Why shouldn,t I pay the model!

Why shouldn,t I pay the model!

26 posts
23 Feb 2014
diipii
Photographer
diipii
I believe paying the model is the best thing to do. It puts your relationship on a professional level and firmly establishes your copyright of the photographs making it valid to say no to requests for images. Generally, there seems to be a lack of understanding that giving away a digital file is more or less the same as handing over authorship and ownership with the associated implications. Set up the shoot on a professional basis and all will be well from then on...............
Posted 24 Feb 2014
stolenfaces
Photographer
stolenfaces
diipii
Generally, there seems to be a lack of understanding that giving away a digital file is more or less the same as handing over authorship and ownership with the associated implications.
Of course it isn't - no more than giving/selling someone a 10x8. All of my photos which have been published in books/mags without my consent were from physical prints.
Posted 24 Feb 2014
Edited by stolenfaces 24 Feb 2014
diipii
Photographer
diipii
Wrong. It is exactly the same as giving away the negative.

Posted 24 Feb 2014
stolenfaces
Photographer
stolenfaces
diipii
Wrong. It is exactly the same as giving away the negative.
How can it be the same as giving away the negative - I can only think you are talking of passing an unprocessed RAW file to a third party - does anyone do that ? Usually the third party would not want a RAW file even if it were offered. So what was your point ?? The lack of understanding you talk of arises because it isn't actually true (and frankly not even relevant in 95%+ of cases)
Posted 24 Feb 2014
Edited by stolenfaces 24 Feb 2014
MaoZhu
Photographer
MaoZhu
ChrisD
From your profile notes " I am interested in TFCD or TFP to improve my portfolio "
If Asked by model, I don't ask the model to do.
Posted 24 Feb 2014
Edited by MaoZhu 24 Feb 2014
diipii
Photographer
diipii
stolenfaces
How can it be the same as giving away the negative - I can only think you are talking of passing an unprocessed RAW file to a third party - does anyone do that ? Usually the third party would not want a RAW file even if it were offered. So what was your point ?? The lack of understanding you talk of arises because it isn't actually true (and frankly not even relevant in 95%+ of cases)
In the digital world the camera produces a file which you clone and give away. It doesn't matter which format. From that point on authorship/ownership/control is up for grabs even if you watermark it. Anyone can do that or remove it at any time and use the image in any way. By all means shoot with the arrangement that the model receives digital images but realise the possible consequences.
Posted 24 Feb 2014
stolenfaces
Photographer
stolenfaces
diipii
In the digital world the camera produces a file which you clone and give away. It doesn't matter which format. From that point on authorship/ownership/control is up for grabs even if you watermark it. Anyone can do that or remove it at any time and use the image in any way. By all means shoot with the arrangement that the model receives digital images but realise the possible consequences.
'Clone and give away' ??? I don't, do you? You don't really seem to have a clue about the real world. So what's the difference under your theory with giving a 10x8 or enprint. If you are so scared of anyone reproducing your photograph you should probably not bother taking them. Authorship/Ownership is certainly not up for grabs, control depends whether you can be bothered policing any use. Mostly people's photos have literally no value to anyone but the photographer and maybe the subject so even if your opinion had any truth in it (which it doesn't), it still would be of very little significance to most people.
Posted 24 Feb 2014
Edited by stolenfaces 24 Feb 2014
emmwood
Model
emmwood
The way I see it is simple to me: Photographer wants photos - The photographer requires the model's service. The photographer pays the model. Model wants photos - The model requires the photographer's service. The model pays the photographer. Both the model & photographer are wanting photos - Equal split of ideas so both get what they want out of the shoot, no money transfers hands as they both require the other's service. This is a TF shoot. I have been modelling since summer 2008, in this time I have used all 3 scenarios. These days, I've ran out of things that I want for myself more or less so don't do a lot of trade shoots (or "TF" shoots), but when I do have an idea I want to try, I trade my time with a photographer who has ideas of their own to shoot so we both achieve what we want. I think this system is a lot better than the standard "Time For" idea where everyone wants something for nothing. Pay for what you want or trade services is what I stand for. I honestly think "trade for" would be far better than "time for"! I trade services in the non-modelling world too. I trade working on horse yards for riding lessons, I trade baby sitting for lifts to places I need to be. Why is the world so money orientated!? Maybe I'm just born in the wrong era, I should be back in the days you traded vegetables for sheep! Seems to make far more sense to me!
Posted 26 Feb 2014
Edited by emmwood 25 Feb 2014
MaoZhu
Photographer
MaoZhu
emmwood
The way I see it is simple to me: Photographer wants photos - The photographer requires the model's service. The photographer pays the model. Model wants photos - The model requires the photographer's service. The model pays the photographer. Both the model & photographer are wanting photos - Equal split of ideas so both get what they want out of the shoot, no money transfers hands as they both require the other's service. This is a TF shoot. I have been modelling since summer 2008, in this time I have used all 3 scenarios. These days, I've ran out of things that I want for myself more or less so don't do a lot of trade shoots (or "TF" shoots), but when I do have an idea I want to try, I trade my time with a photographer who has ideas of their own to shoot so we both achieve what we want. I think this system is a lot better than the standard "Time For" idea where everyone wants something for nothing. Pay for what you want or trade services is what I stand for. I honestly think "trade for" would be far better than "time for"! I trade services in the non-modelling world too. I trade working on horse yards for riding lessons, I trade baby sitting for lifts to places I need to be. Why is the world so money orientated!? Maybe I'm just born in the wrong era, I should be back in the days you traded vegetables for sheep! Seems to make far more sense to me!
No arguments with this at all.
Posted 26 Feb 2014
mph
Photographer
mph
keithpics
I'm with David Bailey. I've often wondered how many TF shoots actually do benefit the model's portfolio to the point they end up getting paid work. By 'paid' I mean hard cash, not images, biscuits, etc.
Although of course some TF shoots don't benefit the photograper's portfolio either.....
Posted 27 Feb 2014
RedChecker
Photographer
RedChecker
mph

Although of course some TF shoots don't benefit the photograper's portfolio either.....


Ooh, that could be interpreted in so many ways laugh
Posted 27 Feb 2014
To reply to this thread you must be a member. Click here to join