There's been a rather lively thread raging on the Glamour1 main forum. It was started by some guy in Florida who... well, no one's sure what he does, exactly, but he either manages, pimps, publicizes, or simply hangs out with a bunch of wannabe models. Actually, I think many of them might be young strippers who ocassionally moonlight in front of cameras or shake their pretty behinds at trade shows. But maybe that's just me, thinking with my jaded mind... again.
The thread has, amongst other issues, gotten into the area of TFP/TFCD work. This guy has argued, essentially, that it's a waste of time for "his girls" to participate in any TFP/TFCD work because the shooter always get the better end of the deal. He discounts the shooter's time, experience, and gear as being worth little in comparison to the model's time. Even when someone asked if one of his models were offered to "test" with Richard Avedon, if Mr. Avedon were still alive, would it benefit his models? Not really: He believes Avedon would be getting the better end of the deal.
Dude please!
Anyway, I chimed in (again) at that point and wrote: "Once again, your ignorance is showing. It isn't MOSTLY about the model's fee being waived, it's MOSTLY about both the model's and the shooter's fees being waived. (Note: This guy had said that TFP/TFCD was "mostly" about the models' fees being waived.)
Time is money. Both time and money are things we spend to further our careers. Often, time is invested in hopes of accomplishing something that will put more money in our pockets. If a model has an opportunity to invest time with a photographer with, as an example already mentioned, the fame and stature of a Richard Avedon, she'd be an idiot to pass it up over not being paid. As a model, spending time in front of someone like Avedon's camera could generate way more money and prestige for her. Down the road, that investment has a greater chance of paying off than most piddly assignments for marginal rates.
Your girls attitudes on this subject, at least as you've describe them, have a typical stripper's or hooker's or porn star's perspective on this issue: Mercenary in the extreme with little or no appreciation of the future benefits of investing some time--without cash being put in their pockets--and what it could mean to a modeling career. This means, for the majority of them, they'll go nowhere as models... nowhere.
A porn star of some notoriety, Aurora Snow, has made tons of cash being the porn star she is. A year ago (or so), the well-known and celebrated photography team of Klinko and Indrani inquired about shooting her-- TFP. Since Aurora has some brains as well as hopes of being more than another pretty chick who chugs man-meat on a porn set, she not only jumped at the chance to shoot with Klinko and Indrani, she flew out to New York from L.A. on her own dime, paid her own expenses, gave up whatever cash she would have made if she stayed available for porn work. Why? For the opportunity to be photographed by the Klinko and Indrani team. That cost her more than time-- it cost her a few bucks to be sure.
My advice to the Fireball Models: Lose you." (Note: Fireball Models are "his" girls.)
Someone then noted that, with me suggesting the girls of Fireball Models "lose" this guy, the "gloves" were off. I responded with, "Sometimes ya gotta bare-handed smack someone upside the head to try and knock some sense into them. In this case, I doubt it will make an impression. He's already argued against logic and sound advice with everyone who's posted. But then, he does things differently." (Note: This guy doing things "differently" was an often-seen defense, by him, in response to much of the "logic and sound advice" the forum's members offered him.)
Here's some advice for models: If you have an opportunity to shoot TFP/TFCD with a photographer whose work seems like it would either add images to your port that would benefit you or whose notoriety or stature as a photographer would increase potential bookers' perception of you, don't just agree to the shoot, jump at the chance! And if some guy tells you different, i.e., he tells you that your time is worth more than the shooter's time, ignore this imbecile. He's looking out for himself and for what his relationship with you will do for him, not what the experience and results of the TFP/TFCD shoot might do for you.
Pics posted are of Ms. Aurora Snow. I don't recall if I've posted these images of Aurora already before. If I have, I'm fairly confident most of you can visually endure experiencing her again.
7 comments:
This is, without a doubt, one of your best articles. Thank you.
I've always wondered what TFP / TFCD stand for, and have had little luck finding the definition... Could you enlighten?
TFP = Trade for Pics (Usually printed)
TFCD = Trade for CD (of the pics)
The terms are a little redundant as the "trade for" agreement might include both but, in a nutshell, it's arrangement where a shooter and a model get together and each contribute, i.e., the model the modeling and the shooter the photography, and the model ends up with pics she or he can use to promote themselves and the shooter ends up with the same.
Looks like the thread in question has "disappeared" too bad it was entertaining.
I saw the thread at G1 when it was just getting started. Checked out the website and saw the note that "it costs photographers" nothing to shoot TFCD. Then I thought about the money I've got invested in my gear and business - well over 6 figures. So even if I assume my time is worthless, certainly the money I have to spend "just to get out of bed in the morning" must carry some value. Thanks for your post here, I resisted joining the thread at G1.
Gotta love this Blog, Mr D. :) Excellent write up on this one!
It's a well spent 5 minutes everyday! Just wanted to comment!
-Mook
Hi Jimmy,
Just a little off the subject. Richard Avedon did a lot of great fashion work. But his personal art work showed his statement, not usually showing the model in a good light. I have seen some examples of his contact sheets, where the shot he chose for printing was the least flattering of the group. A great shot with lot's of emotion, but not the one a model would want to portray themselves.
Olli from GG
I followed the G1 thread and think you summarized it quite fairly. I personally found his position quite puzzling - especially the recommendation to turn down shoots with photographers regardless of their professional stature and abilities.
Again, I enjoy your insights. And the eye candy is not exactly a deterent.
Post a Comment