Pixie Pie wrote:
To me, a GWC is a photographer who THINKS he's got talent, but his work is mediocre at best. Someone who just doesn't have the "it" factor where you can take an ordinary scenario (girl sitting by a tree) and turn it into something that makes the viewer FEEL something: ART.

A GWC likes the idea of calling himself/herself an artist, but simply lacks talent. There are lots of photographers who are hobbyists and yet their images are so amazing it doesn't matter whether or not they do it for pay.

Then there are photographers who demand high pay, yet put forth crappy images. To me, what makes a photog from a GWC is the talent factor.

The same can go for models. I'll call it a "PIP". Person-in-a-picture. Someone who doesn't know how to emote through still imagery. You can have a talented photographer, but if you have dead eyes or look stiff and uncomfortable, you're going to ruin the photographer's vision.

Also, a PIP can be a young girl or man who has low self esteem and is just trying this for the chance to prove to others that she is attractive. The title of "model" is a very high esteemed one to have, and it impresses people and makes you seem glamorous. But if you're in it for the bragging rights of being able to call yourself a model and post cool pics of yourself on Facebook, but don't care about the work itself, then you are not a true model.

For example, once while shooting in New York I came across a photographer who had a vision. He wanted to shoot a model with no makeup, dirty clothes, trash all around and a cigarette in her mouth. Her hair was to look disheveled and oily. She was supposed to look rough, like someone you'd expect to have a drug addiction problem. He had a hard time finding models willing to take on this project because most young girls always want to be pretty. I did the job, and he later sold the images at an art show and sent me a check for being a good sport.

I personally feel it's a matter of dedication.

Sounds like we have a winner

Aberotica  wrote:
We all hear about the GWC, (guy with camera) usually spoken of in derisory terms. Not a serious photographer, only in it for the naked models, etc. Is there a model equivelant?

It seems to me I've spoken to a few (not a lot) here on Mayhem over the years. women, who are here for the "fun" element. Discuss.

Take cover - incoming!!!

agreed

Pixie Pie wrote:
To me, a GWC is a photographer who THINKS he's got talent, but his work is mediocre at best. Someone who just doesn't have the "it" factor where you can take an ordinary scenario (girl sitting by a tree) and turn it into something that makes the viewer FEEL something: ART.

A GWC likes the idea of calling himself/herself an artist, but simply lacks talent. There are lots of photographers who are hobbyists and yet their images are so amazing it doesn't matter whether or not they do it for pay.

Then there are photographers who demand high pay, yet put forth crappy images. To me, what makes a photog from a GWC is the talent factor.

The same can go for models. I'll call it a "PIP". Person-in-a-picture. Someone who doesn't know how to emote through still imagery. You can have a talented photographer, but if you have dead eyes or look stiff and uncomfortable, you're going to ruin the photographer's vision.

Also, a PIP can be a young girl or man who has low self esteem and is just trying this for the chance to prove to others that she is attractive. The title of "model" is a very high esteemed one to have, and it impresses people and makes you seem glamorous. But if you're in it for the bragging rights of being able to call yourself a model and post cool pics of yourself on Facebook, but don't care about the work itself, then you are not a true model.

For example, once while shooting in New York I came across a photographer who had a vision. He wanted to shoot a model with no makeup, dirty clothes, trash all around and a cigarette in her mouth. Her hair was to look disheveled and oily. She was supposed to look rough, like someone you'd expect to have a drug addiction problem. He had a hard time finding models willing to take on this project because most young girls always want to be pretty. I did the job, and he later sold the images at an art show and sent me a check for being a good sport.

I personally feel it's a matter of dedication.

I like this elucidation.

Eyesso wrote:
I thought "GWC" was more of a negative term, like....a guy who uses his camera to get alone time with a pretty girl, and tries to encourage provocative poses, but lacks any creative talent or photographic skills, instead just using the camera to maintain a front row seat to the show he is creating.  In the end it is about inflating his own ego, nothing more.

The model equivalent? 

I'm not sure there is an exact equivalent, but if there were....it would be a guy or girl who has a sizable portfolio, and "experience".  This person might make requests like make up, hair, wardrobe, getting paid, etc.  But then during the shoot it becomes clear that they have not invested into the art of modeling, their poses might be cliche or poor, they might not care about the creative vision of the photographer and instead want to lead their own fantasy shoot experience.  Then after the shoot which might yield no great pictures, yet they request 20-30 edited shots....two days later, with reedit requests because they "don't like it". 

I have not met any models like that....but from reading on the forums, I know they exist.  So maybe that is the GWC equivalent?

many of these 'models' congregate in China. We get weekly shippings. The sad thing is, that local clients actually request models to be like this.

salvatori. wrote:
Although I didn't say it as eloquently as others did (coffee hadn't kicked in), I agree that the MC is the worst place for this thread, even if it was created in a lighthearted manner.

These words from the original post: 'Take cover - incoming!!!' lead me to believe it's a true troll post: toss a bomb, see what blows up, and sit back and laugh at the carnage.

Again, IMHO

+1

We don't really need more threads with models and photographers bashing each other.

DLatrice wrote:
Model here, please don't hurt me

There are wanna-be's: those who say they are a model, "yeah, I'm on MM" but only have selfies in their portfolio with no stats and will do 'paid only'. This includes flakes.

And while agreeing with this I will add 'models' who never add a single image to their collection of selfies or low quality bikini shots and still demand money.

I've found the serious ones will jump at the chance to do a shoot and them move on. I will no longer deal with a model after a cancellation. When I was first starting I've been strung along for up to two months with emails 'I want to work with you!' promising the *next* weekend we will get together. Now I tell them it is a one shot window of time and that is all. I enjoy newbies that are serious but am not doing this for the frustration of a no-show or what occurred two weeks ago: a rolling no-show. A model called can moved to 2:30, then 3:30, then 4:00, then 5:00, and I ended it. My fault for letting it happen but I won't allow it again.