This thread was locked on 2012-02-10 20:36:14
Model
Samantha Scarlette
Posts: 456
New York, New York, US
I've always kind of thought it would be cool to be a suicide girl.. So last night I sent in an application, and I checked my inbox this morning and I had an email back saying I'd passed the first stage of the application process, and it directed me to their site with all the w9 forms and contracts.
Is this common to get back such a fast response?
I was also curious peoples opinions of the site.. I'm aware they can use your image however they'd like.. Have you ever heard horror stories regarding this?
Photographer
AJ_In_Atlanta
Posts: 13053
Atlanta, Georgia, US
You may want to search about that, there are a lot of stories and threads 
Model
no onehere
Posts: 99
Müllendorf, Luxembourg, Luxembourg
I can’t think of a specific story, but I have heard that Suicide Girls don’t treat their llamas very well.
I’ve been told that Godsgirls is better, but I don’t know too much about either of them.
Photographer
Blue Ash Film Group
Posts: 10343
Cincinnati, Ohio, US
Samantha Scarlette wrote:
I've always kind of thought it would be cool to be a suicide girl.. So last night I sent in an application, and I checked my inbox this morning and I had an email back saying I'd passed the first stage of the application process, and it directed me to their site with all the w9 forms and contracts.
Is this common to get back such a fast response?
I was also curious peoples opinions of the site.. I'm aware they can use your image however they'd like.. Have you ever heard horror stories regarding this? Uh, oh. And we're off.....
Photographer
Image Magik
Posts: 1515
Santa Cruz, California, US
Samantha Scarlette wrote:
I've always kind of thought it would be cool to be a suicide girl.. So last night I sent in an application, and I checked my inbox this morning and I had an email back saying I'd passed the first stage of the application process, and it directed me to their site with all the w9 forms and contracts.
Is this common to get back such a fast response?
I was also curious peoples opinions of the site.. I'm aware they can use your image however they'd like.. Have you ever heard horror stories regarding this? Hi Samantha, I'm getting ready to submit to them for a model as well. Be curious how the process works. Haven't heard anything bad about them. Are they offering to pay you per picture in return for unlimited rights?
Photographer
Doug Jantz
Posts: 4025
Tulsa, Oklahoma, US
Yet again …. lol. SG is sooooo old and out of date with soooooo much BAD publicity.
Model
Samantha Scarlette
Posts: 456
New York, New York, US
Image Magik wrote:
Hi Samantha, I'm getting ready to submit to them for a model as well. Be curious how the process works. Haven't heard anything bad about them. Are they offering to pay you per picture in return for unlimited rights? From what I read on the forum, it's only if you're picked as Set of the day that you get $500.. Other than that you get $0. It's more the issue with them having full rights to your photos.. Like i don't care if I'm on their site and stuff.. But i don't want my picture winding up on some random porn site or a vibrator box.lol. I've never even done nudes, topless or implied before..
Photographer
Good Egg Productions
Posts: 16713
Orlando, Florida, US
As far as I can tell, you don't have pale skin, tattoos or peircings. Hardly alternative.
SG was cool in 2002. Not so much now.
Model
MelissaAnn
Posts: 3971
Seattle, Washington, US
I got an offer from them the first week my port was here on MM. It was another Suicide Girl who wanted to give me more details about a potential shoot that would pay $500 (she said they liked my look). I responded with a simple "thanks, but not interested".
I don't think they're terribly selective about their models. If they're that desperate to try and recruit people, something must be up. My port isn't even that good. Make sure you know what you're getting in to.
I think Zivity is the new thing now. You may want to check them out.
Photographer
CS Dewitt
Posts: 608
Atlanta, Georgia, US
Samantha Scarlette wrote:
From what I read on the forum, it's only if you're picked as Set of the day that you get $500.. Other than that you get $0. It's more the issue with them having full rights to your photos.. Like i don't care if I'm on their site and stuff.. But i don't want my picture winding up on some random porn site or a vibrator box.lol. I've never even done nudes, topless or implied before.. You'll do all of the above, if you plan on becoming a SG....
As a Photographer, I will NOT do SG. I do Zivity set with models. Zivity, is more Model and Photographer Friendly.
I wish you success in whatever route you decide to take....
Model
Bilee Rose
Posts: 15
Penticton, British Columbia, Canada
I have a lot of friends who are suiside girls... And have bean and they say gods girls is better... I know a number 2 contributer to there meg. Lol hes retired now.. But they wont let anyone but there photographers work with you... Limiting your work.. Apperently there very controling of there models? The photographer i know was a big name in there meg... Said he dosent wonna do anymore work for them... They buy his entire sets so his portfolio is empty. Lol idk if thats a good or bad thing...? Apperently gods girls is way easier to work with... And a little more freedom ive never really looked into it... I wanted to when i started modeling but... Ive heard some horror storys... From people eaten up and spit out..
Model
Kelsey-L
Posts: 1558
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Photographer
CS Dewitt
Posts: 608
Atlanta, Georgia, US
MelissaAnn wrote:
I got an offer from them the first week my port was here on MM. It was another Suicide Girl who wanted to give me more details about a potential shoot that would pay $500 (she said they liked my look). I responded with a simple "thanks, but not interested".
I don't think they're terribly selective about their models. If they're that desperate to try and recruit people, something must be up. My port isn't even that good. Make sure you know what you're getting in to.
I think Zivity is the new thing now. You may want to check them out. MelissaAnn, it's not always about your port, it's more about what they saw in you as a MODEL for the site..... You're a Very Beautiful Woman/Model and I must say, your port is Outstanding now.
Photographer
Loki Studio
Posts: 3523
Royal Oak, Michigan, US
Samantha Scarlette wrote:
From what I read on the forum, it's only if you're picked as Set of the day that you get $500.. Other than that you get $0. It's more the issue with them having full rights to your photos.. Like i don't care if I'm on their site and stuff.. But i don't want my picture winding up on some random porn site or a vibrator box.lol. I've never even done nudes, topless or implied before.. So you have no tattoos or piercings that are characteristic of Suicide Girls. You want to give all rights to your only nude photos to a website that will not guarantee payment or restrictions on use. You will commit by contract to not work for many other websites or magazines. And the only compensation for all of this is a chance to get $500.
How much thought have you put into this?
Photographer
Sungoddess Studios
Posts: 5191
Keyport, New Jersey, US
JoJo wrote:
Joining SG as a user? go for it
Joining SG as a model and modeling for them? No No No No No No No No No (get the picture)  this says it all.
Photographers are not here for you to send their work off to be stolen.
Models are not here to send their work off to be abused.
rethink it a little. Zivinity is a much better way.
Photographer
UCPhotog
Posts: 998
Hartford, Connecticut, US
Doug Jantz wrote:
Yet again …. lol. SG is sooooo old and out of date with soooooo much BAD publicity. Yeah, this thread can only go one way...
![https://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g285/webpager/original%20default/trainwreck.jpg]()
Model
Samantha Scarlette
Posts: 456
New York, New York, US
Good Egg Productions wrote:
As far as I can tell, you don't have pale skin, tattoos or peircings. Hardly alternative.
SG was cool in 2002. Not so much now. I actually have about 8 tattoos. Septum, naval and both nipples pierced. Oh and since when is being half black a disqualification for being alternative? Racism much.
Model
Samantha Scarlette
Posts: 456
New York, New York, US
Loki Studio wrote:
So you have no tattoos or piercings that are characteristic of Suicide Girls. You want to give all rights to your only nude photos to a website that will not guarantee payment or restrictions on use. You will commit by contract to not work for many other websites or magazines. And the only compensation for all of this is a chance to get $500.
How much thought have you put into this? Once again I DO have tattoos and i currently have 4 non-ear piercings ( in the past I have more). I am not doing this for money purposes. My only worry is about where my photos would wind up outside of their website.
Photographer
Shot By Adam
Posts: 8095
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
Samantha Scarlette wrote:
From what I read on the forum, it's only if you're picked as Set of the day that you get $500.. Other than that you get $0. It's more the issue with them having full rights to your photos.. They aren't YOUR photos to give the rights to, you know that, right? Most likely the rights of the image belong to the photographer who shot them for you.
Photographer
Mr Banner
Posts: 85322
Hayward, California, US
the fact that she isn't pale isn't really relevant, since she isn't white.
Your profile notes you don't do nudes. When I was a member (back when they were alot more selective) you had to at least show some titty! I'm sure that has evolved a little since then.
I know people personally who have had bad experiences with them. I've also know people who are 100% content with them.
Model
Samantha Scarlette
Posts: 456
New York, New York, US
Damon Banner wrote:
the fact that she isn't pale isn't really relevant, since she isn't white.
Your profile notes you don't do nudes. When I was a member (back when they were alot more selective) you had to at least show some titty! I'm sure that has evolved a little since then.
I know people personally who have had bad experiences with them. I've also know people who are 100% content with them. I'm half white...
I'm willing to do nude for SG, not for random model mayhem tf shoots.
Photographer
Mr Banner
Posts: 85322
Hayward, California, US
Samantha Scarlette wrote:
I'm willing to do nude for SG, not for random model mayhem tf shoots. Last I heard, they may "buy" your set and not pay you, so you may still end up doing that TF!
Model
Laura UnBound
Posts: 28745
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Samantha Scarlette wrote:
Once again I DO have tattoos and i currently have 4 non-ear piercings ( in the past I have more). I am not doing this for money purposes. My only worry is about where my photos would wind up outside of their website. If its not the money, what ARE you doing it for?
Because SG doesnt get you exposure, of the literal THOUSANDS of members the chances of your set being picked is extremely slim, you could spend the 2 year contract never getting 500 bucks, and no, you DONT get to say where your photos go. SG (if youd read the threads linked, and do some googling) has gotten in trouble before for selling photos of their members to websites like mypunkrockgirlfriend, and such.
So again...why DO you want to do this? If its for the fun of it...do it on MM instead. Get good at it and you could be making 500 bucks a month, maybe even a week, rather than MAYBE (but probably not) once in a two year period where you arent allowed to pose for whatever SG is calling their "competitor" now. (No Godsgirls, no personal paysites, etc)
Model
Laura UnBound
Posts: 28745
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Samantha Scarlette wrote:
I'm half white...
I'm willing to do nude for SG, not for random model mayhem tf shoots. So dont shoot nudes TF. Shoots nudes for pay.
Edit: I also dont see the difference. Hundreds of random dudes browsing SG see you naked....hundreds of random dudes browsing MM see you naked...
Either situation a photographer has to see you naked.
If your set for SG doesnt get picked, you shot nudes TF.
Photographer
Joel England Photo
Posts: 599
Los Angeles, California, US
Samantha Scarlette wrote:
I've always kind of thought it would be cool to be a suicide girl.. So last night I sent in an application, and I checked my inbox this morning and I had an email back saying I'd passed the first stage of the application process, and it directed me to their site with all the w9 forms and contracts.
Is this common to get back such a fast response?
I was also curious peoples opinions of the site.. I'm aware they can use your image however they'd like.. Have you ever heard horror stories regarding this? There is a great deal of information and the common consensus is that SG's terms are very unfair to both llamas and photographers. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Photographer
BatchFoto Photography
Posts: 1367
Tampa, Florida, US
If you prefer getting paid for your work and desire to avoid a negative stigma, I would stop corresponding with SG immediately.
Photographer
Joel England Photo
Posts: 599
Los Angeles, California, US
Samantha Scarlette wrote:
From what I read on the forum, it's only if you're picked as Set of the day that you get $500.. Other than that you get $0. It's more the issue with them having full rights to your photos.. Like i don't care if I'm on their site and stuff.. But i don't want my picture winding up on some random porn site or a vibrator box.lol. I've never even done nudes, topless or implied before.. One of the issues is that SG tries to prevent girls from working for other alt look sites, or even generic sexy/nude sites. Very unfair, and SG has a rep for being aggressive with threats and even lawsuits.
Model
Kelsey-L
Posts: 1558
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Samantha Scarlette wrote:
I actually have about 8 tattoos. Septum, naval and both nipples pierced. Oh and since when is being half black a disqualification for being alternative? Racism much. I think every one is thinking you don't have tattoos because in your shots you are wearing very little clothing and there is no visible tattoos.
However I did not read your profile to see if you clearly stated otherwise on there.
Edit: Upon further inspection.. you should clearly post in your description that you do have body modifications.
Model
Samantha Scarlette
Posts: 456
New York, New York, US
Laura UnBound wrote:
So dont shoot nudes TF. Shoots nudes for pay.
Edit: I also dont see the difference. Hundreds of random dudes browsing SG see you naked....hundreds of random dudes browsing MM see you naked...
Either situation a photographer has to see you naked.
If your set for SG doesnt get picked, you shot nudes TF. . As far as exposure there are about 2,200 suicide girls as allowed to the 10's of thousands of girls on model mayhem.
Model
Kelsey-L
Posts: 1558
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Damon Banner wrote:
the fact that she isn't pale isn't really relevant, since she isn't white.
Your profile notes you don't do nudes. When I was a member (back when they were alot more selective) you had to at least show some titty! I'm sure that has evolved a little since then.
I know people personally who have had bad experiences with them. I've also know people who are 100% content with them. To expand on this they currently require at least 1 fully exposed crotch shot.
Model
Samantha Scarlette
Posts: 456
New York, New York, US
Joel England Photo wrote:
One of the issues is that SG tries to prevent girls from working for other alt look sites, or even generic sexy/nude sites. Very unfair, and SG has a rep for being aggressive with threats and even lawsuits. . I don't particularly have a desire to be on any othe nude site thing, as I'm pretty sure I don't have what it takes to do playboy.
Model
Laura UnBound
Posts: 28745
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Samantha Scarlette wrote:
. As far as exposure there are about 2,200 suicide girls as allowed to the 10's of thousands of girls on model mayhem. Youre still only one in several thousand, and youre very late to the party, the popular SG girls have been at this for a while, its going to be hard for you to draw attention to yourself.
What do you want to be exposed for? What KIND of exposure do you think being on SG will bring you? (IE: Who, besides crazy men who still think they need to pay to see a naked woman) do you think is going to be looking at your profile, and why do you want them to be looking at you naked? (on SG, and not anywhere else)
More importantly, the girls that GET profile views are the ones who are active on the site, and submit DIY sets. Which pay somewhere in the 50 buck range I believe. (which, if you spend a bit more time on your regular modeling and work with some good photographers TF, you could make an hour, at least. Naked of course)
Photographer
Mr Banner
Posts: 85322
Hayward, California, US
damn 2200 girls? I forgot when I closed my membership, 2002/3/4.. there were like 500 girls! anyway, I tend to agree w/ laura. esp if you aren't gonna be on the front page.... how much exposure are you gonna get being added to a drop down list with 2200 other girls. It's just free content for them. IMO. You are much better off networking w/ good photographers around here, getting paid... working w/ photographers who can get photos in books/magazines/on walls. but that is my biased opinion.  anyway, good luck and so forth.
Photographer
BatchFoto Photography
Posts: 1367
Tampa, Florida, US
Judging from how fiercely you're defending them, it appears you've already made your decision. Thus, I'm a little confused as to what you're going to get out of this thread.
If you do in fact sign with them, at least realize you may have to lawyer up for any of these reasons:
a)to get money from SG jobs
b)to keep money made on other jobs while signed to SG
c)to get pictures from them
d)to keep using pictures from them
e)to get a fair contract
Side note: I chose not to shoot with ladies signed to SG because of the headache that company has put me through in regards to shots taken with said ladies, even though said shots had nothing to do with SG (with the exception of me using the same model).
Photographer
Farenell Photography
Posts: 18832
Albany, New York, US
Samantha Scarlette wrote:
I've always kind of thought it would be cool to be a suicide girl.. So last night I sent in an application, and I checked my inbox this morning and I had an email back saying I'd passed the first stage of the application process, and it directed me to their site with all the w9 forms and contracts.
Is this common to get back such a fast response? Despite the rhetoric, SG is a porn site. & by porn I mean, you're going to have to show some skin (not something you have listed on your MM profile). Visualize a model whose 5'4" doing NYC Fashion Week runway rare.
Yes, they do occasionally show sets w/o boobage & bush. But its VERY rare.
Photographer
TXPHOTO
Posts: 1907
Fort Worth, Texas, US
The whole SG thing is pretty much old news now. The words "has been" come to mind.
Photographer
DVP Photography
Posts: 2874
Broomfield, Colorado, US
The photos you would send to SG are not yours to send. The copyright belongs to the photographer, unless he gives it or sells it to you. If he sells the photos to SG, then you or the photographer have no say over where they go, and SG is well known for selling photos to other sites. Also they are very restrictive on what else you can do in modeling. I never shoot a model for photos to go to SG, ain't worth it.
Photographer
DVP Photography
Posts: 2874
Broomfield, Colorado, US
Lyra Jayne wrote:
I can’t think of a specific story, but I have heard that Suicide Girls don’t treat their models very well.
I’ve been told that Godsgirls is better, but I don’t know too much about either of them. Is there some reason you felt compelled to respond given you don't know much?
Photographer
MMB Photos - Artistique
Posts: 37
Boucherville, Quebec, Canada
Samantha Scarlette wrote:
I've never even done nudes, topless or implied before.. Then why do you want to be a suicide girl ?
Oh, I think I know.. Like almost every woman ending up with bad story about SG...
Photographer
Patrick Walberg
Posts: 45207
San Juan Bautista, California, US
Samantha Scarlette wrote:
From what I read on the forum, it's only if you're picked as Set of the day that you get $500.. Other than that you get $0. It's more the issue with them having full rights to your photos.. Like i don't care if I'm on their site and stuff.. But i don't want my picture winding up on some random porn site or a vibrator box.lol. I've never even done nudes, topless or implied before.. I know little or nothing about the goings on of SuicideGirls, but plenty has been written about them on the forums. So basically it's similar to Zivity.com where you submit photos, get very little or no pay, but if you win ... or get lots of votes, you get money? If you do it, then you'd be going in with lower expectations. It's good to remember that "Nothing is guaranteed in life!" Good luck with it either way!
|
