Questions to all the models and photographers

[Raza]

So, both my girlfriend and I like to have pictures taken of ourselves. We'll spend weeks or even months imagining a concept, figuring out a set of aesthetic ideals that go well together, creating clothes, accessories, coming up with strategies to work hair and makeup and finally applying it all to ourselves, finding a suitable background/area and photographing ourselves.

Some of the things serving this process (coming up with ideas, designing clothes, generally being hot) we're better at than others (hair and makeup, scouting locations), although we're improving on all fields. But one thing that comes up time and time again is that compared to everything else, our photographic abilities really suck, and our achievements in other parts of the process deserve better. We're using pretty decent borrowed compact digicams and under ideal outdoor lighting conditions will generally have a few really sharp and good pictures out of the hundreds we take, but this restricts us to the warmer half of the year and concepts served by an outdoors background. We don't like that.

So the first question is, where would you go or have you gone from there?

We've looked into DIY indoor shooting options. We've got a powerful construction lamp and diffusing paper sheets, but the result is still too single-angled. At longer opening times we screw up cause we're rarely content to take only angles that allow for resting the camera somewhere. We're barely employed crazies, so we're on a budget. Tips, experiences?

We're not opposed to working with someone else for a photographer, but we're not interested in someone who'll apply only their own tastes to everything and filter the results before we get to see them, or someone that'll demand 'intellectual property' of the final product in the form of any conditions other than attribution (in text, not photoshopped-in names) and perhaps a say/share in commercial uses we won't put them to anyway. So without beating around the bush, we'd need someone who'll appreciate us for what we do as-is and wants to work with us for the same reasons we want to do it. We'd love to work with a creative like mind that shares our tastes and has valuable ideas to contribute, but that might be asking too much.

So what conditions are reasonable in the photographer/'model' relationship? We bring awesome and aren't looking to be paid, but we desire someone either also packing the awesomeness or passive enough not to mess with ours, and willing to not act like they paid for anything.



The second question mostly for the models. Is there anything you do or did to learn to 'pose'? My girlfriend is pretty damn hot, but both me and other photographers have noticed she never really gets into what shes being. Her expressions look either neutral or forced - which is distinct from when she's not posing, since she looks just fine doing the things normally that she fails to pretend to do convincingly. I myself apparently do it well intuitively, simply imagining my role gives me an idea of how I would present myself in a situation, so I can't really advice her. Is there something you can do to practise this?

[Amelia G]

You are pretty fabulous, but why would any quality photographer immortalize you to your specifications with their expensive equipment and their expensive indoor location, for no payment, loss of intellectual property rights, and probably no credit for shooting anything even and they get to have their bad shots critiqued so they'll have to stress if they ask you to take any risks posing?

The only way that is useful for the photographer is if they are a student in desperate need of portfolio. No guarantee to you that they won't suck because they have no real port yet, but someone like that might be able to provide what you want.

Can you think of any other reason that plan would make sense for the photographer?

My recommendation is to think about which of those factors are truly dealbreakers for you and which areas you could give in, such that the exercise would be good for everyone and not just you and your girlfriend.

[Morning Glory]

I think you should leave other people out of your masturbation.

[Raza]

I think you should leave other people out of your masturbation.

Well yeah, that's pretty much implicit.

[Raza]

You are pretty fabulous, but why would any quality photographer immortalize you to your specifications with their expensive equipment and their expensive indoor location, for no payment, loss of intellectual property rights, and probably no credit for shooting anything even and they get to have their bad shots critiqued so they'll have to stress if they ask you to take any risks posing?

The only way that is useful for the photographer is if they are a student in desperate need of portfolio. No guarantee to you that they won't suck because they have no real port yet, but someone like that might be able to provide what you want.

Can you think of any other reason that plan would make sense for the photographer?

My recommendation is to think about which of those factors are truly dealbreakers for you and which areas you could give in, such that the exercise would be good for everyone and not just you and your girlfriend.

Well, I'm not doing everything I do to be 'useful', to achieve some advantage for a carreer, or gain some new property. I'm doing it because it's interesting and rewarding on its own. Their equipment may be expensive, but the materials and hours of work (even translated at a modest wage) I put into my end of the bargain often don't end up being incomparible, so if I'm willing to do that for no material gain, I wonder why they shouldn't be? I wouldn't ask someone to rent a studeo or invest in some other perishable resource, merely to use what they already have and won't lose in the process. I'm not condemning photographers with more material interests, but that mindset is alien to me and I don't expect I'd work with it well - not for the conclusions to our pet projects, leastwise.

But eh, there's few things sillier than asking a question and then telling people what you want for an answer, and I'm making myself guilty, so I'll take this opportunity to can it and thank you for answering my question.

To get to your own, I had hoped that there'd be people willing to do it out of sheer interest. I personally agree that I would not bestow my interest easily in something I'd get no say in, but experience with people in general has taught me that this often isn't to be expected of others. Moreover, if someone did connect with us creatively I'd love to have them have their say - this just seems like an even less modest expectation than merely looking for someone to stick to their end of the process. I'm quite willing to let someone without a proper CV have their shot though, so a student might be a good idea.


Why are exclusive intellectual property rights so important? They only concern what we and others can't do with the pics; leaving them public wouldn't stop the photographer using them for whatever his purposes are. I wouldn't even care if they're commercial, if they can somehow manage to sell something that's available for free elsewhere.

[LeilaHazlett]

Eh, as Amelia already pointed out I don't think most professional photographers are going to jump at the idea of shooting an amateur couple for free with little to no control over what they shot and what they get to do with the images. However a photo student might be willing to work with you guys, that way you could all learn in the process. Back when I was shooting alot for websites however I did have a setup with a photographer where I would have him shoot whatever I wanted and I would retain all commercial rights to those photos in exchange for shooting whatever he wanted and he would keep all rights to his photos. Something like that might be a good option for you.

And as far as the modeling stuff goes the more you do it the easier it will get. I hate looking back at my older work because it does look kinda awkward and for some reason I thought I looked better when I didn't smile. Just doing it more will help her improve. Also I've been told that posing in front of a full length mirror is really helpful. That way you can see what looks good and can practice it till you know how it feels so when you go to shoot you can just strike a pose by feel.

[Morning Glory]

Well yeah, that's pretty much implicit.

It doesn't seem so. You say that you don't care what anyone else thinks, but it looks to me like you think that you are important and have some kind of entitlement "take my picture because I'm awesome" and that you are trying to get other people to recognize that. Such as saying that you pretty much only post on here to try and make other people look stupid.

[Wickedanima]

Its just not the way that things work. Most photogs, weather they admit it or not, consider themselves the 'artist', and the model is the 'object'. That is simply the way of things. A model is a beautiful human version of the still life, the photographer is the creator that takes an already pleasant piece and turns it into something immortal. Ameila is quite correct in saying that regardless, there are VERY few photographers if any that would be willing to be a place-holder.

Your best bet for getting a place holder is a non-artist friend who will click the button after you've set up your shot. Even then things will be technically murky, because you yourself didn't click the button. Artists for the most part won't be anyone's bitch for free. Something has to be exchanged.

It sounds to me like you very much desire to be served by your photographer, and that's flat out just not going to happen. Even if it does, it would be sketchy, wrong, and turn out badly for you.

I think your utter best bet for how you want to play it would be to take turn taking photographs of eachother... learn to set up a timer... and be your own photographer.

I also am very much of the opinion that you should cut back on the control factor a bit, and let a photographer take pictures of you. It would be a lark for one, your look is rather cool, and its a shame to not be a model just because you can't stand the thought of not being in control.

If your pictures are coming out sucky because you aren't good at it, then A) Practice more, B) Suck it up and let someone else photograph you. And keep the Diva 'tude in check until you're famous.

[Thistle Harlequin]

well..this probably only answer one of your questions but like someone above me said before.... it just gets easier with experience. I too see my older shoots and some i'm look at and criticize very much so, as to now I kinda know what i'm doing, though before i shoot with someone i like to see what they like to shoot and i like to meet them before the shoot to get to know them and if thats not possible just talking/chatting with them to break the ice (makes it comfortable anyways)

[Amelia G]

Well, I'm not doing everything I do to be 'useful', to achieve some advantage for a carreer, or gain some new property. I'm doing it because it's interesting and rewarding on its own. Their equipment may be expensive, but the materials and hours of work (even translated at a modest wage) I put into my end of the bargain often don't end up being incomparible, so if I'm willing to do that for no material gain, I wonder why they shouldn't be? I wouldn't ask someone to rent a studeo or invest in some other perishable resource, merely to use what they already have and won't lose in the process. I'm not condemning photographers with more material interests, but that mindset is alien to me and I don't expect I'd work with it well - not for the conclusions to our pet projects, leastwise.

But eh, there's few things sillier than asking a question and then telling people what you want for an answer, and I'm making myself guilty, so I'll take this opportunity to can it and thank you for answering my question.

To get to your own, I had hoped that there'd be people willing to do it out of sheer interest. I personally agree that I would not bestow my interest easily in something I'd get no say in, but experience with people in general has taught me that this often isn't to be expected of others. Moreover, if someone did connect with us creatively I'd love to have them have their say - this just seems like an even less modest expectation than merely looking for someone to stick to their end of the process. I'm quite willing to let someone without a proper CV have their shot though, so a student might be a good idea.


Why are exclusive intellectual property rights so important? They only concern what we and others can't do with the pics; leaving them public wouldn't stop the photographer using them for whatever his purposes are. I wouldn't even care if they're commercial, if they can somehow manage to sell something that's available for free elsewhere.

I am not properly motivated by money. When it comes time to buy stuff, I am sometimes sorry that I am not, but I'm not.

Speaking only for myself, the intellectual property issue would be the dealbreaker for me. I do some content trade, but the person in the picture is in the picture. All someone has to do to see their involvement is look at the picture. If the photographer's credit is not on the image itself, they might as well not have existed.

On a more practical and less philosophical level, the wanting to see every image would be a dealbreaker too, for someone who was not paying me. I like to feel free to try lots of things with poses and simply discard the images which suck. Nobody hits a home run every time they click the shutter.

Obviously, I put a lot of my work out there for free, in terms of people being able to see it, but with my credits on it and I'll exercise my intellectual property rights when people come along, stealing my work and trying to claim it as their own. If it weren't valuable, people wouldn't be trying to grab it for their own purposes, ya know. Like, if I shoot a friend's portrait just 'cause and they turn around and use it for something commercial, when it's not like they paid me, it is upsetting. If I shoot someone's photo because it will be mutually beneficial, then great. But, for a trade to be fair, everyone needs to bring something to the table. Even if the only resources involved are time, once you factor in prep work and post work, a shoot always takes a photographer more time than it takes a model.

[Raza]

It doesn't seem so. You say that you don't care what anyone else thinks, but it looks to me like you think that you are important and have some kind of entitlement "take my picture because I'm awesome" and that you are trying to get other people to recognize that. Such as saying that you pretty much only post on here to try and make other people look stupid.

Naw, I use 'awesome' descriptively, not prescriptively - also, deliberately exaggerate and oversimplified. I think that people may to some more reasonable degree agree with me because they often have in the past, which is brought up because it's relevant to my point here. Not because I, being me, am somehow entitled to it from everyone I meet. You're more than welcome to disagree, regardless of whether that is because you sincerely think it's untrue or simply because I'm an ass.

And do you really think I am so involved with what you people think about each other as to post here only to negatively influence it? I do wish you'd misinterpret my posts in the threads they were made in, though; knowing what you're talking about would make clarification a lot easier.

[Raza]

Its just not the way that things work. Most photogs, weather they admit it or not, consider themselves the 'artist', and the model is the 'object'. That is simply the way of things. A model is a beautiful human version of the still life, the photographer is the creator that takes an already pleasant piece and turns it into something immortal. Ameila is quite correct in saying that regardless, there are VERY few photographers if any that would be willing to be a place-holder.

Ah, see, that's exactly why I tried the DIY approach. I don't feel like getting pushed into the role of 'a model', or even a 'model/designer'.

It sounds to me like you very much desire to be served by your photographer, and that's flat out just not going to happen. Even if it does, it would be sketchy, wrong, and turn out badly for you.

I think your utter best bet for how you want to play it would be to take turn taking photographs of eachother... learn to set up a timer... and be your own photographer.

Taking turns is how we've been doing it so far, and we're learning, but it's not going fast enough. That's why I also asked about tips on affordable indoor lighting alternatives and such.

I also am very much of the opinion that you should cut back on the control factor a bit, and let a photographer take pictures of you. It would be a lark for one, your look is rather cool, and its a shame to not be a model just because you can't stand the thought of not being in control.

If your pictures are coming out sucky because you aren't good at it, then A) Practice more, B) Suck it up and let someone else photograph you. And keep the Diva 'tude in check until you're famous.

Why, thank you. Fame seems like a rather fragile aspiration, though, what with all those famous people you only ever hear of a first time. I'd rather work on being good.

Artists for the most part won't be anyone's bitch for free. Something has to be exchanged.

This, it seems, is the crux of the matter - applying to myself and potential photographers equally. The problem being that in this case 'something' won't be money, and that people just can't be assumed to have any other measuring unit of value in common.

[OliX]

How much does a photo shot cost?

[Raza]

I am not properly motivated by money. When it comes time to buy stuff, I am sometimes sorry that I am not, but I'm not.

Good for you!

Speaking only for myself, the intellectual property issue would be the dealbreaker for me. I do some content trade, but the person in the picture is in the picture. All someone has to do to see their involvement is look at the picture. If the photographer's credit is not on the image itself, they might as well not have existed.

This is actually a good point that I hadn't considered when it comes to digital format images, but whole bars of text in an image are often repulsive and detract from the picture, and many photographers don't seem at all inclined to try and minimise this. If it could be done with a small, non-ugly logo - or if the name's text - color, front, effects, whatever - could be adjusted to go with the contents of the picture then that'd be more reasonable. Being graffiti on the wall is one thing, being a glowing bar of bolded text floating over my feet in a horribly mismatched color theme is another.

Frankly, we need a graphic file format that comes with the equivalent of an MP3 ID3 info tag, like an expanded EXIF data that includes space for names of involved parties and URLs to refer to for each.

On a more practical and less philosophical level, the wanting to see every image would be a dealbreaker too, for someone who was not paying me. I like to feel free to try lots of things with poses and simply discard the images which suck. Nobody hits a home run every time they click the shutter.

Isn't this kinda a pride/shyness thing that models are already expected to have overcome, though? I mean, they're the ones looking bad even if its your picture of them - they're taking at least an equal 'risk', I'd say. Either both parties or neither should have selection privileges, and it's not entirely fair if one gets them before the other, either.

I mean, is anybody really going to attack you for an experimental picture turned out bad? I just wouldn't want someone who looks with different criteria in mind to take out pictures I might really like because they presumably committed some faux-pas on a phototechnical level I don't even understand. I would try not to be a dick and tell you you can't publicise your favorites because they make my ass look big in a way that only I can see or something, either.

Obviously, I put a lot of my work out there for free, in terms of people being able to see it, but with my credits on it and I'll exercise my intellectual property rights when people come along, stealing my work and trying to claim it as their own. If it weren't valuable, people wouldn't be trying to grab it for their own purposes, ya know. Like, if I shoot a friend's portrait just 'cause and they turn around and use it for something commercial, when it's not like they paid me, it is upsetting.

The parts of IP that I object to don't rule out a general noncommercial attribution licence. I just don't want a whole complex rules list of stuff I and others can't do with it, especially if it includes a double standard between me and the photographer. I've seen some of those waivers that friends more inclined to the 'model' role have had to sign, and frankly they slightly nauseate me. Especially the SG one - she comes at me with this five-page legal form "You can read fancy english, is signing this ok?". I read it and say "Fuck no", and they go and do it anyway. While exceptionally bad though, that one wasn't the only one.

If I shoot someone's photo because it will be mutually beneficial, then great. But, for a trade to be fair, everyone needs to bring something to the table. Even if the only resources involved are time, once you factor in prep work and post work, a shoot always takes a photographer more time than it takes a model.

That time must cover some of the things we're doing wrong then, cause even if you don't count the creation of the outfit, putting it on and otherwise getting ready tends to take us quite as much time as sorting out and photoshopping the results.

[Wickedanima]

Ah, see, that's exactly why I tried the DIY approach. I don't feel like getting pushed into the role of 'a model', or even a 'model/designer'.

Don't get caught up in the desperate need not to be pigeonholed. Be flexible. I personally think the more you can do, the greater your chance of succeeding at something.

Taking turns is how we've been doing it so far, and we're learning, but it's not going fast enough. That's why I also asked about tips on affordable indoor lighting alternatives and such.

I hate to say it, but photography is an artform. You can't get it down in a few moments. I'd keep going, keep trying, and try your best to be a little patient.

As for DIY alternatives, I can only suggest to have a house full of lamps with the shades off, lots of old sheets, and some aluminum foil wrapped around a big piece of foam-board.

I'd rather work on being good.

If you have no natural gift for a tast, being good means a bit of time and some hard work. ^_^

This, it seems, is the crux of the matter - applying to myself and potential photographers equally. The problem being that in this case 'something' won't be money, and that people just can't be assumed to have any other measuring unit of value in common.

As a model, you are a product of sorts. This product requires exposure, good personality, and a mysterious spark of something that the camera finds interesting about you.

As a poor-bastard, you are going to have to learn to get real creative. Alot of photog's will work you for free. Now that means that you only have control over your poses, your cloths, and your attitude.

Anything to the banal ModelMayham, to Craigslist, to poking art students with a stick will get you photographed for free.

Another crux huh? Working with photographers may give you some ideas. The more you mingle, and relinquish a bit of control to really learn about what these people are up to, the better off you can be later. Ask plenty of questions. Take notes, mental or otherwise, and keep asking and paying decent attention to the feed back you get here. People often have good practical advice as to how to get to your goal.

[Raza]

Don't get caught up in the desperate need not to be pigeonholed. Be flexible. I personally think the more you can do, the greater your chance of succeeding at something.

It's more of a principal objection to prescriptive roles in interpersonal ethics.

As for DIY alternatives, I can only suggest to have a house full of lamps with the shades off, lots of old sheets, and some aluminum foil wrapped around a big piece of foam-board.

We're getting there, step by step. So far it's all just taking up precious living space though.

If you have no natural gift for a tast, being good means a bit of time and some hard work. ^_^

I don't know what a tast is, but I'm finding more than reasonable affinity for what I do in myself and put in plenty of time and work. I wouldn't ask anything less of myself.

As a model, you are a product of sorts. This product requires exposure, good personality, and a mysterious spark of something that the camera finds interesting about you.

A photographer can be reduced to 'a product' as easily as a model; neither is more true than the other unless you act like that. Tradition might stimulate people do that 'acting like it' part, but doesn't necessarily vindicate itself.

Anything to the banal ModelMayham, to Craigslist, to poking art students with a stick will get you photographed for free.

Walking down the street will get me photographed for free. I just want it done in a way that I can benefit from for a change, in exchange for doing my part endlessly better than I dress to get groceries. I think I'll try poking art students.

[OliX]

So how much does it cost?

[Wickedanima]

I don't know what a tast is, but I'm finding more than reasonable affinity for what I do in myself and put in plenty of time and work. I wouldn't ask anything less of myself.

Probably taste. I have long forgotten what it was supposed to be. The word, my taste is still somewhat in tact.

A photographer can be reduced to 'a product' as easily as a model; neither is more true than the other unless you act like that. Tradition might stimulate people do that 'acting like it' part, but doesn't necessarily vindicate itself.

We can argue the principal to the end of the world Raz, but the fact is the Model is a piece of art in his/herself to be photographed by an artist. I'm sure if you sat down with philosophy students, or debated enough, you could win this argument on principal.

This is utterly aside from the fact that photographer is an artist, and it would be bad manners at best to make what seem to be rather unreasonable demands of a photographer. If indeed you feel thusly:

we're not interested in someone who'll apply only their own tastes to everything and filter the results before we get to see them, or someone that'll demand 'intellectual property' of the final product in the form of any conditions other than attribution (in text, not photoshopped-in names) and perhaps a say/share in commercial uses we won't put them to anyway.

You may not be looking for an outside person to photograph you PERIOD. I'm just stressing that Photog's are are their own people, the photographs are to their taste... and on top of that, often times know how to make you look good, deal with lighting, angles, and perhaps even work around your girl's issue with posing.

I know few net models that have done shoots with photographers they know, and managed to eventually get some 'good' out of it. Its not any profit aside from exposure... its really working alot for free, getting your face out there, and hoping after you bust your ass, that something comes of it.

[Raza]

In advance warning, very little of this bears any more relevance to the questions in the OP. It's just discussion for its own sake on the ethics of art.

We can argue the principal to the end of the world Raz, but the fact is the Model is a piece of art in his/herself to be photographed by an artist. I'm sure if you sat down with philosophy students, or debated enough, you could win this argument on principal.

Insofar as I am a 'piece of art', this stems from my own creative efforts and aesthetic lifestyle sensibilities, not my potential function as 'a model' to a photographer. As my own artist, I ask to be worked with rather than on.

This is utterly aside from the fact that a photographer is an artist, and it would be bad manners at best to make what seem to be rather unreasonable demands of a photographer. If indeed you feel thusly:

You may not be looking for an outside person to photograph you PERIOD. I'm just stressing that Photog's are are their own people, the photographs are to their taste... and on top of that, often times know how to make you look good, deal with lighting, angles, and perhaps even work around your girl's issue with posing.

I don't agree that photography is an art first and foremost. It is a medium, capturing things that already exist for preservation or communication. Certainly there is skill involved in working it - and the process of selection on what to capture, which allows for endlessly many options on the same subject, may under a broad definition be called 'creative' - but using it artistically is a choice at best, an often difficult to attain ideal by many reckonings. Asking for a photographer is not necessarily asking for an artist, insofar as that's presumed to grant them any particular privilege or status over that earned by merely being another individual that I'd like to approach on mutually beneficial terms or not at all.

I know few net models that have done shoots with photographers they know, and managed to eventually get some 'good' out of it. Its not any profit aside from exposure... its really working alot for free, getting your face out there, and hoping after you bust your ass, that something comes of it.

You keep addressing me as standing at the bottom of some professional hierarchy that I've no interest in participating in. I'm not looking to attain prestige or 'exposure', to get my name or face 'out there' to some hypothetical audience that might offer some hypothetical 'good'. I'm not out to make a career as a model. I'm looking for a means to capture my own at that point 95% finished artistic projects in .jpg format in a way that does them honor - that's the final stage of my considerations.

And don't tell me there isn't many things a photographer can do with that. We've been asked for photo editing projects, selected for theme collections, featured in dozens of photo- and fashion academy collages, had characters based on us by hobbyist video game developers. If they could find someone dumb enough to pay for it, they could sell the pictures for all I've got to fiddle philosophical about it. They get to put their mark on their copies and flaunt it as their works to climb imaginary steps on imaginary career ladders. All I want is my intact copy of the original.

[OliX]

Dude, answer my question -.-

[Raza]

I hadn't realised it was adressed to me. Why would a photoshoot cost anything?

I mean, if a photographer would want to recruit me or us to do their thing, I suppose that'd be a matter distinct from anything discussed here - I'd do it for free if I thought it was interesting, perhaps for money if I didn't, or they were going to earn any from the ordeal. But for the purpose of capturing our own projects on image file format, I'm neither looking to pay or be paid anything.

[Raza]

Thank you. So are you another incarnation of episode_allah? Your style seems similar, but I haven't seen anything verbose enough yet to tell for sure.

[Raza]

All worthwhile posters are trolls some of the time, even if not all trolls are even sometimes worthwhile posters.

[OliX]

Just wondered how much would it cost.

I personally would rather pay a professional to do a good job instead of going trough the hustle of blabbering here or looking for someone to do it for free. But that's just me.

Btw... look at this picture and tell me what you see.

[Amelia G]

I would also like to get my photo taken, in the way I wish to be presented, for free. I think most people would.

I think the whole "altmodel" fantasy career LARP world is lame as well. But people still need a reason to do the things they do, even if it is just the joy of creation.

Can you please explain why any photographer should want to shoot a picture, to someone else's specifications, for free, with no credit given to them?

[Cafe_Post_Mortem]

Raza,

Whether or not you are intending to, you are disparaging what the photographer does.

Whether or not you consider photography are, it is a skill. It is a skill that takes time and practice. A lot of both. You have seen for yourself that it is not an easy skill to learn.

So what do you actually bring to the table for the photographer?

You have already ruled out money. No problem. There are hundreds of amateur photographers out there who are not looking for money.

You bring models. But to be honest, a lot of models are willing to work for prints or CDs and do what the photographer wants. While some models can demand a lot from photographers, even big names have to pay the photographer if they want final creative control (at least from what I have seen).

You bring hair and makeup. This is a good thing, but unless you are also doing hair and makeup for the photographer's other projects, it is still them working for your project and getting nothing in return.

And finally, creative direction. If this is really what you bring to the table, then you are going to have to sell it. You are going to have to get the photographer so excited about your idea that just being a part of it is worth the photographer's time and effort.

But on the bright side, we face the same things on the other side of the lens. If I want a model to work for me I have the same choices.

Pay the model,(not necessarily cash, but some exchange of goods or services) or get them so excited about a project they will give up their time and rights just to be associated with it.

So I gotta back Amelia's question. Even if the all Blue Blood hotties lined up at my door with what you are proposing, I would say no. I consider my time and talent, even as an amateur, to be worth something. not always money, but at very least respect for my work. any photographer who doesn't think their time and talent is worth anything is usually right.

So, what are you giving the photographer for his or her time and talent?

[Thistle Harlequin]

Can you please explain why any photographer should want to shoot a picture, to someone else's specifications, for free, with no credit given to them?

To kiss ass...is the only reason I can think of

[Raza]

I would also like to get my photo taken, in the way I wish to be presented, for free. I think most people would.

I think the whole "altmodel" fantasy career LARP world is lame as well. But people still need a reason to do the things they do, even if it is just the joy of creation.

Can you please explain why any photographer should want to shoot a picture, to someone else's specifications, for free, with no credit given to them?

What, again? I thought we were a few points further along earlier.

But I feel you're misrepresenting my position a bit. They'll get credited everywhere I put the pics, just not in some obnoxious font over the picture itself, with reasonable middle roads being discussable.

They can take pics acording to their insights and select or edit what they show the outside world through their own channels as they see fit, but I'd like my copy of the raw product before it's subjected to someone else's preferences. If I end up agreeing with what they did and selected, I'll be using that anyway - and if I don't, well, then the point was justified, no? Taste is subjective; rather than forcing a single 'compromise' product, let everyone have their ideal.

And they might want to do it because the results will be pretty cool, with their copies being for them to do with as they please as my copies are to me.

[Raza]

Raza,

Whether or not you are intending to, you are disparaging what the photographer does.

I'm not looking to; I just have little faith in humanity in general. I've mentioned before and have been seeking an opportunity to emphasise that I'd cheerfully share creative control with a photographer that I got the impression shared and could add to our ideals. But experience tells me most just sit and gawk and think it's either awesome or dreadful, and I'm trying to work with that rather than further narrow my criteria with something as improbable and untestable as the requirement for them to have a developed feel for furthering the specific aesthetic of every theme we're going for.

So what do you actually bring to the table for the photographer?

You have already ruled out money. No problem. There are hundreds of amateur photographers out there who are not looking for money.

You bring models. But to be honest, a lot of models are willing to work for prints or CDs and do what the photographer wants. While some models can demand a lot from photographers, even big names have to pay the photographer if they want final creative control (at least from what I have seen).

You bring hair and makeup. This is a good thing, but unless you are also doing hair and makeup for the photographer's other projects, it is still them working for your project and getting nothing in return.

And finally, creative direction. If this is really what you bring to the table, then you are going to have to sell it. You are going to have to get the photographer so excited about your idea that just being a part of it is worth the photographer's time and effort.

Clothes, makeup, hair, roughly in that order of boastworthiness. The outfits we make are hand made/modified and assembled, unique, expansive and very detailed - not something you can just buy or rent an equivalent of anywhere I know, although I suppose LA might be different. 'Makeup' preparations often take hours when going for our less human themes, with the ideal often being to add something interesting to every bit of exposed skin. Last shoot we did she was a kind of romanticised zombie, which irregular four-coloured skin, stitches drawn everywhere (and with thought behind most), rotting wounds, detail like fungus speckles and glued on plastic flies, rows of ants and a millipede placed to crawl out of her clothes. Hair we were previously never very good at beyond dyeing it strong unusual colors, but we've spent the last few weeks picking up the synthetic dreadmaking trade - something I think is horribly underutilised outside of cyber - and finding endless potential to apply our detail-mongering style to large and varied dreadcuts.

[Amelia G]

What, again? I thought we were a few points further along earlier.

But I feel you're misrepresenting my position a bit. They'll get credited everywhere I put the pics, just not in some obnoxious font over the picture itself, with reasonable middle roads being discussable.

They can take pics acording to their insights and select or edit what they show the outside world through their own channels as they see fit, but I'd like my copy of the raw product before it's subjected to someone else's preferences. If I end up agreeing with what they did and selected, I'll be using that anyway - and if I don't, well, then the point was justified, no? Taste is subjective; rather than forcing a single 'compromise' product, let everyone have their ideal.

And they might want to do it because the results will be pretty cool, with their copies being for them to do with as they please as my copies are to me.

Ah, I think I see where one of the points of disconnect is. If a photo is placed on the internet, anywhere on the internet, and the photographer credit is not embedded in the image, then the image will appear many places without credit to the photographer. I guess I know, from my extensive publishing on the web, that this is simply the case. I forget that not everyone has my experience, but, yeah, allow an image online without embedded credit in the actual image and it will be posted without credit. Intellectual property laws give some recourse after the fact, but you specified already that the photographer would not be permitted to own his or her intellectual property, so that would not apply in your case.

[Raza]

Ah, I think I see where one of the points of disconnect is. If a photo is placed on the internet, anywhere on the internet, and the photographer credit is not embedded in the image, then the image will appear many places without credit to the photographer. I guess I know, from my extensive publishing on the web, that this is simply the case. I forget that not everyone has my experience, but, yeah, allow an image online without embedded credit in the actual image and it will be posted without credit. Intellectual property laws give some recourse after the fact, but you specified already that the photographer would not be permitted to own his or her intellectual property, so that would not apply in your case.

Didn't we have this conversation a few posts up?

Serious question.

[Amelia G]

Didn't we have this conversation a few posts up?

Serious question.

Feel free to copy/paste where you feel you answered, but my most recent point is that your requirements mean the photographer will generally not get credit. You can quibble about how often they might get credit sometimes, but mostly they won't get credit. You might find a photo credit on the image to be obnoxious, but not putting one on means not getting credit and that is just a fact of how images circulate online. Not having intellectual property rights in an image mean there is nothing the photographer could do about not getting credit either.

If the photographer actually brought something to the table, then giving them absolutely nothing in return is kind of really greedy.

If, on the other hand, you just want the photographer to push the button when you tell them to with auto settings on the camera and no input, how are they supposed to feel good about cool results, if they had pretty much nothing to do with what those results turned out to be, if the only function of those results is to glorify and immortalize you and your girlfriend?

[Cafe_Post_Mortem]

Clothes, makeup, hair, roughly in that order of boastworthiness. The outfits we make are hand made/modified and assembled, unique, expansive and very detailed - not something you can just buy or rent an equivalent of anywhere I know, although I suppose LA might be different. 'Makeup' preparations often take hours when going for our less human themes, with the ideal often being to add something interesting to every bit of exposed skin. Last shoot we did she was a kind of romanticised zombie, which irregular four-coloured skin, stitches drawn everywhere (and with thought behind most), rotting wounds, detail like fungus speckles and glued on plastic flies, rows of ants and a millipede placed to crawl out of her clothes. Hair we were previously never very good at beyond dyeing it strong unusual colors, but we've spent the last few weeks picking up the synthetic dreadmaking trade - something I think is horribly underutilised outside of cyber - and finding endless potential to apply our detail-mongering style to large and varied dreadcuts.

Maybe it is different in LA, I have spent little time in Europe so it is hard for me to say.

The thing is there are other people out there who offer what you are offering. Hair, makeup, modeling and fashion. I would have to hustle to find the ones who will do trade for print, but when I do I will be in charge of the creative direction. I will choose the final prints. I will own the photos.

Flip the situation around. Imagine if someone came to you with some sketches, asked you to make an outfit by their design, pose the way they want and you would get no credit, cash or input (unless it agreed with their input). Would you do it? If not, what would convince you to do it?

This is what you need to focus on. Unless you find someone so head over heals about your project that they are ok with just giving their work away, you need to find out what motivates them and work a trade. For every X hours of photography on your project under your terms, you could trade them Y hours of your time doing hair, makeup, fashion or modeling under their terms. X and Y to be negotiated. Just make sure everyone is clear up front about what they are getting out of it and what everyone's limits are.

Hope that helps.

[Mindgames]

Raza - what you're ultimately asking for is that the photographer signs a 'work for hire' contract, transferring both asset and rights claim to you. That's fine, but note the word is "hire" not "fun". They expect compensation for their loss, as they are giving you something potentially worth far more than the time it takes to turn up and close the shutter. No pro will sign a WFH for free, period, and without a written contract the images belong to the photographer, no matter what you may discuss with them verbally.

Which means of course that if you don't have their signature, and subsequently posted the pics on a website, they can sue your ass into next week. It happens a lot, and the photographer almost always wins. Putting their name on the image or in a credit is besides the point.

[Raza]

Feel free to copy/paste where you feel you answered, but my most recent point is that your requirements mean the photographer will generally not get credit.

K.

This is actually a good point that I hadn't considered when it comes to digital format images, but whole bars of text in an image are often repulsive and detract from the picture, and many photographers don't seem at all inclined to try and minimise this. If it could be done with a small, non-ugly logo - or if the name's text - color, front, effects, whatever - could be adjusted to go with the contents of the picture then that'd be more reasonable. Being graffiti on the wall is one thing, being a glowing bar of bolded text floating over my feet in a horribly mismatched color theme is another.

Frankly, we need a graphic file format that comes with the equivalent of an MP3 ID3 info tag, like an expanded EXIF data that includes space for names of involved parties and URLs to refer to for each.

I also mentioned earlier that I'd be fine with an attribution/noncommercial license, so long as use remained public. That'd give you the IP to address people failing to put your name with the images with legal weight, if you wanted to - just not to tell them they can't use them at all.

If the photographer actually brought something to the table, then giving them absolutely nothing in return is kind of really greedy.

I don't really see what they should want, that I'm denying them. They get the pics, they get to use them as they please - I just want the same thing, so each of us can actually do what pleases them, rather than having to filter and adjust to eachother's tastes.

If, on the other hand, you just want the photographer to push the button when you tell them to with auto settings on the camera and no input, how are they supposed to feel good about cool results, if they had pretty much nothing to do with what those results turned out to be, if the only function of those results is to glorify and immortalize you and your girlfriend?

I dunno, they get to put their name with something cool? They'd have do have contributed something, or there'd be no improvement over what we do ourselves. Is there something wrong with taking pride in knowing you contributed to something worthwhile if that contribution was only a relatively small part of the whole?

I try not to speculate at what drives people and just assume pluriformity. Plenty of models that like the 'everything provided' kind of deal just fine, in my experience. I'm not sure I'm willing to insult them by calling their motivations invalid.

[Raza]

Maybe it is different in LA, I have spent little time in Europe so it is hard for me to say.

The thing is there are other people out there who offer what you are offering. Hair, makeup, modeling and fashion.

If there's more people overthere offering these things than there's people looking to photograph them, it must be creative heaven over there - or at least reasonably quiet.

Flip the situation around. Imagine if someone came to you with some sketches, asked you to make an outfit by their design, pose the way they want and you would get no credit, cash or input (unless it agreed with their input). Would you do it? If not, what would convince you to do it?

If I had a machine that could do it at the push of a button with only a few hours of time and no material investment, I'd very much consider it if I thought their concept was cool at a level with our own, yes. Even if I'd spent a lot of money on that machine to use it for my own purposes first.

This is what you need to focus on. Unless you find someone so head over heals about your project that they are ok with just giving their work away, you need to find out what motivates them and work a trade. For every X hours of photography on your project under your terms, you could trade them Y hours of your time doing hair, makeup, fashion or modeling under their terms. X and Y to be negotiated. Just make sure everyone is clear up front about what they are getting out of it and what everyone's limits are.

Hope that helps.

This would do just fine, actually, if X and Y came at a 1=1 rate. Considering I want the raw mass of unedited .jpg, their time investment would be nothing I'd not be willing to return.

Besides, I wouldn't need a deal for that. If someone's willing to work with us on pleasant terms, of course I'd be willing to work with them on their projects.

[OliX]

There you go, you finally answered why they would do it for free. If term of free means money-free trade.

[ForrestBlack]

This would do just fine, actually, if X and Y came at a 1=1 rate. Considering I want the raw mass of unedited .jpg, their time investment would be nothing I'd not be willing to return.

Hey Raza, I think some of the difficulty you might be having is that the way you would value what someone contributes is different from the way they might value what they are contributing. I, for example, could potentially be hired to do a creative shoot that I was not the creative director for. I would actually want to charge a LOT more to hand over raw unedited images at the end of the day. That might sound strange, but photographic processing is artistically and professionally very important to a lot of photographers. The tree above reminds me that even Ansel Adams wouldn't be who is is today if it were not for some of the amazingly detailed technical photo processing he had done to his shots, post actually snapping the shutter. You might think you are asking less of someone, when in fact you are asking a lot more. You also might feel that putting any sort of words on the images is something you object to, as it clutters the shot, but a lot of photographers have learned that if they don't put the credit actually on the image, their work will almost certainly be stolen and used for really inappropriate things. They feel a certain natural inclination or responsibility to protect against this, so the offer of a text credit off the images just sounds almost like a threat. Without the words on the image, the thief can easily attempt to claim there was just no way they could have known it wasn't public domain or some such nonsense, etc. Understanding the needs of the people you are working with will help you organize the efforts of your creative partners.

[TheDeathKnight]

I will add my experiences here...

First of all, I tend to come to the bargaining table with photographers with the following deal...

I bring a ton of costumes, props, concepts, makeup, fx, location, etc, and they get to have a really cool photo shoot, that they would be hard-pressed to come up with on their own. And in exchange, I get a copy of the raw images. But that's mainly for my own use. The way it usually works, is that they get to claim the photograph as their own, and they get to use them on their website, and get any money they can make from it. That's fine with me. I don't need or want to earn anything off the images. I just want a copy for my own use. Generally, what the photographer does for their editing, and color corrections, is better than what I can do on my own. So I tend to use their image, and give them full credit. So that if people like the image that was created, they can seek that photographer out for their own work. I simply get credit for being the model and for providing the costumes.

And as far as hints for how to do your own shoots indoors, one really cheap and basic setup I use, is to get a bunch of clip lights at the hardware store.



And then get a bunch of dimmers for them...



And a bunch of colored light bulbs...



Digital cameras are so sensitive nowadays, that you don't need high-powered flash units to capture a decent image. And the advantage to using actual lights, is that you can see what the scene is looking like. You can just slide the dimmers up and down, and get a nice balance.

[Raza]

Hey Raza, I think some of the difficulty you might be having is that the way you would value what someone contributes is different from the way they might value what they are contributing. I, for example, could potentially be hired to do a creative shoot that I was not the creative director for. I would actually want to charge a LOT more to hand over raw unedited images at the end of the day. That might sound strange, but photographic processing is artistically and professionally very important to a lot of photographers. The tree above reminds me that even Ansel Adams wouldn't be who is is today if it were not for some of the amazingly detailed technical photo processing he had done to his shots, post actually snapping the shutter. You might think you are asking less of someone, when in fact you are asking a lot more. You also might feel that putting any sort of words on the images is something you object to, as it clutters the shot, but a lot of photographers have learned that if they don't put the credit actually on the image, their work will almost certainly be stolen and used for really inappropriate things. They feel a certain natural inclination or responsibility to protect against this, so the offer of a text credit off the images just sounds almost like a threat. Without the words on the image, the thief can easily attempt to claim there was just no way they could have known it wasn't public domain or some such nonsense, etc. Understanding the needs of the people you are working with will help you organize the efforts of your creative partners.

So again it's about the distinction between what I ask of them as a person in time and effort as we can measure it by a universal standard, and what I'm asking them in their role as 'a photographer', in professional faux pas and the relinquishing of traditionally expected privileges.

I don't think in these terms, and honestly have no desire to start. Role divisions, 'inappropriate uses', 'theft' of information - these things are meaningless to how I view the world. That doesn't mean I'll hold it against people quoting them as a reason not to work with me, but chances are I'm just gonna say "Ok, no deal then."

So, I think I'm just going to accept that I probably won't be working with any professional photographer third parties and focus on learning the trade myself. I'd rather do things my way on my own than adapt to rationales I don't believe in.