Erlinda wrote:

I'd love to shoot her.... Faack what an honour that would be

It seems like his website doesn't really work

Peter Beard discovered her in Kenya prior to that she had some test shots done by a uncle of a friend (Michele).

You'd have to travel to Switzerland to shoot her.

Heather Honey wrote:

If you need a PRO you should pay. If you want to 'play' at it, well, wtvr. this applies to models AND photographers.

Just my opinion.

When I have a SPECIFIC NEED like I want something special for MY use, for a membership site etc, I hire and PAY for the photographer. if a photographer wants something special for THEIR use, they should pay for it.

Of course, most pro photographers and models are hired by CLIENTS and not each other as much.

+1

Greg Kolack wrote:
I would guess that most models who sign releases know it is they are agreeing to.

And, except in very limited cases, the photographers always own the images, whether the models get paid or not, and whether they sign a release or not, unless the photographer specifically offers them a document turning ownership over to the model.

I have to disagree with that statement Greg. Most of the models I've shot with didn't even read the release before signing it, so how could they know what they just agreed to?

Stephen Markman wrote:

Well, given that Conceptually Black doesn't fit any of my modeling needs, I think I'd be more inclined to grab a drink with him than shoot him.

But you are free to feel that makes me something less than serious about my photography. 

I will note that I probably shoot and update my portfolio more than most of the people I know on this site, but YMMV.

Edit: and since you and I have never met and my post to Conceptually Black hardly suggests what you are implying it suggests, I'd think you might want to stop listening to bitter rumors.  My life is far more boring than your "friends" may have led you to believe.

I don't know Markman, I get nude, I have never flaked for a photographer(mostly self portraits) and I pose well with AJ...I might be what you want...
So obviously, I see how you're trying to ply a model with alcohol and show me a good time on the town with that post.

Kymberly Jane wrote:
all you need is a naked lady in the middle and BAM...

This is funny to me in a way only I will ever understand.

Roy Hubbard wrote:
Because like, she's naked, and in the middle and... no, that probably wasn't it.

It's the worst kind of inside joke. It's so inside, it's just me. Yet I laugh.

Don Garrett wrote:
I came to this site with no pretense of being the big-ass photographer, who is so good that everyone has to pay him for the privilege of talking to him, or being in his holy presence. I was an art major in college, and image making has ALWAYS been my greatest passion. When I started getting serious about photography as my favored medium, about 20 years ago, I hired prostitutes from the local pool, on El Cajon Blvd. (if you lived here at that time, this would make sense). Many were very attractive, it was easy to get one when they were "needed", and they were uninhibited subjects. Many were also openly appreciative of the fact that they didn't have to perform any sexual favors to get me to hire them. The down side was that some were unreliable, and hard to get an honest day's work from. Some even lit up a crack pipe in my car as though it was nothing out of the ordinary !!! I started to put ads in the local, San Diego State University, newspaper. I found that I could get more "models" than I could ever need. I could choose as I pleased. I always payed when I chose one to shoot with.
  Much later, a friend of mine from the Digital Art Guild, and The Photo Arts Group told me about this site. I came here with the intention of finding subjects for my art. Although I shoot regular landscapes, about 10 to 1, over shooting with a model, I DO like to have a model in my outdoors images sometimes. I expected to pay the models for their time, the images, and a release form. I also expected to ALWAYS be the one contacting THEM for a shoot, NOT the other way around.
  In the forums here, I started to notice this ongoing fight between models and photographers over who pays whom. Both sides were adamant, and I came to understand that BOTH sides came here with at least some notion of "making it big" in his/her "profession", BECAUSE of their presence on the site. If everyone came here expecting the other to support them with pay, nobody ever gets paid !
  Photographers insist that their amazing images will enhance the models portfolio, and, therefore, make her a success, so he should be paid for that privilege. The models found out that this is NOT the real modeling industry, and the only way they could get paid for their work was to "get naked" for both questionable "photographers", and/or artists.
  I would be VERY surprised, if more than about 1% of the shoots lined up here are a "professional" photographer, looking for a model to shoot with because "a client" hired him to shoot for some big commercial project. This is NOT where they would go looking to fill that need. My 1% estimate might be too generous, or it might be too low, but the principal stands.
  I pay, but not as much as I used to, (times are not as good as they used to be, who is at fault is another issue). I am appreciative of many of the women I shoot with, they can be VERY good subjects.
  If everyone "gets real" about the nature of Model Mayhem, we can all get along well together, have our own little world, AND STOP FIGHTING !
  Of course, there are other possible scenarios, and explanations for the way things are here, but this one is the most likely, in my opinion.
-Don

MisterC wrote:

This is funny to me in a way only I will ever understand.

Because like, she's naked, and in the middle and... no, that probably wasn't it.

Rachel Jay wrote:
That's great and all, but everyone's ways of doing things are different, and each individual has the right to throw their policies out the window if the right opportunity arises. 

I've seen plenty of models who will work nude TF* with the right photographer.  I also know that some of the folks with huge glaring "NO TF*!!" banners have worked TF* with the right model.

1

Kymberly Jane wrote:
My hero.

Art of the nude wrote:
Really?

How long would you shoot, with a release, for $25?

funny shits

B R E N N A N wrote:
Hey, I'm just pissed you made me drink in your apartment instead of taking me out! Damn GWC.......

I had you drink at my house.  We could have gone "out on the town," but, well, you saw the town. 

Austin Galantography wrote:
Being a Model and a photographer and someone who has spent years booking models, I've seen it from all angles and I feel like TF is good in some senario's. I do them cause I like shooting stuff/ being in cool shots and If I get to a point where I want to use the image I shot for something I will go back to the model and say hey I'm gonna use this shot, ...Here is some money sign this release. I personally look at it like this, We traded time and energy, you can use these photos for whatever you want and I'll do the same.  Some photographers think they don't need to pay models and still get to use the images from the models to sell and make money from but the model can't use them for her own biddings, I think thats kinda out of line.
      Everybody wants to get paid in this game, but the model has a look you want to shoot, You have a camera and know how to get great images. I think if both parties agree to a TF so be it.
     If the model thinks she should get paid all the time, well good chance she won't do that many photo shoots unless she's taking her pants off. In which case unless a girl need nudes for her portfolio?? , I think they should get paid for doing nudes. I think dudes should get paid to get naked as well.  For the most part,.. girls that I have booked for, that do nudes, don't really care about getting nude shots.  If they weren't getting paid they simply wouldn't do nude shoots.

        And then what would we all get our kicks looking at. LOL

Austin Galantography wrote:
For the most part,.. girls that I have booked for, that do nudes, don't really care about getting nude shots.  If they weren't getting paid they simply wouldn't do nude shoots.

Well, a lot of the models I shoot nudes with only put clothes ON because I ask them to.  They have a business of modeling nude, and believe that we can create images that will help that, or that we can create something cool, or ideally, both. 

I have no problem with the idea of paying models, or paying nude models.  I won't pay a model to pose nude if that's the only reason she's doing nudes.

Rick Fink wrote:
Do whatever you think is best.

True that.

Jessica Vaugn  wrote:

True that.

I work with local models and many touring models and the stories about photogs trying to get out of paying them are endless!

Touring models all have told me stories about photogs canceling out at the last minute. Local models have told me stories about photogs treating them like mercenaries when they asked if a shoot paid or not!

I would cut slack for the photogs if they were 20 years old like the models but most of them are 10 to 20 years older!

Models- don't you get tired of guys pleading poverty?

Rick Fink wrote:

I work with local models and many touring models and the stories about photogs trying to get out of paying them are endless!

Touring models all have told me stories about photogs canceling out at the last minute. Local models have told me stories about photogs treating them like mercenaries when they asked if a shoot paid or not!

I would cut slack for the photogs if they were 20 years old like the models but most of them are 10 to 20 years older!

Models- don't you get tired of guys pleading poverty?

I don't usually approach traveling models. And you do what works for you; the rest of us will do what works for us.

Lumigraphics wrote:
I don't usually approach traveling models.

Thats probably because we approach you lol

Rick Fink wrote:

I work with local models and many touring models and the stories about photogs trying to get out of paying them are endless!

Touring models all have told me stories about photogs canceling out at the last minute. Local models have told me stories about photogs treating them like mercenaries when they asked if a shoot paid or not!

I would cut slack for the photogs if they were 20 years old like the models but most of them are 10 to 20 years older!

Models- don't you get tired of guys pleading poverty?

Pleading poverty usually means being broke.   A MM  model approached
me about a clothed fashion shoot.  We agreed on $40.00 per hour.
I mentioned a friend might want to join us and she said.   The rate would
be $50.00 per hour.   Why the change, I asked.   A hour is a hour no
matter who points the camera at you.   So instead of $120.00 for three
hours she got zero from me.   My point?   Some of the traveling models
price themselves out of being used.  Find out what the project is first.
Maybe trade for cash and travel or hotel or something else.

Greed doesn't make anyone look good.   I've actually found many shooters
to be very generous.   Often paying a fair wage but  also being willing to
pick models up, buy lunch or dinner and even clothes and make-up.
I've done it myself.   However ask yourself this.   Why are these models
telling you these stories?   Are they true?   Are they looking for sympathy
dollars?   A model I worked with had a small son.  I paid her and bought
her little guy a toy.   It was Christmas.  Later she told me that someone
told her, I hadn't paid her enough.

Odds are she might not have given you the side that made me look
good.   However as, I said before.   Do your thing.  Pay as you
see fit but don't make it seem that those who don't or can't are wrong
when you are only hearing part of the story but let me stop.
I haven't changed my Avatar in years, I'm a troll and I'm not a
big name NY or LA agency photographer.  (not meant for you)

Tony Lawrence wrote:

Pleading poverty usually means being broke.   A MM  model approached
me about a clothed fashion shoot.  We agreed on $40.00 per hour.
I mentioned a friend might want to join us and she said.   The rate would
be $50.00 per hour.   Why the change, I asked.   A hour is a hour no
matter who points the camera at you.   So instead of $120.00 for three
hours she got zero from me.   My point?   Some of the traveling models
price themselves out of being used.  Find out what the project is first.
Maybe trade for cash and travel or hotel or something else.

Greed doesn't make anyone look good.   I've actually found many shooters
to be very generous.   Often paying a fair wage but  also being willing to
pick models up, buy lunch or dinner and even clothes and make-up.
I've done it myself.   However ask yourself this.   Why are these models
telling you these stories?   Are they true?   Are they looking for sympathy
dollars?   A model I worked with had a small son.  I paid her and bought
her little guy a toy.   It was Christmas.  Later she told me that someone
told her, I hadn't paid her enough.

Odds are she might not have given you the side that made me look
good.   However as, I said before.   Do your thing.  Pay as you
see fit but don't make it seem that those who don't or can't are wrong
when you are only hearing part of the story but let me stop.
I haven't changed my Avatar in years, I'm a troll and I'm not a
big name NY or LA agency photographer.  (not meant for you)

Rick Fink wrote:

I work with local models and many touring models and the stories about photogs trying to get out of paying them are endless!

Touring models all have told me stories about photogs canceling out at the last minute. Local models have told me stories about photogs treating them like mercenaries when they asked if a shoot paid or not!

I would cut slack for the photogs if they were 20 years old like the models but most of them are 10 to 20 years older!

Models- don't you get tired of guys pleading poverty?

Dude this is business, NOT charity. It shouldn't matter if the photographer is 20 or 60, they worked to get where they are and what they have. They are not obligated to pay simply because they worked for something, just as a model is not obligated to work TF*. People will do what works best for each individual situation, regardless of what some internet sluggo/white knight says should be.

Rick Fink wrote:
Models- don't you get tired of guys pleading poverty?

No, there are impoverished individuals out there. Jesus said there always would be

They shouldn't be shooting (in theory) because just shooting costs money: getting a respectable place to shoot, styling, hair and makeup, a person to photograph, camera repairs, rentals, replacing unusable equipment... basically this hobby is not for poor people. (Although it might make you poor if you make bad choices).

My answer to the frustration? I just stay polite about the whole thing and simply work with other people. There are only so many hours in the day- I'd rather be working with those who have their lives enough together to hire models. Means they will have other things taken care of in their lives that will make them more the type of person I might want to invest my time into. I'd rather have steady work form those I enjoy who you are not financially a burden to then off and on squeeze some poor pizza delivery boy for his only extra hundred dollars or whatever. Trust me, he needs to be doing something else with that money.

Girls should stop milking a dry cow and they wouldn't have so many flakes and bad experiences.

This is a great example of why I have the rate minimum I am clear about. Those folks who can meet it also overall treat and can accommodate you better. Its not the most polite thing to say but I know ahead of time he's responsible if he has money to invest into a shoot. Makes me feel better about flying away from my security of home and going into the great unknown of a weekend shoot in some random city. Trust me if they can pay my rate they will also afford a hotel as opposed to those individuals who think having you sleep on a dirty couch where their dog fur and dander is so thick its revolting to sit on let alone sleep on. Or those people who like to never turn heat on when its snowing outside to save money...or those low income individuals who might hope YOU'LL buy them dinner on their shoot. LOL All those things have happened to me (but never by the higher income who can afford a respectable model day rate). I have changed my business to only work with this caliber individual for travel. If they come to my photo studio in LA for a few hours, obviously I don't care about such things but think about any person who ever nickel and dimed you on makeup time, went over on shoot time lengths and not compensating you for it, did a bate and switch, etc. Big red flag if they mention the stress of payment. At that point I'd rather move on. They will cancel the shoot as soon as they need that $300 for a car repair, etc.

Rick Fink wrote:
I started this post on the Model page because I wanted models to know what they are getting paid for- a legal document that gives the photographer all the rights and ownership of images from your work together!

Oh I see. you're a white knight. one who believes models are so stupid they need to be warned. that they cannot read.

Nice horse. thanks for contributing yet another train wreck in the forums.

White Lace Studios wrote:
Oh I see. you're a white knight. one who believes models are so stupid they need to be warned. that they cannot read.

Nice horse.

Check it:

He's saying if you give commercial rights to images of you know he has the ABILITY/POTENTIAL to make mad money off the pics if he plays his cards right.

Knowing most who shoot me never will, because their payoff is not in reselling, but the end image product itself, I am still weary of t-shirt companies who want me to shoot and give THEM full rights on ANY exchange less than a flat respectable 4 digit rate. IT HAPPENS!! People try and take advantage of models in that regard. If intent is clouded (like selling them to stock companies when you shot on a tf basis), shame on them!

Know all those betty paige pics on shirts, binders, all that? Work for hire shoots, she probably made $300 all day from the shoots that you see images from. Think what the people who license out the pics and the photographers made? She is of course an exception and iconic, but the layout is the same as if it were YOUR face.

White Lace meet White Knight(?)

Jessica Vaugn  wrote:

No, there are impoverished individuals out there. Jesus said there always would be

The rest edited out to not take up space!

Now, Jessica, this I respect and support. You have made your choices, you stick by them, you have found what works for you, and have built a good business.

But I don't see you telling everyone else we all should do things your way.

Whether you agree with the way others handle their business or not, you are not chastising others for doing things differently than you.

This is one of the many reasons you are so respected.

Jessica Vaugn  wrote:

Check it:

He's saying if you give commercial rights to images of you know he has the ABILITY/POTENTIAL to make mad money off the pics if he plays his cards right.

Knowing most who shoot me never will, because their payoff is not in reselling, but the end image product itself, I am still weary of t-shirt companies who want me to shoot and give THEM full rights on ANY exchange less than a flat respectable 4 digit rate. IT HAPPENS!! People try and take advantage of models in that regard. If intent is clouded (like selling them to stock companies when you shot on a tf basis), shame on them!

Know all those betty paige pics on shirts, binders, all that? Work for hire shoots, she probably made $300 all day from the shoots that you see images from. Think what the people who license out the pics and the photographers made? She is of course an exception and iconic, but the layout is the same as if it were YOUR face.

White Lace meet White Knight(?)

Check it my ass.
I don’t need his point explained. I’ve been around a lot of years.

This is about personal accountability. Be accountable for the business arrangements you make. If you don’t like them negotiate or don’t take the gig.

To infer the models are too stupid to look out for themselves and they need this guy to save them is ridiculous.

PashaPhoto wrote:
can someone please just pay this guy's models already so this thread could go away

lol

PashaPhoto wrote:
can someone please just pay this guy's models already so this thread could go away

White Lace Studios wrote:
Check it my ass.
I don’t need his point explained. I’ve been around a lot of years.

This is about personal accountability. Be accountable for the business arrangements you make. If you don’t like them negotiate or don’t take the gig.

To infer the models are too stupid to look out for themselves and they need this guy to save them is ridiculous.

Having recently been a teenage girl, I can assure you the vast majority of my peers would no, not understand the entire implications of contractual agreements within the realm of intellectual property or likeness compensation, limited usages, full commercial release, etc.

PashaPhoto wrote:
can someone please just pay this guy's models already so this thread could go away

Jessica Vaugn  wrote:

Having recently been a teenage girl, I can assure you the vast majority of my peers would no, not understand the entire implications of contractual agreements within the realm of intellectual property or likeness compensation, limited usages, full commercial release, etc.

Ha! Good luck finding a photographer with "years of experience" around here who does. :-)

Rick Fink wrote:
I really think that photogs should generally pay models for shoots!

Experienced models, sure. They deliver when it counts.

When time is crucial, maybe. Done properly and with the right model, it can save time.

When a client is paying, it's only fair.

An inexperienced model... why?  What value does she bring to the shoot?

The problem with the generic logic expressed in the OP is that the vast majority of "models" on MM are inexperienced. I think they need to build a solid portfolio and demonstrate ability before at least the more established photographers are going to consider paying.

To do otherwise would be like applying for a job without relevant experience or qualifications, and you can imagine how well that's likely to work in the real world.

Brooks Ayola wrote:

Ha! Good luck finding a photographer with "years of experience" around here who does. :-)

word

Knomad One wrote:
An inexperienced model... why?  What value does she bring to the shoot?

Hopefully she's a REALLY pretty, gorgeous, amazing woman! Many photographers can shoot anyone, skilled or not, and it only depends how she looks. Some photographers rely on the strength of a model's ability in front of the camera. Just depends what he needs based on his own strengths.