Dierra Janae wrote:
Please! You learn from those who are successful not from those who are not! So lets here it!

A four photo portfolio of barely okay is not inspirational. It's nice to know on facebook what you're future husband may look like but a photographer wants to see you. Mags may want to see you but they don't really want to hear you. Your thoughts, your philosophy. It's about the image. What is it and where is it? 

I think you're playing at being a llama. Playtime is over. Do you want to enter a tough game?

$500 Homeless-stop-begging award. It means that your work would have a tough time doing well here and you might become homeless. Come on, you're homeless, admit it.

You nice but L.A. eats nice for breakfast.

Jeff Cohn wrote:
This sounds fun.

The contrast between MM and your website is powerful. The website I saw first and I was impressed. You are a professional photographer. You do advertising photoshots. You have a portfolio of product. You show work done for agencies. Going through the books was quick and impressive.  You have a nice list of real credits. You don't write: "International Jaeger drinker." You write where you have drunk, so to speak.

You don't come off so well in MM's size thumbs and on the first photo on your website which is super powerful, the contrast between the sharpness of her body and the sense of motion in her flying hair is just killer when you see it on MM it is a bit reduced.

Often really good photographer's don't look so good when their work is sized small.

On MM the special effects don't look special yet on your website the roll of them and the selection and placement work better. So when you do the multiple imagery it works much better there.

Your website sells you. Models should work  with you as shown in your commercial book for agencies you understand the market. Fashion? I thought you need to grow there, conceptually. But you have the goods. 

A few negatives. There's a few bad photos. It's the models not you. But they torture your camera. You must have been partying and uploaded those in between Jaeger shots.

Your website was a very enjoyable experience.

$60,000 per year.  You're-almost-a-monster-now-Award.   The studio rental is eating you alive. Everything is eating you alive. You're almost very very good. If you don't become great the sheriff is going to kick you out of the house. The foreclosure notice is in the mail.

KG Photography wrote:
Me please!

done for tonight. It will be tomorrow some time.

figurativearts wrote:
Is there a place where we can cash the check?
or can we do the $500 by paypal?

Do you want to be critiqued. I haven't looked at you and the avatar intrigues me.

LA StarShooter wrote:

You're beautiful and there's poetry in your face. There are limitations. Put you next to a motorbike and you look lost, disconnected. In the suit shoot it is a little rumpled in the wrong way. I wish the photographer or the "team" had caught it.  You're tall but very lean and that's not the most in demand-look but sometimes a guy like you can catch on.

I think a lot of photographers here would like to shoot you and you should take full advantage of that.

If you're going to feature in a shot with a motorcycle you have to compel, draw us in. There's magic in you but you don't know all the spells.

$5000 Part-timer.  It's great-that-you're-keeping your day job-award. You can do this part-time and you may be doing it part-time.

I think you've started off okay and you're adventurous, casting to do underwater shoots.

Good luck.

Thanks so much man, I was braced for the worst because I'm so new to this. I want to be big. Any advice? Tell me more about these spells...

KG Photography wrote:
Me please!

I looked at your MM portfolio and like lion who has just found a nice mound of grass on the Serengeti I stretched out and yawned. With my paw I clicked on your website. I was ready to do my impression of MGM's lion but I didn't get to roar. I dreamed of chasing gnus and the Cape Buffalo too, because some of the over-exposed work (two shots were you just blew the lighting) reminded me of the hot sun at midday, only you were inside somewhere maybe trying to recreate what it was like to be at Hiroshima when that bomb went off, long, long ago.

Why do you kick of the parade on the website with SKI first and then portraits? You're big on Landscapes. Do models need to know that? To attract top models to do TF you need a website that showcases work that attracts. And it's okay to fail at taking images. You have to start somewhere with models but you also have to recognise when you and reality didn't have that meeting and the photo is not good. Be careful about putting up examples of bad, overbright lighting as a savvy top model may think you can only work in natural light.  Other shots are generally fine but nothing is outstanding or intriguing.

Your business? You've started one where you encourage women to go out and party and you photograph them and you bring your portable studio. Interesting business concept. Some portraits look solid but I don't think they got anything stellar. Your boudoir needs some upgrading. A friend of mine actually did Boudoir photography back in the nineties. 10 grand a month. Film. That's right he lit and rolled, just like he was smoking marijuana except he banged out the beautiful images and the referrals just poured in!

Work on your composition skills. Imagine the woman as landscape if that helps and the sight of her should wow the observer the way landscapes clearly wow you. I would suggest having the modeling site separate as you want to present yourself as photographer passionate about shooting beautiful images of models. They won't like thinking that you rank skiing images above them. 

Your interest in nudes or as I think you put it "dancing around" may net you some cash.

Your ranking: $1500 per year.  You-became-naked-from-shooting-nudes-award. Really naked. Robbed of all your clothes by one of the escorts.

4 U Photography wrote:
Give it a shot

https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/p … 1#19856281

is an example of why I question your claim about portfolio development and charging for them. You have packages for blown highlights? It's not bad, but to correct that shot is tough. Essentially, this one happens to just about everybody. Settings are off, there's no scrim to mellow out the light, and the sun is tough, brutally tough and it's like a thermonuclear explosion on the face and it's tough to shoot in the brightness of day, brave one. Sometimes highlights can work but its a balancing act, isn't it?

I was shocked at that the lack of a website. We will not cyber dazzle. Instead we will talk about our packages but not show them or show photos of them. You like women, that is clear and good. I saw nothing remarkable but it's not a horror story. In L.A. you have to really stand out.

I thought poses mostly could be worked on. I thought of your avatar that is sized a little small on the photo page of MM, that in it the model looks like she might be in a cramping position but manages to smile her way through it. The pose just doesn't work.

I would suggest stockpiling vogues and giving up Maxim and just look at fashion poses and why they work or don't work and really develop your eye.

You're rating: $1900 per annum. Photographer-in-search-of-portfolio-and-a-website- award. I just didn't think from the perspective of developing packages, books, comp cards for models that the portfolio work was persuasive.

Now if you're website was cunningly hidden on the MM page, I apologize for missing it.

Mel Corn wrote:
Please take a look and let me know what you think:) I love the honest opinions you give and hope to get some useful feed back, thank you!

You have started off okay, somewhat late to the game of modelling but you're adventurous diving under water in gowns with strands of pearls and there are some okay shots. But nothing killer. Nothing that put the photographic bullet in me and made me stop thinking and your photo for a moment became my world.

It's okay to curve the body. You're not in church and you can go later and pray for your modelling sins. I would like you to pray a lot of more. "Dear Jesus, deliver me from Satan who whispered to me on the Internet that I should become a glamour model and said something about less clothes. He said you would be okay with it if I said Satan made me do it. Are you okay?"

You could bank, really bank as a nude model and there's no shame in being beautiful. I didn't like your dismissive depiction of other models when you tried to describe yourself by saying what you don't do: Smile and pose. THANK HEAVENS FOR THEM. For models who can do two things at the same time.

If you don't go nude modelling will be an enjoyable hobby. You're just don't quite have the stats.

Work on poses. I think you're good at smiles and expressions, but you could use some knowledge on posing particularly for swimsuit. You should learn the power of your eyes.

$250 per year. You-better-go-glamour-or-you're-not-eating-award

That said you are fun like a happy sleek dolphin in the water.

ZeeZedZee wrote:
I've only had a handful of shoots, but go ahead and rate me. I'd like to think I wouldn't end up homeless.

You could cut a couple of those shots and it made me laugh. You rolled well but maybe you thought, they might not notice that they are good so I'll put a couple of street shots in so they can see the difference. I think you can light and do mood very well and you might serve models well. You made me curious, a bit of portrait artist.

It's interesting how a small gallery of good and very good can be effective.

Simply: I would like to see more. You don't put fashion in as something you're drawn to, and that fine. You could be a good glamour and art nude photographer.

$27,500 per annum. You-get-more-than-a-cup-of-coffe-award. If you focus and think about edge and power you'll make a lot more. Now cut the street photography shots. Now.

LA StarShooter wrote:

Do you want to be critiqued. I haven't looked at you and the avatar intrigues me.

sure, why not?

LA StarShooter wrote:

There was no website link and a claim that there were too many credits. You're a videographer and so I started wondering if some of the photos were stock as you work on other people's stuff all the time. It was the lack of credits on a lot of the photos.  One of the photos has over-processed eyes. I saw a divergence of styles. To really break out you need some hotter images, and you do have some hot, but with editorial themes like your video editing work, but more recent work and that thing about model requirements bothered me: eye colour. I have hazel-eyes. Thank you, Ma-ma.

You shot one model who appears to have ended up working escort in San Francisco and she once had an MM portfolio so you have done several shoots with her, but I'm just not sure about you.

Thank-God-you-edit-video-award. You need to bring some of that processing skill to stills. Now, sir. $45,000 because you can pick up video editing work in the real world of fantasy-land l.a.

I wondered if you were just here to socialize?

First Kiss wrote:
i'd appreciate your thoughts

I went to your facebook and saw some of your wedding photography and I couldn't after looking at your MM Portfolio see how you would attract top models. If you take photos of prominent actors at a convention and let's say you're the convention photographer and you get some nice head shots, it's not the same as shooting fashion models, or top fetish models. Some of those shots are very, very nice.

Models are like props to your love of digital art. They are transferred to their new digital setting but do not blend. Their lighting values are often different from the scene. You use a model in a bride's dress and put behind here a sky with light shafts. So we have light. Here back is to it but she's lit up in front and it's natural light because her eye sockets are dark.

At tiimes you're ugly with a badly put together mermaid shot. At times you take tragic symbols, like the Hindenburg, in which people burned, and you put a babe with a gun in front. The common thread is that there is no message. And for digital art when married to photos of models, for it to work, you have to say something and/or it just has to be fantastically executed.  Otherwise it is preferrable to shoot a model at a real castle than a fake one and to have an editorial theme.

Nothing touched me, although I liked the celebrity work, done at conventions, and award shows, nothing said fashion. Nothing said artist. I think you're passionate about digital media. I think you like shooting babies and weddings.

Your rave on MM is a long read for a model. I think top models will not respond to you.

I would consider puttting your celebrity work up top. And in a folder.

$45,000 per year. The-Butterfly-has-broken-wings-award.  You can make a living. Shooting weddings would do okay for you here. You leave the city and do conventions. You go to award shows and take real photos but your "art" takes you no where but to the strange satisfaction you find from creating work that doesn't have the power you really want because some things are too hard to do.

subtleshades wrote:
Would love to hear your thoughts!

I went to your website and went through each section. My conclusion on technique. Lighting people is a bit of a challenge for you. I saw quite a few blown highlights, not stylistic blown highlights, but a harsh in the middle of a model's nose stood out. Your images are at times too bright and you don't have solid control over contrast. Tonality: it it ever meets you you'll turn red in embarrassment.

Your fashion section made me gasp in horror. You don't know what fashion is and your commercial section convinced that you don't have many commercial clients even though you had models wearing herballife T-shirts, the way you angled that showed that shooting people is more of a hobby than a service and when you tried to give the look of a commercial to models wearing shades, we can tell that you didn't have an art director and you're not an art director.  You have a long way to go.

There's good gear for controlling light and there awesome mobile stands: tall men. You should master lighting. If you don't you will not progress beyond less-than-adequate.

Your blog/clients section is slick. I'm no sure those people paid you. Some of the shots are okay/good, but it's well done.

You could become very, very good. Sometimes you have good angles and sometimes you get a good shot, but I'm rating on competing in L.A. for business against some of the crack photographers here. There are some really great photographers here.

$20,000 old pro but come here and you would starve if you went full-time. Be safe, stay where mediocrity pays.

It's tough here.

pStudio - LA wrote:
Your comments are most interesting

I am not a videographer.. but I guess thank you? Always thinking of adding video to my portfolio. I guess I have an eye for it?

2nd. I am not sure which model you say works as an escort.. I would be most interested to learn. That comment took me by surprise..

I don't work on other people's stuff. But I guess I do have a pretty wide styles. Or lack of style... lol

The model requirement are something from agency. Not from my own. So I simply prefer someone that will likely to work out from agency standpoint.

yeh.. I am a party animal .. (response to your socialize comment hahah.. )

I'll email you.

CINE IS IN wrote:
Let me hear it !

It was interesting going to the MM portfolio first. I saw two good shots but on the website I saw a few more and it was so slick. I think posing is something you really want to think about.

So, it wasn't bad but it didn't rock.

I did like that you linked to your website rather than facebook and that you took some care to present your work. $5000 Part-timer.  It's great-that-you're-keeping your day job-award. You can do this part-time and you may be doing it part-time. You can pick up a wedding shoot once in a while.

sospix wrote:
Should I keep my job at Mickey D's  .  .  . 

SOS

There's talent there, but you shooting too low too often. Are you confused by long legs?

Why don't have a website. You're a professional photographer you say. So where's your website. Where is it?

Is it under your bed.

$10,000 per year. Maybe you've-got-steam award. Still part-time but starting to occasionally dazzle. But can you afford new tires. The roads are tough on cars here.

Oleg Tokarev wrote:
Very interesting your opinion

There's the sense of production value in some of the shots and as group it looks good, your twelve apostles of beauty, but included in the gospel of photography must be full-length shots and I don't think you can see the waist when you shoot.

This made me curious. How come there are no full-lengths? You describe yourself as an amateur. Fashion models need full-length shots.

I went to your facebook link and couldn't find any photos and I went is Oleg a photographic absurdist?

$40,000 GOOD:you're good, but we are flooded with good and how can you become great is the burning economic question.

LA StarShooter wrote:
My assessment will also encompass your profile and perhaps even your website in giving a portfolio dollar value via Los Angeles professional photography standards for models and photographers. 

I'll also throw in a critique of the portfolio and of some photos.

Beware: you're now about to enter the land of snakes and liars and a honesty that slices people to the bone. 

$0 You'll never make it here award. It means that your work couldn't sell in Los Angeles.
$500 Homeless-stop-begging award. It means that your work would have a tough time doing well here and you might become homeless. Come on, you're homeless, admit it.
$1000 Stop doing crack and meth. It means that you may have one really good shot in that portfolio, but, baby, you're in trouble.  Your car is about to get repossessed. See, sleeping in your car is not fun when they are towing you away. Put the pipe down!
$5000 Part-timer.  It's great-that-you're-keeping your day job-award. You can do this part-time and you may be doing it part-time. You can pick up a wedding shoot once in a while or get model work for a small boutique.
$10,000 Maybe you've-got-steam award. Still part-time but starting to occasionally dazzle. But can you award new tires. The roads are tough on cars here.
$20,000 old pro but come here and you would starve if you went full-time. Be safe, stay where mediocrity pays.
$40,000 GOOD:you're good, but we are flooded with good and how can you become great is the burning economic question.
$60,000 Photographer and model: You're-almost-a-monster-now-Award.  Also: Model GWC camera model full-time. Photographer: The studio rental is eating you alive. Everything is eating you alive. You're almost very good. If you don't become great the sheriff is going to kick you out of the house. The foreclosure notice is in the mail.  If you're a model, and you get this rating, you're probably working with a lot of GWC camera models and you have to do better than this.

$100,000 Shark alert! Oh my God, you could eat anyone alive it seems but still you're not elite. You're making the cash but for how long? You're not quite a flavour, but you're eating well for now.

$250,000 Baby, you're-a-star-award. Photographer: There are sharks all around you. They want what you have got, that luminous glow, that spark, and they want to steal your gear and have you teach them for free how to use it. Model: Bank, baby, bank. You're talented, extraordinary. And in two years it could be over.

I'm going out to shoot a location for research. When I get back I'll give out these wonderful loving awards. Welcome to the Jungle.

ME PLEASE

LA StarShooter wrote:
There's talent there, but you shooting too low too often. Are you confused by long legs?

Why don't have a website. You're a professional photographer you say. So where's your website. Where is it?

Is it under your bed.

$10,000 per year. Maybe you've-got-steam award. Still part-time but starting to occasionally dazzle. But can you afford new tires. The roads are tough on cars here.

I'm old as dirt, and fall down a lot  .  .  .  plus, I'm lazy, so once I've fallen I jest shoot from there  .  .  .    Nah, I like llllllllooooooooonnnnnnnggggggg legs, like ta show 'em off, you guys that do only down shots must be tall, or like ta stand on ladders  .  .  .    I have several websites, jest don't feel the need to let everyone know who I am, or what I'm about in "real" life, this site is more social than commercial, I like ta keep it that way  .  .  .  I sleep on da floor, makes it easier to do those "upshots"  .  .  .    10k, yikes, I don't think I kin feed the dawgs on that, and I'm too danged close ta retirement ta go back ta part-time, guess I'm a more of a "short-timer"  .  .  .  damn, and I gotta buncha cars that need new "shoes", guess I better stay hidden down here in steamy Florida, makin' 10k a month sounds easier ta do here than out there on da west coast  .  .  .  thanks for the look, and the assessment  .  .  .  much continued success!!!!

SOS

sospix wrote:

I'm old as dirt, and fall down a lot  .  .  .  plus, I'm lazy, so once I've fallen I jest shoot from there  .  .  .    Nah, I like llllllllooooooooonnnnnnnggggggg legs  .  .  .  I have several websites, jest don't feel the need to let everyone know who I am, or what I'm about in "real" life, this site is more social than commercial, I like ta keep it that way  .  .  .  I sleep on da floor, makes it easier to do those "upshots"  .  .  .    10k, yikes, I don't think I kin feed the dawgs on that, and I'm too danged close ta retirement ta go back ta part-time, guess I'm a more of a "short-timer"  .  .  .  damn, and I gotta buncha cars that need new "shoes", guess I better stay hidden down here in steamy Florida  .  .  .  thanks for the look, and the assessment  .  .  .  much continued success!!!!

SOS

Pfft. Excuses.

LA StarShooter wrote:
My assessment will also encompass your profile and perhaps even your website in giving a portfolio dollar value via Los Angeles professional photography standards for models and photographers. 

I'll also throw in a critique of the portfolio and of some photos.

Beware: you're now about to enter the land of snakes and liars and a honesty that slices people to the bone. 

$0 You'll never make it here award. It means that your work couldn't sell in Los Angeles.
$500 Homeless-stop-begging award. It means that your work would have a tough time doing well here and you might become homeless. Come on, you're homeless, admit it.
$1000 Stop doing crack and meth. It means that you may have one really good shot in that portfolio, but, baby, you're in trouble.  Your car is about to get repossessed. See, sleeping in your car is not fun when they are towing you away. Put the pipe down!
$5000 Part-timer.  It's great-that-you're-keeping your day job-award. You can do this part-time and you may be doing it part-time. You can pick up a wedding shoot once in a while or get model work for a small boutique.
$10,000 Maybe you've-got-steam award. Still part-time but starting to occasionally dazzle. But can you award new tires. The roads are tough on cars here.
$20,000 old pro but come here and you would starve if you went full-time. Be safe, stay where mediocrity pays.
$40,000 GOOD:you're good, but we are flooded with good and how can you become great is the burning economic question.
$60,000 Photographer and model: You're-almost-a-monster-now-Award.  Also: Model GWC camera model full-time. Photographer: The studio rental is eating you alive. Everything is eating you alive. You're almost very good. If you don't become great the sheriff is going to kick you out of the house. The foreclosure notice is in the mail.  If you're a model, and you get this rating, you're probably working with a lot of GWC camera models and you have to do better than this.

$100,000 Shark alert! Oh my God, you could eat anyone alive it seems but still you're not elite. You're making the cash but for how long? You're not quite a flavour, but you're eating well for now.

$250,000 Baby, you're-a-star-award. Photographer: There are sharks all around you. They want what you have got, that luminous glow, that spark, and they want to steal your gear and have you teach them for free how to use it. Model: Bank, baby, bank. You're talented, extraordinary. And in two years it could be over.

I'm going out to shoot a location for research. When I get back I'll give out these wonderful loving awards. Welcome to the Jungle.

Well - -  Got a good laugh!   Everything I have in my portfolio,,  is a paid job.
Maybe not last week,  nor  40 years ago..   But I got paid good money for everything on there.....I am full time,  and will be here till I cannot find the shutter release...

Lady Pelvic wrote:

Pfft. Excuses.

Hey, it's models like YOU that make me havta do "upshots", and git made fun of for it  .  .  .  if ya wuz taller than a Junebug I might be able ta shoot like "regular" people  .  .  .    It's okay, ya look pretty good when yer all painted up, no matter how short ya iz  .  .  . 

SOS

Tiffiney C wrote:
Sure, I'll play

https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/p … 9#26181429

is the revelation of your modelling power.

I think your credits should be moved up. You posed for Hustler so for your market that you're targeting on MM, that's good. The credits are also diverse. You may have put tear sheets up but I didn't see anything. 

I didn't like some of your shots but you have enough in there to get across the point that you can model and that you can boost a photographer's portfolio.

Some models lead with a roll of six shots on their profile page and that show starts before you read much about them.

You have a fashion section on your flickr account and you have it nicely organised but I think for fashion you're not quite there. You're build is a bit more powerful than most fashion models, and so what do you do? You can do print ads, it's clear just in your MM portfolio that you can really rock and roll when the music is turned on, but it's hard also to pick up commercial work as your credits show.

You've done Hustler, I think, because fashion is not happening for you and commerical work is not really exploding and your primary market is photographers, rather than commericial and fashion companies.

It will be awesome for you for some time.  You have a great look, great range, and it would be good for you to explain to many inexperienced photographers how to shoot you.

Just bring the above photo and a light may go on in their heads.

$85,000. Baby-White-Shark-Award.  You're in the water now, sleek one, and to be a monster you have to feast often. The biggest white sharks are female just like the highest earning models are female. I didn't go higher because I think your portfolio is uneven. If you worked on dazzling up the MM portfolio with a roll of pics that happens almost straight away, I think you would bank more. Bank away.