Marin Photography NYC wrote:
Network!

You have 84 friends instead of 8400 friends.

Thank you all.

Marin, you're absolutely right! this might work! hehehe

Cheers,

Marin Photography NYC wrote:
Network!

You have 84 friends instead of 8400 friends.

And this is important how )?

Jakov Markovic wrote:
That place that get's you jobs is called an agent.

agencyaccess.com for example.

Never heard of this Agencyacces.com thing but to be honest that's not really how to get yourself clients, at least in my opinion/experience.

To the OP, you should learn to market yourself properly, get your name out there and ask photographers you love for a test or even some TF to enhance/improve your porfolio. From there, everything becomes a bit easier but never forget to keep practicing and learning.

cwwmbm wrote:
I would also note that if you want to get decent retouching jobs you should learn different types of retouching, because beauty retouching will get you occasional semi-pro photographers looking to impress beginner models, knowing how to realistically replace the sky (as an example), and get an amazing colour palette in the picture - that's what will get you jobs faster than you can manage.

I agree on the first part of learning different retouching areas by really disagree on the beauty aspect... Do you think the photographers that are shooting Max, Lancome, Dior cosmetics, Chanel Cosmetics, etc are "semi-pro"?? Really don't think so.

cwwmbm wrote:
Think about this - look at retouchers' portfolios here on MM and see how many of them contain nothing else but faces (often of the same models)? Probably around 90%, maybe more.
When you walk on the street and see billboards, posters, etc. - how many of them are beauty retouched faces? 10%, if not less. Do the math - what's more lucrative

I would like to say a couple of things about this..

First, your portfolio has a lot (80% faces). So you are part of those 90% right?

Seconds, when you walk on the street... you see a lot of everything, Advertising, Beauty, Fashion, etc. Have you ever bought a Vogue/Elle/Marie Claire magazine??

Just my opinion tho :-)

The Invisible Touch wrote:

cwwmbm wrote:
I would also note that if you want to get decent retouching jobs you should learn different types of retouching, because beauty retouching will get you occasional semi-pro photographers looking to impress beginner models, knowing how to realistically replace the sky (as an example), and get an amazing colour palette in the picture - that's what will get you jobs faster than you can manage.

I agree on the first part of learning different retouching areas by really disagree on the beauty aspect... Do you think the photographers that are shooting Max, Lancome, Dior cosmetics, Chanel Cosmetics, etc are "semi-pro"?? Really don't think so.


I would like to say a couple of things about this..

First, your portfolio has a lot (80% faces). So you are part of those 90% right?

Seconds, when you walk on the street... you see a lot of everything, Advertising, Beauty, Fashion, etc. Have you ever bought a Vogue/Elle/Marie Claire magazine??

Just my opinion tho :-)

So what exactly is your point other than contradict what I'm saying?

My portfolio has a lot of faces, true. My statement though was about retouchers, and I'm not one, so fail to see how that's relevant.

As for your second point, I don't really understand it because it sounds like you're trying to argue with my statement but you don't say anything that would contradict it. Yes, Vogue/Elle/MC have some beauty images. Are you trying to make a point that retouchers are mostly needed exclusively for beauty? If so then you're wrong.

Go to the wonderful machine website, or lebook website and randomly see portfolios of photographers represented there. What is the ratio of beauty images that you see there compared to the other stuff?

Being proficient at retouching beauty is like being a one trick pony - it's an impressive trick but it's only a very small part of the retouching world outside of MM.

cwwmbm wrote:
So what exactly is your point other than contradict what I'm saying?

My portfolio has a lot of faces, true. My statement though was about retouchers, and I'm not one, so fail to see how that's relevant.

So if you are not a retoucher, how you seem to be so certain about how this industry works??

cwwmbm wrote:
As for your second point, I don't really understand it because it sounds like you're trying to argue with my statement but you don't say anything that would contradict it. Yes, Vogue/Elle/MC have some beauty images. Are you trying to make a point that retouchers are mostly needed exclusively for beauty? If so then you're wrong.

I don't trying to argue with you, just giving my personal opinion on your comments above.. :-)
I have never said retouchers are mostly needed exclusively for beauty.. I am just referring to your comment that "beauty retouching will get you occasional semi-pro photographers looking to impress beginner models" On this you are wrong, there are retouchers out there, they only work on fashion/beauty and advertising that's it and trust me they make a lot of money. And also there are incredible super talented photographers (not semi-pro) that mainly shoot beauty/fashion.

In my opinion your comment referring to those semi-pro's was wrong.

cwwmbm wrote:
Being proficient at retouching beauty is like being a one trick pony - it's an impressive trick but it's only a very small part of the retouching world outside of MM.

I have never said, you should be a one trick pony (beauty) and focus just on beauty... have I??

cwwmbm wrote:
Also out of curiosity I went to see how many faces I have and while 100% of my photos here have people in it, but only 9 of those I would give to a retoucher whose portfolio consists only of beauty retouch examples. Check you math, it's way less than 80%.

Sorry, you are right on this one... but it was just a way of speaking..

The Invisible Touch wrote:
I am just referring to your comment that "beauty retouching will get you occasional semi-pro photographers looking to impress beginner models" On this you are wrong, there are retouchers out there, they only work on fashion/beauty and advertising that's it and trust me they make a lot of money. And also there are incredible super talented photographers (not semi-pro) that mainly shoot beauty/fashion.

You made two points that can be valid except, when viewed through the contextual lens of MM...

The retouchers in here, for the most part, are doing exactly what the quote states. You would think, judging by the numbers and the vocality of them in forums, that the retouchers in here were responsible for the success enjoyed by Pascal at Box. When in fact, the majority of them have day jobs, and their retouch work is at best, a hobby.

There are a number of incredible and super talented beauty photographers here on MM, and most of them have day jobs, and photography is their hobby. You aren't going to pry much money out of them for retouch, especially when there is such a large pool of "retouchers" available that will work for free.

Your third point is where you really fall off the cart. In the real world marketplace, there are a mere handful of retouchers making bank, the rest are struggling to make rent. MM is a wonderful resource for photographers and models, it's filled with delusion when it comes to retouchers. There is a very small handful of legitimate retouchers in here, and a number of people that make a decent dollar selling videos to the rank and file, and that's it. The people working for Box and Taylor James wouldn't waste their time in here.

Sorry, the Retouch forum has always been a lightening rod issue for me.

Robert Randall wrote:
You made two points that can be valid except, when viewed through the contextual lens of MM...

Hi Robert, I think you have mistaken me, I am guessing what you put in bold letters, they were meant to be my points right?? Well, if that's what you meant, on the first point ("beauty retouching will get you occasional semi-pro photographers looking to impress beginner models") this is not my statement, this is someone else.. cwwmbm

Robert Randall wrote:
The retouchers in here, for the most part, are doing exactly what the quote states. You would think, judging by the numbers and the vocality of them in forums, that the retouchers in here were responsible for the success enjoyed by Pascal at Box. When in fact, the majority of them have day jobs, and their retouch work is at best, a hobby.

There are a number of incredible and super talented beauty photographers here on MM, and most of them have day jobs, and photography is their hobby. You aren't going to pry much money out of them for retouch, especially when there is such a large pool of "retouchers" available that will work for free.

Based on that I haven't said this, I totally agree with you, MM has an incredible amount of super talented not full time photographers (beauty/fashion/whatever) and also a big bunch of non full time retouchers willing to do it for free, just for the sake of learning. Good on them, this is exactly how I started a few years back and now after a lot of hard work it has become my full time job.

Robert Randall wrote:
Your third point is where you really fall off the cart. In the real world marketplace, there are a mere handful of retouchers making bank, the rest are struggling to make rent. MM is a wonderful resource for photographers and models, it's filled with delusion when it comes to retouchers. There is a very small handful of legitimate retouchers in here, and a number of people that make a decent dollar selling videos to the rank and file, and that's it. The people working for Box and Taylor James wouldn't waste their time in here.

Sorry, the Retouch forum has always been a lightening rod issue for me.

Again Robert, I am not trying to criticise MM or anyone that uses it.. I refer again to what I said in point one, there are really incredible photographers (beauty/fashion/whaever) here and out here too!! What I was saying is that you can actually make a living by doing beauty retouching if you are good at it.

Robert Randall wrote:
You made two points that can be valid except, when viewed through the contextual lens of MM...

The Invisible Touch wrote:
Hi Robert, I think you have mistaken me, I am guessing what you put in bold letters, they were meant to be my points right?? Well, if that's what you meant, on the first point ("beauty retouching will get you occasional semi-pro photographers looking to impress beginner models") this is not my statement, this is someone else.. cwwmbm

I realized the quote came from cwwmbm, it was your point of refuting his quote that I made comment on.

The Invisible Touch wrote:
I don't trying to argue with you, just giving my personal opinion on your comments above.. :-)
I have never said retouchers are mostly needed exclusively for beauty.. I am just referring to your comment that "beauty retouching will get you occasional semi-pro photographers looking to impress beginner models" On this you are wrong, there are retouchers out there, they only work on fashion/beauty and advertising that's it and trust me they make a lot of money. And also there are incredible super talented photographers (not semi-pro) that mainly shoot beauty/fashion.

In my opinion your comment referring to those semi-pro's was wrong.



I have never said, you should be a one trick pony (beauty) and focus just on beauty... have I??

Sorry, you are right on this one... but it was just a way of speaking..

First off, I'd like to start by saying that the phrase "beauty retouching will get you occasional semi-pro photographers looking to impress beginner models" was in bad taste and I shouldn't have said that.

Working on fashion/beauty and advertising are different things. Advertising is a very broad subject, and it includes fashion and beauty. But fashion and beauty are only a small part of it. Look at the car commercials, movie/TV show posters, etc. - these all fall under advertising but none of them requires beauty retouching.

What I meant to say is that the competition in beauty retouching is huge, much bigger than in any other kind. Case in point - when I needed some beauty retouching done I spent an hour browsing retouchers here and I was able to find one who did a good job for not much more than a cup of coffee. When I was shopping for a retoucher who would be able to retouch an image that is my avatar I only found two on MM who looked like the could deliver + one outside of MM. The average quote from three of them was in 3 digits and first digit wasn't 1. And guess what? I cashed out and it was worth it.

If your only portfolio is beauty retouch you're competing against people from countries where 10$ is a good money - and there are a lot of these people here. If you can do something else - it singles you out.

cwwmbm wrote:

First off, I'd like to start by saying that the phrase "beauty retouching will get you occasional semi-pro photographers looking to impress beginner models" was in bad taste and I shouldn't have said that.

Working on fashion/beauty and advertising are different things. Advertising is a very broad subject, and it includes fashion and beauty. But fashion and beauty are only a small part of it. Look at the car commercials, movie/TV show posters, etc. - these all fall under advertising but none of them requires beauty retouching.

What I meant to say is that the competition in beauty retouching is huge, much bigger than in any other kind. Case in point - when I needed some beauty retouching done I spent an hour browsing retouchers here and I was able to find one who did a good job for not much more than a cup of coffee. When I was shopping for a retoucher who would be able to retouch an image that is my avatar I only found two on MM who looked like the could deliver + one outside of MM. The average quote from three of them was in 3 digits and first digit wasn't 1. And guess what? I cashed out and it was worth it.

If your only portfolio is beauty retouch you're competing against people from countries where 10$ is a good money - and there are a lot of these people here. If you can do something else - it singles you out.

Totally agree on what you are saying now Andrey!! :-)

Najan wrote:
I admit I also have difficulties to understand your first statement, cwwmbm. Retouchers that only represent Beauty in their portfolio aren't necessarily unable to retouch other themes. It just shows that the person likes portraiture. Tastes and skills are two different things. But a texture is a texture. So, one who can retouch a skin can also retouch other textures. Hopefully one can understand a technique and applied it no matter the subject.

Think about this - if I am to pay you 10-50-100-whatever dollars, I want to KNOW that you can do something else. I need to see it, preferably with before/after photos. Do you really think that somebody will ask you to retouch a car commercial only because you have a lot of pretty flawless faces in your port?

Texture is great but texture is 30% of retouching at best; and beauty retouching mainly focuses on that. Face is very 2 dimensional compared to environmental portraiture, where you have foreground, middle ground and background, and there's much more than texture involved. Do you know how to increase a perceptive volume of a scene? Do you know how to retouch so that the colors would be very pleasing and invoke a sense of nostalgia?

Let's do it this way - go to Chris Crisman website (www.crismanphoto.com). Can you retouch like this because "texture is texture"? If you can I'll hire you to do some of my photos. But I will need to see the proof that you can.

Joe Diamond wrote:
Then dont pretend you know what it means to be one

.


Sorry, I'm supposed to be helpful, and that wasn't.

cwwmbm wrote:
Do you know how to increase a perceptive volume of a scene?

It depends on your project. Light hues are known to increase space perception. Plus light will bounce and add more light. Which will open the space. So if you want to increase the perceptive volume of a scene, light it up.

cwwmbm wrote:
Do you know how to retouch so that the colours would be very pleasing and invoke a sense of nostalgia?

An overall colour lighting, a specific range in the colour wheel, probably with low contrast. White has been known to reflect dream-like state, green for horror, grey for sadness, sepia as an old-fashioned time, etc. Then again, it depends on the subject and elements that composed the plan to find what will fit the mood best. Plus, colours have different meaning according to western or eastern cultures.

cwwmbm wrote:
Can you retouch like this because "texture is texture"? If you can I'll hire you to do some of my photos. But I will need to see the proof that you can.

Hopefully. Time will tell. When I talk about texture I have also in mind how the light reflects on it. If you don't take it into consideration then all elements will look the same, despite their forms.

Thank you for sharing the link to Chris Criman's work, it's always a pleasure to watch beautiful images. Now, regarding any projects, there's the questions that should be asked first. How to attract the sight of the viewers ? What do I want to prioritise first? How to guide its sight?

cwwmbm wrote:
Think about this - if I am to pay you 10-50-100-whatever dollars, I want to KNOW that you can do something else. I need to see it, preferably with before/after photos. Do you really think that somebody will ask you to retouch a car commercial only because you have a lot of pretty flawless faces in your port?

Most of my portfolio is faces, yet I get contacted by agencies that pay a lot more than 10-50-100-whatever dollars to commission me their projects.

Go figure, maybe your assertion is not entirely correct.

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:
Most of my portfolio is faces, yet I get contacted by agencies that pay a lot more than 10-50-100-whatever dollars to commission me their projects.

Go figure, maybe your assertion is not entirely correct.

Most is not "all". Plus, it's my understanding your name is fairly well known; and since they keep contacting you then you must have a good reputation.

I admit I would have liked to see more advertising type stuff in your portfolio but mainly just because I'm curious of what you're capable of outside of beauty/close up portrait retouching. Not because I doubt you but because I'm genuinely curious. Then again you don't have to prove anything to me - agencies contacting you is all the validation one needs.

I was talking about people who are just starting out and nobody knows what they are capable of - the only thing we can rely on is their portfolio. If all their portfolios have is beauty retouch then I assume they don't know how to do anything else.

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:
Most of my portfolio is faces, yet I get contacted by agencies that pay a lot more than 10-50-100-whatever dollars to commission me their projects.

Go figure, maybe your assertion is not entirely correct.

cwwmbm wrote:
Most is not "all". Plus, it's my understanding your name is fairly well known; and since they keep contacting you then you must have a good reputation.

I admit I would have liked to see more advertising type stuff in your portfolio but mainly just because I'm curious of what you're capable of outside of beauty/close up portrait retouching. Not because I doubt you but because I'm genuinely curious. Then again you don't have to prove anything to me - agencies contacting you is all the validation one needs.

I was talking about people who are just starting out and nobody knows what they are capable of - the only thing we can rely on is their portfolio. If all their portfolios have is beauty retouch then I assume they don't know how to do anything else.

I too was curious about her other work, so I clicked on the link to her web site, where Go Daddy is trying to sell me her domain name for $9.99. Not sure how that's going to attract much agency attention.

cwwmbm wrote:
I was talking about people who are just starting out and nobody knows what they are capable of - the only thing we can rely on is their portfolio. If all their portfolios have is beauty retouch then I assume they don't know how to do anything else.

Just curious, what do you mean by they don't know how to do anything else? I could be wrong here but the tools you use and the skills you develop by doing beauty carry on to any other kind of retouching. Correct me if I'm wrong but if you understand how light and shadows work, how color theory plays out, how you can refine and polish a face, then you can do any kind of editorial work, unless you're talking about photo manipulation and stuff like that.

To me knowledge is transferable, you can apply what you know to other things, it just takes practice.

D A N I E L wrote:

Just curious, what do you mean by they don't know how to do anything else? I could be wrong here but the tools you use and the skills you develop by doing beauty carry on to any other kind of retouching. Correct me if I'm wrong but if you understand how light and shadows work, how color theory plays out, how you can refine and polish a face, then you can do any kind of editorial work, unless you're talking about photo manipulation and stuff like that.

To me knowledge is transferable, you can apply what you know to other things, it just takes practice.

Imagine this - you're on a murder trial. Would you hire a lawyer who only done divorce hearings, but according to him he knows the criminal law in and out and it's going to be an easy win for him? Or would you hire a lawyer who does murder trials all the time and has a stellar statistics when it comes to getting a "not guilty" verdict?

Similarly, you wouldn't hire a photographer who specializes in fine art nude to do your wedding. Or you wouldn't want a small biplane pilot to fly a commercial 747 across the ocean.

Retouching faces is not the same as retouching everything else. If anything, advertising retoucher must possess good compositing skills and be an excellent landscape retoucher. Not to mention being able to recite colour theory in his/her sleep. None of that is really required for the beauty retouch though.

I want to repeat myself - in no way I say that beauty retouching is some kind of stigma or that I (or anyone else) would think less of you for being awesome at it - quite the opposite. But if it's the only thing that's in your portfolio - then to me it means it's the only thing that you can 100% deliver. You may or may not be great at other things but that's taking chances, and I'm not willing to pay for taking chances. You're saying - all it takes it practice - it's true. But if you had that practice then you must have good results to show. And if you haven't had it... Then, like I said - I'm not interested in paying someone to practice.

ST Retouch wrote:
My advice to all young retouchers which want to make living from retouching is to learn all other types of retouching , it is a MUST.

True

ST Retouch wrote:
Things have changed on the market.

No, they haven´t - The only thing that changed is that more people can do basic stuff then everyone doing a crappy job is out of a job

ST Retouch wrote:
Beauty retouching is very, very small part of the market, not more then 3% of the market ( I speak about real market, industry market).

Lets define the market then... lets define the industry.

I think when YOU speak about the industry, you mean something different.

So lets, define the terminology so we can be clearer.

ST Retouch wrote:
Money maker in retouching business is special commercial and advertising retouching with composite work or cgi work  for serious clients and companies which order that level of retouching ( automotive retouching, sport retouching, high end jewelry retouching, high end fashion retouching or any other type of retouching with composite work).

What about all of the cosmetic ads?

ST Retouch wrote:
These days if you don't provide that level of retouching it is almost impossible to get any serious job or clients.

Those who say it can`t be done shouldn´t interrupt those already doing it.

ST Retouch wrote:
I know couple of good retouchers which make living just from beauty retouching ( but it is nothing special, because they can earn more money if they find some other regular jobs in some companies ) and I know much more beauty retouchers without any job and with a lot of problems to find clients , because they don't know to work other types of retouching.
Also market is really over saturated with beauty retouchers, too many beauty retouchers,  and they fight for work for 3% of the market.

YOUR experience and YOUR definition of "the market"

One beauty/hair image (KI) for L`Oreal goes from USD1000 to USD 3500 (around) 

Believe me, you can make a good living doing beauty.

ST Retouch wrote:
For example have a look here on this great site forums and challenges.
If someone wants free beauty retouching , it is enough to make post on forum , to put his/her files and a lot of people will make free retouching , to build their portfolios.
To be honest some of them provide extraordinary work for free.

Sure, MM... that´s the market... amateur photographers doing portraits of pretty girls looking for a $20 retoucher. THATS the market.

ST Retouch wrote:
From the other side try to post files here on forum to get free advertising retouching with composite work , and you will see that no one will do that work for free.

You`re mistaking working on an image for your portfolio with FREE WORK
If you don´t have a portfolio and you need to build one and don´t want to/CANT pay a photographer for THEIR images then you retouch, don´t get monetary compensation but you get usage rights.

I would be willing to work on an image for no monetary compensation if it´s for portfolio use, but real advertising, with a paying client, that´s not a test or portfolio building, that´s someone taking advantage of you and that´s why most people wouldn´t do it for free.

YET if a photographer posts some good source images to create an advertising like image for portfolio then I'm pretty sure A LOT of starting retouchers would JUMP at the chance.

ST Retouch wrote:
Not too many people on the market ( retouchers or retouching agencies) work high class of advertising retouching with composite work and all of them have a lot of  jobs , with real industry rates.
I speak about really high class of work with realistic retouching and composition , with great photo realism style ( not fake digital work with fake digital backgrounds which entry level of digital artist work) .

Exactly. Just the really good ones.

ST Retouch wrote:
There are two ways to make living from retouching .

One way is to find some agency or some online shops and to be part of their team.
Mostly they need junior level of retouchers because they work with a huge amount of files like Look Book or catalog files , salaries there are nothing special , so you have to think if is better for you to stay as junior level of retoucher in some ordinary  agency or online shop, or to find some regular job somewhere else.
Also that level of simple retouching provide a lot of outsourcing companies from India, China, Bangladesh etc so you will fight with them who will be cheaper.

So this is NOT a way to make money out of retouching. Got it. So it´s not really TWO ways...

ST Retouch wrote:
Second way is to stay as a freelance high end retoucher and to provide your services to very serious clients worldwide and also to provide your services to other high end retouching agencies worldwide which need top high end freelance retouchers and  which work for serious advertising clients .

Yes, this is a way.
Another is working in a production company who does MORE than catalog
Another is to partner up with a photography studio.
Another is to work INHOUSE a retouching agency.
Another is to create your own company and hire retouchers yourself.

ST Retouch wrote:
With this second way you can make living from retouching and to make money.
But, you have to be very, very highly skilled and you have to know all other types of retouching, serious retouching.

Beauty retouching is not serious retouching... weird Ogilvy paid me big money for consulting on it for their inhouse team.

ST Retouch wrote:
If you know only beauty retouching, you will not be in the game.

Bullshit! Sure you need to know everything but you can be a specialist.

ST Retouch wrote:
Also I forgot to write , retouching for companies which make games , to make backgrounds and sceneries from scratch is the best work at the moment on the market.
Rates are enormously high , you can charge for 3-5 different backgrounds and sceneries from $7000-$20000 per simple game ( working time on files for highly skilled people for that from 4-7 days)
If we speak about advanced games , my god which rates are.
Friend of mine runs service for that level of retouching and I was impressed when I saw his rates and invoices.
I couldn't believe what I saw.

Yes, there are many many many markets within retouching besides retail

ST Retouch wrote:
Many people on forum and young retouchers dream about some retouching for magazines or covers or whatever else, because too many people( "retouchers")  on retouching forum play with their post and with "their understanding" of the industry where don't belong

Fashion and beauty retoucher´s dream SHOULD be working for high end magazines.

You will never understand why tho.

ST Retouch wrote:
Retouching for magazines is very low-end business ( better to say free business or TF work however you want to call that) , or sometimes you can earn some peanuts from photographers which want to submit their files to magazines, and if you dream to make retouching for magazines , it is better to find job in some grill and to sell food.

1- Editorial is not commercial, obviously. But you don´t do it for free.
from $500 to $2000 per editorial is normal rate.

2- You don´t do editorial for the money, you do it for the exposure and because it gives you creative freedom and portfolio material.
I don´t like what I do for advertising, is cold and not interesting, it looks like any other retoucher´s work because we don´t decide a thing.

ST Retouch wrote:
So, like I wrote above, try to learn other types of retouching if you want to have job and to make living from retouching.

Yes, Learning as much as you can is always great.
The more you do and experiment and learn, the more you know where you want to become an expert.

ST Retouch wrote:
If you stay only with beauty retouching I am afraid that you will not have success on the market and it will be impossible to find any serious job in the future.

Hola!

ST Retouch wrote:
To many people paint pixels over soft light layer on the skin

Fuck you

Show me your hair and beauty work if it´s THAT easy.

ST Retouch wrote:
but not too many people on the market make serious advertising retouching.

The same amount that do high end BEAUTY advertising.

ST Retouch wrote:
If you learn that level of advertising retouching , you will have a lot of success .

Best Regards,
ST

So your advice is: Learn a high end skill and you will be successful?

Brilliant!

ST Retouch wrote:
Also I forgot to write , retouching for companies which make games , to make backgrounds and sceneries from scratch is the best work at the moment on the market.

Are you talking about concept art or matte painting? The latest would be more linked with retouching techniques but the "from scratch" is confusing.

Neil Snape wrote:
There are few that have risen to the demands of the best photographers in advertising or serious editorial, coming from MM, yet many, so many others that have done a lot of pictures through MM.

For the ones that did well, including via MM were to connect directly with the target photographers wherever they may be.

One I know and have worked with, contacted Greg Kadel. Yet exemplary work has to be there already, it is not just contacting good photographers that gets you anywhere.

Network as much as possible, follow and chose your favorites, try to simulate their style, then when you're ready try a million times eventually it will work.

Some of the comments are well stated for the technical aspects: your color judgements must be extremely right, then comes taste, and knowing what is good and bad.  You can also contact those who work for localized publications, say L'Official de la mode Maroc. Based in Paris of course but it's destination is close, thus you have the cultural differences in your favor, which can be helpful.

I like this