Models required for paid solo shoots (upto finger and toy insertions).
Rate is ?250 plus travel. Shoot should be no longer than 5 hours with a good model. Shoots are quite relaxed, you won't be over-worked and I've been told I'm easy to work with.
For examples of work, see here . References can be supplied, please feel free to contact any model I've previously worked with.
Location: Cheshire.
Age is unimportant, so long as you are 18 or over. Two forms of proof of age ID essential.
Must be slim/slimmish and reasonably attractive.
Would prefer models without tattoos, not only do I dislike them but so do the majority of others.
It seems that the growing trend amongst models at present is to be completely shaved downstairs. Whilst this is obviously much better than hairy, I will give preference to models who are neatly shaved rather than bald.
One requirement I am starting to make is for nice nails, I can't understand models who go to the effort with hair and make-up but neglect their nails (especially when a bottle of colour doesn't exactly break the bank), it's a real pet hate of mine, so nice nails is a must.
If you have been stupid enough to have ever done TFP/TFCD shoots, then do not apply.
Spectators are not welcome, I only wish to work with models who have a professional approach so if you have a chaperone/pimp do not apply.
Previously worked with models, do not apply, as much as I might want to rebook you I am looking for new faces at present (sorry!). Also, models who've previously let me down !tut! , do not apply.
If you haven't been put off by my fussiness !hmmm! (I'm not that bad............honest), and are interested, please send an email to roy0511@aol.com including all relevant details, your availability, and pics (or a link to website or profile where pics can be seen).
Roy
Models required
-
Officer Dibble
- Posts: 2372
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Models required
"Models required for paid solo shoots...Must be slim/slimmish"
What, you mean like, no tits?
"Would prefer models without tattoos, not only do I dislike them but so do the majority of others."
To right, they're very chavy and tacky.
"It seems that the growing trend amongst models at present is to be completely shaved downstairs. Whilst this is obviously much better than hairy"
'Better'? Really? Says who?
"I can't understand models who go to the effort with hair and make-up"
Jeez, I haven?t come across any of those in a while.
"Spectators are not welcome"
Yes, I'd agree. They can tend to put you off your apertures and exposures.
"Also, models who've previously let me down , do not apply."
Yeah, t' fuck with 'em.
"If you haven't been put off by my fussiness"
I reckon it's a breath of fresh air that you are so exacting in your standards. If the glamour/sex photography and video scene has gone to pot in the last decade (as many believe it has) it has been due in part to producers of all types jettisoning all quality control and accepted standards of beauty and sexual allure.
Good luck with your project.
Officer Dibble
What, you mean like, no tits?
"Would prefer models without tattoos, not only do I dislike them but so do the majority of others."
To right, they're very chavy and tacky.
"It seems that the growing trend amongst models at present is to be completely shaved downstairs. Whilst this is obviously much better than hairy"
'Better'? Really? Says who?
"I can't understand models who go to the effort with hair and make-up"
Jeez, I haven?t come across any of those in a while.
"Spectators are not welcome"
Yes, I'd agree. They can tend to put you off your apertures and exposures.
"Also, models who've previously let me down , do not apply."
Yeah, t' fuck with 'em.
"If you haven't been put off by my fussiness"
I reckon it's a breath of fresh air that you are so exacting in your standards. If the glamour/sex photography and video scene has gone to pot in the last decade (as many believe it has) it has been due in part to producers of all types jettisoning all quality control and accepted standards of beauty and sexual allure.
Good luck with your project.
Officer Dibble
Re: Models required
quote: Spectators are not welcome, I only wish to work with models who have a professional approach so if you have a chaperone/pimp do not apply.
I know SERIOUS models who have made it, on the same levels as Sophie Howard, Lucy Pinder and others around that level (not saying who) that ALWAYS have a chaparone.
I think to say NO CHAPARONE is dodgey, Its one thing to say "No Chaparones in the shooting area, but welcome to wait in another room or nearby, but out and out no no, doesnt reflect well.
I know SERIOUS models who have made it, on the same levels as Sophie Howard, Lucy Pinder and others around that level (not saying who) that ALWAYS have a chaparone.
I think to say NO CHAPARONE is dodgey, Its one thing to say "No Chaparones in the shooting area, but welcome to wait in another room or nearby, but out and out no no, doesnt reflect well.
It is said that both love and truth walk hand in hand. But if the need is great enough, can we learn to love a lie?
Re: Models required
brerbear wrote:
> "If you have been stupid enough to have ever done TFP/TFCD
> shoots, then do not apply"
>
> Nice one. Why's that though? Coz I can see a couple of models
> on your site that have done that very thing.
>
>
I know there are a number of models I've previously shot who have done tfp, but for some I wasn't aware at the time of booking them, and for others they had stated they regretted having done TFP and I guess we all make mistakes.
There are several reasons why....................
Firstly, not sure if it's coincidence or not but it is definitely noticeable to me that the models who've done TFP are not as popular on the site as those who've not done TFP, so my way of thinking on this is that if models are having to do TFP then it's because they aren't good enough to get paid work, and if others don't think they're worthy of paying then it's unlikely my members or potential members are going to think differently.
Secondly, as I read from someone else recently, "portfolio = extension of ego" and what you find is that generally TFP models think they are better than they really are (I'm not saying a portfolio isn't needed because of course it is, but I'd rather see a portfolio containing "real" pics than a portfolio of badly photoshopped studio pics).
Thirdly, sticking to the subject of photoshopped pics, models that have done TFP say things like "I've got a tattoo but you can photoshop it out" or when you point out a scar "you can photoshop that can't you?". Photoshop may be great for the TFP'er who has all the time in the world and only giving a select few pics out but for us guys as you know it just isn't possible to photoshag hundreds of pics.
Fourth, and maybe the main reason, I think it's a damn cheek for a model to expect some photographers to pay her whilst happily working for free with others, why the hell should I subsidise the TFP brigade so they can enjoy a hobby they can't afford !furious!.
Finally, I think that by booking TFP models for paid work only encourages the TFP'ers and keeps the whole piss take going.
My views don't make me popular, but I'd rather be honest than popular.
Roy
> "If you have been stupid enough to have ever done TFP/TFCD
> shoots, then do not apply"
>
> Nice one. Why's that though? Coz I can see a couple of models
> on your site that have done that very thing.
>
>
I know there are a number of models I've previously shot who have done tfp, but for some I wasn't aware at the time of booking them, and for others they had stated they regretted having done TFP and I guess we all make mistakes.
There are several reasons why....................
Firstly, not sure if it's coincidence or not but it is definitely noticeable to me that the models who've done TFP are not as popular on the site as those who've not done TFP, so my way of thinking on this is that if models are having to do TFP then it's because they aren't good enough to get paid work, and if others don't think they're worthy of paying then it's unlikely my members or potential members are going to think differently.
Secondly, as I read from someone else recently, "portfolio = extension of ego" and what you find is that generally TFP models think they are better than they really are (I'm not saying a portfolio isn't needed because of course it is, but I'd rather see a portfolio containing "real" pics than a portfolio of badly photoshopped studio pics).
Thirdly, sticking to the subject of photoshopped pics, models that have done TFP say things like "I've got a tattoo but you can photoshop it out" or when you point out a scar "you can photoshop that can't you?". Photoshop may be great for the TFP'er who has all the time in the world and only giving a select few pics out but for us guys as you know it just isn't possible to photoshag hundreds of pics.
Fourth, and maybe the main reason, I think it's a damn cheek for a model to expect some photographers to pay her whilst happily working for free with others, why the hell should I subsidise the TFP brigade so they can enjoy a hobby they can't afford !furious!.
Finally, I think that by booking TFP models for paid work only encourages the TFP'ers and keeps the whole piss take going.
My views don't make me popular, but I'd rather be honest than popular.
Roy
Re: Models required
Cenobitez wrote:
> quote: I think to say NO CHAPARONE is dodgey, Its one thing to say "No
> Chaparones in the shooting area, but welcome to wait in another
> room or nearby, but out and out no no, doesnt reflect well.
>
>
You say it's dodgy to not allow a chaperone, but isn't it dodgy for a model to have a chaperone? I know of more photographers who've had possessions stolen during shoots than I know of models who've come to harm on shoots.
There is no legitimate reason for a chaperone. The only reason can be either the model doesn't trust the photographer (which is insulting if numerous good references are being supplied), or she has a partner that insists on tagging along.
There is no other occupation that would tolerate employees having a chaperone coming to work with them, and yet modelling is a lot safer than nearly every other occupation.
If someone doesn't feel safe enough to go alone to a job then they shouldn't be doing that job.
Anyway, bottom line is I don't allow them and I don't care what anyone thinks of that, if that doesn't please anyone then they just don't apply for a shoot. I've never had a model bring a chaperone, all the models I've worked with have been professional in their approach and they can all be approached for a reference should any models have concerns.
Roy
p.s. Don't get Chaperones confused with travelling companions, I have no objections to someone bringing a model, introducing themselves and calling back at the end of the shoot to collect her again (I appreciate some models don't drive and don't like getting trains and therefore have someone drive them and that's perfectly okay).
> quote: I think to say NO CHAPARONE is dodgey, Its one thing to say "No
> Chaparones in the shooting area, but welcome to wait in another
> room or nearby, but out and out no no, doesnt reflect well.
>
>
You say it's dodgy to not allow a chaperone, but isn't it dodgy for a model to have a chaperone? I know of more photographers who've had possessions stolen during shoots than I know of models who've come to harm on shoots.
There is no legitimate reason for a chaperone. The only reason can be either the model doesn't trust the photographer (which is insulting if numerous good references are being supplied), or she has a partner that insists on tagging along.
There is no other occupation that would tolerate employees having a chaperone coming to work with them, and yet modelling is a lot safer than nearly every other occupation.
If someone doesn't feel safe enough to go alone to a job then they shouldn't be doing that job.
Anyway, bottom line is I don't allow them and I don't care what anyone thinks of that, if that doesn't please anyone then they just don't apply for a shoot. I've never had a model bring a chaperone, all the models I've worked with have been professional in their approach and they can all be approached for a reference should any models have concerns.
Roy
p.s. Don't get Chaperones confused with travelling companions, I have no objections to someone bringing a model, introducing themselves and calling back at the end of the shoot to collect her again (I appreciate some models don't drive and don't like getting trains and therefore have someone drive them and that's perfectly okay).
Re: Models required
Officer Dibble wrote:
> "It seems that the growing trend amongst models at present is
> to be completely shaved downstairs. Whilst this is obviously
> much better than hairy"
>
> 'Better'? Really? Says who?
>
Me !grin!. I know it shouldn't be about my preferences, but I also strongly believe that the majority of others would choose bald over hairy.
Obviously the best scenario for me is to have a variety of different looks and with so many models being completely shaved I just need to balance things out a bit.
Roy
> "It seems that the growing trend amongst models at present is
> to be completely shaved downstairs. Whilst this is obviously
> much better than hairy"
>
> 'Better'? Really? Says who?
>
Me !grin!. I know it shouldn't be about my preferences, but I also strongly believe that the majority of others would choose bald over hairy.
Obviously the best scenario for me is to have a variety of different looks and with so many models being completely shaved I just need to balance things out a bit.
Roy
-
Officer Dibble
- Posts: 2372
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Models required
"Me . I know it shouldn't be about my preferences, but I also strongly believe that the majority of others would choose bald over hairy."
Well, we have regular debates about this and the prevailing consensus seems to run about 50/50 - which means half of the potential customers out there are not being catered for in these dark, chavy, bald beavered times.
Officer Dibble
Well, we have regular debates about this and the prevailing consensus seems to run about 50/50 - which means half of the potential customers out there are not being catered for in these dark, chavy, bald beavered times.
Officer Dibble
-
Officer Dibble
- Posts: 2372
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Models required
"Photoshop may be great for the TFP'er who has all the time in the world and only giving a select few pics out but for us guys as you know it just isn't possible to photoshag hundreds of pics."
But shit, we absolutely shouldn?t have to start wazzing about with Photoshop - glamour models should be clued up professionals (like they used to be). Pristine, classy, feminine, sex goddesses - the sum of all men's desires. Not skanky chavs out to make a few easy quid 'cause they don't fancy gettin' up at 8.00 AM to 'man' Tescos checkout till.
Officer Dibble
But shit, we absolutely shouldn?t have to start wazzing about with Photoshop - glamour models should be clued up professionals (like they used to be). Pristine, classy, feminine, sex goddesses - the sum of all men's desires. Not skanky chavs out to make a few easy quid 'cause they don't fancy gettin' up at 8.00 AM to 'man' Tescos checkout till.
Officer Dibble
-
Tequila_Woods
- Posts: 1760
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Models required
Having worked with Roy on two seperate occasions i can say he is a great, laid back photographer to work with! Whats wrong with saying exactly what is required for a shoot with him? They are all valid points.
<http://refer.adultwork.com/?R=1661927&T=1661927>