egafd.com

Don't really see the point of this post. So what ? You're gonna find arseholes in most professions. Some of us have been doing this biz for many, many years and have a good reputation but not one would disagree with the facts that they started in it for the sex kick as well as making money. So what, whats wrong with that. Magazines sales are tumbling by the month so why shouldn't we sell them again and again. And as John says most girls (99% anyway) get paid on the day - we don't, we have to firstly sell the pics and then wait for the mag to pay us on publication or in some cases chase the fuckers for months to get the dosh.

i agree with john, well said.

A photographer with a good rep is more likley to turn up, than a model with a good rep.

need i say anymore!

"In fact two very well known guys, who shoot for mags are moaning as the rates have dropped from ?600 to ?150 for a set of pics these days !!!"

That is some drop!

Exactly how are snappers supposed to make a living on that sort of money?

I spoke to a well known photographer today and a magazine has dropped the prices to ?70 a page!!!!.

John/Marcus totally agree with you.

Michelle xx

davewells wrote:

And as John says most
> girls (99% anyway) get paid on the day - we don't, we have to
> firstly sell the pics and then wait for the mag to pay us on
> publication or in some cases chase the fuckers for months to
> get the dosh.

Just broke my own record last week. I got paid for a set I shot in early 2001

Illinoisblue wrote:

> "In fact two very well known guys, who shoot for mags are
> moaning as the rates have dropped from ?600 to ?150 for a set
> of pics these days !!!"
>
> That is some drop!
>
> Exactly how are snappers supposed to make a living on that sort
> of money?
>
>

Get this. One publisher has said they may be recalling sets they've returned to photographers to use again. No extra payment though!

Yes, well we all know who they are. Don't think that's a workable idea, because you may well have already sold the Second UK Rights on any given set. I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case for most photographers.

If certain publishers have dropped their rates, that's an issue for photographers to take up with them. Our rates haven't dropped, nor have our sales (when was the last time you shot a photo set, Dave? I thought you'd swapped to video).

John's bang on when he talks about models not turning up for shoots, though. I remember in the old days spending nigh on 600 quid on a set (prop hire, make-up artist etc.) only for the girl to just not turn up.

However, there are some very, very dodgy wannabe glamour photographers out there, and I'd again advise girls to contact other models or even magazines to ask questions if they're not sure. This is a small business, and bad news travels fast.

"the rates have dropped from ?600 to ?150 for a set of pics these days !!!"

I think that may well be someone telling you a load of bollocks as I don't know of any publishers paying such a fee although I may well be wrong. It would be interesting to know who is paying this princely sum.

"Or is that models really need a male to compose and turn the model on and get the best out of her?"

I very much doubt that is the case. Check out the work of the mighty Suze Randall, she HAS to be the best glamour photographer in the world and is a member of the fairer sex. Respect.