huremics wrote:
Interesting. So maybe some newer models either cannot or choose not to differentiate between going rates for experienced models (defined by me as at least 1-2 years on MM and a strong, creative port) and those for beginners?

Well, as we've both experienced, the attitude is different on MM than on Craigslist, so there is defiantly something about MM that makes many new models have an over inflated sense of their worth. 

Certainly there are some models who have a great look, do nudes and can commend pay right off the bat, and set their rates appropriately, but from what I see, the vast majority of those who fill out a MM model profile don't do any shoots, or maybe just a couple and then fade away.  Of course part of getting models via CL might be that we are simply screening out all those models and not seeing them.   That's not the whole explanation however.  When I post the exact same casting here on MM and on CL, I'll often get several responses from the CL ad, and none here.  Often I've even had MM models reply to a CL ad, but not the MM casting.

huremics wrote:
it's someone's right to ask whatever he or she likes.

It IS everyone's right to ask for whatever he or she likes.
Just like it is our right to accept, decline, or make a counteroffer.

I figure the a model's "experience", time on MM, and/or the quality of the images in the model's portfolio are all secondary considerations.  Things that matter more include...
...  How well the model's look & ability meet the requirements of the project, and
...  The local supply & demand of similar talent (i.e. that meet the same requirements).
Thus, it is quite possible that your so-called "inexperienced" models deserve to be (and even likely to be) paid.

Some of the most popular images in my portfolio were made with a model you'd classify as "inexperienced".  She has a fantastic look.


My advice:  Don't worry about it.  If you don't want to pay a model (or any model for that matter), you don't have to.  But there are no rules, guidelines, or criteria that dictate when a model (or a photographer or a stylist) can ask to get paid.

huremics wrote:
Curious to hear thoughts from both models and photographers about this. By "inexperienced" I mean having joined MM within a few months and having a port that is so-so (admittedly subjective, so let's just say "basic"). I get that each of us must value our time as we see fit,, and that it's someone's right to ask whatever he or she likes. And that my style may not be for everyone. So no argument there.

I'm sometimes surprised however by newer models asking for upwards of $100/hour regardless of style. (fashion or nude) when this is a rate that the really experienced MM models charge. At one point last year I politely pointed this out to such a model. It was not well-deceived, so now I don't.

First, Model Mayhem is no standard or qualification for modeling, not even web modeling. It has a function, but it does not have a standard nor can you infer any prestige or esteem from having a free or paid membership here. A bad, unreliable model can still have a profile with here for years and years.

Secondly, experience around here is a double edged sword. A veteran of 100 GWC shoots might have actually picked up so many bad habits from bad photographers that a fresh and natural human/model will actually yield better results. Some of the best models I have ever shot do not have profiles here. Agency models I work with occasionally have profiles here, but of those that do most are not very active here.

Thirdly, there are models here who are popular with some photographers, yet wholly inappropriate to other photographer's vision. I don't really care how many GWC shoots a model has done.  If you are using MM experience MORE than your own preferences for face and body you are letting MM photographers pick your models for you. Would you like us to pick your lenses too?

Finally, in some circles (ironically both porn and fashion) there is a value is finding/working with the freshest talent available. I'm not advocating for that, but it would be dishonest to deny that sentiment exists.

You either value a model or you don't. You either have a project that deserves compensation or you are asking for TFP. It is each models' own right to set their rates. Respond according to how much YOU would value them in your project not how much others have.

huremics wrote:
...it's someone's right to ask whatever he or she likes...

...It's certainly a person's right to ask what they want...

+1

huremics wrote:
...I now list on Craigslist, where I don't encounter this at all...

Problem solved!

huremics wrote:
What do you mean by "mill"? I've not heard that before.

They are pseudo 'Agencies' who make their money from persuading prospective clients to buy expensive portfolios shot by their own in-house photographers, with the promise that work will follow - although, of course, it never does.  The photos are not very good, and there is no thought given to the photo session.  The shots are all the same, even down to the same set of steps being used for the outdoor shots by one notorious mill in London.

I'm not sure why they are called mills, it's a term that's been used, at least in the UK, for years.  I suspect it's something like the production line of models being processed one after the other, as in a factory (or mill).

Fotopia wrote:
In my market area, I see beginners with selfie portfolios demanding "paid assignments only."

Demanding does not equal obtaining.

I just shrug it off as typical web nonsense.

Such persons have obviously never thought about just what value their efforts will produce, how will the resulting images be monetized to offset the expense of modeling fees?

Part of the reason I am particular about who I pay and what kind of work I pay for is because I don't have any clients paying me for my work. Happily, I have a day job I like, which means I'm not having to hustle to market myself and find paying gigs. (I really admire you folks who have the drive, entrepreneurial spirit, and talent to do so!)

These days, I shoot for my own site, and for the creative and artistic satisfaction of hopefully creating beautiful work.

If I were being paid, I'd absolutely pass some of that along to the model in shoot fees. As it is, most of my work, with the exception of select nude work, is TFP.

huremics wrote:
I'm sometimes surprised however by newer models asking for upwards of $100/hour regardless of style. (fashion or nude) when this is a rate that the really experienced MM models charge. At one point last year I politely pointed this out to such a model. It was not well-received, so now I don't.

When I cast, or approact a model, basic or not, if the rates dont work for me, I just say sorry, and move on.
It's still surprising me that a lot of those brushed off like that come back with a better offer or ask for my budget. Wanting to work something out.

It's also important to me to let the model know I am not haggeling for price. I just have to keep things within certain econoimical frames. I also explain that I don't haggle because I don't want a model to be dissatified and stand me up, or get a better paying gig and stand me up. So if the rates don't work with my budget, I pass it up. And still some come back after that.

One would think that working 40 hours a week for $50 an hour would be way better than working 4 hours a week for $100. But like you say, it's peoples own choice to make. Judging from the models I have worked with, the professional ones (the ones that mode for a living) don't have sky high rates, but they work a lot! Since they don't seem to really need or want the gigs, I think it appears that a lot of the models that present themselves as proffesional are semi professionals.

J.

Fotopia wrote:
In my market area, I often see beginners with selfie portfolios demanding "paid assignments only."

Demanding does not equal obtaining.

I just shrug it off as typical web nonsense.

Ditto.  Lots of models with very amateur looking portfolios/selfies specifying paid-only gigs in my area as well.  I just pass them by.  I guess I just assume that it's a case of wishful thinking and/or they really aren't interested in modeling, but might do it for the right price?  Meh, whatever.

Dekilah wrote:
In my experience there are quite a few factors to this including:

- A lot of models are told that they shouldn't do this or that unless they are getting paid, regardless of their experience level (or perhaps the people giving this advice assume the models seeing it are already somewhat established?).

- Early on in my posing, a couple of the first photographers who paid me, and as I got more experienced those who seemed to be hobbyists or GWCs (the pleasant sort) and always insisted on paying my rates, would tell me that I should always be paid because I was worth it and I shouldn't cheapen myself by posing for just anyone for trade.

- As a general rule, the community often tells models to ask around about what other models are charging for the styles they want to be hired for. Sometimes that information is not further qualified to include the ideas that more experienced models are often able to charge more.

- It also happens that sometimes very new models are paid a sort of premium rate by photographers because they are a new face, but that rate often decreases if those photographers want to shoot with that model again and in general once the model is a bit more established.

- We're also regularly told that experience doesn't matter, just our look (and maybe posing skills, though that can be relative). While in some cases this might be true, I don't think it's quite that simple unless the very new model is also very professional in her behavior.

As far as a model reacting to a stronger portfolio versus a weaker one... some models approach this solely as a career and, as this is how they make their money like any other career, they aren't concerned with your final "product" but rather in simply supplying the service you are hiring them for, if that makes sense. And I don't mean that they don't care about the photos, but more that the finished photos are more about what you want as the photographer (or client) not something the model wants or needs. If they're being hired, their main goal is just to make sure you are getting the images you want.

For me both look and experience are important!

Abbitt Photography wrote:
Here's another thing I think may be happening on MM:

New models with any reasonable look get bombarded by TF offers immediately when joining.  I can see where models can mistake a large demand to do TF for an ability to commend good pay.  I've seen many models even state that in forum posts.  They get more TF offers than they know what to do with, but when they ask of pay, they get nothing.  Of course part of that is what pay they ask when they start asking for pay 

It is a matter of supply and demand, but much of this is due to perceived worth, which may or may not be the same as actual worth.  Supply and demand also doesn't dictate that two parties must come to an agreed upon rate.  It's very possible for someone to have a rate they want, and have no takers for that rate in which case there is no transaction.  That's what I see happening more and more here.  Models want a rate few photographers are willing to pay so fewer shoots happen.

And then the model becomes inactive and no longer shoots.  Good indication she joined thinking it would be easy money and found out rather shortly that nothing is easy.

DeanLautermilch wrote:
I've had a number of models want compensation for travel even when they are nearby.
.

I experienced that once. I had a model want $20 travel and she was about 10 minutes away.

Kent Art Photography wrote:
Elsewhere in the forums, a 16 year-old male model posted a question about TF and testing.  His profile states that he wants paid work only, and his portfolio is typical portfolio mill stuff.  I think this is the key, In order to sell the portfolio package, these mills are giving people false ideas as to how the industry works and how much money a model can make.  I suspect the mills are finding their victims on Facebook.

I wonder as to what extent these mills are influencing models' expectations, and whether models are entirely to blame for their naivety.

More years ago than I like to admit to, as a struggling young actor myself, I "taught" for a time at a combined acting/dancing/modeling "school" specializing in mid-to-late teens.  We did precious little actual teaching and at the management's instructions, concentrated on praising the "accomplishments" and "talent", whenever possible to the Moms of the youngsters, who were, after all, the ones writing the checks.  So, no, as far as overblown expectations and the causes behind them  go, it is not a new phenomenon.

Can we do anything about it?  Probably not much, but active participation in the forums, especially by models who have been there and done that, discussing openly and honestly the rewards and the drawbacks of modeling, especially internet modeling, might be a help.  And I would caution anyone that professes a concern about this trend to put away the smarmy, pseudo superior comments that at best simply convince anyone seeking real help or knowledge that this ain't the place to find it.

All IMHO as always, of course.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I don't think its fair to criticize members outside of the critique forum.

...' Leaving aside the quality your work and it's alleged creativity, there is still no way that a model is likely to want to shoot with you. Models shoot tfp to get more paid work; your work isn't useful in that regard. '

I certainly think the OP is worth shooting with.   While I am not a model it in my view has value but the above quoted remark was just nasty.   As for inexperienced or experienced models charging.   There are MM models who have made money their first few days here and others who have been here years who struggle to make a dime.   Models are paid for their look.   While beauty is subjective there are acknowledged standards of beauty.

Thanks, Tony, for backing me up. I contacted a mod since that bullshit has no place in this thread.

ontherocks wrote:
are models paid for their experience or for their look (and range of genres they are able to shoot)? sometimes i think it's as much for their look as anything else.

For me, it's definitely both. I would personally rather shoot with a model who is very experienced and lacks a little bit on the looks side rather than have a "10" who can't make a facial expression other than duck lips and who is constantly asking me to help pose her because she doesn't know how.

A good model with good looks and who knows how to model, knows how to express herself, knows how to move and create a synergy with the photographer is worth ten models who are super hot but haven't got a clue what they are doing. Just my 2 cents.