Can someone help me please?

Can someone help me please?

49 posts
4 Sep 2012
theperfectgentleman
Photographer
theperfectge..
I posted this in the premium as a reply but I feel it requires a broader airing.

I have been discussing the logic of this with a number of models recently, and the general opinion is there is no logic to it at all, can someone explain.

A model works with a photographer and it's reasonable to assume that the same number of poses and shots are taken regardless of the genre of shot. Travel expenses are the same so why the difference of rates?

A model doing a clothed shot has to buy those clothes and once they have been used in a shot there use is diminished for future shots unless it's coordinates.

A lingerie shot isn't any good with used underwear unless a different backdrop is used. But a set of underwear isn't as expensive as a set of clothing. Yet it demands a higher rate than clothed why?

If you are shooting a nude shot then all the model has to do is take her travelling clothes of hoping she isn't wearing an under wired bra and tight lined knickers like an experienced model did on a recent shoot. Yet she expects an enhanced fee for less outlay. CRAZY.

Why is it happening? Why do photographers put up with it? Even with the same fee on all the forms of modelling the girls who keep their clothes on have higher expenses than those who don't.

It baffles me.

Especially as I am hearing on the grape vine that a number of models are having problems with their rent,food and having to give up there independence and having to go home. Yet they still have the same rates as years ago, and still insist on the differential rates.

Isn’t it better to have your home and eat for £5 or £10 less per hour than stick to an unrealistic rate and sit in a cold room without food.

I don’t think photographers know the real answer so can we have an explanation from models 



Posted 4 Sep 2012
GaryWallace
Photographer
GaryWallace
so nude should be cheaper? worth a try I suppose.....good luck with that
Posted 4 Sep 2012
frankpht
Photographer
frankpht
It's simple less is more.

Posted 4 Sep 2012
allegra
Model
allegra
In principle I actually empathise with you to some extent, though wouldn't necessarily agree with your assessment of 'all a nude model has to do'. I have never charged more for being nude than I have for being clothed or partially clothed (probably because I hardly ever shoot clothed or partially clothed....!). But I think that a lot of it has to do with placing a higher value on exposing a more intimate, private side of the model if she is nude.

Posted 4 Sep 2012
Gerry99111
Photographer
Gerry99111
So 100% of models shoot clothed and a far smaller proportion shoot nude. Far larger supply of models shooting clothed, its far harder to find one that will get naked.

Many photographers who shoot nude are prepared to pay to do so. Many photographers who shoot clothed are not prepared to pay.

There is far more money available for nude work and far less models prepared to shoot it.

Simple supply and demand.

If however, you think this is wrong, you can either offer to pay all models at their nude rate for clothed work - many will love you for that.

Alternatively, you could try asking models for their clothed rate and then a discount for nude and see how many shoots you can get.

Seriously, -it really worries me why some people dont get the difference between cost and value - do you really think the models would not like to be able to charge more for all their work - the simple fact is they cannot so they work out how best to get an income out of the available cash

Posted 4 Sep 2012
mgphotomedia
Photographer
mgphotomedia
The most illogical thing is why you bother to concern yourself with models' rates at all. Just ignore them - simple!

If you want to work with someone just tell them what you would like them to do and offer an all-in rate (or deal if TF) which you're prepared to pay for the shoot. They'll either accept, decline or attempt to neotiate.
Posted 4 Sep 2012
Edited by mgphotomedia 4 Sep 2012
barone
Photographer
barone
Gosh....I can't believe that you wouldn't expect to pay a premium for a nude model over the price of a clothed one....
Posted 4 Sep 2012
we asked 100 woman if they would pose naked, how many said yes? I'm guessing a very small percentage.
we asked 100 woman if they would pose clothed, how many said yes? I'm guessing a very high percentage.

There for it would figure that those willing to bare all are rarer and therefore can demand a higher fee..


no doubt it will be pointed out that certain 'super models' can demand higher fees for shooting clothed, but Hopefully you understand my point


Posted 4 Sep 2012
gerryquiff
Photographer
gerryquiff
theperfectgentleman

I posted this in the premium as a reply but I feel it requires a broader airing.

I have been discussing the logic of this with a number of models recently, and the general opinion is there is no logic to it at all, can someone explain.

A model works with a photographer and it's reasonable to assume that the same number of poses and shots are taken regardless of the genre of shot. Travel expenses are the same so why the difference of rates?

A model doing a clothed shot has to buy those clothes and once they have been used in a shot there use is diminished for future shots unless it's coordinates.

A lingerie shot isn't any good with used underwear unless a different backdrop is used. But a set of underwear isn't as expensive as a set of clothing. Yet it demands a higher rate than clothed why?

If you are shooting a nude shot then all the model has to do is take her travelling clothes of hoping she isn't wearing an under wired bra and tight lined knickers like an experienced model did on a recent shoot. Yet she expects an enhanced fee for less outlay. CRAZY.

Why is it happening? Why do photographers put up with it? Even with the same fee on all the forms of modelling the girls who keep their clothes on have higher expenses than those who don't.

It baffles me.

Especially as I am hearing on the grape vine that a number of models are having problems with their rent,food and having to give up there independence and having to go home. Yet they still have the same rates as years ago, and still insist on the differential rates.

Isn’t it better to have your home and eat for £5 or £10 less per hour than stick to an unrealistic rate and sit in a cold room without food.

I don’t think photographers know the real answer so can we have an explanation from models 







I found a similar problem in the newsagents.

Top shelf magazines where the ladies wore very little clothes were pretty expensive compared to magazines that had ladies with clothes on. 

The sales assistant just wouldn't explain the reason, and threw me out of the shop.  

I'll go back tomorrow using your logic 
Posted 4 Sep 2012
IainT
Photographer
IainT
This has been discussed so many times before.

Generally, highly regarded models have an hourly rate which reflects their experience and appeal and is the same whether clothed or nude. The type of photographers they appeal to book them because of their experience and appeal, not for pay and display.

Those models who have a scale of rates depending on how nude they get generally tend to work with a similar type of photographer. Ie, those who favour "flash for cash"

I often think that one rate for clothed or nude compared to a scale of charges depending on how much flesh is on show is an indicator of a models class and target market.

Posted 4 Sep 2012
Edited by IainT 4 Sep 2012
It's the economy, stupid.

Posted 4 Sep 2012
theperfectgentleman
Photographer
theperfectge..
on an earlier post there was a question what has gone wrong with purestorm?
Here is a typical answer. I have had nine responses and almost every one who has responded has dripped on about models not reading stuff on purestorm in the past, some have been very desparaging on the point.
But dont do what I do. do what I say has come to the fore every one hasn't read my post properly and some have even put words in that weren't there.
Go and read it again, I specificly said photographers wouldn't know the answer and I wanted models oppinions.
So please don't bully models of the forum and twist things I never said anything about reducing rates for nude.
I dont realy want photographers oppinions I want to hear from models so leave this post free for models.
Thank you.

Posted 4 Sep 2012
theperfectgentleman
Photographer
theperfectge..
What has the economy got to do with different rates.
The differential have been their before the economy went down and will possably still be there when it improves.
I am only trying to understand it from the models point of view.
and there is no need to get rude, maners cost nothing.
Posted 4 Sep 2012
Gerry99111
Photographer
Gerry99111
theperfectgentleman

 I specificly said photographers wouldn't know the answer and I wanted models oppinions. .


No, you dont know the answer, most of us do

Tansy_Blue

It's the economy, stupid.
 

but here is one from a model
Posted 4 Sep 2012
Brian_Markie
Photographer
Brian_Markie
Hey not only does the psot give some kind of rationality to his way of thinking. Which is stimulating good reaction and some good replys have been posted with some kind of reasoning to his 'why' Q's but as yet only 2 models have posted a reply.
Posted 4 Sep 2012
To reply to this thread you must be a member. Click here to join