It’s Not Fair

I’ve heard many times, “It’s not fair,” in comment on how some nude models get lots of work while others do not. Often it is the aspiring model, having trouble finding work, who is commenting.

Nude modeling is not supposed to be egalitarian or documentary. Whether the decision maker is the photographer, an art director, or a publisher there is no obligation to take all applicants. Just as with any employment there will always be more applicants than open positions. Even qualified applicants will be turned away.

No, It’s Not Fair, and It’s Not Supposed to Be

Too tall, too short, too heavy, too thin, too male, too female, and any number of other reasons prevent a prospective model from getting the part. There is a misconception among some that if they try hard enough, they can get any part. While I encourage aspiring models not to give up, you have to find your niche. While you’re trying to find your niche you have to be realistic. It may take a long time, and you may face a lot of rejection.

Certainly there are those who will accept just about any applicant for their projects. These entry-level projects are a fine way to start, provided they’re legitimate opportunities. Most everyone has to start at the bottom and work their way up. It’s one of the few “fair” things about most any industry. But most models want to get to the next level. Many expect to be injected right at the top from the very beginning. It’s simply not going to happen.

Meeting the Minimum Requirement is Seldom Enough

Make sure you read the requirements for any casting call. If it says minimum height is 5’6″ and you’re 5’5″ and three quarters, don’t get your hopes up. Even applicants who are 5’7″ are going up against those who are 5’10″. If height is stressed in the casting, they are probably looking for long legs. Unless you are “tall for your height” (leggy) you’re not going to be the most qualified even if you meet the minimum requirements.

Not every genre of modeling is going to be for you either. No photographer is obligated to shoot in multiple styles, or a even a single traditional style. Just because your look is perfect for a popular style of nude photography, doesn’t mean you’re a shoe-in for every job.

I had one model write to me “I don’t have the face for fashion or glamour, which is why I am perfect for nudes.” While this makes sense for some genres of nude photography, again it’s not a guarantee of employment. The majority of nude photography de-emphasizes the face to some degree simply by the inclusion of the body. But the degree to which the face is important varies from style to style. There may be more options for an aesthetically pleasing nude without the face than in other types of photography. However, not having the face for glamour doesn’t mean you’re perfect for nudes. (Side note: I did not find the model in question unattractive. I’m not saying who she is, but I photographed her and thought her face was one of the more interesting things about the images.)

Don’t Be Discouraged

If you are an aspiring model, don’t give up after a few rejections. It’s not fair, but you’re not being singled out. I’ve rejected models that were too thin, too busty, too tall, and other reasons that you might think would give them an advantage. The fact is, like other photographers, I’m looking for something in particular for each shoot. You won’t know what that is until you ask us. And like most employment applications, you’re more likely not to get the job than to get it.

I’ve had some models contact me twenty times without being awarded a shoot. I’ve even referred some overly persistent models to other photographers (admittedly with the selfish purpose of getting them off my back.) But other models have contacted me multiple times and only found work on the third or fourth contact.

Persistence will help you. Broaden your horizons and look for different types of castings, especially those where you fit in the middle or high end of the requirements. If they want someone 5’4″ or taller and you’re 5’6″, go for it. If they ask for few tattoos and you have zero, don’t forget to mention that. If they want comfort with implied nude and you’ve experience with full nudity, let them know when you apply. Look for those opportunities where you have an unfair advantage.

Sarah H. is a wonderful and experienced nude model, who applied a few times before I had a project for which she was suited. I've now shot with her several times.

It’s been a long time since I’ve had a TFP photo shoot. A long time ago I made a decision to pay all my models. It was the right decision for me. However, TFP is still right for some situations, even amongst experienced and skilled models and photographers.

TFP (once Time for Prints, before digital) is when a model and photographer do a shoot for free. No modeling fees. No photography fees. Both get images for their use. Details will vary, but that’s the gist of it. It’s also sometimes known as TFCD (time for CD) or TFDVD or TF*, etc. But “TFP” is the more widely used term.

This practice has been both revered and reviled. Truth is, it has it’s place for many models and photographers, including beginners and veterans alike.

I’ve heard some say “never do TFP” as blanket advice. When some says “never” it reminds me of the time I saw a paramedic running to someones aid with a pair of scissors in hand; never run with scissors, I thought to myself; never say never.

I’ve done maybe two TFP shoots in the last five years. But every once in a while someone comes along with an interesting idea that I want to do, only it doesn’t fit into what I’m hiring for. In that case, I do TFP.

If you’ve read Internet forums about composition, you’ve undoubtedly seen advice “not to cut off the model’s arms or legs,” or “if you crop a limb, do it between the joints.” You’ve probably also seen in major magazines stunning examples of photos that blatantly violate these so-called rules. And you probably have stumbled upon at least one discussion that asks why these rules exist if so many successful photos obviously disobey them. If you look to works of master artists such as Michaelangelo or Degas you will see they sometimes framed their figures with limbs, hands, or feet cut off. Did the master artists goof? No, they just knew how to break the rules and make a successful composition. When done properly, it can make the composition more distinct and interesting.

The reason these rules exist is that they provide a structured framework for creating well balanced images. If you’ve read my other posts pertaining to “rules of composition,” you know I’m not a fan of static, safe images. Read more

I’m sometimes asked, “Why is the model nude;” occasionally it’s phrased “why is the model naked?”

Here is a list of fun responses I’ve given. Many apply to most of my images, while others apply to only some of my images. Enjoy

1. She was born that way
2. I find it more interesting that way
3. That’s what she wanted
4. That’s what I wanted
5. That’s what almost everyone except you wanted
6. She’s beautiful
7. Because I wasn’t interested in photographing clothing, jewelry, or hair wraps at the time
8. Why not?
9. Because I don’t live in Saudi Arabia (any more)
10. Nudes have been the subject of artists  for millennia; the oldest artwork (22,000 B.C) is a nude female statue. Why stop now just become some prude is cruising the internet to comment on nude photos?

Here is my list of priorities in building a nude image. These are specific to me, and vary widely based on individual photographers. However there are many photographers with a similar background to mine that follow this general hierarchy of steps for building an image. I have a parent who is an artist, an older sibling who is a university art professor, and I have an art degree where I studied more than just photography. I grew up overseas and have been to museums in dozens of countries. Since my exposure to art, from childhood through college as been mainly non-photographic art, it has influenced my thinking on building an image.

#1: Composition. Any image is perceived by viewers as an abstract composition first. Before you can process what an image is (context) you see how it is composed. We’re hard wired to do this, and it’s not just my opinion. Without a solid composition, the viewer’s attention will go elsewhere quickly. Quick test: convert your image to black and white and reduce it to about 200 pixels wide, if it’s a strong composition it will still look interesting.

#2. Context (mood): What is the image about? Context tells you what the mood of the image is, not necessarily a story (context is the what not the how). The mood is not always beauty, sometimes an image can be intentionally jarring to communicate the context.

#3. Beauty. Context and content can feed into beauty, but do not have to. Beauty can be flattering to the subject in traditional ways, but is more about intriguing the viewer — sometimes with an unusual approach. Don’t underestimate the power of beauty; my mediocre shots of extremely beautiful models win more appreciation that the most meticulous shot of a just slightly beautiful model. Capitalize on the innate beauty of your subject, don’t try to put her in the role of something she’s not.

#4. Illustration. I’m not talking about pen and ink here, but story telling through images. This is not essential to a good nude photo, but most good nudes tell some sort of a story. Not surprisingly, the story is often somewhat ambiguous and thus open to interpretation.

#5. Technical aspects. A favorite Ansel Adems quote goes “Nothing is worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept.” I’m not saying that technique isn’t important. It is very important, but it comes after good form. A poorly executed image can be distracting and sabotage a good concept.

Just following the above, doesn’t make an image successful. Nor am I recommending anyone could use this as a recipe for success. This is food for thought, an insight into my process.

I’ve identified an interesting trend, amongst the many nude models and potential nude models that I’ve talked to about doing a shoot. Quite often, an inexperienced model will request much higher pay than an experienced model. This seems ironic, but there are logical explanations. Part of this phenomenon is economic, and part is psychological.

The Economic Aspect

In a recent conversation, an inexperienced model requested between three to four times what I and other area photographers normally pay models. Although she was attractive, she was nowhere close to the level of physical beauty of nude models that were working for far less. So why would a less attractive model, with almost no experience ask for over three times what more attractive, experienced nude models are willing to work for? Some may think she’s simply doesn’t know the market and is just guessing at what nude models earn, but this is not the case. In her mind the sum was not outlandish. I established that she had indeed worked for this pay rate, although on a very short shoot. So the market will bear this kind of pay, even for a model that is not in the upper half of physical attractiveness. Read more

If you’re a fan of nude photography, you’re probably familiar with the technical aspects: focus, light, depth of field, and so on. In the four years getting my art degree, technique was something infrequently discussed in the realm of painting and drawing, and was also a minority topic in photography. Never did we discuss in depth what kind of chisels Michelangelo used, or whether Edward Hopper preferred natural or synthetic brush bristles and how technique affected the way we interpreted their resulting artwork. After art school I found it refreshing to hear more discussion of technique. Many years have passed since my undergraduate degree, and outside of art school it seems that technique is the most discussed photography topic, and in some circles technique seems to be the only topic.

In this article I will discuss some of the other ways to look at photography, beyond aspects of technique. This article is about interpreting photography. Not just what technique was used to create the photograph, but the role that you as the viewer play in interpreting the image. Read more

When considering the technique of nude photography vs. portraiture, you won’t get too far by just applying the rules of portraiture to your nude work. Not that there is nothing to be borrowed from portraiture, some of the basics  (lighting ratio, etc) share similar concepts, but their application is greatly different.

Nude photography is a discipline in itself. Broaden your approach to more than full-length portrait photography minus the clothes, and you’ll be two steps ahead of most beginners. The lighting and posing concepts for nude photography are different from those of portraiture and fashion photography. I’m not going to tell you to forget everything you know about non-nude photography, because all that knowledge is going to help you. Admittedly, there are similarities between non-nude and nude photography, but you need to know what the differences are, my suggestion is that you neither forget nor rely entirely upon your past experiences, but instead that you learn with an open mind. (from page 10 of my book)

Knowledge of portrait lighting is helpful, but not essential to learning nude lighting. A portrait lighting configuration is not sufficient to light the whole body.

In portrait photography a ratio of 2:1 is traditional; but in nude photos a higher ratio like 3:1 or even 4:1 often yields more dramatic images. It is a matter of taste and style — the more fill light the more detail you will see in the shadows. Higher contrast images are often viewed as more artistic, while lower contrast images (like the 2:1 portrait ratio) can risk looking a little pedestrian.

The techniques around portraiture are distinct from nude photography (at least the kind that I do) in three major ways: 1. they were developed for photographing non-models; 2. they were developed for a subject who is also your customer; and 3. the rules of portraiture center on the face — a minority in the world of nude photography:

1. Since we’re talking about photographing nude models (not ordinary people) there is no reason for all those little tricks for minimizing or hiding flaws. If you do employ those tricks, you’ll likely miss out on some of the more interesting angles for your model.

2. To come up with an interesting image, you needn’t be concerned with the most flattering pose. Granted, you’re not trying to create an unflattering pose, but experimentation is called for. You’re not constrained by your subject being your customer.

3. And finally, the face does not have to be central to a nude. Certainly it can be, and sometimes to great effect. But many if not most interesting nudes are not about a face with the body as an afterthought.

So if you know some techniques from portraiture, begin with a fresh mind as you embark on nude photography.