Photographer
JLC Images
Posts: 11615
Phillipsburg, New Jersey, US
RGK Photography wrote:
Ok we are not talking about someone who is picking up a camera for the first, or second time. You don't seem to be willing or able to get passed this, so I am out.
Have fun. This thread is directed towards the OP and helping him specifically.
relax
Photographer
Zalacain
Posts: 314
Winter Park, Florida, US
DVS wrote:
My first model and 3rd novice shoot...I had no idea what I was doing and everything was in automatic...
![https://modelmayhm-5.vo.llnwd.net/d1/photos/080818/09/48a97db883395.jpg]() People get lucky - when you click in auto is the camera taking the picture not you.
Photographer
DVS
Posts: 10000
Detroit, Michigan, US
Zalacain wrote:
People get lucky - when you click in auto is the camera taking the picture not you. Really? I still use shutter-priority in all my shoots. I like to think the main key to an image is comprised of the eye for composition, lighting and subject all together as one...not because a piece of equipment is in automatic.
Model
Miss Anna Evans
Posts: 40233
Astoria, New York, US
the Art Wraith wrote:
Nice and cold.
I used to buy models breakfast/lunch whatever as well as pay some for shoots I never used, trying to be helpful because they were down, etc... Silly me, thanks for the wake up call. I'll be sure to stop that. Oh, Jesus Christ. I'm saying that I send the same rates to everyone, whether they want to shoot me nude or want me to haul three suitcases of complicated wardrobe to their location, and that I send the same rates to everyone regardless of their experience level.
Apparently, that's still offending some people. Obviously, I should lower my rates dramatically to allow for the fact that other people might not have money, and thereby impair my ability to care for myself and my loved ones. Brilliance.
Model
Miss Anna Evans
Posts: 40233
Astoria, New York, US
Lumigraphics wrote:
But Anna, I'm saying they should be. If everyone is broke, nobody can hire you. You'll make more money if you can help create a market.
That's like a GM employee saying "the financial situation of the car industry isn't my problem." Um...
As it is, I think you do terrific work. The ONLY way I would pay you a dime is if there was a market- paysite, workshop, collector, w/e. That's how agency modeling in the real world works BTW- models don't get paid unless there is a paying client. Don't you think that agencies are worried about the current economy? If businesses don't advertise, nobody hires models. I can't control the economy. I just charge enough to pay my bills, and I send the same rates to everyone. I'm fair like that. 
Photographer
Luminos
Posts: 6065
Columbia, Maryland, US
Hurricane Rebecca wrote:
Paying a skilled model is a GREAT way for a photographer to learn and improve (e.g. focusing on the photography and not having to pose a model, getting inspiration and ideas from her posing). The Porsche analogy doesn't bear any weight. Agreed. A skilled model can actually teach the photographer. Or relieve the photographer of some duties and leave him free to cope with equipment.
The best model in the world for a newbee is a model who also is a good photographer themselves, is into art, or is a dancer (or all three). Any or all of these will assist the model in having a better understanding of what makes a good picture, and will be a collaborator rather than a anchor.
And many experienced photographers who are more into the art that the illustration are happy with an experienced model, even when they excell at the direction of new models. Even when they are given the choice between the free model and the pricey one. It will all come down to value in the end.
Photographer
DVS
Posts: 10000
Detroit, Michigan, US
Luminos wrote:
The best model in the world for a newbee is a model who also is a good photographer themselves, is into art, or is a dancer (or all three). Any or all of these will assist the model in having a better understanding of what makes a good picture, and will be a collaborator rather than a anchor. I can attest to this personally. My first model was also a talented artist and ballet dancer. Her grace and beauty was inspiration in itself to become greater as an artist.
Photographer
Luminos
Posts: 6065
Columbia, Maryland, US
JLC Images wrote:
I realize you are trying to make a point about paying models and how a great model can help a photograph. I am not arguing this. I am arguing at the lvl we are speaking of in this thread it to be a waste.
-Would you buy top quality skis to go out on your first try?
-Do you give a 13 year old girl top quality make-up?
-Do you give a new driver a Porsche?
-Do you buy a Hassleblad as your first camera ever? Bad analogy.
If the Porsche could sense when it was being overdriven (see next year's model?) yes! If it could navigate by itself? Yes! If it had just won the Darpa challenge? Yes!
If the Hassleblad had better focus control with smart technology that would pick the right focus point - yes.
If skis could steer themselves - yes.
A model isn't simply looks. There is a brain between the ears of the better models, and they have both experience and talent to know what looks good.
Photographer
Art Wraith Images
Posts: 1411
Antioch, California, US
Miss Anna Evans wrote:
Oh, Jesus Christ. I'm saying that I send the same rates to everyone, whether they want to shoot me nude or want me to haul three suitcases of complicated wardrobe to their location, and that I send the same rates to everyone regardless of their experience level.
Apparently, that's still offending some people. Obviously, I should lower my rates dramatically to allow for the fact that other people might not have money, and thereby impair my ability to care for myself and my loved ones. Brilliance. Actually I'm agreeing with you. It should be calculated as has been said earlier in this thread. What is the value of working with any particular model and decide on an individual level if it's economically viable for you. Negotiate price if possible, if not make the call yes or no.
As to the OP's question, I've shot models where the only payment was in food up to a maximum of $150 an hour. It's been a learning experience and I agree, the more experienced she is the more it may be worth while paying.
If, however, an inexperienced model wants $100 an hour to do nudes, walk away... unless you're feeling overly generous.
Photographer
JLC Images
Posts: 11615
Phillipsburg, New Jersey, US
Luminos wrote:
Bad analogy.
If the Porsche could sense when it was being overdriven (see next year's model?) yes! If it could navigate by itself? Yes! If it had just won the Darpa challenge? Yes!
If the Hassleblad had better focus control with smart technology that would pick the right focus point - yes.
If skis could steer themselves - yes.
A model isn't simply looks. There is a brain between the ears of the better models, and they have both experience and talent to know what looks good. You are two steps ahead of what I am discussing. This is merely a suggestion to the OP at this point in his studies
Photographer
Archived
Posts: 13509
Phoenix, Arizona, US
Miss Anna Evans wrote:
His portfolio currently doesn't warrant TFwhatever, in my opinion. Why tell him to go find a possibly free, definitely inexperienced model who won't know how to work with whatever lights he's using, guaranteeing that his images will suck?
Anyway, it sucks for people to come into the model forum and insist that we should all work for free. 1. Doing trade work is not "working for free."
2. You can't speak for every model as to whether his work warrants a trade shoot. It might not be worth it to you, but that's irrelevant - he can probably find someone willing to do a trade shoot.
3. Working with a less experienced model isn't a guarantee that "his images will suck." I've worked with girls who have never been in front of a camera before, and we've made excellent images together.
4. Experience is something that experienced models seem to think is very important, and something that means they're worthy of being paid - whereas experienced photographers usually don't care how many shoots you've done, they either like your look or they don't. In fact, there are a number of photographers who PREFER to work with less experienced models, for a number of reasons: they often move more naturally, they don't go through the same cycle of poses they do for every photographer, shooting with newbies means they will have photos of a fresh face, not a girl who is in hundreds of photographer portfolios, etc etc.
Photographer
Duane Allen Rusty Halo
Posts: 1000
Colorado Springs, Colorado, US
JoJo Suicide wrote:
Cookies work  Well what do you bake the best???
You rock the artistic world so i am sure you can make the Suzi home makers chill at your incredible skillz
Me i do a chocloate chocolate chip with caramel cookie myself quite well
Photographer
Luminos
Posts: 6065
Columbia, Maryland, US
JLC Images wrote:
You are two steps ahead of what I am discussing. This is merely a suggestion to the OP at this point in his studies But my comments were to the OP as well, and saying there is a good reason for a new photographer not to get with a new model. Face it, it will be the blind leading the blind.
Photographer
PNB Photography
Posts: 424
Brooklyn, New York, US
Ken Marcus Studios wrote:
I only do them on a TFCD basis
KM Same here I get quite a few paid nudes, so no need.
Photographer
Kenzphotos
Posts: 1868
Anaheim, California, US
Luminos wrote:
But my comments were to the OP as well, and saying there is a good reason for a new photographer not to get with a new model. Face it, it will be the blind leading the blind. Is the O.P. really a "new" photographer. I read his main profile page and he writes that he has been taking photos (as a hobby) for 30 years...his posted stuff looks OK - the lighting is good and he seems to know how to pose models well.
I think he just wants to expand his horizons to topless and possibly nudes to add to his portfolio.
Photographer
Archived
Posts: 13509
Phoenix, Arizona, US
Hurricane Rebecca wrote:
Paying a skilled model is a GREAT way for a photographer to learn and improve (e.g. focusing on the photography and not having to pose a model, getting inspiration and ideas from her posing). The Porsche analogy doesn't bear any weight. 1. Working with a beginner model is a learning process, too. If I had only ever worked with experienced models who posed themselves, and I had no idea what kinds of poses I wanted, or how to communicate what I wanted to the model... then what if a beginner model wanted to hire me? She'd get in front of the camera and say, "Okay, what should I do?" and I'd go, "Uh... um, I dunno!" I don't think she'd be very happy at that point.
2. Anybody can get inspiration and ideas from the millions of model photos available everywhere - here on MM, in magazines, on billboards, in art galleries, etc etc. That's not really a good reason to hire an experienced model, I don't think. If you want to get inspiration and ideas for poses, go to a fashion agency website and look at the portfolios there. Or go to the bookstore and look through a few magazines.
Photographer
Magnus Hedemark
Posts: 4281
Raleigh, North Carolina, US
Luminos wrote:
But my comments were to the OP as well, and saying there is a good reason for a new photographer not to get with a new model. Face it, it will be the blind leading the blind. Note that the OP is not a "new photographer". His profile states that he's been at this for "over thirty years".
Blood is running down my throat right now as I've nearly bitten through my tongue to satisfy the forum rules in this thread.
Photographer
Telephoto Studio
Posts: 1439
Raleigh, North Carolina, US
Janice Marie Foote wrote:
And rate depends on the "experiences" of the model! There are lots of inexperienced models on here who claim they charge $50 to $100 per hour when they have nothing but happy snaps/cam phone pics in their portfolios.
Then again, there are plenty of photographers who claim they charge an arm and a leg for shooting pics that are at the GWC levels. So who can really tell?
Photographer
DDC Studios
Posts: 977
Bartlesville, Oklahoma, US
Magnus Hedemark wrote:
Note that the OP is not a "new photographer". His profile states that he's been at this for "over thirty years".
Blood is running down my throat right now as I've nearly bitten through my tongue to satisfy the forum rules in this thread. ya might need a mild antiseptic for that!
Photographer
Picture This 808
Posts: 525
Aiea, Hawaii, US
i tend to pay $50hr topless and $100hr full nude.
Just a little advise though. Don't hesitate to start your nude shoot -shooting nudes. if you decide to pay by the hour you are going to want to get the most shots as possible, so don't waste time building up to the nude shot.
plan out your shots. i got so intimidated and distracted durring my first few nudes shoots that i was disapointed after just because i didn't follow my plan.
hope this helps.
vince PTP 808
Photographer
DDC Studios
Posts: 977
Bartlesville, Oklahoma, US
Picture This 808 wrote:
i tend to pay $50hr topless and $100hr full nude.
Just a little advise though. Don't hesitate to start your nude shoot -shooting nudes. if you decide to pay by the hour you are going to want to get the most shots as possible, so don't waste time building up to the nude shot.
plan out your shots. i got so intimidated and distracted durring my first few nudes shoots that i was disapointed after just because i didn't follow my plan.
hope this helps.
vince PTP 808 Heck ya! if you're paying for a nude shoot, the model need not show up with any clothes! well except the ones she's wearing! a bathrobe is will suffice!!
Photographer
JLC Images
Posts: 11615
Phillipsburg, New Jersey, US
Magnus Hedemark wrote:
Note that the OP is not a "new photographer". His profile states that he's been at this for "over thirty years".
Blood is running down my throat right now as I've nearly bitten through my tongue to satisfy the forum rules in this thread. In light of this new information I encourage any and all to send over their rates. I made a false assumption without reading his bio. I apologize to the OP and really was only trying to help.
Photographer
Ken Elliott
Posts: 45
Bossier City, Louisiana, US
I see everyone suggesting you work TF* with inexperienced models to gain experience, but there is a real downside to this.
An inexperienced model who works with an inexperienced photographer should really just be a practice experience for both. The odds of getting good shots are against both of you. It has value, but if you don't like any of the shots, what will that do for your confidence?
Another approach is to contact a good model and be completely upfront with her. Tell her you need the experience and want to learn how you should treat a model. All the ones I know will be more than happy to show you the ropes and help you make outstanding images. This can be, in effect, a crash course. You'll can get a lot out of the experience and a couple of good shots will boost your confidence.
Good models make it so much easier, and are a great way to start. When you discuss fees, consider multiple shoots. She might give you a break on the price if you use her for more than one shoot. Again, be completely honest with her and tell her what your experience is, and what you hope to learn.
I prefer working with paid models, and find them much more professional and easy to deal with. But TF* has its place.
Photographer
PNB Photography
Posts: 424
Brooklyn, New York, US
My shots wrote:
I just put a thread asking if models fees were set in stone. I'm interested in doing some topless and nudes photos, in good taste. What would most models charge to do these photos? I would like to see the dollar amount. I'm new at this and want to know. Most fees are not set in stone. I would suggest that you look for clients that need nudes first. You'll get paid and get the nudes that you need.
Photographer
Digitoxin
Posts: 13456
Denver, Colorado, US
My shots wrote:
I just put a thread asking if models fees were set in stone. I'm interested in doing some topless and nudes photos, in good taste. What would most models charge to do these photos? I would like to see the dollar amount. I'm new at this and want to know. $0 to $75 per hour. Or negotiate a session fee.
Typically, my non-commercial shoots (tests) I do not pay a fee for. Of course, if you are a new photographer who is just working on developing your skills, some of the more advanced models (nude or otherwise) may not wish to work for images only since the quality of the image may not be better than what the model already has.
Model
Adi L
Posts: 514
Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
i would do it for free if the photographer is a master of black and white nude photography 
Model
Alana Miles
Posts: 6459
Alma, Colorado, US
$50/hr clothed
$100/hr nude
end of story. Prices can vary, but not usually.
Anna you fucking rock, thanks for speaking for us models.
when you can offer a lot, you deserve a lot.
Photographer
myfotographer
Posts: 3702
Fresno, California, US
Some models will actually pay you!
Everything in life is negotiable.
- Ed
Model
Rebecca Lawrence
Posts: 878
New York, New York, US
My rates are subject to negotiation for all kinds of reasons, but if you want dollar amounts, here they are:
$100/h for the first two hours
$300 half day
$550 full day
The amount of nudity is not a factor.
Photographer
Luminos
Posts: 6065
Columbia, Maryland, US
Kenzphotos wrote:
Is the O.P. really a "new" photographer. I read his main profile page and he writes that he has been taking photos (as a hobby) for 30 years...his posted stuff looks OK - the lighting is good and he seems to know how to pose models well.
I think he just wants to expand his horizons to topless and possibly nudes to add to his portfolio. If he's never shot nude before, then he's a newbie to that.
We have a saying in combat swimmer training. Train them until they are proficient, then hand them a new skill to master and watch the rest of the skills fall apart.
For example, hand a skilled diver a camera for the first time - and he will get lost underwater as the navigation skills are forgotten.
Or hand a photographer a naked model. See if he recalls where the "on" button is.
Photographer
DDC Studios
Posts: 977
Bartlesville, Oklahoma, US
Ed Stevenson wrote:
Some models will actually pay you!
Everything in life is negotiable.
- Ed HA HA HA HA!!
Photographer
Abbitt Photography
Posts: 13564
Washington, Utah, US
My shots wrote:
... I would like to see the dollar amount... Here's the results of a poll I did a few months back about what photographers actually pay MM models. I can't say how your talents and intrests fit into the mix, but perhaps it will give you some insight into what is appropriate for you.
https://wwww.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=358238
(Any photographers who have not contributed yet, please feel free to do so.)
Photographer
Shutter Penguin
Posts: 801
Lexington, Kentucky, US
It's a free market, with open trade. If the model feels it's a fair trade, their time and "exposure" equally for your time and "exposure" there is no charge. Sometimes they'll pay you, if they need the pics enough, or want your photographic talent enough. Sometimes you'll pay them, if you need the pics enough, or want their physical attributes oor modeling talent enough. The only rule is that there are no rules.
So, how much? Depends on the photographer and the model. Famous, extremely popular, extremely beautiful, or extremely talented can charge hundreds or thousands per hour. The less famous, popular, beautiful, and talented will charge whatever the market will bear. If you don't like their $125/hr offer, make a counter of $50-75, if that's what you think is fair for your area. If they accept, then it's a win-win. Maybe they'll counter with $100, and accept your final offer of $85.
Just like car sales, everything is open for negotiation, even if the person has posted price lists. How bad they need the money or the pictures controls how willing they are to negotiate or drop/raise their price. It's not like SAG or union-controlled talent where people make "scale." You either find a price point you both can live with, or you keep shopping. Same as car sales.
Photographer
Xeris - Dwight
Posts: 4369
Austin, Texas, US
In my experience there is no such thing as a "standard" rate for nudes. One will see $100 - $150 bandied about as a standard, but I have yet see anything at all to support that.
I have done shoots where I got paid $50/hr, TF* shoots, and where I paid $75/hr and a lot of others somewhere along that spectrum. I had one model whose initial offer was $250/hr, I eventually paid her $50/hr when she found that no one was willing to pay her arbitrarily exorbitant rate.
Always attempt to negotiate a price that both parties can live with or look for another model/photographer.
Jason Todd Ipson wrote:
Doesn't usage figure into all of this too? I think that is one of the main issues... i didn't read all the responses, but this one makes the most sense to me...
if it's known that the usage will end up being for a profit for the photog, he/she should pay the model. it's the stand up thing to do...of course that doesn't mean anything to some photogs.... 
Model
LaViolette
Posts: 9865
Hollywood, Florida, US
Fees aren't set in stone. They depend on the commercial usage of the images & the client's budget. For example, I'd charge more for images that would be used on a photographer's paysite than I would if they were putting them in an art gallery. Since generally a paysite will generate more income for the photographer than the art gallery will.
Come up with a rate that is with in your budget. Contact models & tell them what u are willing to pay them. That way they can either accept it or not.
Model
theda
Posts: 21719
New York, New York, US
PNB Photography wrote:
Most fees are not set in stone. I would suggest that you look for clients that need nudes first. You'll get paid and get the nudes that you need. Are you seriously suggesting that someone with little to no experiencing shooting nudes and nothing resembling a portfolio for this kind of work start out in the genre charging clients? God help the client foolish enough to hire someone with no demonstrated proficiency.
Model
Stella K
Posts: 2173
New York, New York, US
Ken Marcus Studios wrote:
I only do them on a TFCD basis
KM YOU do and you could charge if you want to and STILL have girls lined up to shoot w/ you... but we all know most people here are not on your level.
Standard rates for nude work (I have no clue about topless) seem to be anywhere from $50-$150/hour. Some of the top nude models on MM charge $150/hour, some don't. Most times it's negotiable.
Model
Model Sarah
Posts: 40987
Columbus, Ohio, US
There are so many bad analogies and overall bad advice in this thread.
I'd suggest to hire a professional who knows what they are doing. It can ease the process and the photographer could learn something from the model. Sometime's i'm hired for sheer motivation to shoot something creative.
Not everyone is the same.
My rates vary from $100/hr $350/half day, and $600/ full day. for half and full day shoots I dont keep time. Half day can mean 4/5 hours and a full day can mean 8-10 hours. I've worked for 3 hours for $200 and 6 hours for $600. It's all about negotiation. They arent set in stone but it is a general guideline i've gone by for 6 years.
They are always negotiable and have to make economical sense for me. It's not that difficult. You get what you pay for.
Photographer
No One of Consequence
Posts: 2980
Winchester, Virginia, US
Miss Anna Evans wrote:
I love how many photographers are advocating not paying models. Really.  I love how many models advocate not paying photographers. Really
I've done shoots for trade, I've done shoots where I've paid the model, and I've done shoots where the model paid me. There are examples of each in my portfolio.
Each case is different and should be evaluated on it's own merits and the needs of the people involved.
|
