How to Join
the Fashion Spot / Front Row / Fashion... In Depth
FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Rules Links Mobile How to Join
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
05-12-2010
  16
fashion icon
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Gender: femme
Posts: 3,153
I think the models pay is in line with the amount of techical skill required for the job. Being a photographer, makeup artist, stylist requires some degree of technical skill and in most cases the people have gone to school to be trained to do these professions. This is not the case with modeling where a lot of the girls are underage and undereducated. The supply of models is higher than the demand which is what drives down their wages. This is true of most professions. Models are a dime a dozen and easily replaceable.

The top models who land the campaigns aren't necessarily better models nor do they work harder than the no-name girls at the bottom of the rung-- they are simply more lucky that they were chosen by designers and editors to be stars.

  Reply With Quote
 
05-12-2010
  17
V.I.P.
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Gender: homme
Posts: 7,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by loladonna View Post

The top models who land the campaigns aren't necessarily better models nor do they work harder than the no-name girls at the bottom of the rung-- they are simply more lucky that they were chosen by designers and editors to be stars.
That's how it is all the way across the entertainment industry. It's based on some kind of "unfairness", most models/actors/musicians can work as hard as they want but won't archive anything that is worth mentioning, even with decent management behind them.

  Reply With Quote
05-12-2010
  18
fashion insider
 
TianSoFine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: a metropolis of dreams
Gender: femme
Posts: 2,423
The way I see it is that choosing modeling as a career is a bit of a gamble. It's possible to make it really big and earn millions, but not everyone makes it to the top and it's more common to not get paid those millions. A person makes their own choices on what they will take in gambling, so if you lose, it's not the fault of the person you made the bet with.

And a lot of people here are saying that prestige doesn't mean anything. Maybe not to most of us, but it probably means something to the models, since they were the ones who chose the high fashion route instead of the commercial route in the first place. HF doesn't pay as much as commercial, and models know that. They made that choice for themselves.

  Reply With Quote
05-12-2010
  19
backstage pass
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: All over Europe
Gender: homme
Posts: 572
Quote:
Originally Posted by TianSoFine View Post
since they were the ones who chose the high fashion route instead of the commercial route in the first place. HF doesn't pay as much as commercial, and models know that. They made that choice for themselves.
Not really.
There are of course some exceptions, but overall most of the more commercial jobs dont need the same type of models than the high fashions jobs.
Take underwear for instance, 80% of the high fashion models just dont have the right body for it.
The same about face, there are plenty of face considered like "interesting" for high fashion who just dont stand a chance to book anything commercial.

so most time, it is of course not the girl who choose, it is her type of look which makes that agencies will push her in one of the 2 directions.

  Reply With Quote
05-12-2010
  20
fashion insider
 
TianSoFine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: a metropolis of dreams
Gender: femme
Posts: 2,423
^But either ways, it's a girl's own choice to go into modeling, whether it's HF or not.

  Reply With Quote
05-12-2010
  21
V.I.P.
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Gender: homme
Posts: 7,200
I wonder how niche boutiques who focus on editorial and high fashion adertisement are supposed to pay their rent? They will hardly operate in the black with booking 20 blue chips covers a month, plus converting casting agents & magazine editors to the agency's column seems not very favourable, either.

  Reply With Quote
05-12-2010
  22
front row
 
theBlueRider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Gender: femme
Posts: 491
Quote:
Originally Posted by TianSoFine View Post
The way I see it is that choosing modeling as a career is a bit of a gamble. It's possible to make it really big and earn millions, but not everyone makes it to the top and it's more common to not get paid those millions. A person makes their own choices on what they will take in gambling, so if you lose, it's not the fault of the person you made the bet with.

And a lot of people here are saying that prestige doesn't mean anything. Maybe not to most of us, but it probably means something to the models, since they were the ones who chose the high fashion route instead of the commercial route in the first place. HF doesn't pay as much as commercial, and models know that. They made that choice for themselves.
This is part of my point. The others here are talking about top top 10% models in the top top 10% editorials: Vogue, V, Numero etc. But the girls who are able to get into those magazines in the first place are not the new unknown fashion girl who has to try to first get into the less prestigious magazines like Mirage, Surface etc who do not have the corporate means to pay or even offer a rate. Every model understands where she stands in the ladder. And she can communicate with her booker that she wants to make some money (easy money for high fashion girls is booking them for shooting Bergdorf's website, Saks, Neiman's, Lane Crawford, Bloomingdales, Henri Bendel etc--tons of B-list fashion girls do several thousand a day jobs doing these and it is very easy to book. But if a girl just has tests in her book and has only done no-name designer presentations in the past, she will most likely not be working with those clients).

It's funny because the other members here talking don't know the models and bookers personally whereas I talk about this type of stuff with my friends (who are all models) because it is a part of my life. A lot of this is speculation and a lot here don't have a good grasp (sure you may read as many blogs as you want and know a few here and there but you're not the ones who are truly involved in the lives). I can pull up excerpts of my charts for you as proof and if you want, call sheets and describe what my daily life is like for you to gain a better understanding.

I work regularly as in I get a handful of paying jobs a month(I've only had one Vogue edition tearsheet. One single page). And for me, all the jobs I get within a year are worth the 8 days a year I get to shoot an editorial and the 6 days my booker makes me test/practice in front of the camera.
When I first started with just tests in my shoot, I made the rounds in castings and couldn't get a good paying job to save my ***. It took my booker to push me for some small paying jobs to compensate for what I wasn't making. That's why we focused on getting even one editorial in my book (and my first was not with a big publication). The difference in getting jobs was light and day. So if you take that and project it on a more prestigious level--if a girl is shooting regularly for Vogue, that is not considered the "bulk" of her charts (but that is what her fans will see as her "work" and post all over the blogs etc but it's not considered a "job" for us) because she will definitely have priority over girls like me for good paying jobs. And I can assure you that my friends who have had multiple stories published in Numero/W etc can command much higher rates for runway (one of the 50+ catwalkers). So compared to how much I'm making, yes, it pays off and yes, there is a difference.

So that is why a lot of models consider shooting any editorial an investment in time--it's the minority of bookings that will happen 365 days a year (and many times, you will never get to see the results of our paying jobs unless you're a super model stalker! it's easier to see your favorite model doing her thing buying a magazine off a newstand and that's why the fans don't get it. they think it all she does but it's not)
It's just like the new girls who have their agency advance money for a strong test, that's an investment--it will help her at castings over the other new girls who are shooting free tests (shooting with a very very new photographer). If a girl can take those tests out of her book because she booked 1 editorial story, she will be in better standing to get multiple paying jobs within that year and even direct bookings for paying jobs (also if her booker still believes in her).

  Reply With Quote
05-12-2010
  23
front row
 
theBlueRider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Gender: femme
Posts: 491
Quote:
Originally Posted by cologne_rocks View Post
I wonder how niche boutiques who focus on editorial and high fashion adertisement are supposed to pay their rent? They will hardly operate in the black with booking 20 blue chips covers a month, plus converting casting agents & magazine editors to the agency's column seems not very favourable, either.
Which ones? All the top 10 agencies in NYC have their blue chip stars but they also have girls you may never heard of and girls they do not put on their website (this is very very common!!!). Even the ones the public sees as super cool, too cool for commercial book their girls on less glamorous type of work that pays really well on a regular basis but that type of stuff isn't publicized.
But in the end, a lot of the private owned (all of them are private except for Wilhelmina actually) have investors backing up the agency and if there are no investors (which to my knowledge are the newer, start-up shops) they have a harder time surviving if they don't branch into the commercial and teen/junior fashion market. Investors are usually...very very rich men who don't have anything to do with fashion (and this plays a role in a lot of the shadiness...and scary things you may hear happen to new models...).

  Reply With Quote
05-12-2010
  24
backstage pass
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: All over Europe
Gender: homme
Posts: 572
Quote:
Originally Posted by cologne_rocks View Post
I wonder how niche boutiques who focus on editorial and high fashion adertisement are supposed to pay their rent? They will hardly operate in the black with booking 20 blue chips covers a month, plus converting casting agents & magazine editors to the agency's column seems not very favourable, either.
Some agencies just like to show to public their "high fashion" side, but still have more money jobs beside that they just to choose not to really advertise.

beside that keep in mind that modeling is one of the few business field in the world full of people with very deep pocket , ready to make cheque regularly to keep business loosing money alive sometimes during years and years...

If only the agencies actualy making any money would stay in the market, probably 70% of the agencies would close tomorow...

  Reply With Quote
05-12-2010
  25
you soft and only
 
blueorchid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Gender: femme
Posts: 4,572
I find it interesting how models are the least important part of a magazine (I mean, aside from posing they really have no imput or authority in the production of the magazine) and yet the most important part of it (how many people would buy fashion magazines if there were no editorials) at the same time.

  Reply With Quote
05-12-2010
  26
fashion icon
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Gender: femme
Posts: 3,153
^I buy magazines like People Stylewatch which feature celebrity candids, no editorials and page after page of nothing but shoes clothes and accessories. I just like looking at fashion. I honestly don't care for fashion the way it is rendered in most high fashion editorials. It seems to be more about the model than the clothes plus the clothes are never presented in a way I would actually consider wearing them.

  Reply With Quote
05-12-2010
  27
backstage pass
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: All over Europe
Gender: homme
Posts: 572
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueorchid View Post
and yet the most important part of it (how many people would buy fashion magazines if there were no editorials) at the same time.
i think the average TFS audience is probably not very representtiv of the average whole audience of readers.
i truly would be interested to know it exactly, but i highly doubt that the biggest part of readers considers the editos' as the most interesting part of the mags...

if u check vintage magazines, you will find out that the "fashion" part is nowadays much less important in pages proportions compare to before, i guess it has to do with what readers like...

  Reply With Quote
05-12-2010
  28
front row
 
theBlueRider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Gender: femme
Posts: 491
Quote:
Originally Posted by fritmayo View Post
i think the average TFS audience is probably not very representtiv of the average whole audience of readers.
i truly would be interested to know it exactly, but i highly doubt that the biggest part of readers considers the editos' as the most interesting part of the mags...

if u check vintage magazines, you will find out that the "fashion" part is nowadays much less important in pages proportions compare to before, i guess it has to do with what readers like...
i couldn't have said it any better. the tfs audience is hardcore and not exactly the most realistic

The reason why Anna Wintour is iconic in the publishing industry is because she took advantage of how celebrities can sell as opposed to just a model. (of course today it is arguable that Wintour really needs to freshen things up) She was the vanguard who put celebrities on covers and made them relevant to the fashion audience. She was also the first to introduce high fashion with "low fashion" (like the idea of incorporating jeans into an otherwise very expensive designer outfit)--how the real women puts an outfit together. Now we have many younger magazines that are modeled after the same ethos like InStyle, Allure, Lucky etc. Celebrities sell--I would never buy an InTouch or People Magazine but many other people do.
This plays an influence on the lessening role of the model and nonetheless, the nonexistent supermodel today.

  Reply With Quote
08-12-2010
  29
fashion insider
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: London
Gender: femme
Posts: 2,149
wow guys I just saw the list of payments on the first page and I'm kind of shocked. I've always wondered how much these pretty girls are earning in order to be beautiful, but these numbers are insane - $125??? for French Vogue really? have nothing to say...

__________________
twinfashion tumblr
  Reply With Quote
08-12-2010
  30
V.I.P.
 
agee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Georgia
Gender: femme
Posts: 6,108
Quote:
Originally Posted by theBlueRider View Post
The reason why Anna Wintour is iconic in the publishing industry is because she took advantage of how celebrities can sell as opposed to just a model.
This plays an influence on the lessening role of the model and nonetheless, the nonexistent supermodel today.
Just because celebrities sell fashion better in certain markets / niches does not mean that models do not sell fashion at all. Selling and presenting clothes has always been a model's job, and sales is a vital part of any organization / industry and fashion is no exception. Secondly, the niches that the publication serves matters, yes the American and British editions of Vogue are celebrity oriented, but the same does not apply to the French, Italian and Japanese editions. Also the celebrity orientation mostly applies to the cover and accompanying ed and a few random profiles, models are still featured on many of the pages of British, American Vogue and the like.

To me not paying models for playing a key role in a profit making endeavor, and most magazines are for profit entities, is based on anachronistic reasoning, but the attitude is so steeped in the psyche that everyone is continuing to act as if the rationale that applied years ago still applies today. We live in a time where information is quickly and readily available, and also the real movers and shakers in fashion, for better or worse, are a relatively small group of people, so between runway shows, backstage beauty shots and word of mouth, there is plenty of "information" about a model with which to make a decision about a campaign and therefore the "editorials are investment and exposure" argument no longer applies to the same extent as it once did. I am not making this up, you can see this based on the timing of announcements / blind items / "rumor has it" commentary about campaign castings.

Furthermore, clearly the people who cast for campaigns do not need to see lots of editorial printwork given the number of newbies who snag campaigns right out the gate, in some cases, they haven't even done a proper runway season, so some of these models are true unknown quantities. Thus in many cases, freshness trumps experience and having some kind of indicator / proof that a model can carry a campaign. So really my previous point about getting substantial information from the runway shows is actually an overstatement because those casting for campaigns don't even need that. It should also be noted that lots of campaigns go to experienced models, but both extremes kinda prove my point, you have one set of models who snag campaigns with little or no printwork or you have models who have so much printwork, including current stuff, that there is plenty of proof of what she brings to the table.

As I stated upthread, I am not asserting that there are not circumstances where it makes sense for models to work for free / scale, but it should not be the norm for an established model.

  Reply With Quote
Reply
Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Tags
editorial, models, paid, work
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"


 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:01 AM.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
TheFashionSpot.com is a property of TotallyHer Media, LLC, an Evolve Media LLC company. ©2014 All rights reserved.