Tag: model

Skipping Out on TFP

Photographers make note that a good number of models don’t take TFP arrangement seriously, often ending in a no-show or abrupt cancellations. This can make a photographer hesitant about offering them in the first place. But, as a model, should you accept a TFP? Should accepting them as work be in your written profile? Will it get you paid gigs too? And does the ‘F’ in TFP stand for “free?” If so, what do TFP arrangement gain you? Well, here are the answers and some things you didn’t know.

Photographers make note that a good number of models don’t take TFP arrangement seriously, often ending in a no-show or abrupt cancellations. This can make a photographer hesitant about offering them in the first place. But, as a model, should you accept a TFP? Should accepting them as work be in your written profile? Will it get you paid gigs too? And does the ‘F’ in TFP stand for “free?” If so, what do TFP arrangement gain you? Well, here are the answers and some things you didn’t know.

A photographer’s unwritten rule is that if a model is a no-show without an advanced cancellation, never use her again, much less extend a TFP deal to her or her friends, and warn my fellow colleagues that there’s a high element of risk to consider if they think about using her.

Conversely, models that are amazing to work with and are professional, I personally cut steep discounts for, retouch more photos for, provide actual prints to, use as often as I can, bend my schedule for, extend projects to first, and share news of them with everyone I can find.

Obviously, many models are looking for paid work, and many also have a greater sense of their worth than their experience, looks, or willingness commands. Luckily, a model’s portfolio tells a great deal about her than just her looks. If she’s got a lot of photos from a number of different photographers, she’s most likely reliable. If she has a variety of poses, she’s most likely willing to try new things. If she looks great universally, she most likely has actual experience.

I suspect the starting out model doesn’t know her worth and sees it as just standing in front of the camera will turn on the cash spigot. But she also knows that if she can’t demonstrate experience, a photographer will pass her over during casting.

So, to combat this, she tries to cheat the system by indicating she’s willing to work for TFP, when in fact she’s not necessarily fully committed to the idea. An inexperienced model thinks that TFP means “free photos” and doesn’t realize that the photographer is paying her with his time, which often dollar-for-dollar can be very much in a new-model’s favor.

By assigning no “value” to the TFP, she feels it’s something she can walk out on without consequence because it must also be of no value to the photographer, too. Wrong. A number of photographers hold multiple jobs, and if he takes off a day to do a photo shoot and goes through the trouble of setting up the equipment or renting space, the photographer takes it in the shorts not once, but twice. No wonder he may become embittered.

As such the model thinks that she’ll get TFP deals and paid deals, and then elect to only accept the paid ones. Conversely, she might tell herself that she’ll do a TFP deal, but only if it’s a famous, rockin’ photographer. What she doesn’t get (we’re talking new, inexperienced models here still) is that she’s killing her chance to build a portfolio, by extension get a paid gig, or be sought by Mr. Super-Shutter.

Not having anything pan out quickly fuels that impression that there is something wrong with the industry, clearly not her or her attitude, and after one or two cycles of this, the model fades away — being very put off with photographers in an unfair over-generalization.

Photographers: one solution I’ve found that has worked well is to offer TFP deals to scouted new discoveries. Because they aren’t seeking to be models, they are very appreciative and are willing to follow directions. When the reward of fantastic photos pops out the other end of the workflow, they do more word-of-mouth advertising than I could ever afford to purchase for other outlets. The trade-off is that you have to be able to work with inexperienced models and be very, very patient with them. I personally find it rewarding to be there first-hand as someone learns a new, marketable skill. Many valuable friendships follow.

It turns out this kind gesture can open doors for people: other modeling offers, and in one case a small part in a movie that’s coming out soon.

TFP/CD deals are gold mines for models, which explains how some smart models always seem to have that really rich, diverse portfolio with a competitive edge.

For models just starting out

If you scan through many modeling websites, you’ll see there’s a common question asked by new comers who want to be models: “What do I need to do to become a model?” Ironically, that question often goes unanswered, even on professional sites. Maybe it’s that the answer is a little more complex than a quick answer. However, as a photographer, I decided to take a shot at answering the question.

If you scan through many modeling websites, you’ll see there’s a common question asked by new comers who want to be models: “What do I need to do to become a model?”

Usually members skip that question. I’m not sure why. Maybe it’s that the answer is a little more complex than a quick answer. Perhaps it’s that a good portion has to deal with genetics. It could even be experienced models don’t want the new competition entering the field.

I decided to take a shot, however, at answering the question.

What can I do to become a modelQ: What can I do to become a model?

A: To a writer, the advice is read as much as you can. To a model, I’d say look at as much as you can — in particular other photos of models.

Analytically, try to figure out what it is about the models you like. Is it their pose, is it their facial expression, do they look into the camera? Try to emulate that pose in the mirror.

Study books on posing. And if you’re really clever, study books on photographic composition. If you can deliver what the photographer is trying to capture, you’ll make life so easy he’ll be raving about you.

Another thought is to find pictures of models that look like you. There are some web sites where you can beam up a picture of yourself and it will give you celebrity matches. Perhaps hair styles, makeup, and clothes that work for them will also work for your looks and body type.

Take care of your body; keep your skin clean and healthy. Apart from good diet, steer clear of all the things you know you should. Modeling is based upon looks, and you have it in your control to keep them.

Know your body, be comfortable with it, and find make up that works for you. Photographers often go for the natural look, so keep that in mind the next time you want a sprawling tattoo or obvious body piercing. These won’t necessary stop you from being a model, but it can raise unnecessary barriers to entry. Imagine a bank looking to fill a teller position, which candidate has the higher probability of landing the job: someone dressed in punk with a lip ring and colored spiked hair, or, the candidate in an pressed shirt, tie, and jacket. Both might be equally capable and friendly, but one will have a harder time than the other.

Work on building a decent portfolio. The best way to do this is to find local photographers you trust and negotiate a Time for Prints/CD shoot. It costs you nothing but some time, and in return you get some great pictures.

Ideally, you want more photos that you know what to do with. Cull them down to the best of the best, you don’t need to show every photo you have. Make sure you get a variety of looks. You want to show you’re versatile. Demonstrate that you’re adaptable.

Post your portfolio where photographers can see you, and let them know about your availability, interest, and boundaries. You may get more TFP offers, you may get fixed rate sessions, you may get a set hourly rate. Take only the jobs you feel comfortable with.

Seek opportunities where the photography is going to get exposure, even if you have to do it at a reduced rate. The more exposure you get, the more you’ll be able to command later.

It’s important not to let things get to your head. When a model without serious experience wants to be compensated as someone who’s done it as a career, opportunities can start to dry up. Photographers just want to take the picture, not deal with a diva. Think of it much like a job interview; you wouldn’t hire someone to be your doctor if they simply wanted to be a doctor all their life and took a class in first aid. Experience is important. And you can get all you want with TFP/CD.

Be professional, be on time, and know when to say no. Consider setting up a website, something which doesn’t say “I got a MySpace account.” Show your styles and answer the who/what/when/where/why about yourself; let people know how to contact you, and get back with them promptly. Sometimes photographers are working under horrific deadlines, and reaching a viable model is all that’s needed. A quick response can give you the edge.

You might want to forge a relationship with a makeup artist and/or a favorite photographer. If you have a solid relationship with good communication and trust, the photo sessions will go seamlessly and productively. They in turn will become part of a mini-network and potentially bring opportunities to your door that you’d otherwise not have known about.

Eventually, demand may increase, and if it does you may want to get an agent. Usually it’s a while before one gets that far. You might not even need one.

Modeling is a competitive field, with new and younger models entering all the time. Switch your mental role about how you’d market yourself and you’ll see what you need to do to become that. You’re selling an image: yours.

Why no average models?

New models sometimes raise the point that there aren’t that many ‘average’ models that show up in media, catalogs, and pin-ups. Are average people skipped over? Is the genetic bias a wider gap than it ought to be? And why do there seem to be so few casting calls to the average person waiting to be discovered?

Why no average models

The very question itself, “Why no average models?” raises an interesting conflict that marketing has been struggling with for a long time. Because an “average” person does, indeed, show how a given product would look on an average person, giving a truer representation.

However, the problem is that often doesn’t look very flattering — and people, in large sample groups, tend to go for superficial looks rather than actual reality. As such, marketing tends to go for those images which convey, whether true or not, that purchasing their product will raise your self esteem in the direction of the presented ideal. That’s often good enough. It doesn’t have to actually deliver perfection.

When it comes to looking at people for the sake of looking at people, which is more attractive: Brad Pitt or the average beer-gut guy you find the barbershop who thinks styled hair is pointless? The eye clearly has a higher level of attraction to one over the other. Biologically, we can even measure it, even if psychologically we pretend to hide it. Playing to that hard-wired response sells products.

So, this might explain why the “average” look hasn’t been splashed all over the media; everything is about optimizing profits, not representing reality.

Now this is something surprising that one might find very comforting. The people I’ve selected to show in my online profiles are actually are not models and have no prior modeling experience. I do this deliberately because what my studio focuses on is taking average people, revealing their extra hidden beauty, and capturing that — I want to be able to show my clients that they too, no matter how average looking they think they are, can look that good. And, if you’re going to make a bold claim like that, one better have the portfolio to back it up. If I just simply showed all my experienced model/actress shots, people think “well, yea, she’s a professional and I’m not that pretty” and I’ve lost a potential client. Customers rarely seem to be looking for how technically competent one’s photography skills are, but rather how good you can make them look.

Here’s where things get slightly obscured. If an “average” person is photographed to look like an above-average person, are they no longer considered average?

An employee at Kinko’s shared this astounding observation to me: numerous women customers bring in portfolios to have various images re-produced en masse. He’d look at the jaw-dropping photos and ask, “Who’s this?” only to be more surprised when the answer was “That’s me!” He reports the his customers almost always, without the added magic of the camera, were not hot but actually less attractive than the average woman. Sans makeup and pushup, quite a number of models are plain ordinary.

In fact, we know this to be true; browse any celebrity-stalker web site where someone has caught a celebrity when their publicist hasn’t been able to filter the image from public consumption. Such images range from unflattering to just someone you’d pass by in a crowd.

You have to compare your average self with their average self, or your modeling headshot to their modeling headshot. If you compare apples to oranges, it’s not just an unfair disadvantage, but an unrealistic one. Many people are far more attractive than they give themselves credit for. Does the makeup really make you that much prettier, or is it that your belief that it does actually turn on your self-confidence?

That said, I’ll point out that an experienced model is a joy to work with; it requires far less work on part of the photographer and one typically get a high quality product in far less shoot time.

I suspect it’s assumed that an experienced model (or her agent) will know where to go find placement casting calls, and thereby save the casting director a lot of time by skipping inexperienced labor. Running a photo shoot is very expensive, and if you can cut this time down, you save money.

This is different from casting calls which try to discover someone new; those usually happen in areas of high density to increase the odds, such as major cities.

Escorts at Photo Shoots

There’s a common concern often expressed by models: they prefer female photographers to male ones. While personal safety is expressed as the rationalization, almost always the sentiment is coupled with a side note about photographers not wanting escorts present.

It may surprise you that photographers don’t care if you bring an escort. Just share this with the escort first…

There’s a common concern often expressed by models: they prefer female photographers to male ones. While personal safety is expressed as the rationalization, almost always the sentiment is coupled with a side note about photographers not wanting escorts present.

Several observations about this line of thinking: One, if you’re uncomfortable with a photographer, you shouldn’t be doing a shoot — period. Two, you should really be bringing an escort to your female photographers anyhow, especially if you go on location; what makes you think she isn’t the ‘front’ and there isn’t a load of thugs hiding in the back room. Three, you should always do your homework, talk with with references, and make sure the photographer can be located. A photographer that hides their contact information isn’t one you should be dealing with.

Professional photographers usually don’t have a problem with bringing an escort or your pet elephant for that matter. What they do dislike is the photo session being disturbed. Here are the top annoying factors, even for female photographers:

Escorts at Photo Shoots

  1. The escort getting curious and messing with or breaking the equipment, simply getting in the way, or asking questions of the photographer during the shoot.
  2. The escort wanting to be photographed as well. This includes “just a few at the end.”
  3. The model being distracted by the escort, whether by talking or looking to the escort for validation.

Explain these concerns to the escort up front and they usually evaporate. With the talking and non-verbal validation, I find that male escorts tend to behave much better than “female friends who decided to come along.”

When someone brings an escort, I usually hand them a reflector which keeps them busy, fills their hands, and makes them have a vested interest in getting the job done. Babysitting an escort in this manner reduces risk of the top three issues, but the model is now getting far less attention and most likely, less photos. A good escort will stay out of the way and quietly monitor that no funny business is going on — which, after a short time, will get very boring.

One other interesting point is worth mentioning, some models get self-conscious (even professional ones) when someone they know is watching them; this can ruin a shoot, which ends up wasting everyone’s time. If the escort sits in a waiting room only a shout away, often you can get around this problem.

The best solution I’ve seen is to bring the escort, let them sit on the sidelines until both they and you feel comfortable with the arrangement, at that point let them leave with the photographer’s business card, the address they dropped the model off at, and a known pre-arranged check-in time for the model to call via her cell phone. Having the escort call to check in is even the worse than being there, it totally breaks the pace to stop and locate a purse.

If you do bring an escort, let the photographer know in advance — especially for location shoots — as if an extra person is riding in the vehicle, sometimes alternate travel arrangements are necessary (e.g., taking the van instead of the two-seater car).

Follow this simple advice and you should have no problem bringing an escort, thereby doubling the number of photographers and broadening your portfolio photo contents.

Model Compensation

This blog addresses solutions that are fair, as well as touching on factors that go into deciding amounts, why that’s the case, and what models can do to their profiles to avoid being skipped over aside from not making common photographic mistakes.

It’s understandable that models would prefer paid shoots, but it’s also important to recognize that the photographer does as well.

For a model, the photo session ends with the last shutter click, but for the photographer that’s when the real work begins. This reveals why photographers can be so expensive. Add risk, like missing an important wedding moment, at the pricing tier jumps again to astronomical levels.

In all cases, I believe a model should be fairly compensated. The debate will boil down to what that compensation is and that expectation should always be spelled out up front before anything progresses.

There are many factors that go into what value compensation should be set at. There are three big ones.

Expertise, in particular, plays a large part because an experienced model arrives on time (and sober), knows how to interact with the camera and the photographer with minimal direction, assumes appropriate poses naturally that fit the context of the scene, pauses at the right times as to minimize the number of discards, and she can make facial expressions look genuine. The higher compensation comes from making the photographer’s job easier and producing higher quality product in a shorter timeframe.

The model’s looks also play into the equation, primarily because that sets the demand for the model and in turn that affects availability. Basic economic models of supply and demand clearly state the higher the demand, the more things cost. Hence a model that isn’t in as much demand will likely be unable to command rates that one is. This is why models should to TFP deals to build their portfolios in order to raise their demand, even if just from gaining additional experience.

And the other primary factor which affects cost is how much skin the model is willing to show and what she’s willing to do in front of the camera. Unlike looks, this is one area where all models have total control. It can also be one of the bigger money makers.

Model Compensation

The photographer has to determine a rate that factors these accordingly, and many other things (availability, short-term notice, …) as well into the compensation rate.

Just because both models are willing to stand in front of the camera for equal time does not mean they are providing equal value to the photographer. [It is also true that multiple photographers do not provide equal representation value to a model, which is why one looks at a photographer’s portfolio before accepting a trade-based assignment. Skill, equipment, and post-processing abilities are the parameters the photographer has to measure up to.]

Here’s a reasonable compensation paradigm that is actually fair to both parties equally:

  • If a model is hired by the photographer, the compensation is cash. (Pose for me.)
  • If there is a trade of services, her compensation is the photos and his the model’s time.
  • If the photographer is hired by the model, the compensation is cash. (Make me a portfolio.)

This makes sense from other business methodologies: if you were hired to do a task, such as frame a painting, you get paid, you don’t get a copy of the painting, free frames, or free framing services. An expert framer, incidentally, would be paid more too, and the resulting craftsmanship would be obvious. Quality, not time, is what’s sought.

The task a photographer is hiring for is to have someone take specific direction so they can produce a precise product. To get cash and photos would be double compensation and thereby a double hit on the photographer; most likely that would be the last time the photographer ever cast or recommended the model.

That said, there is nothing wrong with the model requesting some pictures in leu of some portion of the cash. Sometimes the photographer can do this, but quite often if the photographer has been hired on behalf of client, it’s stipulated in the contract that he can not. Hence the cash, which usually comes from a budget that the photographer may, or may not, have control over.

If a model wants photos and tear sheets, that should be negotiated up front, not after the shoot. Again, the photographer may have contractual bindings.

Some models will be fortunate enough to find photographers who will give away photos in addition to cash. Models, if you get cash, don’t expect this, but be grateful if it happens to you — the photographer has figured out a win-win situation that you both can benefit from. Don’t be mistaken, this action is somewhat self serving to the photographer, as he’s looking for extra visibility and word of mouth advertising from you to widen his client base.

Paying gigs are more likely for models when the client needs a specific look. If there’s just a generic need, photographers are going to draw more from TFP/CD deals. Knowing this, the more variety a model can pull off in her portfolio, the easier she just made it for the photographer to just to cut a check than to keep searching.

There does seem to be a subset of models that have a higher impression of their own market value than the market will actually tolerate. New models don’t seem to have this problem much, experienced models have a very good sense of worth (and a portfolio to prove it), but it’s most common among the narrow my-portfolio-is-cell-phone-pictures / I-want-a-job-pay-me modeling-wannabes. These models are usually difficult to work with and are problematic after the shoot, having shifting expectations of the deliverable. Photographers will actively try to avoid them and anyone that fits that stereotype.

Models: if your portfolio reeks of indicators that you fall into this pile (whether you really do or not), be aware that you’re hurting your chances to get a casting call, profile comments, TFP/CD deals, and valuable experience. If you want higher compensation, simply do what those did who are earning it. Their profiles are right there in the open on many modeling sites. Your chances of getting directed casting calls will increase.

Models: Getting Discovered

As a photographer, I spend a good deal of time looking a model profiles, cataloging possible candidates. There’s a pretty stark line between existing models and those that want to be models. The fidelity of the line, however, may be hard to see from the modeling side of the table.

New models can increase their chances by applying a few little secrets that will help your profile from quietly getting skipped over.

I doubt it’s too far of a stretch to assume that the primary goal of anyone with an online modeling profile is to increase their personal chances of getting approached with a modeling gig.

As a photographer, I spend a good deal of time looking a model profiles, cataloging possible candidates. There’s a pretty stark line between existing models and those that want to be models. The fidelity of the line, however, may be hard to see from the modeling side of the table.

This blog entry is aimed at helping new comers increase their chances by passing on a few little secrets that will help your online modeling profile from quietly getting skipped over. You’ll get inside the minds of those looking at your profile photos, as to be better match yours to what they’re looking for.

Getting Discovered as a Model

We’ve all met a waitress who says she’s an actress and is waiting to be discovered. But as an non-emotionally invested third party, it evident to you know what’s wrong: she’s waiting tables, when she should be acting, in anything, if not for the exposure, then the experience.
RULE #1: Don’t wait to be discovered, get yourself out there — don’t say what you want to be, do what you want to be.

If you can’t take quality photos of yourself, find a photographer online and negotiate a TFP/CD deal (it’s free), then post those photos to your profile.

Clients and photographers have to know what you look like. That means in the modeling world, photos speaks volumes. The more, the better. A model that expresses desire (“I’ve always wanted to model my whole life”), but has no photos has given no point of reference to make a casting decision. Worse yet, this is precisely the kind of person a scammer can target by playing to emotional appeal.
RULE #2: You can’t be discovered with an empty portfolio. Post photos.

First impressions count, and you know this to be true from when you meet new people at social engagements. It’s also true for a virtual encounter. The first thing people will see is your avatar — your profile’s picture should be of you. Low-res, grainy images are unflattering.
RULE #3: Choose a good quality profile picture that makes people want to click on it.

If your profile picture is your resume, which is designed to get a larger slice of follow-on attention, then your profile photos are your interview which showcases what you’re capable of. Unfortunately this is the point where, after a quick browse, many profiles get skipped over.

The problem is not so much the model, but the presentation. If there isn’t enough detail to tell what a model looks like, it’s just about the same as not having any photos.
RULE #4: Presentation is everything.
(MUST READ: See my blog post titled Online Model Portfolios: 7 Common Problems to avoid making a bad online portfolio.)

Speaking of getting noticed, consider how most people find your portfolio: it isn’t by searches or random browsing, it’s by your activity on the system. Participate. Leave comments, join groups, start discussions, post photos. Anything you do raises the chance of someone seeing your profile picture and clicking on it.
RULE #5: Participate to be seen.

All of the rules boil down to effectively selling yourself, in particular, your image. Show the product (you) in the best possible light (your photo gallery) and market it (raise awareness by getting it seen more often).

Online Model Portfolios: 7 Common Problems

After scanning hundreds of modeling portfolios online, I’ve noticed a number of common problems which are preventing potential models from being taken seriously or that get their profiles skipped over. Here’s are seven common mistakes to avoid.

I’ve scanned hundreds of modeling portfolio profiles and have noticed common photo problems. Simply avoid these and your profile will have a much more professional look. That also means you’ll get more comments, and that translates to a higher popularity rating on the site.

Photo Mistake #1 – Face-on, arm-dangling photos.
The camera isn’t going to suck a beautiful image out of you just standing there. You’re a model, right? Pose. Not sure how? Twist your torso, tilt your head, shift your weight to one leg, bed an arm, and put your hands somewhere. Mimic a pose from a magazine.

Photo Mistake #2 – Dead facial expressions, or worse, snarling.
Avoid glaring into the camera with a pissed off look. Don’t be void of expression. Smile, look into the camera, and engage the viewer. For a sincere smile, actually think of something that makes you happy until a smile naturally comes, don’t just go through the motions; the camera will pick up the difference.

Photo Mistake #3 – Blurry and out of focus shots.
There’s a big difference between an expert’s use of depth of field, which has selective sharpness, and a photo that has no sharpness and is totally out of focus. While it might be possible to tell what you kind of look like, you won’t get a gig based on this. Post sharp, clear images of yourself.

There are too common ways a blurry picture results. One is that you have the camera too close and it can’t focus. Two, and this is the most common, is that you’re holding the camera at arms length and there isn’t enough light in the room — so the shutter stays open longer, you can’t hold perfectly still (no one can), and that results in blur.

To fix this, have someone else take the photo. And if you can’t, simply increase the amount of light, or put the camera in auto-timer mode and prop it up on something.

Photo Mistake #4 – Photo is too small.
Again, being able to see and make out detail is important to someone who’s selecting a model. If your photo is an inch or two in size, it’s too small to be of use. The bigger, the better.

Photo Mistake #5 – Digital Extremes.
If a photo is too light and washed out, too dark and covered in shadow, or too contrasty then it doesn’t have enough detail to be of use. Mind you, it might be a pretty photo, but if you can’t be seen, then there’s not enough information to make a decision about selecting you.

Photo Mistake #6 – Distracting elements in the foreground and background.
If you’re going to take a picture to sell yourself, then make it count. Use a decent background, we don’t want to see a toilet, towel racks, tile, or shampoo bottles behind you; while bathrooms have mirrors, they have other things that say “unprofessional.” If doing an overhead shot, remove the pile of laundry behind you or the clothes you just took off that are crumpled at your feet. Make sure there’s no television on or person walking in the background. Make sure there’s no junk on the table in front of you. Let nothing detract from you.

Photo Mistake #7 – Flat and dull photos.
Pictures taken with an on-camera flash have a habit of being harsh and unflattering. If you’re able to illuminate from the side instead, and not use the flash, your picture will have light and shadow, and that means visual depth. If you must use the flash, put a white index card in front of the flash at a 45 degree angle, and “bounce” the light off the ceiling. You’ll get a much gentler and flattering image.

A good profile that has a high chance of getting a model work consists of professional quality images, represents a variety of styles, and include tear sheets if available.

Don’t know how to work your camera? That’s ok, you don’t have to! Find a photographer online, negotiate a TFP/CD deal (there’s no cost), and post the session to your portfolio. Keep adding to it, doing as many TFP deals as it takes to get noticed.

Note that if a photographer enjoys working with you and produces good product, there’s a much higher chance you’ll be sought again, and referenced to friends, for paying gigs.

Models: Getting more from a TFP/CD shoot

TFP/CD is an arrangement whereby a model and a photographer exchange professional services instead of one hiring the other. Surprisingly, though, many new models don’t know it exists, and those that do have some serious misunderstandings about it. Here are two secrets models might like to know.

Getting more from a TFP shootTFP/CD means “Time for Print” / “Time for CD,” and it’s an arrangement whereby a model and a photographer exchange professional services instead of one hiring the other.

Surprisingly, though, many new models don’t know it exists, and those that do have some serious misunderstandings about it.

I happened to be reading a discussion forum where some photographers were discussing photo shoots and the models were wanting quick turn around times on CDs. Reasonable. But then it dawned on me, perhaps it wasn’t clear too all what caused the delay. By the time I was done, I derived two secrets models might like to know.

For photographers, setting expectations up front is really important. Failure to do lets misconceptions propagate.

For instance, an inexperienced model may do a 2 hour shoot and roughly estimate the photographer took 500 pictures based on shots-per-minute during a scene and how long the total session was. When a CD doesn’t arrive within the next few days, anxiety replaces anticipation, and when it does arrive there may be only a handful of images leaving a model to wonder why it took so long. But what’s really happening? Did the model get screwed? Was the photographer lazy?

Is there anything that could have been done to get even more images, get some them sooner, or even get even higher quality images? Actually, yes.

The photographer in a TFP/CD deal is just as concerned about his or her reputation as a model is and doesn’t want anything substandard floating in the wild. As such images rarely go from camera to CD to model without review and processing.

Here’s the same scenario from the other side of the camera:

In reality, the photographer may have taken only 200 pictures. Photos are often taken in bursts and during makeup and wardrobe changes the camera isn’t firing; this counts for a lot of down time.

Of the photos, there will always be some that didn’t turn out: eye blinks, unwanted motion blur, lens flare, a horrible facial expression, hair obstructing the face, an unflattering fold of skin, an oil shine, a harsh shadow, undesirable lint, fly away hair, hot spots, exposure alterations, etc. The bursting allows for lots of micro differences to choose from, so that the best of a given set can be selected. To the untrained eye it can simply look like a lot of the same picture. This narrows down the usable images considerably.

Also neglected is that many photographers now also do their own photo editing. And that’s where the really time-consuming part starts. A single photo might take an hour just to get right. The higher the resolution photo and the sharper it is, the more time it takes. Often a photographer inspects every pore of skin. So, even if 20% of the photos are usable, this can represents a full-time week’s worth of editing.

Think about it; that’s 40hrs of follow-up work from a mere 2hr shoot. The misconception is that pictures are ready once taken, usually they aren’t. And, in a TFP/CD shoot, there’s no cash income from this job, so it’s very likely that this post-processing time has to come from in-between other paying gigs, which pushes out the delivery further depending on other commitments and schedules.

A studio uses TFP/CD to put their best foot forward, and that’s why the model greatly benefits from this. It’s unspoken, but often TFP/CD shoots get a little more time, care, and attention; one isn’t producing product, but art.

Sometimes whole segments that looked like a good idea during the shoot just don’t have the magic when everything is seen in context. As such, the photographer will often cull down from the usable photos to just the absolute best of the best and then spend a lot of time and detail on just those.

Believe it or not, the photographer also wants the model to have the images as soon as possible, because if they’re ready for the model’s portfolio, they’re also ready for the photographer’s.

I think the best advice to a photographer in this case is to under commit and over deliver. Don’t say it will take a week if it will take two. Explain that the goal is to get some small number of high quality photos, regardless of how many are taken.

And as for information to the model, the shoot isn’t over for the photographer when the last picture has been taken; that’s when the laborious and time consuming meticulous editing begins.

But here’s some secret advice that will get a model better product, sooner, and more of it:

1) If you are patient and have the extra time, offer during the TFP/CD shoot to allow the photographer to experiment with the lighting. Almost always there are a number of experimental configurations a photographer is secretly wanting to try, but he knows it’s high risk because it might not work perfectly and he doesn’t want to send you home with nothing. Conversely, it could really work out special and you’d have something new, amazing, and highly creative for your portfolio. By allowing for creative freedom, which might not work out, you actually increase your chances of getting super-spectacular shots. Photographers kill for models who let them tinker with experimental lighting.

2) If you are a tech-savvy model and are willing to accept electronic delivery instead of a CD, many photographers will happily send you email attachments or URLs where you can get your photos as they become ready. Because there is no bulk collection with a looming deadline, the photographer will often end up giving you more photos over the course of time, but you also benefit from getting those already done sooner. Plus, since you’ve set up a venue for delivery, a photographer revisiting prior shoots experimenting with new editing techniques has the means of sending you future updates for your portfolio as well.

Connecting Models and Photographers… why so hard?

There are numerous sites that proclaim to connect models and photographers, however based on the design and business models I’ve seen, I don’t think it can work in present form. Here’s why.

As a photographer that photographs models, there’s two primary goals that any website that tries to connect models and photographers should aim for:
Model: Leah M. - Image Copyrighted by Walt Stoneburner

1. Assisting a photographer in finding the right model.

2. Assisting the client in finding the right photographer.

All else is peripheral.

The idea is that if you’re a model looking for work, you post your portfolio online and photographers approach you with gigs. Conversely, if you’re a photographer, you post your portfolio and jobs start coming out of the wood work. The reality is that few sites can deliver on the promise adequately, not to a fault of the site’s objective, but due to design, business model complexities, or subtleties pertaining to the problem of brokering.

Naturally, for any such site to work you’re going to need a critical mass of both kinds of users just to have a wide enough selection to make this happen. As such, it’s important not to alienate users — something that is very easy to do with bad design or practice. It’s not enough that a site be free.

The closest site that I’ve come across that seems to have the right idea is www.ModelMayhem.com. It’s search capability is right on target. You tell it that you are looking for models in your local area that are some number of miles from your zipcode, that are between the ages of 18-24, female, 5’2″ – 5’7″, olive skin, with shoulder length black hair, green eyes, and poof — out pops a number of candidates.

This is the way it should work. You tell the criteria about what you need, and it finds people with those attributes.

The problem is the interface is klunky, the portfolio space limited, the navigation is horribly disorganized, and pretty much anything other than models is left wanting. Yet it’s still usable.

I wish it had a way to describe the kinds of services photographers offered and made them in a searchable fashion as well. Oh well, at least finding models isn’t problematic.

Such locator services are not a social network, nor are they a dating service. They’re supposed to be resources that connect professional with professional, with the added bonus of having a reasonable idea of what you’re getting. It frustrates me when a site is designed around chit-chat and messaging. Simply put let one professional find another, preview their work, and then get in contact with them by email; don’t obscure things. A site that works gets traffic, it doesn’t need fudging to get visitors.

Conversely, I just deleted my account over at www.aMuseBook.com, a web site that professes to do the same thing: connect models and photographers. I’d argue not only that it doesn’t, but that it physically can’t in my personal opinion — it’s a business model problem gone awry.

While better organized, and certainly much prettier, it’s search capabilities are downright awful. The best geographical resolution is state-level. So, if you’re looking for a model in Texas, that’s all of Texas. Additionally, providing search criteria for attributes just isn’t possible, which means locating a specific model by looks isn’t doable. And if you can’t find candidates, you aren’t going to be hiring.

Here’s another bad design choice that just seems obvious. If you want to find a model, you typically are looking for an age bracket, yes? Well, the site doesn’t let you search by age, instead you have to search by a specific birthday, which is stupid. Oh, and that’s a Day – Month – Year birthday at that. Even searching by year alone isn’t helpful, because simply year subtraction doesn’t give age.

Now while aMuseBook does give you more space to store your photos, it unlocks features using a point system. You gain points by commenting on people’s pictures and telling your friends to join. What becomes transparent very quickly is that the site is not structured to make contacts, but to get you to churn through pages so that Google Ads get thrown in your face generating an alternate revenue stream. I quickly got tired of being told in every email I have to “use” the site and it will ‘work’ for me.

Hogwash. If I can’t locate a model or post a comprehensive portfolio, then neither I, nor the models, are getting any serious value out of the site.

Adding insult to injury, the site gives you the ability to provide URLs to your own site; this sounds good at first, until you realize that many models and photographers keep their photos on Flickr. Why? Because Flickr is great for managing photos. But what does aMuseBook do for those sites? It blocks them out, showing up as www.*****.com, and when I questioned the site admin about it, I got back a response stating they didn’t want their site for depositing competitor URLs and not another portfolio site.

Wait a second. The service is there to help me find people by showing them my portfolio but they don’t want me to show them my portfolio if it’s elsewhere? Plus I can’t post my portfolio unless I leave comments that I wouldn’t have otherwise. That’s stacking the deck and gives unrealistic feedback. And when points are rewarded for clicking on ads, I’m pretty sure that’s against Google’s terms of service for AdSense.

If people are churning pages leaving “Nice smile” comments, how is one to know which comments are real (and therefore useful) versus people just trying to collect points? The information itself becomes devalued. Thus the business structure and the design alienates users in the short term, while the lack of utility alienates them in the long term. It can’t be viable.

And that’s why I deleted my account over there: It wasn’t usable or productive.

No wonder it’s so hard for models and photographers to get connected. I wish there were a simple directory that focused on doing one thing and one thing well, connecting professionals. It’s a hard problem, but the person that cracks that nut can steal a whole lot of business from all these other sites without trying too hard.

Fundamentally, the problem is that a brokering agent has to provide and organize information. Limiting it, not being able to search it, or failing to have a positive user experience drives away the very assets that are needed to make the site work. This appears to be a case where a well simple organized directory could be a winner-take-all.


UPDATE: I have found an awesome site for models, photographers, and makeup artists. It’s call Miss Online and it allows unlimited photo uploads with no point limitation schemes. It also includes discussions, groups, blogs, and email. The site is very active and quite attractive to use; advertising is at a minimum, and you aren’t coerced into clicking through tons of pages. Plus, and here’s the real proof: as a photographer I’ve had more exchanges with models with this one site than all the other sites combined. It does get you connected.

Jaw Dropping Photo Retouching

Put aside everything you think you know about photo retouching, as here are some serious resources for doing it just as the pros do.

In addition to capturing the perfect image and having the perfect lighting, you also need to know how to do photographic retouching.

While many of these sources revolve around Adobe’s Photoshop, you can also use Corel’s Painter, Gimp, GimpShop, or even Pixelator.
Yes, you know to shoot in RAW mode.

You may even know about Raw Developer, to eek out what your photo editing software can’t.

Huey Pro by PantoneYou might even know about the Pantone Huey Pro, which is the dual-monitor color calibration device.

Forget everything you know or think you know, here are the sources you need for high-end professional photo retouching!

Color Correction


A good photo has to take into account its color space, and it turns out the simple color wheel model is actually fairly simplistic. A color space looks more like a stretched and distorted multi-dimensional field. By deliberately contorting the color space, it’s possible to do everything from white-balance to invoke moods to increasing contrast.

Additionally, your camera has the ability to pick up more detail that you’re able to discern or your monitor can display. By stretching and twisting the color space, you can draw out more details in areas where you need it.

Instead of using the Levels control, building a strong command of advanced Curves will do wonders. Curves can be used on different channels. And, with selective masking, it’s possible to create images that are physically impossible for a camera to capture.

Curves effectively do a translation, but instead of linear relationship, the change can be dramatic in some places, less so in others. Think of it like a color spectrum on a rubber band, you can stretch portions of it.

The eye dropper tools in the Curves dialog help identify what should be considered white, what should be considered midtone, and what should be considered black for transformation. It may come as a surprise that it might not be ideal to have a pure black or a pure white.

Mastery of Curves allows you to deal with under exposed, over exposed, and color casted images. With a well exposed picture, it will help make the subject pop. It also affords some very clever use of creative coloring. And let’s not forget controlled desaturation can lead to many splendid images.

Once you learn how to really use Curves, you’ll have no need for Levels.

Certain color-space models play off of different strengths. Color need not be RGB.

Print, for instance, looks great when CMYK is used.

It turns out that for drawing out detail, LAB color space makes a world of difference.

LAB space is magical because it puts the luminance on it’s own channel. The tradeoff is that red/green become opposites on the ‘a’ channel, and blue/yellow become opposites on the ‘b’ channel. This works well, as often it’s the brightness you want to affect without washing out the color. For instance, LAB mode can remove unwanted fog and haze, magically pulling color out of seemingly nowhere.

Additionally, the Unsharp Mask can be applied to just the luminosity channel, pulling out extra details. If there’s noise in an RGB’s blue channel, one can covert to LAB, apply the Dust’n’Scratches filter to the B channel, and convert back. Blurring A and B will hide imperfections.

The A and B channels can be used to accent color. And if an image has an unwanted color cast, moving the curve out of A’s or B’s center point removes it.

LAB also has another amazing use: getting amazing selection masks from the channels.

Color Enhancement


Scott Kelby, a Photoshop guru, has identified that there’s really only seven steps needed to really push an image to the limits. This can make a horrible picture acceptable, and a well exposed image astounding.


  1. Use Open the file in RAW mode, even if it’s a JPEG, and pre-process there.
    Fix the white balance, and then do things like warm it up. Fix the exposure and twiddle the details. Information that’s clipped can be brought back into the color space.

  2. Perform the Curves adjustments.
    Bring out detail.

  3. Adjust the Shadows and Highlights.
    Pull out more detail, and set the mood. Good contrast makes a dramatic photo.

  4. Paint with light.
    Layers, gradients, and layer blending can simulate camera filters. A neutral density, for instance, can bring out the blues in your skies. In a more controlled sense, this is non-destructive dodging and burning.

  5. Channels Adjustments using LAB color space.
    By applying an image to itself with soft light, in LAB mode this produces aesthetic contrasts.

  6. Use Layer Blends and Layer Masks.
    Often the whole image won’t need uniform changes, this step brings all the elements together.

  7. Sharpening with the Unsharp Mask and fading the Luminosity afterward.
    Extra sharpness can be pulled out to provide what looks like a really in focus image. Doing it this way removes color halos that may appear.
You don’t apply every step for every photo, and it’s important to recognize less can be more. The cumulative effect of these steps is what get results. Also worth mentioning, the order is important.

Professional Retouching


Most retouching instructions inadvertently make a model’s skin look like plastic. They focus on the Gaussian Blur filter, screening layers, and use the Clone tool, and the Spot Heal Brush. This might be acceptable for small web images, assuming you want that look.

It’s not what the professional do.

Why not? Those activities destroy information in the image. That means the image looks fake and retouched when viewed up close or when it appears in print.

To do things right, you need a solid command of color spaces, the Healing Brush, the History Brush, Dodge/Burn brush, Warp/Liquify tools, and Unsharp Mask. Most changes are made with Adjustment Layers, so the image is actually a composite of small, controlled alterations. This is time consuming and can be tedious if you don’t know the numerous shortcuts of your post-processing application.

To make a clean image, one uses the Healing Brush with sampling from all over the image. Reshaping parts of an image requires the Liquify tool, and to alter the whole image the Warp tool is used. These activities can damage data, which is why after using them cleanup with the History Brush is necessary. The goal is to preserve detail and remove imperfections.

Since the magic of photography is in capturing the light, not the subject, having controlled contrast makes an image stand out from the rest. What makes a good professional photo retoucher isn’t the blemish removal or pushing of pixels, it’s the re-sculpting of the image in 3D.

In this context, I’m not talking about modeling tools like Poser, Blender, Animation:Master, or DAZ:3D. No, I’m talking about the illusion of depth created with shadows and light.

Face Painters are do this to reshape the face, using smooth gradient blending and edges to create fantastic illusions. The dodge and burn tools, along with an decent understanding of human anatomy, will let you get a model closer to that perfect body.

The insight comes when you realize things that are further away are darker, and things that are closer are lighter. By performing slight emphasis on naturally falling light, shadow, and edges, it’s possible to enhance the perceived depth of the photo’s subject. By adding or removing light, it’s possible to alter the shape of the subject in very flattering ways that are not perceptible unless you compare the image to the original.

Total reconstruction is possible when sampling can be used to build the right textures, hue and saturation can set the right colors, and dodging and burning can create the right shadows to convey a shape or edge.

Bringing It All Together


The name of the game is contrast and sharpness, and with the resources above, you’ll be able to produce some jaw dropping images.

Mind you, there’s no magical automated formula. One image can take literally hours, but the results are worth it.


Photo by Walt Stoneburner