Quote:
Originally Posted by petiteassman
you say whenguys do the photography all you get are tits and ass pics. being they are marketing to guys like us who are predominatly interested in tits and ass is that really so bad. second you say guys who do photography for sex are sleezebags yet doing sex for money is ok. if the guy takes his cash earnings and buys sex from you with it is it ok
|
Ok, i do understand your points, but disagree with them, even if they might sound logical at first glance ... I do see your point about tits and ass, and here i agree, but also there are different ways of tits and ass :-). No playboy photographer would trade his services for sex and i regard these photos as mostly tits and ass (but in a good way). The comments about tits and ass was regarded to non-professional photographers, which mostly are the ones who do either TFP or want sex in return. Tits and ass i refer to photos, where the only thing on the photo is looking good is tits and ass (in a bad way). And face and legs and whatnot are looking fat or the pose is stupid. Most unprofessionals do exactly that. So you are correct with your statement, i should have made it precise ;-). Not all tits and ass is necessary bad photography :-), i agree.
Its not a bad thing per se, but you want to stick out of the crowd if you are going to "pay" for your shootings in one way or the other.
As to "service for service" - generally speaking you are correct. But - non-generally and realistically speaking i`df say you are wrong. Its plain and simple mathematics.
1. A person that is good at what he/she does, would not trade her services for anything else except for cash. As i pointed out - real photographers don`t do that- because they could hardly put their education any further IF they do (We are talking about two strangers doing that as well - no one that is serious offers such things to strangers UNLESS it is extremely beneficial for HIM). Its not like the photographer in question is doing "social work" for the poor models so he can do something good for THEM, no way
2. next point : The benefits - who has them? If you "sex" up a photographer who would not get any money anyhow for his work - then benefit is to him. Not only does he get paid with your service rates (between 200 and 600 or more ) and he still can deliver his "lousy" photos. That are not worth that much.
so - if you need to pay anyhow - i`d take someone that charges money and can charge it because his photos are the equivalents to the 200 to 600 or more you pay anyhow. Not someone whose photos are worth "zero". (in addition most good photographers have stylists, make up artists, and retouchers. Would you need to screw them too, or does he do all that himself, or how does that work out exactly?)
So - end of story: Its the photographer who benefits for a trade of services and not the model.
I am not saying "ethically" its wrong to trade services, its just unusual and mostly stupid for the models end of the bargain. Being a photographer is hard work and cameras and retouch cost a lot of money. And in retouch its basic photoshop that needs to be done after EVERY work (even tits and ass). No one that is good can afford to do that without cash. If you are really good friends with someone it might be ok, but mostly its sleezebags. I don`t think in this case (as in most cases) models are friends with the photographers. Also the other way round - models who need to screw their photographers are not good models. Haven`t seen any professional model screwing anyone for work
.
That is not "photography" most people that trade services do :-)). Its like "being able to hold a mediocre camera (good ones cost 5000 and up and different lenses even more) and press the button ..... (lol)....... I am on modelmayhem and decline most requests because i am bored already. But some who are on there are exceptionally good, so its worth it ;-). And strange you get only nude requests from non-professionals, right?? :-) If you are a good photographer you don`t need nudes. And models who get only shootings because they are stupid enough to go for the nudes are not professionals either or good enough to get any shootings for dress and paid for it. I never do nudes for free ever. Its either work i pay for or work i get paid for. Or for some exceptionally long lasting friendships i do work for "free". Its basic and simple. And even if this sounds arrogant, it is to prevent abusing naive women. Out of principle i would rather pay 5000 dollar than screw someone. Because for the money i get the equivalent in work. For sex - i don`t . Plain and simple.
Hell - if i could trade services with any VOGUE photographer out there, who wouldn`t :-)).
But that is not how it works, darling. :-)......
. Too bad all three of us didn't get to take a pic together.
