Viator-Defessus Photos wrote:

Well, you may be lazy but I'll be in the same boat for the most part. About the only things I pull out are black frames from the flashes/strobes failing to fire.

Hi,
When I receive a batch of shots and have to filter out the no focus, poor crops and misfires I really wonder about the photographer that sent them. Its not fun to see the bad shots. I end up mentally critiquing the photographer as I look through them. Like, "Oh my...why did he send that one?" or "the focus is not on my face or eyes..." or "argh! dang autofocus!" or "egads! why didn't he tell me to raise my chin, drop my chin, fix my strap, open my eyes...or whatever." So, it isn't the pics I critique so much as it is the photographer.
Jen

MyrnaByrna wrote:
When I receive a batch of shots and have to filter out the no focus, poor crops and misfires I really wonder about the photographer that sent them. Its not fun to see the bad shots. I end up mentally critiquing the photographer as I look through them. Like, "Oh my...why did he send that one?" or "the focus is not on my face or eyes..." or "argh! dang autofocus!" or "egads! why didn't he tell me to raise my chin, drop my chin, fix my strap, open my eyes...or whatever." So, it isn't the pics I critique so much as it is the photographer.
Jen

Most definitely.  I have to go through all my shots and when I see bad focus or lighting or what not I completely cringe and MUST throw it out immediately!  I really don't want anyone seeing it.

EmGii wrote:
so i got a message from a lovely photographer that i did a trade shoot with, she said "sorry i never sent you those photos from the trade shoot. i ended up not liking them. i am a perfectionist lol" and i asked if it was my modeling and was told it was her lighting. /: has this happened to anyone else? it's the first time this happened to me, i kinda feel like i wasted my time now. :L is there any way to avoid this in the future?

I take it there wasn't a written contract, but I imagine you had a verbal one?  They would be in breach of that.  Unfortunately there are photographers and models out there that don't value their word or name.

As to avoiding it, it SOUNDS like they weren't acting professional in the first place with the lack of contract/lack of specific items to be traded (how many images and in what time frame), that would be a yellow flag to me.

If you learned something from this, then you didn't waste your time.  Very sorry it happened though.  You have every right to be upset and disappointed as I'm sure most everyone on these boards would be too.

EmGii wrote:
so i got a message from a lovely photographer that i did a trade shoot with, she said "sorry i never sent you those photos from the trade shoot. i ended up not liking them. i am a perfectionist lol" and i asked if it was my modeling and was told it was her lighting. /: has this happened to anyone else? it's the first time this happened to me, i kinda feel like i wasted my time now. :L is there any way to avoid this in the future?

In my opinion:   It is the photographer that has to produce,  after he accepts the project.   We would never cop out this way..

291 wrote:
the unwritten rule of thumb for photographers is, "if it isn't worthy for my portfolio it isn't worthy to release the images for any portfolio." 

the unfortunate circumstance for tf* is some feel there is a written rule that it doesn't matter.  give me what you think is crap regardless.  that doesn't bode well for either party, but for many it doesn't matter.  they just want the pictures regardless of the quality.  simply surf the site to confirm that.

what most don't realize is just having pictures for the sake of it can create more harm than good.  just because one goes through the motions of tf* doesn't mean the effort becomes a guarantee.  the opposite should be the approach and if greatness isn't captured then throw them all away.

I understand that both parties only most benefit if the images credited to them are portfolio worthy.  However, no skilled photographer would agree to giving the model complete approval over the images.  Why should only models be required to accept that condition?

When doing commercial work, a client will not give the photographer the right to trash the shoot.  How is this different?

-Scott

EmGii wrote:
i told her this,

"do you think maybe i could have a few photos to see just to look at how i posed and maybe edit them? i wont credit you if you want. o: it's just i drove all the way out there for a trade shoot and i kinda want something. you know?
like maybe i could pay a retoucher to fix them or something. (:"

i hope that didn't come off badly, i'm waiting for a reply. c:

She probably deleted them from her hard drive to make space and no longer has them if its been months and she didn't like the pics.

Send her the link to this forum and let her see how other photographers feel about her lack of professional attitude.

GM Photography wrote:
If she felt the photos were bad due to her actions, she should offer a re-shoot or some other form of compensation for your time.

This.

I would even go further and let the model pick the theme/location (within reason).
My screwup, I go the extra mile to fix it.  Professional behavior.

My two cents, YMMV
Daeda1us

bw fotograf wrote:
"LOL! HEHE! OMGWTFBBQ! THE SHOTS WERE BAD! LOL!"

Maybe he just didn't like them?

There's a World of difference between technical errors (which shouldn't happen, I grant you) and just 'not liking them' you know.

As I said earlier I sometimes get a set within the shoot that don't really do it for me aesthetically-speaking - they don't get processed and they don't get sent out.

EmGii wrote:
so i got a message from a lovely photographer that i did a trade shoot with, she said "sorry i never sent you those photos from the trade shoot. i ended up not liking them. i am a perfectionist lol" and i asked if it was my modeling and was told it was her lighting. /: has this happened to anyone else? it's the first time this happened to me, i kinda feel like i wasted my time now. :L is there any way to avoid this in the future?

trade used to be called testing. The fact is without monetary compensation to the photographer you can't really do anything  if the photos don't turn out well. You gave your time, the photographer gave their time and unfortunately there are no images worthwhile enough to utilize.

If you had paid the photographer you could ask for your money back, but nothing more than just the money they owe you for the shoot. You couldn't charge for your time.

In the end if you want to have a very good chance of getting images from a shoot pay a photographer to help you build up your portfolio.

If you want to build through tests you should be doing at least 2 a week and at the end of 6 months you will have at least 10 good photos.

Dani Jaye  wrote:
I would want to at least see one photo and strongly encourage it. I would never be ok without seeing something from the work.  Even in testing, they must produce something for you to see from your efforts. Don't be afraid to ask for what you want, what IMO you deserve.

why must they produce something? Is the opposite true- meaning if you did a test with me and i hated the make-up would you owe me my day rate since the test won't work for me now?

EACH PARTY gave of their time, most likely the photographer gave 3 hours to every hour the model gave. If NO ONE gets photos then no one can cry foul. If the photographer was using photos and not providing them then they are a horrible person. Saying sorry but the shoot didn't turn out is perfectly acceptable.

Loki Studio wrote:
I understand that both parties only most benefit if the images credited to them are portfolio worthy.  However, no skilled photographer would agree to giving the llama complete approval over the images.  Why should only llamas be required to accept that condition?

When doing commercial work, a client will not give the photographer the right to trash the shoot.  How is this different?

-Scott

clients pay me

bw fotograf wrote:
"LOL! HEHE! OMGWTFBBQ! THE SHOTS WERE BAD! LOL!"

what a fucktard. if the photographer shoots RAW, there's no excuse for this unless they blew the focus point, or have absolutely no idea what they're doing.

did you preview the images at the end of the shoot? i upload my shots into LR as i'm breaking down and always show the model, paid or not, what we got. we look at comp, lighting and focus at 100%. we also earmark a few as ones we both like at first glance, but I ultimately decide which to process based on how well they will represent the both of us in a TFP situation.

The name calling is really unnecessary.

For many, acceptable images, or images one wants to represent them in public as their best work, is not just about getting the right exposure. Image selection is about a whole lot more than that. Clearly everyone has their own quality metric.

Also, after a day (or 1/2 day) of shooting, both myself and the model are exhausted - no one feels like spending an hour going through the photos. Everyone wants to go home and/or eat.

RKD Photographic wrote:

Maybe he just didn't like them?

There's a World of difference between technical errors (which shouldn't happen, I grant you) and just 'not liking them' you know.

As I said earlier I sometimes get a set within the shoot that don't really do it for me aesthetically-speaking - they don't get processed and they don't get sent out.

Hey, I hear you, but the OP clearly relays that the photographer didn't like her lighting and that it was TEE HEE that she never bothered to tell her or send her pics.

the OP's photographer sounds like an unprofessional dipshit. how did she not get a single usable image out of the shoot? not one? if she's shooting digital, she should be chimping the fuck out of the LCD to make sure she's got something decent all throughout the shoot until she gets her shit together and can fly solo without relying on the polaroid built into the back of the camera.

bw fotograf wrote:

Hey, I hear you, but the OP clearly relays that the photographer didn't like her lighting and that it was TEE HEE that she never bothered to tell her or send her pics.

the OP's photographer sounds like an unprofessional dipshit. how did she not get a single usable image out of the shoot? not one? if she's shooting digital, she should be chimping the fuck out of the LCD to make sure she's got something decent all throughout the shoot until she gets her shit together and can fly solo without relying on the polaroid built into the back of the camera.

Your toilet mouth is really becoming offensive in the morning.

Star wrote:
why must they produce something? Is the opposite true- meaning if you did a test with me and i hated the make-up would you owe me my day rate since the test won't work for me now?

EACH PARTY gave of their time, most likely the photographer gave 3 hours to every hour the model gave. If NO ONE gets photos then no one can cry foul. If the photographer was using photos and not providing them then they are a horrible person. Saying sorry but the shoot didn't turn out is perfectly acceptable.

I agree with this in theory and in the case of a test I completely agree. However, where it wavers from that is the photographer promised a certain number of images out of that, called it a TF*, and didn't perform it as a Test.

Why, in this case, they must produce something is because that's what the agreement stated (I'm assuming) and both parties agreed. If you had an agreement documenting you would receive your day rate in any instance where you couldn't use the images, and all involved agreed, that would be fair and reasonable too.

A Test is just that and there is no guarantee or assurance of any usable images...and no expectation of that. I think in this instance the photographer did create an expectation by agreeing to provide a certain number of images.

bw fotograf wrote:
"LOL! HEHE! OMGWTFBBQ! THE SHOTS WERE BAD! LOL!"

what a fucktard. if the photographer shoots RAW, there's no excuse for this unless they blew the focus point, or have absolutely no idea what they're doing.

did you preview the images at the end of the shoot? i upload my shots into LR as i'm breaking down and always show the model, paid or not, what we got. we look at comp, lighting and focus at 100%. we also earmark a few as ones we both like at first glance, but I ultimately decide which to process based on how well they will represent the both of us in a TFP situation.

Thank you for providing us with your image workflow and business policies which have absolutely no relevance to the thread.

John Allan wrote:
Your toilet mouth is really becoming offensive in the morning.

great. anything else i can do to make your stay more pleasant?

Michael Pandolfo wrote:
Thank you for providing us with your image workflow and business policies which have absolutely no relevance to the thread.

you bet, chief. let me know if i can be of further assistance.

perhaps the relevance to the OP is don't work with people that don't seem to have it together, but WTF ever.

Michael Pandolfo wrote:
A Test is just that and there is no guarantee or assurance of any usable images...and no expectation of that. I think in this instance the photographer did create an expectation by agreeing to provide a certain number of images.

In my experience testing with agencies, that has not been true. There is definitely an expectation of usable images. If I had gone back and said there were not any, not sure I would have been booted out of the relationship, but it would have been embarrassing, as the booker more than likely would have been concerned that his girl didn't perform well and that was the cause. A few of no-usable-images and I doubt I'd be testing long.

bw fotograf wrote:
you bet, chief. let me know if i can be of further assistance.

perhaps the relevance to the OP is don't work with people that don't seem to have it together, but WTF ever.

You're bordering on being abusive and personal attacks here. Knock it off.

John Allan wrote:
You're bordering on being abusive and personal attacks here. Knock it off.

to whom? you? michael? to the nameless/faceless photographer who hosed a fellow MM'er and doesn't seem to have any intention to make it right? jfc.

Armond Scipione Photo wrote:
Look for photographers who have consistency throughout their portfolios. Look for consistent lighting, correct exposures, and possibly a consistent style. Also find their worst image in their portfolio..this will sometimes determine the true skill level. This will increase your chances that you will get images similar in quality to what they have in their portfolio.

That doesn't always work...this particular photographer is obviously very selective about what they let into the public's view so you'll only get to see selected, edited images and not representative images.

EmGii wrote:
so i got a message from a lovely photographer that i did a trade shoot with, she said "sorry i never sent you those photos from the trade shoot. i ended up not liking them. i am a perfectionist lol" and i asked if it was my modeling and was told it was her lighting. /: has this happened to anyone else? it's the first time this happened to me, i kinda feel like i wasted my time now. :L is there any way to avoid this in the future?

It happens.  I've had a couple experiences like that where I was not happy with the images too.  The most recent time I can remember that happening was back in 2006, when I drove to the LA area to meet and shoot a couple models for the first time.   Having never seen the location where we were to shoot, I struggled with it.   A swimming pool that provided a much smaller dry area to work with than I thought.  It was cold, and the models didn't "plan" on getting in the water.  We moved it in side ... but I still struggled, and could see it in my images.  I was able to salvage a few to give to the models ... but not a typical TFP session for me.  I try to give something. 

We're not perfect.  I try really hard to check out new locations in advance, and even meet with prospective models in advance too! Sometimes the first shoot turns out great, but sometimes it doesn't.  If she is up to doing a reshoot with you, then perhaps you can do that?

bw fotograf wrote:

Hey, I hear you, but the OP clearly relays that the photographer didn't like her lighting and that it was TEE HEE that she never bothered to tell her or send her pics.

the OP's photographer sounds like an unprofessional dipshit. how did she not get a single usable image out of the shoot? not one? if she's shooting digital, she should be chimping the fuck out of the LCD to make sure she's got something decent all throughout the shoot until she gets her shit together and can fly solo without relying on the polaroid built into the back of the camera.

You are giving the impression that you are a perfect ... asshole!  Such a mouth!  Did you ever think that perhaps the images are not up to her quality because of something else other than exposure?

Patrick Walberg wrote:
You are giving the impression that you are a perfect ... asshole!  Such a mouth!  Did you ever think that perhaps the images are not up to her quality because of something else other than exposure?

HFS. lol. i'm getting dog-piled by the fraternity of sensitive photographers. being a pro photographer sounds like an awesome gig of being able to tell a client you just didn't get anything usable. tee hee *shrug*

good thing that i'll continue to just be a scab hobbyist. i wouldn't know what to do with all of that freedom to just let people down.

EmGii wrote:
so i got a message from a lovely photographer that i did a trade shoot with, she said "sorry i never sent you those photos from the trade shoot. i ended up not liking them. i am a perfectionist lol" and i asked if it was my modeling and was told it was her lighting. /: has this happened to anyone else? it's the first time this happened to me, i kinda feel like i wasted my time now. :L is there any way to avoid this in the future?

You were scammed!! I have had this happen to me. But only when I started modeling. One of them I spent 500 bucks on expenses. I got Smart to the little ways. So now I rarely do TF and its usually on my terms and one of those terms is, I see all photos from the shoot and let me decide with the photographer what is liked or not! If they don't like it then oh well we don't shoot!

JadeDRed wrote:
I'm surprised how many people are suggesting a re-shoot, if a photographer hired me, ignored me for months, then refused to pay me the LAST thing i'd do is shoot with them again.

I remember reading a story from someone here once who was like, "I did three shoots with this photographer and they never gave me images from any of them." And of course my first thought was, how did you ever book even a second shoot when you hadn't gotten photos from the first? Asking for a reshoot just seems like it's potentially wasting more time.

It's too bad that the photographer didn't provide the OP with images. I've had a few cases where things like that happened. Once was a shoot where the model and I both went in totally exhausted and neither of us did well. I offered to show her proofs to explain why I didn't want to release images, but she knew me and took my word for it. A couple of other times it's been when I was experimenting and those experiments failed. Usually when I'm trying something new I also do something that works so I know the model will at least get some images. But a few times that wasn't possible. In those cases I warned the models going in that I couldn't guarantee that I'd be able to release images from the shoot. I think that's a fair approach, if the model is informed and accepts the risk.

Never have I just said, "Sorry no images lol."

I think the model in this case did the right things. Asking to receive some images without crediting the photographer was a good idea. It's unfortunate but it happens. Move on.

And to the point that someone made that you should have paid a photographer, there are models with stories about how they didn't receive images from shoots they paid for too.

Rich Burroughs wrote:

I remember reading a story from someone here once who was like, "I did three shoots with this photographer and they never gave me images from any of them." And of course my first thought was, how did you ever book even a second shoot when you hadn't gotten photos from the first? Asking for a reshoot just seems like it's potentially wasting more time.

I have had photographers say to me, i'll give you your pictures at the next shoot or whatever, i always cut my losses there and then, you cant deal with people like that. Trying to is just wasting more time.

JadeDRed wrote:
I'm surprised how many people are suggesting a re-shoot, if a photographer hired me, ignored me for months, then refused to pay me the LAST thing i'd do is shoot with them again.

Agreed. Offering a reshoot because "i didn't realize the TV was on and was polluting light into the scene" (a gaffe i did on my last shoot) is perfectly acceptable, but NOT after months of silence. This kind of thing is a next-day alert. "Hey, i really apologize, but I had a technical error I didn't notice, and the shots didn't come out. I'm really sorry about this. I can offer you a re-shoot if you're not terribly angry with me..."

Need to be contrite when your fuckup causes other people grief. My TFP licensing agreement spells this out, actually: "In the rare event that, in Licensor's sole opinion, no images are of acceptable quality for public release, no images will be provided, but arrangements for a re-shoot may be made, at Licensor's sole discretion."