|
Forums >
Model Colloquy >
Crotch shots...or full frontal nudes restrictions?
Hello, So, long story short I'm going back to Toronto, Canada to visit my family and friends and wanted to book a model and do a nude photo shoot while I'm there. The last time I was in Canada was two years ago and I did a shoot with a fantastic model, and before that it was 4 years ago before I left. Anyways, 2 out of the 3 models that got back to me with their rates also had a rule about no photos taken of their crotch, or with their legs open, or even a full frontal shot unless they can have their hand or something else covering that area. Now, I didn't hear about this restriction two years ago when I shot with the last model, and it sure as hell didn't exist about 4 years back when I was shooting nudes more regularly. So, my question is this, is this a new restriction that models have made up, and if it is then is there a specific reason for it? I understand that they don't want their crotch to show in photos, but if someone wants to do an art/macro shot of that area then obviously they'd never book this model, and for the rest of the people that want to do normal Playboy style nudes then we can't book that model either. I don't have the time to check to make sure that nothing is showing and being restricted to no full frontal shots, or having to check if the model's legs are open too much or not enough is also not something I'm interested in. Can someone let me know what's going on with this new "restriction" as well as how you feel about it as models or photographers? Mar 13 18 10:41 pm Link It is a personal preference of the models. If it is an accommodation that fits with your vision, then shoot with one of them. If not, shoot with someone else. Mar 13 18 11:14 pm Link I'd say you just happened upon a couple models with the same disinterest in having their genitals shown, I wouldn't say it's a new trend among the general nude model populace. Unfortunately the idea that someone who is trying to shoot genital-focused images just wouldn't book a person who isn't into it isn't entirely true. A lot of us have found out after the fact that shots were snuck in when we weren't looking/were turned away, while they were "just testing the light" or "whoops zoomed in too far". There's a fairly common gross fascination with trying to sneak in shots one shouldn't be taking or seeing just how far a model's limits can be pushed. There was a time where my credited images folder showed an incredibly low quality pixelated crop of just my vulva - it was taken from a full-body image that was shot from across a room at an "art nude" workshop. Dude just really focused on my junk. People do that, and it sucks. Some models attempt to mitigate that possibility. Others simply just don't want their genitals showing. Keep browsing. There's still plenty of locals without those particular restrictions. Mar 13 18 11:22 pm Link PIEntertainment wrote: Since you asked specifically "how you feel about it as ... photographers," I will posit that these are simply models who are comfortable doing what have been termed "implied" nudes and are being very specific about their limitations. That you found two out of three in a single search seems to be nothing more than coincidence unless there was something in your job posting that brought about the specific response. Mar 13 18 11:25 pm Link Many models have these limitations. Some are more daring and don't care about it. I have taken full frontal nudes but am not obsessed with doing this. Mar 14 18 02:01 am Link PIEntertainment wrote: Just find and work with models who shoot the styles in which you are interested, and don't spend energy on the ones who don't. It's really not any more complicated than that, in my opinion. Mar 14 18 02:13 am Link 
Model Posts: 6639 MacMurdo - permanent station of the US, Sector claimed by New Zealand, Antarctica Personally, I think there has been a shift in mindset of many models. These days, there are unending numbers of places that a photographer can post images publicly. It used to be that the images weren't distributed so widely so it wasn't an issue. Now facial recognition software makes it impossible to keep nude images private. There are internet trolls who make it their goal in life to discover the identities of women they see in images, and there are forums where they link the models' real names with their stage names, making it linked in google searches for years to come. Society's perception of nudity is changing in this country as well, and as it does, society's perception of models who pose for explicit photography changes with it. So it isn't that a model necessarily has a problem with showing their body... it's that they don't want to be judged or punished when those images are discovered online by someone they know. Mar 14 18 06:08 am Link MoRina wrote: That's what I see as well. And eventually, someone a model knows will find those photos, or a total stranger who has seen the photos will approach her in a public place and ask if she's a model. It's never a matter of if they will be recognized, it's a matter of when that will happen. Mar 14 18 08:20 am Link I've heard of this before, but I wouldn't say it's common among all nude models. I'd side with MoRina in saying that it could be partly due to how far the images spread, the multitude of places the end up posted, etc. I also think Laura is correct in saying that models are worried about genitalia focused shots and it's easier to just have that as a limit in what they'll show in a photo at all. I've also had photographers sneak shots while shooting that I'm not happy with - usually for me it's in the process of a complicated figure pose. Fortunately I have so much pubic hair, macro shots of genitalia are impossible. But as for that being a general trend, I'd say it's not. I don't personally know anyone who doesn't allow full frontal shots while modeling nude - though open leg shots are a whole other story. I'd just work on finding models who have quite a few examples of what you're looking to shoot in their portfolio already, and not worry too much about it. Mar 14 18 08:27 am Link OP, when I think nudes, I'm thinking implied, frontal, no frontal, and erotic/open leg. So, in your casting call/communication, it's probably best to make it clear what you're wanting to shoot instead of putting out just a "nude" shoot then having to deal with finding out their limitations when they reply/apply, or on the day off. Mar 14 18 11:14 am Link I have always advised models to own what they have done and how they have been photographed. Do not pose naked if you are too shy to show everyone on earth what your skin looks like, and if you do pose naked, make no bones about it. Be big and bold and brash about it, and the trolls will shrink from you in fear you will damage their cherished bullshit beliefs. But if you ever cower before those asshats, they will beat you mercilessly. Vanessa Williams and Madonna have two tales that illustrate this. When Vanessa was Miss America and confronted with nude photos she had done, she apologized and was promptly stripped of her title. When Madonna was called out for having been a nude model in NY back before she made it as a singer, she laughed in the face of the accuser, and told him to stuff it where the sun don't shine, that she was proud of her work, all of it, and she didn't care what anyone said. The story died on the vine, and a couple years later she went out and posed nude again for her book, just to make the point clear. And one thing is clear, if you make yourself out to be a victim, you will be victimized. If you are loud and proud, "they" will generally leave you alone. Mar 14 18 12:43 pm Link The fact that digital content, once published, cannot be controlled anymore certainly plays a part in those restrictions. In some countries, nudity in general and even more so modeling is considered shameful or at least morally questionable, so people's easy access to face-matching software can definitely put a damper on a model's willingness to pose nude and make the model impose restrictions on what may or may not appear on camera. Personally, I've made it a point to NOT agree to posing for photographers with a questionable reputation or whose portfolio does not make me go HELL YEAH in response to an offer to model for them. However, if the photographer has a good reputation, if their portfolio speaks for itself, and if the concept they wanna shoot with me sounds fun, I'll jump in with the tacit agreement that nudity means that any skin that shows is fair game. Mar 14 18 02:21 pm Link "Madonna was called out for having been a nude model in NY back before she made it as a singer, she laughed in the face of the accuser, and told him to stuff it where the sun don't shine, that she was proud of her work, all of it, and she didn't care what anyone said" She posed for a bunch of photographers including, I think, Lee Friedlander. Nowadays, almost any woman (and some guys) in entertainment will have posed: Olympians; Ali Raisman, April Ross; Singers, Lady GaGa, Erikah Baydu, Miley Cyrus. Actresses: just about all of them. Excuse the spelling-- just working from the top of my head. Hardly "scandalous" anymore. Many models here hold regular, "normal" day jobs. Mar 14 18 02:37 pm Link I'll probably be strung up by my proverbials by my photographer colleagues for saying this, but why not just handle this by simply not shooting anything that's outside the model's comfort zone and making that a part of the original agreement? I've been surprised many times by models who have been not only willing but who have requested going beyond the stated limits, probably as often as I've been surprised by models who have asked for more restrictions once the shoot has begun. It's more often a matter of the individual pose than a general restriction in my experience. My way of dealing with this is to allow, within the model release, the model the right to restrict from publication by either of us, any image that goes beyond her personal boundaries. If that decision comes after the pictures have been posted, I have no problem making it retroactive. In over 10 years of shooting primarily nudes of one sort or another, I've only had three such requests. Granted I shot trade only and for publication only in my own portfolio, so there is no financial consideration. If I were paying the model or being paid to produce images for a third party client, obviously that policy might change, but then again, it might not. As a group, I sometimes think that we photographers would be well advised to consider such a refusal as more of a legitimate appraisal of the artistic value of our work than as evidence of the model's prudery. Our work and its acceptance by the modeling as well as the general artistic community might very well be improved thereby. All IMHO as always, of course. Mar 14 18 04:21 pm Link PIEntertainment wrote: Your impression that a model's right and tendency to be selective about their posing limitation is patently wrong. You're flippant suggestion that it didn't is irresponsible and borderline disrespectful. Mar 14 18 04:49 pm Link Dan Howell wrote: He's asking if what he's encountered is a new pattern or trend among a majority of models, not saying that "back then" models across the board did not have a say in how they posed. Mar 14 18 08:30 pm Link I usually ask what their limits are either when arranging the shoot or during the shoot, but my model release states that the model can choose what is not posted online Mar 15 18 03:12 am Link I think it's just a way for models to sort out the serious photographers from the creepers. Honestly, anyone who spends thousands of dollars on photography equipment in addition to modeling fees just to take a photo of a woman's crotch must be out of their mind. Just google "naked girl" with the "safe filter" off and you come to realize that "it has been done." As a photographer, however, I think that models who place so many restrictions on what I can and cannot photograph are too difficult to work with. I'd rather work with someone who tells me, "Photograph anything you like." Then it's on me to show the model in the best light because new models won't work with someone whose portfolio looks like a medical reference manual. Mar 15 18 05:04 am Link Laura UnBound wrote: He made an emphatic, incorrect statement about a very well discussed topic. Mar 15 18 04:19 pm Link MarkGerrardPhotography wrote: Your model release gives the model post-shoot censorship authority? Do I understand correctly? Mar 15 18 04:46 pm Link Dan Howell wrote: He was asking if this particular restriction was a new trend. He was not saying that a model doesn't have the right to set her own boundaries. Mar 15 18 06:57 pm Link In most cases, it’s probably a line they don’t want to cross for personal reasons, period. In other cases, they may simply be attempting to filter out the clueless weirdos who shoot sleazy, artless images. They can always waive the restriction if a particular photographer is good enough, and trustworthy enough, to make an exception for. Mar 15 18 07:16 pm Link I'm not going to address the "white knight" comments, that was so 2008 that it's not even funny. Just to add more info to my original post the models didn't give me the answer based on something I said. The first model has on her profile information that she doesn't shoot spread legs poses, and also Playboy style nudes however she did message me with her rates and her availability for a photo shoot which I said it was a hotel room Playboy style shoot...so that doesn't make any sense. The second model doesn't mention her "restriction" on her profile page but when she messaged me with her rates she mentioned it and also said that she only did full frontal for Playboy only and so she doesn't do any open legs shots or full frontal nudes for other people because it doesn't benefit her...not sure what that means exactly. So, both models are obviously not shy about doing full frontal/spread shots, they have done it before but one doesn't want to do it anymore and only do "art" shots which is fine, and the second one will only do it for Playboy. However, both models' rates are top dollar rates per hour for doing nude photo shoots IF the photographer agrees to their restrictions. I have never had any interest in shooting macro shots of women's vaginas, if I did then I would state that up front and I would pay the models whatever for those type of shots, the only photo shoot in which I got even close to that is my Sushi photo shoot where the models knew ahead of time I'd be shooting specific body parts with sushi on them, as well as their full body and that I require them to be fully shaved so that it maintains a clean look. The concept of the shoot was that the models are the table/background for the sushi which is the main subject in the photos, you can see these pics in my portfolio in the sushi folder. All my other nude photo shoots with models have been in a Playboy style without the models spreading the legs, their labia or God knows what other things they could be possibly spreading. Back to my main question as I said back 5-6 years ago when I booked a model for a nude shoot they used to message me and ask me if I want them fully shaved, landing strip or what since they knew it is a NUDE photo shoot, not a bikini or lingerie only shoot...but now it seems like they don't even want to show their lower area which once covered makes the photo shoot IMPLIED nude/Topless shoot and they might as well be wearing panties and doing a lingerie shoot at that point. I have nothing against models that choose not to show their crotch, and I understand that they have had "bad" experiences with photographers before and I always have had the best time talking and shooting nude models, they are awesome people. However don't ask full rates payment to be booked for a "NUDE" shoot only to start making restrictions which would cause the final shoot/images to basically look like implied nudes covering the crotch area with hands, or other objects. Hope this helps to clarify my point of view and that I have nothing against models that don't want to show their nether regions, and they can choose whatever poses they'd like to do if they find a photographer willing to pay them in full with the aforementioned restrictions! Mar 15 18 09:59 pm Link PIEntertainment wrote: How do you not see that you are answering your own question? The fact that you reference 'Playboy style' which has been not only a useful but widely used term for posing limitation shows that you have heard of the concept. Models have used it for years. Photographers have understood it for years. There has been no demonstrable change in the number of models stating their posing limitations. What is more apparent is your lack of experience. Mar 16 18 05:29 am Link MarkGerrardPhotography wrote: me too Mar 16 18 11:16 am Link Such restrictions are common. Nude doesn't always mean completely nude. I always ask they have any restrictions. If I feel those restrictions are too limiting to work around I'll just find another model. PIEntertainment wrote: That is different story from normal restrictions. These sound like models who use a history of nudes and credits to ask for higher rates without delivering what's on their resume that warrants a higher rate. When I come across a models who charges everyone top dollar but plays favorites on who gets restrictions or not. I'll just find another model. Mar 16 18 07:47 pm Link Super Dimension Foto wrote: This is exactly what I was thinking about, and in the world of business it's called "bait and switch". I'm sure everyone is aware of that term where you offer something and deliver something else. They are using their previous portfolio pics and credits to still ask for the higher rate for nudes but they give you restrictions which the previous photographers that worked with them on the previous pics didn't have, but now for some reason, they expect you to pay them the same but with restrictions. Mar 17 18 05:46 pm Link I have no problem finding models who do complete nudes! Mar 17 18 10:40 pm Link Jerry Nemeth wrote: What are their restrictions ? Mar 17 18 11:50 pm Link PIEntertainment wrote: You just don't give up. You apparently don't have any concept of what has happened in the past. We have to assume it is because of your lack of experience. I know one model on your 'wish list' who has the exact limitation that you are complaining about. You can't stomp up and down about this new 'trend' when is has simply been around as long as web/glamour model has been around as well. Mar 18 18 04:49 am Link I agree Dan! Mar 18 18 06:35 am Link I’ve seen that “don’t” on models do’s/don’ts lists since I first signed up on MM Mar 20 18 10:22 am Link Brooklyn Bridge Images wrote: Some models have none. Mar 22 18 11:22 pm Link Without seeing your work is there anything in your port that prompts such a response? Maybe these models have been approached many times to do open leg shots and are being up front with that before you ask. Maybe you just happened upon a couple models who do not shoot those types of images. Just honor their limits and book them or move on if you are looking to shoot the crotch area. Mar 25 18 09:21 pm Link Just based on the photos in model portfolios, there is no shortage of women willing to pose as you request, so the easiest solution is to find those models and hire them. Mar 26 18 07:37 am Link having read the responses thought i would add a comment. excuse me if you feel this to be in the wrong place not trying to hijack the thread but as it relates to model comfort and privacy and facial recognition software it could be worth mentioning: if people were diligent about removing the exif info from images before posting it would greatly deter them being located in searches. maybe this needs to be brought up somewhere else so that more people would see it and fight for the last ounce of privacy we have remaining. it only takes a second to delete the info Mar 26 18 11:22 pm Link I don't focus on crotch pictures. and I never ask a model to shoot it. so I don't have this issue. but I have seen a increase of limitations with nude models. I was talking to one model to hire who just wanted to wear a thong. Which at the time I couldn't think of anything creative with a thong. I also only use my pictures for Model Mayhem. so normally full nude isn't a issue. and I try to respect the model as a person so their body isn'y splashed over everything. Mar 27 18 07:38 am Link JJAG Photography wrote: Yeah, my point exactly, so called nude models that want to charge top $ rates per hour but want to wear panties or thongs in the photos and keep saying they are nude, instead of topless or implied. Mar 27 18 10:58 am Link Some of what you're posting reads pretty aggressively, OP. I think part of the problem is that you are viewing the rates as tiered (bikini rates vs nude rates, etc)... Like, it appears you are seeing it as, "They charge 'nude rates' but won't pose 'nude.'" A lot of models do not tier their rates based on exposure. Everyone has their own rate. Sometimes, they fit an average, but that doesn't mean they're ultimately structured the same. For example, plenty of models will charge the exact same (or more) to be clothed because the styling is more intensive, and they have to bring massive bags of clothing. In short: Let models have whatever restrictions they want. Let them charge what they want. If they are being clear in their messages to you when you guys talk about it, then that's all that matters. S/he isn't "baiting and switching" if they are stating their limitations upfront in their emails. Do your part and ask so you can be sure they are OK with what you want too. Provide examples. Mar 27 18 11:51 am Link |
