Laura UnBound wrote:
lack of crediting the models in their portfolio
lack of "thanks for the great shoot!" "I cant wait to shoot with you again" etc positive tags from past shoots
been on the site for years and years but still has very few photos, or is currently active but all photos are from years and years ago. (begs the questions what have you been doing, and/or why wont more people work with you?)

outright lies like "Ive been published in ELLE, Vogue, GQ, etc" but their work is beyond obviously not publication quality and they dont exhibit any of the tears in their portfolio.

Really long rambling bios about how much they just oh so love the female body and its so sexy and sensual with its curves and smooth skin and suppleness and yadda yadda....oh but they're just appreciative, totally not creepy! (If you have to TELL people youre not creepy...either you deep down know that your behavior will come off that way or someone has outright told you so...and you probably ARE. ) Bios are meant for Who, what, when, where, why, not what gets your rocks off in the shower.

Okay, I think you got the high points.   Those are some (not all) of the exact things I was talking about.

Leland Ray wrote:

Okay, I think you got the high points.   Those are some (not all) of the exact things I was talking about.

Leland your profile is a curious read.

Laura UnBound wrote:
lack of crediting the models in their portfolio

This one annoys me.  I'm left to interpretation and I tend to interpret that the photographer is possessive of the models and doesn't want anyone else "stealing them away."

Tony Lawrence wrote:

Leland your profile is a curious read.

Well, part of the reason I posted this was because I was in the process of revising it.  I come across as kind of cynical.  That's because I AM cynical, but I'm also a really nice guy all the same--seriously, if I had any friends they'd tell you.

Omaroo wrote:

This one annoys me.  I'm left to interpretation and I tend to interpret that the photographer is possessive of the models and doesn't want anyone else "stealing them away."

EXACTLY!  And I hate it when a model says, "yes, I'm a model, but I prefer to shoot with my REGULAR photographer."

So why is she here anyway?

Leland Ray wrote:

Well, part of the reason I posted this was because I was in the process of revising it.  I come across as kind of cynical.  That's because I AM cynical, but I'm also a really nice guy all the same--seriously, if I had any friends they'd tell you.

I guess most things are about perception.   Once your model friends told you they had problems you suddenly found 'red flags' in the photographers profiles.   Could your not allowing escorts be a red flag?   Could a model misinterpret your Brian De Palma quote?  For the record I don't allow escorts and I know for a fact that some models see that as a red flag but I don't give a shi^.   I did find your link funny and Jesus comment funny.

Tony Lawrence wrote:

I guess most things are about perception.   Once your model friends told you they had problems you suddenly found 'red flags' in the photographers profiles.   Could your not allowing escorts be a red flag?   Could a model misinterpret your Brian De Palma quote?  For the record I don't allow escorts and I know for a fact that some models see that as a red flag but I don't give a shi^.   I did find your link funny and Jesus comment funny.

I don't give a shit either, and I've met some creepy escorts.  Yeah, the De Palma quotation might be construed that way, but it happens to be very much the way I feel.  I have been riding in this rodeo for a very long time.

As for perception... I'm a very careful reader, and I can usually catch the flags without prior information.

CBAPhoto wrote:
I've learned you really can't say anything right on this site. So I stopped. I get far better response for my photos and who I am personally on Facebook and Google+. Here I change out the photos from time to time whether or not people have faved them, and then I check in from time to time. Some weeks I'm here daily. Some weeks I'm not here at all. Right now I'm showing two shots from a personal project simply because I have too many other shots to sort through and post when I know I'll just be changing them out again.

Its kind of hard to go wrong with just covering the 5 Ws. When I was full time thats basically all I ever had in my profile, in bullet point form, and I kept each to 2-5 sentences. I let anyone looking to book me know almost everything they could possibly need to know before they even sent their first message, but I didnt go on long rambling paragraphs of nonsense that nobody would ever read in the first place. I got a lot of "Im so glad youve got an intelligent useful profile I can actually read!" comments from people. Its pretty simple.

Marin Photography wrote:
I don't think it matters. Most models I dealt with don't read the darn bio anyway. You know how many people ask me where I am located when it's clearly stated where I live. Then they go on to ask questions that are already answered in my bio. So, for this reason alone, I wouldn't put too much stock in the stupid bio.

They have no idea where the Bronx is.   

Omaroo wrote:

This one annoys me.  I'm left to interpretation and I tend to interpret that the photographer is possessive of the models and doesn't want anyone else "stealing them away."

I credit models when I can but a lot of the models are agency girls and don't have profiles on here.

I do try to credit them by their first name and their agency when possible.

Laura UnBound wrote:

Its kind of hard to go wrong with just covering the 5 Ws. When I was full time thats basically all I ever had in my profile, in bullet point form, and I kept each to 2-5 sentences. I let anyone looking to book me know almost everything they could possibly need to know before they even sent their first message, but I didnt go on long rambling paragraphs of nonsense that nobody would ever read in the first place. I got a lot of "Im so glad youve got an intelligent useful profile I can actually read!" comments from people. Its pretty simple.

Yeah. Tried that too. No bueno.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:

They have no idea where the Bronx is.   

No they don't...I have to tell them what train and everything...geeze! I thought cell phones had google...

Laura UnBound wrote:
lack of crediting the models in their portfolio
lack of "thanks for the great shoot!" "I cant wait to shoot with you again" etc positive tags from past shoots

There are some of us on here that don't shoot many MM models, or if they were here they have since deleted ports or quit all together. 

I always love your posts, btw.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
For the record I don't allow llama herders and I know for a fact that some models see that as a red flag but I don't give a shi^.

Yes, I've had plenty of models PM me saying that I must be a "creeper" for not allowing llama herders (friends).

That's okay. I prefer not shooting models who are insecure with themselves and view photoshoots as an opportunity to hang with a friend(s) while getting paid.

That's not acceptable to me.

Leland Ray wrote:
What do you see in a photographer's profile that tells you he might be sketchy? 

I kind of hesitate to bring this up, since some perfectly legitimate photographers can be abrasive, or they don't communicate well, but I've had a couple of models I consider friends contact me and report bad experiences with people; when I looked at their profiles, I immediately read things that would have set my antennae buzzing immediately, yet the models didn't notice.

I know, I'm not stating this very well, but I do believe it's a discussion that could be beneficial for young models.

I would think that asking models what they consider to be a red flag, is a red flag. 

The thing that has always stood out to me as stupid is "I require that models bring an llama herder for their safety."  I mean, allow them, or don't.  But if you don't think models are safe WITH YOU without an llama herder, perhaps you should just quit.

Omaroo wrote:

This one annoys me.  I'm left to interpretation and I tend to interpret that the photographer is possessive of the models and doesn't want anyone else "stealing them away."

+1

Leland Ray wrote:

EXACTLY!  And I hate it when a model says, "yes, I'm a model, but I prefer to shoot with my REGULAR photographer."

So why is she here anyway?

+100 I just had one of those in the past couple of weeks. I agree with the comment what are they doing on here.

Marin Photography wrote:
I don't think it matters. Most models I dealt with don't read the darn bio anyway. You know how many people ask me where I am located when it's clearly stated where I live. Then they go on to ask questions that are already answered in my bio. So, for this reason alone, I wouldn't put too much stock in the stupid bio.

To be fair, I know several people in NYC who live in one burrough, have a studio in another, and shoot locations in another, so its actually a bad idea to assume "so and so lists their location as the bronx, Im obviously going to be working with them in the bronx then." Ive done that before only to find out last minute that we're actually shooting way way the fuck far away from where I thought we were and its going to add another hour onto my commute and if I go there I wont even come close to making it to my second shoot in time and everything gets screwed up. Regardless of what someone lists in their location I still ask them "where will we be shooting/where are you located?"

Also true for LA. LA is goddamn HUGE and everyone lists themselves as being IN LOS ANGELES PROPER when really they mean theyre an hour and a half outside of downtown without traffic and no, they wont come to you or meet you half way.

Nogawd Photography wrote:
There are some of us on here that don't shoot many MM models, or if they were here they have since deleted ports or quit all together. 

I always love your posts, btw.

I do understand that. However if youve been here for 4 years, got 20-50 photo slots and not a single one of them is used for an MM model, or you just refuse to take the extra 30 seconds to credit them...

Also, just for future reference, when someone leaves MM (or if they remember what their profile number was) their credits still show, which even if I cant go contact her anymore at least it shows you DID work with someone from the site at SOME POINT which is better than nothing. How do I know all your uncredited photos werent just yanked off the web somewhere otherwise? Its better than nothing.

Leland Ray wrote:
What do you see in a photographer's profile that tells you he might be sketchy?

The same things you look for if a model's profile might be sketchy:

-stolen photos
-glaring photoshopped/imposter photos
-sock puppet profiles
-scams
-nonsensical bot comments
-etc etc

You never know unless you interact with them first.

Omaroo wrote:

This one annoys me.  I'm left to interpretation and I tend to interpret that the photographer is possessive of the models and doesn't want anyone else "stealing them away."

I always think that too! Sometimes I'm lucky enough to find a model, if she credited the said photographer. I also find it crazy when folks turn off their credited photo filter.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:

They have no idea where the Bronx is.   

The Bronx is up and the Battery's down...

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I think its not a great ideal to judge anyone by a few paragraphs on a web site.   If a shooter has been here a while but not updated its fair to ask why.   Few MM members shot?   Based on the many flake threads easy to understand.   A shooter may have taken some time off.   People are often too quick to judge others.

exactly. communication is key. but a profile is not really communication. it's an entrance. what lays behind a krunky profile may be little different than what lays behind an excellent one. grain of salt.

Laura UnBound wrote:
lack of crediting the models in their portfolio

one thing MM could do, if it was the least bit evolutionary - which it isn't - is have a place to credit [and link to] models other than MM ones. instead we have to somehow shove model info into one of the available lines presented, such as title or location.