|
Forums >
Model Colloquy >
Open leg
I'm thinking of putting up my fee to $150/hr for art nude. My fee for art nude now is $100/hr for poses you'd see in paintings in the National Gallery but I sense that photographers always have that touchy question in the back of their mind.... "Will you open your legs please"? I oblige because I'm uninhibited and, as I'm naked anyway, why not show completely that I'm female. Celebrate that I have a vagina, why hide the fact? Why feel shame? But I'm wondering if perhaps I should be charging more since I'm willing to go that extra mile and reveal more. So I thought I'd put these questions out there. 1. Does open leg style art nude give better value than the less revealing style. 2. Therefore should it be a paid more? 3. What are the consequences if I do open leg style? 4. Does it matter to anyone really? I'd like to hear from models that do and those who don't and their reasons. And from photographers who find asking for open leg difficult and those who are comfortable and get what they want. Do you pay extra... Like a tip if the girl gives a little more. Aug 04 14 04:03 pm Link Okay, I know I'm not a model (people should be grateful) and I live in a different country but what does $150.00 an hour for art nude have to do with showing your vagina ? Btw, I would not consider showing your vagina as the focal point of the photo constitute national gallery work, although like I said, I'm thinking of our national gallery. I would first decide if I want to show my body parts, then decide in what way I want them shown, and finally decide how much to charge. If you don't mind showing them because they are part of you and all women have one then do. If you don't mind having them be the focus of the picture then agree to pose that way. If you don't want them to be the focus of the picture then make that restriction. But raising your price for art nude to $150.00 an hour in my country would severely limit your work as that is far above the going rate. Some models have a step scale for nudity. The more they show and in what style the more they charge. Also, remember supply and demand. What are the other models in your area charging for either art nudes or for spread art nudes ? You have to be somewhere in the ball park (American phrase) with your prices to be competitive. Aug 04 14 04:10 pm Link Miss 5 11 wrote: This should be an interesting discussion... Aug 04 14 04:13 pm Link If you don't lose work and end up earning more for the same effort...good for you! If your bookings drop, adjust accordingly. Aug 04 14 04:33 pm Link Miss 5 11 wrote: I agree, that people might be willing to pay more to see the whole enchilada, but are those the kinds of artists you want to work with anyway? Aug 04 14 04:35 pm Link Miss 5 11 wrote: if one person is willing to pay more for that specific style, then yes, it "gives better value" - to that photographer, at least. Aug 04 14 04:35 pm Link Miss 5 11 wrote: For me, it's not about actually having the model doing open leg poses so much as she is comfortable with various nude poses which MAY include open leg poses. Aug 04 14 04:45 pm Link  I think this is an honest question by the OP. Let's see if we can keep this in the context of "Art Nude" and not move into the adult realm. She hasn't asked about adult although I understand how "open leg" can move in that direction. Aug 04 14 04:47 pm Link I have photographed open leg. I didn't ask the model to pose that way. She just did it on her own. Aug 04 14 04:48 pm Link GPS Studio Services wrote: When you were doing websites for girls, did you pay more for that kind of content? Aug 04 14 04:50 pm Link Consequences can be extensive. I know a model who did some and lost a job years later because they were still on the net. I started as an art nude model but don't like gratuitous stuff myself so didn't want to do it. However, some of my fashion clients - designers, boutiques,etc were concerned I may have done 'worse' and it may affect their branding. Luckily I hadn't; but was several times called on to defend it. So be careful. Aug 04 14 04:51 pm Link I look at it this way, if it fits the style, look and emotion that you want to portray.... poses should look natural, not contrived....unless you're shooting contraband, then no holes barred. Aug 04 14 04:51 pm Link GPS Studio Services wrote: Andrew Thomas Evans wrote: Actually, my sites were (as is my new program now) "pretty girl" sites. They focused more about the girl and we really didn't do much, if any, open leg. That was never my genre. Aug 04 14 04:52 pm Link GPS Studio Services wrote: Did you pay more for open leg or nude content? Aug 04 14 04:54 pm Link I have no insight regarding Australia. In my market, fine art galleries, and serious photography collectors, pointless spread leg images as one might see in the picture of the day here, would be completely unacceptable. Aug 04 14 05:03 pm Link It's worth more because people will pay more for it. Wouldn't know about specific consequences, other than to say that 99 percent of the public will think of open leg as straightforward pornography - ie, you won't be able to convince anyone that it is artistic, which you might be able to do with ordinary nude. Aug 04 14 05:04 pm Link One potential problem that I could see is that you may inadvertently price yourself out of traditional art market. While there may be some demand for an art nude model who is more comfortable with open leg poses, I would guess that most of your assignments would be from photographers looking for open leg poses, and that would become the bulk of what you would do. Meanwhile the photographers who are less interested in open leg poses may move on to more affordable models. Naturally, I'm just speculating. You'd probably have to see how often you're hired and what sort of assignment you're being hired for. Aug 04 14 05:07 pm Link GPS Studio Services wrote: Andrew Thomas Evans wrote: The vast majority of what I did was "Playboy Style Nudes" and we paid a rate for nudes. As I said, "open leg" has never been my genre. Aug 04 14 05:11 pm Link Miss 5 11 wrote: To those who want to shoot open leg, it is a minimum requirement. For them, yes, better value. Miss 5 11 wrote: You should charge whatever the market will bear. That can be ascertained by testing. I see you have it in your profile now. If you've had it up for at least a month or two, have you gotten more inquiries or fewer? Miss 5 11 wrote: I presume you're asking what would be the consequences between open-leg and non-open-leg photos some day being seen by a future employer. I can't imagine in the professions where it does matter, say teaching children or policing that one might be hired if one does only closed leg. Hmmm, there must be some professions where it would matter (comparing those two) but I cannot think of them just now. Miss 5 11 wrote: I'll need you to clarify...to me, to the rate, to non-erotic photographers, to erotic photographers, to family? Whom are you wondering might it matter to? Aug 04 14 05:19 pm Link 
Model Posts: 6639 MacMurdo - permanent station of the US, Sector claimed by New Zealand, Antarctica The time to discuss shoot content is before you book the shoot, and before you give your rates. It is one of the many considerations I've used in quoting my rates. Usage, length of shoot, and location of shoot also should figure in with content. Out of the number of models who pose nude, many do not pose open-leg. Out of those who do, many do so only for certain concepts/styles. If your limits include open-leg poses, you may certainly charge more for that, and many do. But, you may limit your market by charging everyone that higher rate, rather than only charging those who are interested in that type of content. Of course, "open-leg" means different things to different people, so be sure you know what you are agreeing to ahead of the shoot to avoid issues. Aug 04 14 05:19 pm Link I guess I started out in the wrong one of the double post. I see no reason that limb-angle or the yaw/pitch/roll of a torso should make any difference to the price. Naked is naked. Charge more for porn, since it involves a violation of personal space, but charging ala carte for every muscle movement needed to pose is a bit absurd. Aug 04 14 05:21 pm Link MoRina wrote: Yes, and the way you have it in your profile currently would make it seem you only have the one rate now. Aug 04 14 05:21 pm Link
Model Posts: 6639 MacMurdo - permanent station of the US, Sector claimed by New Zealand, Antarctica Toto Photo wrote: You mean the OP, not me, right? I don't have rates in my profile. Aug 04 14 05:25 pm Link Vincent Arthur wrote: ... or announce a "secret garden special", limited time only! Aug 04 14 05:37 pm Link Charging more? I don't see why you should it's not a different genre or anything. Now if you were doing erotic or fetish then I would say sure, charge more but for the most part art nudes are pretty tame in comparison. Aug 04 14 05:43 pm Link Bare Essential Photos wrote: THIS +1,000,000 Aug 04 14 05:49 pm Link Rates should not vary according to what parts of your anatomy are in display, but according to concept and usage. You could be asked to pose for close-ups of your genitals intended for a non-profit anatomy booklet at the local university. And then you could be asked to do the same for comercial use in a porn website. Each case commands a different rate based on purpose and usage. Aug 04 14 06:01 pm Link 4 R D wrote: Lol! This reminded me of the catheterization video they showed in 101! The only woman willing to shoot it was an adult film star! Bwhaha! And I assure you the meatus is no vagina! Haha! So here's the medical video and the women has full puffy hair and club makeup and is breathlessly whispering as the video "nurse" is about to insert the foley. So maybe they only ask "certain people" to do those close ups Aug 04 14 06:16 pm Link I charge by the hour. Math sucks and thinking of the different combinations it takes to set rates for different content use makes my head spin. Base rate, hourly or day rate Aug 04 14 06:42 pm Link Danielle Reid wrote: I've heard this from several models. A few say they can be more relaxed and focused on the job at hand when they don't have to worry about what's showing and what shouldn't. Aug 04 14 06:49 pm Link Danielle Reid wrote: I've never paid a higher rate. Aug 04 14 06:51 pm Link I, as one photographer has shot what would be considered penthouse/hustler style nudes in the past. Maybe 20 something years ago. At that time my focus was to shoot what the client wanted (ATK and their subsidiaries). I was paid well as were the models. OK, been there and done that. Now 20ish years later I can barely get out of bed yet try and shoot that. Would I shoot spread leg for an art gallery? Most certainly. I would use a narrow DOF and focus on the belly button, or whatever... but leave a little more to the imagination. There is no legal definition for "porn" in the US... other than the SC ruling that "I know it when I see it". Lets not label people because they want to work and keep things within a defined limit. She offered nude, including open leg. That does not equal porn. If she had offered POV, or any other extreme then we could discuss that. All IMO not as a mod. Aug 04 14 08:18 pm Link It's a bit like ordering off a Chinese menu. One from column A one from column B and so on. I find that problematic as in the valuation of every body part. I remember Shannon Dorherty from The original 90210 tv series. She posed topless once and then published rates for magazines based on body parts she was willing to show. This became well known in Hollywood a she became a bit of a laughing stock in the industry. And btw she only had one taker, based on her attitude. I'm confused a bit. As a fine art photographer there is not a lot of need to show vagina, labia, spread shots what so ever. And certainly not as a focus of the image. Though a few may handle that subject artistically most are shooting glamour at best. So I know the lines become blurred between fine art nudes and glamour I think those images cross the line from fine art. Besides there is a way to shoot open leg shots , mainly from the side or from the head down that can give you the beautiful angles of the open legs without showing the holy of holyes . From the front the model can roll her hips back to minimize what is shown, as well as the use of shadow to cover the model. If you want to shoot fine art nudes I would stick to fine art. Aug 05 14 05:47 am Link I'm no expert in this area - and have never hired someone for 'open leg' - but I think I can nail the crossover where art meets open leg meets sexuality, but without straying into actual 'adult' The following is not work safe, but it would be interesting to know whether models on here view it is 'open leg' in the traditional (charge more) sense. Also, does it constitute 'nude'? https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/2923756 Aug 05 14 07:35 am Link PR Zone wrote: I would consider that fetish/erotic content, and fetish content often pays quite a bit more than conventional art and glamour nudes - regardless of whether it's nude or not. I did some fetish work yesterday afternoon, mostly stills but also some short video. I had on lingerie throughout the shoot, and it was $100/hour compensation. That's good pay, but pretty typical for fetish work. Aug 05 14 07:38 am Link I think you should charge everyone (well, except me . . . ) as much as you can, or what the market will bear . . . me, you should shoot with TF . . .  Hey, I had to give it a shot . . . SOS Aug 05 14 07:48 am Link anything can be, art....but not like people think it....the execution is usually horrible and confronting... with the right PoV anything can be elevated to Art...but how many fail in communicating....not everything is art...Art is not become you do it, but how much meta(-message, -world, -physic) can you transfer.....how much can you communicate... should it pay more.....sorry ...in the end it's about what you feel comfortable with.... fact remains as well, that you can get better paid....but would it make it more artistic? NO But in a truly artistic level, with real artists and genuine work.....no price is necessary.... but it would not concern me, as there is no payment.. ...models know that my work is genuine and want to be part of that art experience...... So you need to decide when looking at somebodies work... Herman www.hermanvangestel.com Aug 05 14 07:53 am Link btw ..i would not really welcome open legs...it makes it more..complicated..in all different levels.......except if it's really necessary, as all the attention will go mostly to there, and forget the rest of the image.......i don't consider that very favourable...so it needs to be visually compensated.....that asks for a higher degree Herman www.hermanvangestel.com Aug 05 14 08:01 am Link ok...to put it different ... in the end...depends what the quality is of the photographer/artist...the lesser ones you charge more, much more :p.... Herman www.hermanvangestel.com Aug 05 14 08:04 am Link I shoot open leg quite a bit. However I don't want that to be the focal point of the image. I want the model to appear uninhibited, natural and self-assured with a significant theme present. The type of photography that is the worst for me are the crotch shots that are gratuitous and have the model looking like a bimbo. Even a lot of the implied stuff has the models looking like bimbos. In my opinion a model would be thought of in higher regard with artful open leg photography than raunchy Penthouse or Hustler style photography. If I was a model I would much rather hear that someone had recognized me in an artful photograph rather than between some sticky pages in a cheap mens' magazine. Aug 05 14 08:09 am Link |
