|
Forums >
Model Colloquy >
Are tattoos THAT big of a deal?
So I'm fairly new to the modeling world, but I would LOVE to eventually start doing paid shoots. My question is, are tattoos generally frowned upon for paid shoots? I have my whole calf done, but it's very artistic (and hey - I think it looks awesome). Would love to pick your guy's brains on this. Or maybe is it possible to cover up tattoos? Have any of you ever done that either? Thanks so much for your time! Mar 04 16 07:32 pm Link I don't see why tattoos would be a problem. I know for me, I love doing photos of people with tattoos, piercings, etc. But that's just me I guess. Every photographer is different tho. Some love tats. Some hate em. Just gotta see which one fits your style really. Mar 04 16 08:13 pm Link Double Stomp Productions wrote: That pretty much covers it in general and if you're already tattooed to any substantial extent, it will make a difference in your career's development. For Fine Art, PinUp, Fashion, Catalog work, etc. large or extremely prominent tattoos are generally a no-no because rightly or wrongly, they make a very strong statement (That is their purpose, after all, isn't it?) and that statement is frequently not what the ultimate customer wants. For other markets, such as fitness, some glamour, erotic, fetish, etc. they can often be a help. Mar 04 16 08:27 pm Link For some, they are the best thing ever. For some, they like some tattoos and not others. For some, they will put up with tattoos if they really want to work with the model. For some, tattoos are a deal breaker. There may be other options but I think I covered all of them.  Mar 04 16 08:30 pm Link For most themes I shoot I don't want tats showing. Will any tat a model has show given the wardrobe/lack of wardrobe and if so can it easily be photoshopped out? Do I have another tat free model available which will eliminate time consuming photoshopping? Those are the issues I'll consider in deciding whether or not to shoot a model who has tattoos. Mar 04 16 08:32 pm Link Every time you get a tattoo you are placing a limit on yourself as to the kind of photo shoot you are qualified to model for. I can give you a prime example of this. In the mid 1990's I had a chance to be a contract photographer for a local designer. This designer was coming out with a new line of panties for young women. I had recently did a nude shoot with a local model. I showed some of the photographs from this shoot to the designer. The designer thought that this model had the perfect proportions for modeling lingerie. I was told that if I could get that model to pose in the panties I would be given a chance at the contract. This model did have two tattoos. She had a small one on her left breast and a second one on her hip. Because the panties were full cut the tattoo on her hip would have been covered by the panty. The tattoo on her breast would have been covered by her hand in some of the photographs and in others she would have been turned and only her back would have been facing the camera. On the day of the shoot the model arrived and the designer gave her a pair of black panties to model. The model went into the dressing room and changed. When she came out and stepped on to the set she looked perfect for the shoot. The designer wanted to start out with some photos showing the panties from the back. When the model turned around she gave both the designer and myself a major shock. On her back was a new tattoo that a "friend" of hers' had paid for a few days before. Needless to say the photo shoot ended right then. The model did not get paid and I lost out on the contract. So keep in mind that every time you get a tattoo you are placing another limit on yourself. Mar 04 16 08:34 pm Link MoniqueWie wrote: There are models that have a lot of ink and are successful but in my opinion it's really a niche market. In my experience most photographers prefer models without ink. Realistically, I think that each modification you make to your body reduces your marketability as a model. You can obviously do whatever you want since it's your body but you need to decide what's more important to you. Mar 04 16 08:40 pm Link I shoot, mostly, landscapes. Sometimes, I like to "throw" a woman into the mix, but the Image is ALWAYS "natural" looking .Tattoos are usually a problem for this type of photography. I have examples of where I have "painted" out tattoos In my MM portfolio. On a person, they are usually no problem for me, but for my art, they usually are. I actually have not contacted models, who have had many, or large ones, because it is just too much work to remove them, and they interfere with my ideal of an image. I am, probably, in the minority here, but photography, and Photoshop are MY art; my most recent chosen medium, and I want to be the artist. -Don Mar 04 16 08:52 pm Link My question is, are tattoos generally frowned upon for paid shoots? I have my whole calf done, but it's very artistic.} If a customer that is paying for the photo session says no tats. Its no tats. Mar 04 16 08:56 pm Link I generally don't shoot models with tattoos. But if I am so inclined I would like at least one portfolio picture of the tattoo so I know what I am shooting. Mar 04 16 09:16 pm Link Double Stomp Productions wrote: It's only a problem when the model is competing against other models for a job. The majority of work out there is of models without tattoos, so if you do the math (as a model), you'll quickly realize that having tattoos could be a hindrance to the amount of work you can get. There is a niche market out there for inked models, but it's just that, a niche market. Mar 04 16 09:32 pm Link My opinion, few things in a photo shoot are more distracting than tattoos. Fact, one of the few times you can have your cake and eat it too, "so to speak". There are simple, and for the most part inexpensive solutions here. If you the photographer, or a third party want tats, you can use temporary tats, or body paint, both of which can be easily removed after the shoot. Now you can easily work either way. Some clowns make a good living at what they do, but I never saw one yet who had their clown face tattooed on. But as pointed out before the choice is yours alone, and I can work with models with or without tats, but having tats narrows the venues. Mar 04 16 09:55 pm Link The easy answer is that some shoots they may be a plus. For most shoots they will be a minus, it all depends on what the client (photographer) is looking for. Mar 04 16 10:01 pm Link In my photography, I value simplicity & timelessness (sure, tattoos have been around forever, but styles change). My favorite models tend to be those who are most versatile (unless it's hidden, someone with a tattoo will always be someone with that tattoo). So tattoos don't work for me. I'm getting better at removing them in post but, more & more, I try to avoid them. I haven't heard about it in awhile, but isn't/wasn't there concern regarding copyright/releases/compensation when there is an additional "collaborator" (the tattoo artist) whose work is represented in a shoot? Another headache I'd prefer to avoid. Mar 04 16 10:29 pm Link My take on this... I used to absolutely hate tats on women. Years ago, even tiny ankle tats would bug me. I have since lightened up. A lot. Partially because I believe the saying "No point in complaining, nobody listens anyway." But also, I found myself noticing that I do like bodypainting. So why the difference between BP and tats? Bodypainting is generally very colourful, while tattoos are often dreary dark things, like they came from prison. As well a BP piece becomes the primary subject in a photo, while tats tend to just appear as fragments from under clothing. If I am shooting fashion, I do not want to see a tat. Or half of one. So how far have I lightened up? I currently have two photo submissions awaiting publication in a local tat magazine. Mar 04 16 10:39 pm Link TerrysPhotocountry wrote: not to put too fine a point on it, but the client doesn't care if you think it's artistic or ugly as sin - their opinion is the only thing that matters, not yours. Mar 04 16 11:20 pm Link MoniqueWie wrote: It depends on the shoot. Everyone is going to have their own opinion on it. The most important one is yours. There will be those who hire you and those who do not but focus on the ones who will hire you. Plenty of companies hire models with tats these days and it just depends on the style of the shoot. Mar 04 16 11:41 pm Link MoniqueWie wrote: Yes, it limits your opportunities for the types of genres you want to pursue based on your bio. At this point you have probably limited yourself so its a lost cause. If you add genres that are more accepting of tattoos then the answer changes. Mar 05 16 12:19 am Link Tattoos are problem for commercial shots, especially those which show artwork because if one is to license the image commercially a property release must be signed by the author of the artwork. Obviously that is not so easy (if possible at all). So from a business and licensing perspective tattoos are a problem. Small tattoos can be retouched but I try to avoid models with big ones. Another thing to consider is the industry niche you are going to work for. I haven't seen any whole calf tattoos on Victoria's Secret models. You get the idea. Mar 05 16 01:30 am Link If I'm doing an alternative in your face shoot I will emphasize the hell out of the ink. Otherwise I prefer a blank canvas. Mar 05 16 03:02 am Link I shoot both with and without. I prefer without. But there aren't that many models without them anymore. Boob jobs were the big thing years ago. Now they seem to have gone out of style to some extent. And there were some really awful boob jobs just as there are tattoos. I've seen some really beautiful tattoos. I've seen some really ugly ones. In fact I've seen far more ugly tattoos and boob jobs than I've seen what I would consider to be beautiful ones. I guess beauty is in the eye of the beer holder. I sure wouldn't let a tattoo keep me from pursuing a path in modeling. Mar 05 16 04:23 am Link I was a freelance, web-based model for ten years. I have fairly large tattoos on both arms and did fine. However, mine are black (rather than brightly colored) and cannot be see in a lot of poses. I probably lost out on more work due to having disproportionately small boobs, than I did over tattoos. At least in regards to the situations where people told me why they were passing on me. In ten years, I only remember one person who said they didn't want to shoot due to tattoos. One. In 2008, in South Carolina. There were probably 20-30 times I was told I was passed up due to lack of breast size, making tattoos (even fairly large ones) relatively insignificant compared to other, assorted factors. People on here will tell you all kinds of things, but in reality, people who use Internet models for their projects are far more concerned about finding someone who will show up - on time and sober. You can even be older, out of shape and not particularly pretty and do pretty well as an internet model, as long as you're super professional in your communications, show up on time and work hard. Mar 05 16 04:51 am Link It depends on the tattoos and the type of photoshoot. I have photographed some models with tattoos. Mar 05 16 05:04 am Link MoniqueWie wrote: As you've read, for many paid shoots the tattoo will have a negative impact, for others, it won't. Yes, on time, sober and professional are most of the game for internet modeling but that work is usually nude, lingerie, erotic, fetish, etc., which is not work you're looking for right now. MoniqueWie wrote: Great, glad you're happy with it, it's pretty much permanent. For photographers there is varying interest in the quality of the tattoo. The issue is usually more tattoo vs. no tattoo, not how well the work was done. MoniqueWie wrote: Yes, it's possible to cover tattoos or remove them in photoshop. It's also more time and work, so on whole it's a negative. Mar 05 16 05:20 am Link For internet modeling, NO. Mar 05 16 06:45 am Link As already mentioned it will limit opportunities, depending in part on, their number, size, content, location, the preference of the photographer, and/or the client, and the themes or genres of a proposed shoots. Obviously, a tattoo across the middle of your forehead will likely limit you more than a small one, discretely placed in a private area. If they are something you might think of getting more of, you may need to decide which is more important to you, your tattoos or modeling. If you want to continue modeling in many genres, with as little limitation as possible, then certainly describe/show what you currently have in your portfolio. Before getting any more, decide, in light of your modeling, if they can wait, and limit them in number/size/location. Don't just plaster them all over, but plan them carefully, in light of your modeling & other factors in your life. A suggestion of some experienced models & photographers, is, when considering adding new art, try to limit it to one side of the body, to allow you to, in some cases, present a "clean side" to the camera if needed. Might slightly reduce lost opportunities. Mar 05 16 06:57 am Link MoniqueWie wrote: It is almost just like any other variable, (height, weight, hair color, measurements....) Except with this variable there are some vocal anti tattoo folks. My advice, is to ignore them. The highly vocal anti tattoo folks are not going to shoot us anyways and aren't worth engaging in convo with about tattoos anyways. Mar 05 16 07:14 am Link I've never tried to cover up my tattoos. One is in a place where I wouldn't be able to do it. No one has tried to remove my tattoos in post but I say on my profile I am OK with them doing that. I don't know if it limits my ability to get work or not. I have so few shoots due to other factors I am not really concerned. No photographer has said my tattoos are a problem. I do mostly fine art nudes and they have not been a problem for me. Mar 05 16 07:58 am Link My semi-definitive answers (at least from my point of view): ... Some photographers love tattoos. ... Some photographers hate them. ... Some photographers don't care one way or another. ... Removing a tattoo with photoediting takes time, adds expense, and is often imperfect. ... Covering a tattoo with makeup takes time, adds expense, and is often imperfect. ... The makeup covering a tattoo rubs off on clothing, sets, etc. ... The makeup covering a tattoo might need to be refreshed, which slows thing down and takes time, adds expense, etc. ... Visible tattoos are always distracting. Always. (IMHO). ... Many commercial clients don't want visible tattoos in their ads. ... Men can get away with having a tattoo better than women. ... Modeling is a competitive business. Depending on the photo shoot's objective, if you and your identical twin are up for the same project, and one of you has tattoos while the other has none, the tattoo-free twin is more likely to get the job (because as noted above, covering and/or removing tattoos takes time, adds expense, and is often imperfect). Obtaining a tattoo is a personal decision -- do what you want, but ANYTHING a model does that changes her or his appearance will have an impact on the model's modeling prospects. Mar 05 16 08:23 am Link I like clear, natural skin. The worst kind of tattoos are the poerty. It's become so common among models that it's difficult to fine one with clear skin. With clear skin you are able to put on temporary ones if tattoos are required. With regular tattoos... well.. It's a hell of a lot of retouching I can tell you... Nah, clear skin rocks! J. Mar 05 16 08:25 am Link JohnEnger wrote: I love that the model in your avatar has a tattoo... Mar 05 16 08:51 am Link JerryClark Photographer wrote: +1 Yes for many tatts can be a very big problem, many find them visually distracting. I've shot models with tatts depending on type and size, yes it can be a deal breaker. I prefer as many do, including clients for paid shoots, that the model be a "clean canvas" . Many clients want their work/product to be the focus, not tatts. Not all tattoos are beautiful art, many are grotesque, poorly done, and or vulgar. I would just move on to the next model, It's unfair to tell someone "my tatt doesn't matter just photoshop it out". I don't like much retouching and will not "clean out" most tatts unless they are tiny, not to mention time and expense. Even though tattoos are becoming more accepted, many models will flat out lose work because of tattoos. Those beautiful bra and panty ads or underwear ads just don't make the same visual impact with tatts, anyone that thinks it doesn't matter is kidding themselves. I remember a particular male model who was getting a ton of swimwear/underwear/nude work, then he thought it would be "cool" at the the urging of a friend to get a very large body tattoo, well his work dried up to near zero in a matter of weeks. Especially face, neck and knuckle tatts, I want my photographs , as many do to look "natural" and not photoshopped all to hell......................................W Mar 05 16 09:11 am Link As usual Koryn has said it very well. On time - ready to work - models, will find a place/niche -Tats or no tats. The biggest difficulty is that so many tattoos are personal and are there to make a statement - and that is fine. But, sometimes that statement is at odds with the theme of the image. (a tranquil woodland scene is hardly enhanced, with skeletal arms reaching out from behind prison bars, to set an extreme example) I have worked with models with tattoos that enhanced the setting and image - so, it's always going to be a mixed response. Mar 05 16 09:20 am Link MoniqueWie wrote: I am normally an outspoken pro-tattoo guy... but in your case, considering your look, height and age, I'd suggest you'd wait a few years and see if you can get picked up by a mainstream fashion or commercial agency. Mar 05 16 09:52 am Link Isis22 wrote: Two different photographers took the time to remove the portion of my lower tattoo that covers my abdomen but, both times it took me the absolute longest time to notice what it was about the picture that was different!!! I do not "see" my tattoo in my mind's eye so when I saw the picture I didn't notice it until it was way beyond the appropriate time to tell them! However I should tell one now. by sharing this note Mar 06 16 06:27 am Link Depends on the shoots and the tattoos. If I'm doing a shoot that's supposed to look classy and elegant I'm probably not gonna wanna model with tons of tattoos. If I'm doing something more edgy I welcome tattoos. Also if the tattoos are either badly done or just bad looking then i'm less likely to wanna shoot with someone. Sure your tattoo of a elephant might mean a lot to you but it's probably not gonna look good in my shoot. And I say this as a person with many tattoos, some of them totally not flattering for photography. Mar 06 16 06:51 am Link IMHO, there are two problems with tattoos : -first, that's a fashion. Within a few years, people will look at pictures with tattoed models and say "blah, these ugly 10's pictures, how outdated ! " Just think of the 1980's haircuts... Except you can change your haircut. -second, it's someone else's work. It may (or may not) be "artistic", yet photographing a model with tats is a bit like shooting a model wearing a dress by Yves Saint Laurent and a jacket from another designer. And then, tattoos are usually a distinctive style, very often skulls, guns, bikes, playing cards and the like, a rock'n'rollish or Western style. For a boudoir, futuristic, vintage pin-up, boho, high fashion style, to name a few, they just don't match. Mar 06 16 07:15 am Link I shoot catalog fashion, tattoos on models get rejected almost universally with the people I work with. Since the companies are writing the checks, I accept that. It is what it is. Some people don't care, I don't write the rules... Mar 06 16 08:30 am Link i have photoshopped out tattoos for both models and paying customers (at their request). but some tattoos are easier to remove than others. it's rare around here to find a model or paying customer who doesn't have a tattoo. apparently they had to use a butt double for 50 shades of grey because the star has a tattoo on her back. Mar 06 16 12:16 pm Link "Should I bring an escort", "the photographer never sent my photos", and "will my tattoos be a problem" have strong claims to being the most hotly discussed topic on MM. For the record, I have never engaged a model because of her tattoos. I have occasionally photographed a model despite her tattoos, but a full calf would be a deal-breaker. I have had a number of models with small tattoos ask me to remove the tattoos from the finished photos wherever possible. Overall, I give tattoos a definite thumbs down. Mar 06 16 03:25 pm Link |
