Posted by Michael Sloane: 
Rich,

I feel for you. Models are not artists (they can be). You can't expect that they will understand your work, especially when your first contact is through email where the written word can get lost in translation.

Live with it it's a reality of being an artist. Unless you having paying jobs, are paying or famous finding people to work with is always going to be a challenge.

Posted by Rich Mohr: 

It's come to my attention that apparently some of my artistic work is pushing potential models away. So I'm really not sure what to do. On one hand I have done well with the glamour work but I consider it boring and not really inspiring. Then we get to my artistic work which I'm really proud of and each creation inspires me to do more.
Since the photography that I do is used as a base for my artistic work, should I only display the glamour stuff then? I hate to not be able to show off my artistic side but if it keeps models away...
Opinions are very welcome!! BTW, most of my glamour images are on my main site, http://www.rpatrickmohrphotography.com

Rich

I don't understand.  You make enough money off of selling glamour shots to support your art?   Or you make enough money shooting glamour model portfolios to support your art? And the well is drying up so to speak?  If the issue is you're losing your meal ticket because of your artwork shots, then you best figure out how else you plan on supporting your artistic work if you insist upon doing it.


Or is the issue you can't find glamour models to pose for your art stuff.  If it's this, just a suggestion, that I would be too terribly surprised if hawaiian swimsuit oil poster girl has issues with 1) posing for darker alternative work or 2) has the ability to pull it off successfully.  You might indeed want to start working more with actresses (they can assume roles) or models that are used to working with darker/more complex themes other than "stand by the ocean--look cute--and make love to the camera."

Posted by Brent Burzycki: 
What aspect of your artistic work do you feel is pushing them away?

Or does not interest them?

I've actually been lucky enough to run across some models who are honest enough to give thier honest opinions. A couple models from this sight basically said the graphic images I create do not fit thier style. I have no problem with an honest response like that.
I'm just the type of person that gets ideas for "scenes" in my head and the images pound at me until I can get them created. I'm focusing on getting a gallery opening in the fall on 2008 and I want the images to reflect my artistic visions not just my style of glamour images...

Posted by KM von Seidl: 

Posted by Rich Mohr: 

It's come to my attention that apparently some of my artistic work is pushing potential models away. So I'm really not sure what to do. On one hand I have done well with the glamour work but I consider it boring and not really inspiring. Then we get to my artistic work which I'm really proud of and each creation inspires me to do more.
Since the photography that I do is used as a base for my artistic work, should I only display the glamour stuff then? I hate to not be able to show off my artistic side but if it keeps models away...
Opinions are very welcome!! BTW, most of my glamour images are on my main site, http://www.rpatrickmohrphotography.com

Rich

I don't understand.  You make enough money off of selling glamour shots to support your art?   Or you make enough money shooting glamour model portfolios to support your art? And the well is drying up so to speak?  If the issue is you're losing your meal ticket because of your artwork shots, then you best figure out how else you plan on supporting your artistic work if you insist upon doing it.


Or is the issue you can't find glamour models to pose for your art stuff.  If it's this, just a suggestion, that I would be too terribly surprised if hawaiian swimsuit oil poster girl has issues with 1) posing for darker alternative work or 2) has the ability to pull it off successfully.  You might indeed want to start working more with actresses (they can assume roles) or models that are used to working with darker/more complex themes other than "stand by the ocean--look cute--and make love to the camera."

I actually have a day job which pays the bills. But you hit it right on the head when you mentioned models not able to pull off the look successfully. My ideal shoot would be having a model who knows exactly what look the image requires and not needing too much direction. I'm not gonna give up! Still looking!!

Posted by * Visual Mindscapes *: 
glam!

Agree... I love doing glamour looks...  Glamour is my favorite.  It's harder to come up with really fantastic original ideas, but it's just so darn pretty...

Posted by Rich Mohr: 

...some of my artistic work is pushing potential models away. So I'm really not sure what to do. On one hand I have done well with the glamour work but I consider it boring and not really inspiring. Then we get to my artistic work which I'm really proud of and each creation inspires me to do more.

dude, i SO know where you're coming from. sometimes i think to myself, "if i have to shoot one more pretty naked girl like she's posing for playboy i'm gonna barf."

but then, the next pretty naked girl is standing in front me with those hopeful eyes looking so fine and sexy and i know she's thinking she's the next whoever and my stomach twists (in a really good way) and i think, "damn. do i have a great job or what?"

as far as that part of your work that is more "artistic expression" than pretty glam chic, i think i'd keep it segregated from the glam work.  if you're like me, the art stuff doesn't make you any money and the glam stuff does.  ya gotta eat while you're making art, right?

Posted by Lapis: 
stupid quoting device...fools me everytime. here is what I was going to say to above exerpted quote.

Most models may not be artists, but most photographers aren't really either.
So, the artist models and the artist photographers need to contact each other. Look at a models portfolio and contact them if they seem to understand art in the same way you do. Most models contacting you will not be 'the artists'.

Also, models who are artists may be elitists...they have the intelligence and drive to work with the best artist/photographers they can find. This means, if you are in a transitional phase, art models who have worked with people mcuh more experienced than yourself may not want to do the same work for free.

As an artist (whether model or photographer) you have to find collaborators (which is work) photograph still lives (also work...) or give up. Basically, if you are not going to follow the traditional path, expect to use your machete to go through the undergrowth.

Everybody wants to be an artist...but not many have the integrity to truly 'starve' through the period it requires to move up a notch.

Just my rambling thoughts at this moment.

Your thoughts may be rambling, but they have substance.  I, only recently, got back into doing nudes after a long hiatus.  My first shoot, last September, was a TFP with a 53 year old web model who holds a degree in art education.  I'll always love her for the insights that she provided. 

Posted by Ascending Phoenix: 
Just my own ramblings,

I can relate to your frustration. Long before I had a camera in my hand. I surfed the NET to see who shot what. As well as what TALKED TO ME. For me, it was European Art Nude Shooters. Great. Only problem is they are THERE. And I am HERE. Different cultures, art appreciation training etc. So finding Models like they have and work with over there/here is like pulling hens teeth so to speak.

I shoot friends co workers etc learning the camera. Read the Europeans sites Technical Lighting info.Guys like Bjoern De Olsen, Carsten Tschach   , Eric Boutilier-Brown,etc. I was blessed with a few Art Nude Models eventually. But most Models were intimidated by Nudes Period. So I went back to “Playing it Safe” I have been blessed with more Non Nude Models and had fun learning other styles and experimenting with other things through that. Does it  FILL MY SOUL like shooting a well lit Simplistic Art Nude?

An affirmative NO.

But, I have made a conscious choice to shoot what I can shoot the most of.Fine tuning styles and lighting etc.While I wait for the right Models come along to shoot what’s in my soul to create. To some I’m just a GWC.If you want to put a label on me to make yourself feel better. Go right ahead.

I’m just a GWC with a passion to create images and touch peoples lives. That’s  how I hope to be remembered long after I have left this plane.



I aint quitting my goal and dream of creating the images I want to create either. Follow your soul. Its all we really have.

I'm with you, Brother.  Stay true to yourself.

Posted by theda: 
I prefer artistic work. I just can't take glamour seriously.

Oh Theda,
I'm sorry to hear that!  Actually I'm the opposite.  I prefer glamour.  If you take one look at my images here, it is easy to see which camp I'm in.  Not to worry Theda, we had a great shoot  and I was happy that you stooped to my level! (j/k)

Seriously, I consider what I do more of a form of communication than an art form.  I don't find that communication has any more or less merit than art.  I am satisfied with the process and the result of my efforts and care less about what lable is put on it.  The practical application of the distinction between glamour and art for me is getting published and paid.  While not ever shoot has a paid application, the overall goal is to create a body of work that finds an appreciative audience.

My personal opinion is that the creator of a work cannot define whether the work is in fact art.  The audience makes that distinction.  The creator should only be concerned with how the work achieved the goals the creator set for it.

Dan

Posted by Dan Howell: 
Oh Theda,
I'm sorry to hear that!  Actually I'm the opposite.  I prefer glamour.  If you take one look at my images here, it is easy to see which camp I'm in.  Not to worry Theda, we had a great shoot  and I was happy that you stooped to my level! (j/k)

Seriously, I consider what I do more of a form of communication than an art form.  I don't find that communication has any more or less merit than art.  I am satisfied with the process and the result of my efforts and care less about what lable is put on it.  The practical application of the distinction between glamour and art for me is getting published and paid.  While not ever shoot has a paid application, the overall goal is to create a body of work that finds an appreciative audience.

My personal opinion is that the creator of a work cannot define whether the work is in fact art.  The audience makes that distinction.  The creator should only be concerned with how the work achieved the goals the creator set for it.

Dan

Posted by theda: 
Well, Dan, the shot I posted fropm our session received the comment "it's pretty arty for glamour," so I guess I didn't stoop low enough?  I think we obtained a happy medium.

As you said, the line between art and glamour can be pretty indistinct at times. I'll just stick to doing what I like and let everyone else worry about the labels.

Boy, like I just put in the comments on your page, I don't think either the one in your profile or the one in Dan's is in the glamour category at all. If they're stradling two worlds, then to me it's art and fashion not art and glamour.

Posted by Dan Howell: 

Posted by theda: 
I prefer artistic work. I just can't take glamour seriously.

Oh Theda,
I'm sorry to hear that!  Actually I'm the opposite.  I prefer glamour.  If you take one look at my images here, it is easy to see which camp I'm in.  Not to worry Theda, we had a great shoot  and I was happy that you stooped to my level! (j/k)

Seriously, I consider what I do more of a form of communication than an art form.  I don't find that communication has any more or less merit than art.  I am satisfied with the process and the result of my efforts and care less about what lable is put on it.  The practical application of the distinction between glamour and art for me is getting published and paid.  While not ever shoot has a paid application, the overall goal is to create a body of work that finds an appreciative audience.

My personal opinion is that the creator of a work cannot define whether the work is in fact art.  The audience makes that distinction.  The creator should only be concerned with how the work achieved the goals the creator set for it.

Dan

Dan, I think we have a different definition of glamour. I think only a few of the shots you have on your page here are glamour. I wonder which ones you think of as glamour?

This is yet another subject I've been meaning to start a thread on, I think I will now.