Like an open Rose wrote:
me me

Haha, I'm giving priority basd on a secret criteria which you know about... shhh...
-----
First impression isn't very positive - the avi is too dark and a weak shot, the profile pic doesn't show who you are, and the hips seem large in the stats even though you're 6' - a big plus of course.

The profile description is quirky but in an interesting way, so let's see about the port. Mostly candids but surprise! The hips and weight don't seem to show in the pics. In fact your legs look really nice. And your face is really nice. I wish there were a clean full body or 3/4 body shot to answer that question about how the hips would look because most my shoots use standing poses.

Rating: Hopeful - I'd request a full figure sho

Rue99 Photography wrote:
2. If you HAVE NOT YET requested a critique, DO NOT request one until this message changes.

Just saw this.  I'm in no huge hurry and totally understand if you don't have the time.  My life will NOT end if you don't manage to get to me, I promise

Danni Doll wrote:
heck yeah!

I'd love to hear what you have to say.  Your work rocks my socks.

I really like your profile It tells me loads about your preferences, what you like to do, and convey the fun and joy you have modeling. Stats are fine for what I do, and that avatar says you're looking for quality.

The port does not disappoint. You have some great looks, and being a rather egotistical photographer (not to the models though ) I always figure I can capture at least the best expressions myself if the raw material is there, and it certainly is.

Activity is good, and you have enough experience that if you applied to my casting call, I'd feel comfortable that there were no surprises.

Rating: Excellent - For being a smart model who pulls off great looks

====== PLEASE READ ========
Due to the volume of requests, I'll be selectively critiquing the models who seem most interested in having a critique. So please do the following:

1. If you HAVE ALREADY requested a critique but feel you've been skipped, please request another if you'd still like one. But please keep in mind what I shoot, so the critique is in the context of what I shoot and my goals, an not just about your look.

2. If you HAVE NOT YET requested a critique, DO NOT request one until this message changes.

Rue99 Photography wrote:

Haha, I'm giving priority basd on a secret criteria which you know about... shhh...
-----
First impression isn't very positive - the avi is too dark and a weak shot, the profile pic doesn't show who you are, and the hips seem large in the stats even though you're 6' - a big plus of course.

The profile description is quirky but in an interesting way, so let's see about the port. Mostly candids but surprise! The hips and weight don't seem to show in the pics. In fact your legs look really nice. And your face is really nice. I wish there were a clean full body or 3/4 body shot to answer that question about how the hips would look because most my shoots use standing poses.

Rating: Hopeful - I'd request a full figure sho

i so trust and love your opinion. Will post the full body pics
but i do have a giant but toned ass a gift and a curse

Shayn wrote:

Rating: Outstanding - But why ask the question when you already know the answer ?

Like an open Rose wrote:

i so trust and love your opinion. Will post the full body pics
but i do have a giant but toned ass a gift and a curse

Oh sure, make my critique look silly with that new avatar! Those legs, those legs...

DanielleAmber wrote:
would love to hear it too!

Face shot in avatar looks good, the description is straightforward in the profile, and the stats look good. Not attention grabbing, but professional, and the part about artistic is nice but almost like a footnote.

The port is another story though - you do like art, editorial style! Almost as if the description in front were understated so the impact of the port could be greater. The port is diverse, cohesive, and meticulous - even down to a minimally touched photo and arranging pics so their sizes match by row.

Rating: Excellent - for a port and profile that screams edgy editorial, through and through.

Rue99 Photography wrote:

Oh sure, make my critique look silly with that new avatar! Those legs, those legs...

of course not. your input made it happen.!

Rue99 Photography wrote:

My suggestion is to *READ* whatever people write.

====== PLEASE READ ========
Due to the volume of requests, I'll be selectively critiquing the models who seem most interested in having a critique. So please do the following:

1. If you HAVE ALREADY requested a critique but feel you've been skipped, please request another if you'd still like one. But please keep in mind what I shoot, so the critique is in the context of what I shoot and my goals, an not just about your look.

2. If you HAVE NOT YET requested a critique, DO NOT request one until this message changes.

Rachel Jay wrote:

Just saw this.  I'm in no huge hurry and totally understand if you don't have the time.  My life will NOT end if you don't manage to get to me, I promise

I see a cute tomboyish look in the avi and profile, then see the dreaded paid assignments only. The description has the usual will do TFP for... so that's good - it just shows you're picky and selective, something I like to see. The description is straightforward and businesslike, works for me too. 

The port is a real mixed bag though - some shots are really nice, but most are not great and some are poor - not color corrected, snapshots, bland. I'm not inspired by the port at all, but do like the angular face.

Rating: Good - Despite the port.

Rue99 Photography wrote:
I see a cute tomboyish look in the avi and profile, then see the dreaded paid assignments only. The description has the usual will do TFP for... so that's good - it just shows you're picky and selective, something I like to see. The description is straightforward and businesslike, works for me too. 

The port is a real mixed bag though - some shots are really nice, but most are not great and some are poor - not color corrected, snapshots, bland. I'm not inspired by the port at all, but do like the angular face.

Rating: Good - Despite the port.

I'll have to revisit this when I'm not loopy-tired.  But I wanted to let you know that I saw it and it's greatly appreciated!   Thanks for gettin' me in!

Rue99 Photography wrote:

Face shot in avatar looks good, the description is straightforward in the profile, and the stats look good. Not attention grabbing, but professional, and the part about artistic is nice but almost like a footnote.

The port is another story though - you do like art, editorial style! Almost as if the description in front were understated so the impact of the port could be greater. The port is diverse, cohesive, and meticulous - even down to a minimally touched photo and arranging pics so their sizes match by row.

Rating: Excellent - for a port and profile that screams edgy editorial, through and through.

AngelKitten wrote:
MEOW! >_

sarahnyc wrote:
go for it

The first thing that strikes me are the credits in the profile - very big names. Most the images in the port don't really grab me - either very small or not especially interesting. A few are really nice, but not many. I frequently see this with working models, because they don't get the pics from agency shoots.

But given the credits, the faces I like in just a few pics, and your stats, I'd assume that you could produce really good artistic implied nudes, especially since you have one there already.

Rating: Very good - but could have a better port.

Cristina_PR wrote:
this sounds good, still doing the critiques?

The face catches my attention in the avi, and the profile is straightforward. The hips aren't quite proportional to the height, but maybe I don't care. In your port the face does look nice - full lips, a little sexy. You don't look tall in the pics but I shoot Dryads and Nyads half the time, so it doesn't matter that much. Activity is good too. Although the pics don't jump out at me, your look makes up for that. 

Rating: Very good - what a great face.

Rue99 Photography wrote:

Mountainbeauty wrote:
Rating: Not ready yet, but promising

Thank you for the critique! I appreciate it! I have family up north lol in the bay area so when i visit them i could possibly shoot with you! haha any suggestions as to how to lose weight in my face to show bone structure! I don't have a clue how lol. I am already strictly dieting. Exercise regularly, and am a vegitarian. I only eat healthy food, so my question is how to lose weight safely! Thank you though you are very kind

Mountainbeauty wrote:

Rue99 Photography wrote:

Mountainbeauty wrote:
Rating: Not ready yet, but promising

Thank you for the critique! I appreciate it! I have family up north lol in the bay area so when i visit them i could possibly shoot with you! haha any suggestions as to how to lose weight in my face to show bone structure! I don't have a clue how lol. I am already strictly dieting. Exercise regularly, and am a vegitarian. I only eat healthy food, so my question is how to lose weight safely! Thank you though you are very kind

I don't know anything about model nutrition, but I would assume in the LA area there must be tons of people with advice about how to do it heathily. There's also the possibility that you can't. If you're not snacking, not eating sweets, eating healthy, and exercising it could also be just your bone structure or metabolism.

But keep in mind that this is not a critique per se. It's just what I look for in models, what's interesting to me, and doesn't mean it applies to anyone else, especially to casting directors and other photographers.

Megan Owenson wrote:
Hi i requested one on page 3 and would really really love still to get one. THANKS

No problem, I skipped some and asked people to re-request if they were waiting for one because it got too long. Anyway....
----

Good profile, it's easy to read and looks like there will be no drama. Stats are good for my type of work. A very conservative port, but your profile does say you're looking for the right photog for something artistic so I'm alright with that. 

In your port, my initial impression is your face is a little rounder/oval shaped rather than the gaunt look for edgy or fashion that I prefer. But when I look closely at some of the photos, it's possible that it's there, but I can't really say.

Rating: Not ready - Improve the port

Jeri Jo wrote:
Am I not interesting enough? I got skipped.....

I requested models repost requests last night, so nothing personal

Anyway, first impression is the weight, hips, and waist seems high for a 5'6 model. The avi shows well though so let's move on to the port. The motto "you will be judged by your worst pic" applies here. My eye zooms right to 8th pic, which shows a little roll on the belly area. And once I start looking for something, I see the same on pic 5/center.

Rating: Not ready

Rue99 Photography wrote:

I requested models repost requests last night, so nothing personal

Anyway, first impression is the weight, hips, and waist seems high for a 5'6 model. The avi shows well though so let's move on to the port. The motto "you will be judged by your worst pic" applies here. My eye zooms right to 8th pic, which shows a little roll on the belly area. And once I start looking for something, I see the same on pic 5/center.

Rating: Not ready

Thanks hun! Your honesty is greatly appreciated! Your opinion states that I am not ready to shoot with you and that I am too heavy. I understand, it's rough in this environment. I got the same treatment as a ballet dancer for 19 years, but I am very comfortable with my body and most importantly, I am healthy. I don't plan on changing that for anyone. You have amazing work and I really like your style. I feel honored to be critiqued by you. Thanks again for your time.

Chloe J Clark wrote:
I still want one, not sure if I was skipped or you havent gotten to me.

Apart from the ink, the two things that jump out in your profile are you look slim (good) and your face looks older than I'd expect for 30. This is important because most my fantasy themes are currently more appropriate for younger looks.

The port has a lot of b/w and face shots. Although I consider the face the most important treat, most my work is 3/4 or 1/2 body shots. For most my shoots, I'm doing wood nymphs, dryads, etc which focus on youth.

Rating: Incompatible - with my current focus.

RivenRaven wrote:
Signs up for some CC

Mercy Rule I notice 5'11 first - very exciting. But no weight or measurements so I think to myself that this profile belongs on myspace, not mm. The "chubby models" stated in the profile is a clue, and looking at the port confirms this.

Rating: Incompatible

Silvia Rho wrote:
newbie model here! Go right ahead!

The profile is straightfoward and positive, which is good. However, I'd wonder why you'd ask me to shoot with you since your look is clearly different from what I state in my profile, and what I shoot is clearly different from what you state in yours.

Rating: Incompatible

Krista87 wrote:
go for it...should be fun

Most the stats are good, except for the waist which is 28" and 2-3 inches more than I like for the height. I'll assume you contacted me so I'll ignore anything about paid work only, although that combined with a low volume of activity on this site means my work would not get much exposure, and the port looks like it can use more work.

Rating: Fair

BrittanyOliver wrote:
im up next... this should be interesting!

The stats are excellent for what I shoot, the profile is good too, and you've been on MM for over a year. Turning to the port, I'm surprised on several levels:

The shots that seem to show your best face are too small or shadowy to know for sure. The shots that show your figure - very few - don't seem to reflect the stats. When this happens, either the photogs who shot full body didn't capture that, the model is embellishing, or she's very new and has little selection. I can't figure out which but notice that your photos are very recent. I'm usually an optimist so...

Rating: Promising - would request more information and candids (e.g. myspace)