Posted by Michael Feinberg: 
I am certainly not a professional photographer (at least with people photography), but it seems to me new models generally have a major misconception about modeling. Seems anyone with a pretty face (and sometimes not even that) thinks they should earn $50 - $150 just for showing up.

I mean come on. What does a new model really offer? Do they know anything about posing, presence, positioning, espression, movement? Doubtful at best. A beautiful or handsome model alone does not a great image make! When I started doing model photography I really didn't realize how much effort/knowledge it takes in order to make even a decent posed shot.

Pfft Michael.. I was a pro from the start hahaha

just kidding

*I did my first shoot after joining onlineland with Michael awwwwwwwwwww   wow I was 17 then lol seems so long ago.

Posted by Joe K. Perez: 
This is what I think a real world approach should be for portfolio only, non-commercial endeavors.

Levels and Rates (sliding scale, per hour, any genre)
Pro: $35 to $45 an hour
Semi-Pro: $15 to $45 an hour
Amateur & Beginner: $8 to $15 an hour

Stipulation(s):
- A minimum of 3 hours of work
- both model and photographer have CD of images
- copyright is shared (negotiated)
---snipped----

That's probably good for your location but it's not taking into account any other locations where that would never work, especially near me.
Everyone should take their own situation and adjust your rates for the average of what your demographics will accept. Sometimes it's just a matter of trial and error.

Posted by Glamour Studio /Gary: 

Posted by Joe K. Perez: 
This is what I think a real world approach should be for portfolio only, non-commercial endeavors.

Levels and Rates (sliding scale, per hour, any genre)
Pro: $35 to $45 an hour
Semi-Pro: $15 to $45 an hour
Amateur & Beginner: $8 to $15 an hour

Stipulation(s):
- A minimum of 3 hours of work
- both model and photographer have CD of images
- copyright is shared (negotiated)
---snipped----

That's probably good for your location but it's not taking into account any other locations where that would never work, especially near me.
Everyone should take their own situation and adjust your rates for the average of what your demographics will accept. Sometimes it's just a matter of trial and error.

Heck if I know. In California? Most likely not, but it seems to get people more gigs in between the larger gigs.

Posted by theda: 
Who does? The model herself. Her agent maybe. That's about it. Clients call an agency and say "I'm looking for X, Y and Z in a model." The agency sends them a stack of comps that fit that criterea or a stack of models with comps in hand for a go-see. The purpose of a comp card is to show as succinctly as possible that the model fits the job. If it can't be done in about 5 shots, it probably can't be done at all.

Finally, someone who knows reality about a commercial shoot.  Reading some of this thread has me scratching my head wondering what Commercial venue is being used.  In most cases i've read about, its "blond, 5'8" 115, blue eyes, autumn colors, comfortable with livestock, no allergies."  (you can read in what you will, but.. imagine small family dairy promotion)

the agency finds the models, sends comp cards, and they bring the models in to see if they can promote and sell the product.  Sometimes they settle for someone, sometimes they cancel out and wait for the right model.   

The best part:  No one gets paid till they choose the model and complete the Session. 

Posted by Jay Smellow: 
The odd query I have for both models and photographers is:

Why is it you feel you've spent more than your business partner? 

Models buy clothing, gym memberships, body mods, health food, Cosmetics (yeah.. There's an expense!), webspace, education, time, etc...  and have to deal with an ever-changing body.  (constant upgrades)

Photographers buy equipment, studio space, film and print supplies, electricity, heat, food, education, time, etc... (ooh.. upgrades... Can't forget new toys!)

so.. with both sides spending tons of money on themselves, Why should either pay the other for services, unless they're WORTH it?

Reward experience with Value.
Pay inexperience with Education.
Leave stupidity behind.

What more is there to consider?

J

The endless debate goes on. I for one don't worry about all this. I just enjoy the shoots and working with the models just trying to help out.

Posted by Mary: 

Posted by ( ANT ) Mgaphoto: 

Posted by Mary: 


you cant be serious


YES, I am serious.   A crappy GWC is worth as much as a non agency internet model, it's a good match, why should the gwc get paid and not the internet model?

I said this because of the ratio of models to photographers on the internet who actually charge people!

Posted by Glamour Studio /Gary: 

Posted by Nicole P: 

Posted by Glamour Studio /Gary: 

$25/35hr for your average clothed shoot. $35/50hr for swimwear. $50/75hr for lingerie. $75/100hr for topless. $100/125hr for nude/Playboy style.

Well what about swimwear? What pricing place do they go into?

^^Good guideline though. That helped.

Nicole, swimwear is listed ($35/50). Remember these are only basic guidelines for the newer or starting out models.

thanks I should read stuff (oops)

Posted by theda: 
Sorry, Monsante Bey, shooting GOOD fashion is hard. Bad fashi0n is easy.

Nope, shooting good fashion can be PRICEY!
Trust me, shooting fashion is EASY.

Posted by Joe K. Perez: 

Some are wondering, "any genre? even nudes?!". Well, check this out. What do the figure models get paid? The ones who pose nude in front of an Instructor and a class full of students at a College, or University? Keep in mind, many of these women are beautiful, have lovely figures and have experience. They aren't getting paid $100 an hour by that institution, I can tell you that right now.

I couldn't agree with this more. Nudes are a big genre big good figure models are VERY hard to find.

Posted by Michael Sloane: 

Posted by Joe K. Perez: 

Some are wondering, "any genre? even nudes?!". Well, check this out. What do the figure models get paid? The ones who pose nude in front of an Instructor and a class full of students at a College, or University? Keep in mind, many of these women are beautiful, have lovely figures and have experience. They aren't getting paid $100 an hour by that institution, I can tell you that right now.

I couldn't agree with this more. Nudes are a big genre big good figure models are VERY hard to find.

Figure modeling for ART is a completely different type of modeling. Most figure models are volunteers or students at the school. In Atlanta the pay was $14 to $25 an hour. The setting was comfortable and secure, the identity concealed, and the medium was art – sketching, drawing, painting – not photography. A few phone calls to local art schools or departments will verify.

There are also figure models who model for photography or professional artists, outside the classroom, with settings that aren’t always comfortable, who keep their name public. Accordingly the pay is higher. The majority of these models do not fit into any other model market – they’re not tall enough for fashion or too curvy whatever. Yes, there are a few exceptions (when isn’t there?). I’ll admit that I’m not as familiar in this area – but believe it or not I don’t live in a vacuum – and the rate seems to be about $100 per hour in Atlanta. Some models / photographers / artists develop a relationship and instead of a per hour pay, accept a % of the sale of any works.

Mary continues to hit the nail on the head.

Posted by Mary: 
I get the point.  The general rule should be that you pay for what you need.  If you're a GWC who takes crappy shots a good model won't work for you without compensation, why should she when she won't get anything she can use from you? 

If youre a great photographer the crappy model needs to pay you because you won't be using her shots in your book, what would you benifit by shooting her free?

If you're a GWC on the internet finding a model that isn't worth a dime in the real market then youre a match.  A perfect TFP senerio.  It's when you break out of that perfect senerio that problems present themselves.

Photographers that get rejected for tests have their ego bruised because what the model is saying is ..."I am too good to work free with you"  when the model gets rejected by a photographer it's the same message "I am too good to work free with you...you are not good enough"  theres no getting around the reality that there are mismatches, sometimes the photographer isnt to the level yet that the model is and vice-versa.

Sometimes the model or photographer is mistaken and really they think the'yre better then they are....this is when you see feathers fly.

Nude shots are another story, I have no idea how that market works, I'm not in it but I would assume that the models that do this kind of work want to be paid well.  I would think that unless the model has a paid site she is using the shots for that the photographer is getting more out of the shoot then the model

Posted by Mary: 
I get the point.  The general rule should be that you pay for what you need.  If you're a GWC who takes crappy shots a good model won't work for you without compensation, why should she when she won't get anything she can use from you? 

If youre a great photographer the crappy model needs to pay you because you won't be using her shots in your book, what would you benifit by shooting her free?

If you're a GWC on the internet finding a model that isn't worth a dime in the real market then youre a match.  A perfect TFP senerio.  It's when you break out of that perfect senerio that problems present themselves.

Photographers that get rejected for tests have their ego bruised because what the model is saying is ..."I am too good to work free with you"  when the model gets rejected by a photographer it's the same message "I am too good to work free with you...you are not good enough"  theres no getting around the reality that there are mismatches, sometimes the photographer isnt to the level yet that the model is and vice-versa.

Sometimes the model or photographer is mistaken and really they think the'yre better then they are....this is when you see feathers fly.

Nude shots are another story, I have no idea how that market works, I'm not in it but I would assume that the models that do this kind of work want to be paid well.  I would think that unless the model has a paid site she is using the shots for that the photographer is getting more out of the shoot then the model

Mary gets most of it right except for the nude part.  Certainly if a model poses nude and that work is used on a commercial glam nude site or a men's magazine then it is clearly a commercial usuage and $$$ do apply... but that is not the case for artistic nude work.  There is a very limited market for that style, so it is rare for agencies and/or photographers to pay much if any $$$ unless the model is willing to participate in the potential profil(similar to the photographer).

Sometimes I see the statement "I'll do fashion, editorial, etc for tfp but not for nude work".  Think about that statement for a minute...   The model recognizes that she either doesn't have the experience yet to command fees for her work, yet she is only willing to disrobe unless she is paid(even though she also has little experience there also)... so what is she now... a model or a stripper?  And I don't mean to offend its just a odd distinction to make...when the real issue isn't clothes or lack of them it's experience...

Posted by RStephenT: 
If a model expects to get paid for her time then that means she is interested in only commercial work, because if she is expecting to be paid the the photographer, MUA etc also should expect payment.  The rub is that many of the models expecting to paid either don't have a commercial portfolio or are not commercial quality.  Understanding your market and the availability of jobs etc is crucial to working on a regular basis.

Expecting established photographers to pay you to work on non commercial projects is not very realistic.  The question I might ask is why is your time more valuable then the photographer's time, particulary if he has more experience and a better portfolio.

What happens is that when you make definitive statements like I work for $$$ only or my portfolio is complete, you show a basic lack of understanding of how the field of modeling works and most folks will pass you by.  You also must realize that photographers rarely hire the model(s) for a job, and almost never hire a non agency(without prior working experience with that model) model... that why testing is critical to the process. 

Posted by theda: 
Here's the way it really works: whoever wants/needs the pictutres pays. If all parties wan/need the pictures, you can trade. It makes perfect sense and that means sometimes the photographer ends up paying the model.

Does this come in bold?

Posted by theda: 
Commercial means something different in modeling terms than it does to the rest of the universe.  To the rest of the universe, if money changes hand for a product of service, it's commercial. Money changes hands for modeling/photography that isn't "commercial" in nature all the time.

Here's the way it really works: whoever wants/needs the pictutres pays. If all parties wan/need the pictures, you can trade. It makes perfect sense and that means sometimes the photographer ends up paying the model.

Posted by RStephenT: 
If a model expects to get paid for her time then that means she is interested in only commercial work, because if she is expecting to be paid the the photographer, MUA etc also should expect payment.  The rub is that many of the models expecting to paid either don't have a commercial portfolio or are not commercial quality.  Understanding your market and the availability of jobs etc is crucial to working on a regular basis.

Expecting established photographers to pay you to work on non commercial projects is not very realistic.  The question I might ask is why is your time more valuable then the photographer's time, particulary if he has more experience and a better portfolio.

What happens is that when you make definitive statements like I work for $$$ only or my portfolio is complete, you show a basic lack of understanding of how the field of modeling works and most folks will pass you by.  You also must realize that photographers rarely hire the model(s) for a job, and almost never hire a non agency(without prior working experience with that model) model... that why testing is critical to the process. 

Don't mean to be argumentative, but if someone expects to be paid for their time it is commercial by nature... modeling is not outside of those perameters.  I choose to do both commercial and artistic work... I get paid normal rates for my commercial work but I receive little pay for my artistic work(I sell fine art prints and sometimes an image reverts to commercial usage, but it doesn't happen more than 3-4 times a year)

Now I know models and photographers charge each other fees for what can best be described as internet work (where the images have no commercial/editorial intent other than to help someones portfolio), and there does exist a market for models posing for well heeled GWC's who view the expense as a form of recreation.  But it is a very limited market and one that exposes the models to some risks because every lady I have worked with has faced her "scary situation". 

So I know that the bottom for me (and a number of other working pros I talk too), is if the model wants $$$ then everyone involved needs to receive $$$... so that is by definition a commercial job, and we haven't even addressed the real situation... working pros don't hire the talent... so when a model places an unrealistic $$$ amount per hour she has pretty much taken herself out of the mainstream loop and generally works with non pros i.e. GWC's with the very real inherent risks... just seems like a potentially dangerous and impractable situation.

Posted by : 
I think it needs to be established a realistic pricing model for models.

G

At the local Michaels' most models go for aanywhere from $4.99 to about $16.50. I went the the other day and got three for $15.75.

So, I get home, and I forgot the paint and glue.. I guess I have to go back and buy some glue, some paint, and then find a space to lay all the parts so I can paint them before I assemble and glue them together.

OH, before I forget, I got a '76 Vette, and '85 Shelby Cobra, and a 1/250 scale model of the Space Shuttle.

Posted by RStephenT: 
Don't mean to be argumentative, but if someone expects to be paid for their time it is commercial by nature... modeling is not outside of those perameters.  I choose to do both commercial and artistic work... I get paid normal rates for my commercial work but I receive little pay for my artistic work(I sell fine art prints and sometimes an image reverts to commercial usage, but it doesn't happen more than 3-4 times a year)

Now I know models and photographers charge each other fees for what can best be described as internet work (where the images have no commercial/editorial intent other than to help someones portfolio), and there does exist a market for models posing for well heeled GWC's who view the expense as a form of recreation.  But it is a very limited market and one that exposes the models to some risks because every lady I have worked with has faced her "scary situation". 

So I know that the bottom for me (and a number of other working pros I talk too), is if the model wants $$$ then everyone involved needs to receive $$$... so that is by definition a commercial job, and we haven't even addressed the real situation... working pros don't hire the talent... so when a model places an unrealistic $$$ amount per hour she has pretty much taken herself out of the mainstream loop and generally works with non pros i.e. GWC's with the very real inherent risks... just seems like a potentially dangerous and impractable situation.

Posted by Jay Smellow: 
The odd query I have for both models and photographers is:
Why is it you feel you've spent more than your business partner? 

Models buy clothing, gym memberships, body mods, health food, Cosmetics (yeah.. There's an expense!), web space, education, time, etc...  And have to deal with an ever-changing body.  (Constant upgrades)
Photographers buy equipment, studio space, film and print supplies, electricity, heat, food, education, time, etc... (ooh.. upgrades... Can't forget new toys!)

So... With both sides spending tons of money on themselves, why should either pay the other for services unless they're WORTH it?

Reward experience with Value.
Pay inexperience with Education.
Leave stupidity behind.

What more is there to consider?
J

CRAP!  I just typed out a whole reply to this, which IE ate! 

Anyhow, long story short.... THANKS FOR THIS POST!!!  It should have been the last post in the thread!!! 

This:

Reward experience with Value.
Pay inexperience with Education.
Leave stupidity behind.

Is F***king Brilliant!!

All parties incur costs.  Economic rules and human nature (Gravity, death and taxes as well, but that's off-topic...) will always apply:  If something is in short supply (i.e.: a trendy look that only 1.6% of available Model Pool X has), thus, in high demand, it will inevitably cost you.  How bad do you want it?  How much are you willing to pay for it?  And then there's human nature... Everyone has a different outlook/instilled values in this area!  Some people, even if they have it, are above spending $ for anything.  Some models (and photogs, for that matter) don't do nude work and there is no amount of $ you could pay them to change their minds.

If all involved parties can't agree on terms, don't do business!  And by all means don't be rude about it!  You can avoid this (and save yourself time and a headache) by gathering information about the person before you contact them.  READ what they've put in their profiles AND look at their photos. This is where you SHOULD get tipped off to how the person operates.  There is always the field in (I think) EVERY portfolio hosting site that says (something like): Projects Considered or Compensation Desired; to which there are a few choices.  Usually: Paid/TFP/Depends of Assignment. 

I always hit the "back" button after reading things like "I DON'T PAY MODELS EVER, FOR ANY REASON" and "Only testing models of major agency quality.  No models less than 5'9" need apply."  Funny, because these are usually photographers who have NO skill and it shows.  Sometimes not.  But hey... Never say never.  It seems people who are in this mindset (and make public such) are stifled creatively and can’t “step outside the boxâ€?.  They know one way of doing things, may have been doing it for decades and are unlikely convinced that this way of doing things could possibly be flawed!!  This doesn’t only apply to photogs, either!

Regarding asking for payment:  I have rates available upon request, which vary depending on what kind of shoot (fashion, lingerie, figure, etc.) and (especially) what the intended use of the photos are, etc.  If someone approaches me with a job and offers an amount (Seems the way legit photogs (rather than GWC's) handle business…) and it's below my normal rate, but I like their work, I'll usually take the job.  I have never ASKED to be paid if it wasn't something agreed upon before shooting... Despite occasionally having incurred inconvinience, monetary loss and not to mention NOT getting my photos from certain trade shoots!  (Model release?  You know they got it!)

Another thing to consider for all parties:  Wouldn't you be more likely to "help out" (pass along job info, give good referrals for, hire, etc.) someone you've already worked with and got good results from?  I feel LUCKY to have worked with some of the photographers I've worked with.  I have also got a lot of photos that will NEVER see the light of day or light of monitor! (hopefully)  I haven’t had any “scaryâ€? experiences, but a few annoying ones, which I leave at that.  If I've had a positive experience, I RAVE about it!  If I was doing my job, they feel the same way!  It comes down to communication, and lots of it!  (Just my 4.26 cents – keep the change!)

Posted by CO Model Amber: 
How come it's always "models who want paid work" what about the photographers who charge a few hundred to a few thousand dollars? How come it comes down to models "cant charge" or should only charge "$20 or $30" per hour? Why cant we charge a few hundred to a few thousand dollars like a lot of these photographers do? Yes WE CAN charge that amount but would be get work? Probably not. I just don't understand it really!

Amber,

Several years ago I saw a young model in one of the modeling magazines that lived in the same VA. town as my daughter. It turns out my daughter knew her and her parents.  I ask her to contact the model, and ask her if she would do a TFP shoot with me.
The model accepted, and the shoot was done several weeks later. The model was Amanda Swisten, now a CA. model, and movie star. (Look her up on Google)

At the time of the TFP shoot she had been published, but was still an unknown, and willing to pose cheap, or TFP. Now she is
a hot property, and can get the high rates. 

What I am getting at is that a model can charge more than most photographers can, but they have to be someone that
has worked their way upward, and has become a public figure.

Amanda did take my advise and applied to be on the "Dream Girls" calendar. She made the cover and then used this
exposure to get bigger and higher paying jobs.

Question. Have you really went after any real work, or are you just waiting to find it on MM?

"To catch big fish, you have to fish where the big fish are at".