not just a numbers game. I give the best from the shoot that I use and the rest of the team use.

For me, shooting is a smaller part of the overall shoot and I can spend many hours afterwards on the retouching.

When I shoot, I take extra frames for my benefit to ensure that I get a good shot of the pose and it's variations, they are discarded afterwards during my select phase of my workflow. There is no need to keep or share them they are just there so that I can make best use of my tools.

Likewise the model makes various minor alterations to themselves within a single pose so that the photographer captures enough to get a "good" capture, they don't expect to see everything.

Generally, in my own experience, those that want "all" are not doing it because they expect all to be good, but because they are afraid of "missing" something.

Darren

Innovative Imagery wrote:
TF is NOT free !  It is an exchange of services as a form of payment.  Your work has a value.  Their work has a value.  Try to make the most even exchange of value between the parties and that way, no one is taken advantage of.

Coming from a portrait photographer perspective, one of my images is worth anywhere from $300 - $1500, depending on duration of shoot, size and finishing (retouching, mounting, etc.) of the print.  Plus framing!  Commercial work is higher due to industry standards and the more involved shoots with higher costs.

A "model" or MUA or Stylist services are each worth their going rate.  Let's say $300, for example.  This could be one hour or all day, depending on their price rate and experience.   So if we do a TF shoot together and each gets one image, that is fair and they "should be" happy.

As the copyright holder, I do get the opportunity to make copies and use them as additional sales, or I wouldn't be able to compensate the MUA and stylist !  Those are additional uses.  That is how and why this works this way.

If their rate is $300 per hour and I agree and shoot with them and we shoot for 3 hours, they they can reasonably expect at least three images, UNLESS the shoot was of such a complex nature (special effects, animals, pours, etc.) that only one hero image was created and they should know that possibility going into the shoot.

They "shouldn't"  expect one copy of every image, as that would not be a balanced exchange of value and each file created may only be ground work or foundation for the one image that was the "winner".

My preference is to do a TF shoot where I use a model to test a few lights or some design goal and then I do a session for him/her and make an image that solves a need for them.  We do a selection and then I do the editing and retouching to create the file or print for them.

I just did a session, with a beginning model and the time spent testing the lights was broken up by reviewing those images and providing feedback.  By the time we got to doing her images, she was much more educated and relaxed and we got several great images to choose from and deliver.  Definitely a win win.

So it makes no difference if the work is being used commercially or not.  If the value of your participation is adequate for your participation, then it is FINE!  IT is NOT FREE!

On the other hand, if you feel your work is not being adequately compensated by the exchange, take a pass.  Just don't say it is free.   Say it is inadequate for your needs and move on.

I like your insight regarding this issue. Like you said nothing is free

That Italian Guy wrote:

In all seriousness, I understand and respect what you're saying.

However, I think that with time you will come to see that you can respect the choices and intelligence of your team while still ensuring that only the shots you feel represent you well are released for public consumption.

Are you telling me that if you shoot 100 images then 100 will be "good enough" by your standards to be uploaded to a public site like Tumblr with your name associated with them? If so, then you're either deluded or you're a much better photographer than anybody whose work I've ever seen!  Even the "greats" of photography shooting on film never published all their images.

Editing (and by this I mean photo-selection and culling) is an integral step in the workflow that results in your finished body of work, and IMHO one of the most important. You can shoot 100 images but the 2, 10 or 20 you (and in your case your team) choose to retouch and publish are the images that will be associated with your name forever and upon which you will be judged as a photographer. Why would you willingly hand over your reputation to the whim of a model or a stylist who, regardless of how much you respect her intelligence and taste, might choose a shot that represents her well but you rather poorly?

This is why serious photographers always cull the sub-par shots (and I don't just mean OOF) before presenting their 'selects' to the client (or team in the case of a creative test) for final selection.

As I mentioned, I generally cut my rough images down to about 10% of what I shot - that means I effectively throw away 90 out of 100 images before anybody else ever sees them! That may sound extreme, but it works for me and if I shot 250 images of a look, that still gives around 25 images to choose from.

And please, don't use the term "spray and pray" to describe shooting a lot of images. Every image I shoot is the result of something in my head telling me to press the shutter; I don't put the camera on "motor" and spray off 10fps in the random hope of getting a good image. I shoot a lot, yes, because I like to have lots to choose from and because when shooting models every frame is always different (even if subtly) from the next. If you try to constrain the model (and yourself) to, say, 10 shots per look then you will inevitably end up with static, lifeless images, and that's never something I want to shoot! I'd rather shoot 1000 frames and come away with 3 or 5 outstanding images than shoot 10 and come away with 10 perfectly focused but ultimately boring shots.

Shoot more. Edit ruthlessly. Only show your best images. It works.



Dude, my ego makes Windsor Castle look like a Lego toy!



Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

Stefano

Hope you didn't take any of my comments as personal attack - that wasn't my intention. Just to clarify...

I understand your point, however I am still sticking to my method.
Namely because I a.) shoot limited TF, b.) work with proffessional people.
So far I had to edit less than 30 shots from a session. Requests average between 3 shots total and about 20.

However, I still let people choose the ones they want because I have a moral obligation to. As simple as that.
They might choose 100, and in that case I will ask if they really are going to use them all.
Another reason is that I can't be arsed to go through the shots - seriously.
I have 2-3 year old sessions I haven't even touched because I am dissatisfied with outcome.

I shoot MF lenses only and often take 2-3 shot sequences because I am compulsive obsessive like that, so pray and spray might apply to me as well in some regard.
Still, I don't need to spit out sequences in hope of nailing one shot in 100.

And in regard to ego, well..there is your problem
Personally I see myself as equal to those who are putting their efforts forward - there is no "I" in "Team".

PS for the record, I believe that greatness is defined by walking own path and not mimicking others. It's another topic alltogether. Reference to great photographers is irrelevant - their paths are theirs to walk. I have my own.

R.EYE.R wrote:
I still let people choose the ones they want because I have a moral obligation to. As simple as that.

You have a moral obligation to

a) do your best

b) give them the best shots that will benefit you all

I don't see how you have a moral obligation to let them trawl through all your outtakes and randomly select whatever the heck they like and expect you to retouch it!

Yes, I know you're working with "professionals" etc. but they are NOT the arbiters of who you are as a photographer. Do you think they chose to work with you based on some random outtakes of your work they found on a CD that fell out of a model's bag? Of course not - they chose to work with you because of your portfolio which (I assume) is all your own choices.

In fact, if you look at it that way, you could say you have a moral obligation to only show them your selects, because anything less is not what they signed up for when they agreed to trade with you!


Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

That Italian Guy wrote:

You have a moral obligation to

a) do your best

b) give them the best shots that will benefit you all

I don't see how you have a moral obligation to let them trawl through all your outtakes and randomly select whatever the heck they like and expect you to retouch it!

Yes, I know you're working with "professionals" etc. but they are NOT the arbiters of who you are as a photographer. Do you think they chose to work with you based on some random outtakes of your work they found on a CD that fell out of a model's bag? Of course not - they chose to work with you because of your portfolio which (I assume) is all your own choices.

In fact, if you look at it that way, you could say you have a moral obligation to only show them your selects, because anything less is not what they signed up for when they agreed to trade with you!


Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

Of course I do. Key word here is trade. Trade is supposed to be fair.
I think there is a massive misconception about TFP afoot.
TFP doesn't mean "I am better than you all and so I decide what you will see! Now shut up and have a bisquit!" Doesn't it?

Now, if I hire a model and pay her to work on my vision I may be so kind as to share few photos with her - that's a different story.
Sorry, but as long as there are more than 1 person involved, they all have a say in what is chosen.
Imho respecting other's effort is the key. Not white knighting, unlike many seem to believe for some apparent reason. Give it first - don't expect it if you put yourself above the rest.

Or maybe this fairness lies in my USSR upbringing? I don't play game of "f***ing people over" very well...

R.EYE.R wrote:
Trade is supposed to be fair.

R.EYE.R wrote:
I don't play game of "f***ing people over" very well...

If you believe that spending 5-20 hours after the rest of the team has gone home selecting and retouching a handful of shots for a trade shoot in addition to the time spent planning and shooting them is "fucking people over" then, while I admire your altruism, I have to say that I think your sense of 'fairness' is way out of whack.



Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

That Italian Guy wrote:

R.EYE.R wrote:
Trade is supposed to be fair.

If you believe that spending 5-20 hours after the rest of the team has gone home selecting and retouching a handful of shots for a trade shoot in addition to the time spent planning and shooting them is "fucking people over" then, while I admire your altruism, I have to say that I think your sense of 'fairness' is way out of whack.



Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

A tad americanised speech from Bath resident
I digress..

Oh poor you, sitting all alone in that wooden floored coverted turn of the century barn by the fortepiano, moving that noble arm around a tablet drawing strokes and sipping soy latte with hazelnut syrup while listening to smooth jazz gently caressing senses, streaming out of Dali speakers...tears occasionally dripping down the unshaven masculine cheek. "Why, oh gods!" he seems to be thinking...life is so unfair!

First world problems!

That Italian Guy wrote:
If anybody asks I say a 'minimum' of 3, total, not per look.

Not every look may work and some looks may only yield one image I can be bothered to retouch.

For tests I do what I feel like - every minute of my time spent retouching after the shoot is finished is effectively a free gift from me for a model who has already gone home and has nothing more to do but wait for me to retouch and email her some images.

If a model wants a set number of images etc. then it ceases to be a trade and she can pay me to retouch them!




Just my $0.02

Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

Pretty much this.
If you look at TF as strictly a trade, when I shoot a model we both spend the same amount of time "trading" however then the post work happens which only requires my time and not any of the models. When I do TF I do it for port building. I am looking to better my port with each photo I put up. I am working for "us" in that way. If I spend my time workin on a photo I'm not interested I am no longer working for me-just the model.
That is no longer a trade.

That Italian Guy wrote:

You have a moral obligation to

a) do your best

b) give them the best shots that will benefit you all


In fact, if you look at it that way, you could say you have a moral obligation to only show them your selects, because anything less is not what they signed up for when they agreed to trade with you!


Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

The photographer is the first editor of his work. You are even editing when you decide which shot to take. If your working with a team shouldn't you all like the finished shots that go out?

That Italian Guy wrote:
...

Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

Whatever he wrote in all his posts
+1000

Grin Without a Cat wrote:
I am probably in the minority on this, but when I do a shoot, the model always gets the exact same number of shots as I do.  That is, however many I decide are decent and worth editing.  It could be 10 or it could be 50 or more...just depends on how the shoot goes.
The only difference between what I end up with and what the model ends up with is that mine are full-res and the model's are resized to portfolio res (800 px).

Same for me, my mentality is that we are "helping" each other out, so I provide the model with the same number of good photos that I would retain.

I think the highest number of distinct shots i provided was about 34....but that was on the high end. I try to at least provide 15-20 good shots assuming we had time for a full shoot and several outfits.

J Millman Photography wrote:
I realise that what appeals to me, doesn't necessarily appeal to everyone else.

A very good point. If I send a model 20 photos, I might only like 5 of those, and she ends up putting one of the photos I didn't like that much in her port.