Should Models Get Paid (More) for Editorial Work?

[franki]

^ i think that grossly underestimates the knowledge of photographers. the gap between the technical requirements/knowledge needed by photographers and models could not be greater. i am not saying modelling is 'easy', but if you can say that about photographers than you could easily say all a model needs is to be photogenic (and thats often something you are born with).

of course some shoots are easier for a photographer (ie look books in front of a white back drop), but to shoot outdoors (and indoors with numerous props, different artificial lighting, multiple girls/guys, different focal points etc) is not that simple

 

[prehuman]

To be a photographer all you need to do is be creative, know lighting, and not be paralyzed in the hands.

I agree that models work very hard, and understand that you're using photographer's higher pay as a comparison... however, I have to say that this comment is ignorant.

I'm a graphic designer and it takes long hours and hard work to come up with creative. People who don't work in a creative job don't always understand how difficult and time consuming it is to come up with and execute a solid idea. Without it, there would be no shoot at all, no work for the model. Lighting is also not easily learned or taught. Lighting can make or break a photoshoot altogether. Knowing angles and moments to capture is an art in and of it's self.

 

[softgrey]

This seems a bit bizarre to me. It really should be the photographer who leads a photo shoot. It's only the person looking through the lense who can really see how the picture is going to come out...

Maybe this is the explanation for why so many fashion photographs look averge today...it's too much focus on the fashion pieces, forgetting the medium.

everything is shot digitally nowadays...
the whole crew sees the image on the screen almost instantaneously...
it's a whole new world really...

the photog can certainly make or break a shoot...
but a good experienced stylist can art direct even a mediocre photog into taking decent shots...


in general...
this is not my opinion- this is fact...
think about the vogue movie- the september issue...
they talked about the fact that EVERY story that grace coddington works on is good...
they might kill some images for various reasons- but not because it isn't good...
other stylists can work with the same photog and not get the shots at all...
*we saw that happen in that movie as well...
what i wish they had shown, but didn't, is what is really going on at the shoots and how exactly does that happen...
but they would never divulge that, i guess...unfortunately...

really- it's all about the team...
it's why you see the same photog and editors/stylists working together all the time...
hair and make up too...although they are a bit more interchangeable...
but models come and go depending on the story...
*although, special ones will also work regularly with certain teams if they have meeting of the creative minds...

maybe you guys haven't paid attention...
but this is what is going on out there...
go on, check it out for yourselves...
it's not a big mystery...

 

[softgrey]

well like it or not...in people's mind, THERE IS a "solo artist" and it is...the photographer.
almost anyone even not much into fashion have heard about Meisel or Testino, but almost nobody could ever said the name of stylist.

It needs also to make big difference about editorial type, a meisel vogue italia edito needs an army because well, let's say that the style in itself i into "big" production.
But there are PLENTY of edito or cover, very basic about style, where the stylist work is rather limited, and wher the lead team is more photopgrapher /art director, with the stylist just beside.

let's keep in mind, that a good photographer, to an extreme can do a great pic with just a girl , a white wall, zero clothe and daylight...

A stylist alone can bring all her clothes and accessories...she still wont be able to make a picture of it on her own

well- no one can do ANYTHING on their own...
you just made my point dear...


and if you have no clothes...then it certainly won't be a fashion photograph...but a portrait...
which is something else entirely and has nothing to do with this...

 

[ultramarine]

well like it or not...in people's mind, THERE IS a "solo artist" and it is...the photographer.
almost anyone even not much into fashion have heard about Meisel or Testino, but almost nobody could ever said the name of stylist.

It needs also to make big difference about editorial type, a meisel vogue italia edito needs an army because well, let's say that the style in itself i into "big" production.
But there are PLENTY of edito or cover, very basic about style, where the stylist work is rather limited, and wher the lead team is more photopgrapher /art director, with the stylist just beside.

let's keep in mind, that a good photographer, to an extreme can do a great pic with just a girl , a white wall, zero clothe and daylight...

A stylist alone can bring all her clothes and accessories...she still wont be able to make a picture of it on her own

OMG! You speak SO freely and with such conviction anyone would say we are having a tête-a-tête with a Conde-Nastie !

I think this is coming down the point of someone who works with models vs someone who works as a stylist. Now ... who would be befitting to say who would win this battle? Id say an editrix.

But about the whole photoshoot as a collab idea, that is the truest of the true .. an stylist and a photog may have an idea in their head, but the make up artist or even the model may have some input which totally changes the feel of the shoot .. or just the mood of everyone that day .. or the location ... and yes, famous bands DO pay everyone the same (Shirley Manson -of Garbage- recently mentioned that was the recipe for a band that works -and doesnt end up in pieces like one is just the star).

Models at the end of the day have the CHANCE to make INSANE amounts of money ... stylists dont ... make up artist dont .. photogs can make more ... the rest of the crew are the unsung heros, they shud get payed more, not models

 

[lepetitcouturier]

I agree that models work very hard, and understand that you're using photographer's higher pay as a comparison... however, I have to say that this comment is ignorant.

I'm a graphic designer and it takes long hours and hard work to come up with creative. People who don't work in a creative job don't always understand how difficult and time consuming it is to come up with and execute a solid idea. Without it, there would be no shoot at all, no work for the model. Lighting is also not easily learned or taught. Lighting can make or break a photoshoot altogether. Knowing angles and moments to capture is an art in and of it's self.

I don't mean it like that, but it's not just the photographers who do the hard work.

 

[models_vlada]

The way I see it, magazines have an enormous amount of power in the Fashion Industry, they basically control the media, and as in any market the big player takes advantage of a lot of little players, to magazines its all about "cost-reducing", i know they inform about the trends and fashion issues, but at the end it's all about the generation of profits.

SO if models are being so poorly paid for editorial work, it's basically because magazines know if a "certain" model doesn't accept to do this job for free, there will be another who will accept to do this, considering all the aspects mentioned before, such as the prestige that the model could gain, or the exposition, or to become more famous... etc And the fact that the model gets paid $150 to $250 bucks per editorial, it's just a symbolic/morally payment to her, and for her work.
Even i did read in "Sebastian Sauve Tumblr" that male models didn't get paid for editorial, which it's worse, but.... that's the monopoly of the game.

Summarizing, models are part of the cost that this companies "magazines" want to reduce too, and they do it, BUT NOT BECAUSE THEY THINK THAT MODELS ARE ENOUGH PAID WITH THE EXPOSURE THAT AN EDITORIAL BRINGS, they just do it in their try of eliminating every cost as possible.

 

[models_vlada]

BTW I forgot, Do I agree with this practices from magazines ? Of Course NOT, Models should get paid FAIR, not all models make enough money or do advertisings to afford the loose of making an editorial (expenses).

 

[franki]

as much as i think models are underpaid for eds (in some, but not all) cases, it just makes me think of a different version of "a property is only worth how much someone is willing to pay"

but "a models work is only worth the least any model is prepared to work for"
its an unfair situation, but hopefully models unions will be able to form/gain more power to make some changes.

 

[purplethistle]

as much as i think models are underpaid for eds (in some, but not all) cases, it just makes me think of a different version of "a property is only worth how much someone is willing to pay"

but "a models work is only worth the least any model is prepared to work for"
its an unfair situation, but hopefully models unions will be able to form/gain more power to make some changes.

With the limited property law that I do know the more there is of something the less value it has. Since there are a lot of models I guess it makes they're work less valuable as it's easier to find another model that can do the same job and not necessarily have the same face everywhere even though at times it may feel that way. But the whole industry really should have some kind of watchdog regulator on various practices including pay.

 

[franki]

^i definitely agree. i don't think what i said is a good thing, but i think its fairly accurate of the situation sadly. i don't know if models work is worth more when compared to pay from different industries (ie i find it hard to say they necessarily work harder than myself or you do, but the industry i work in not nearly worth as much) but it needs to be looked at relative to within the industry i believe.

 

[purplethistle]

Just another thought but models are kinda like freelance workers with agents that have to settle for whatever pay whenever they get 'commissioned' to do something. If there was ever a way where their work could be more structured/stable then maybe putting an reasonable price for their work would be a lot easier.

 

[TianSoFine]

I think that everyone at photoshoots (from models to stylists to make-up artists to photographers) should be paid a decent amount because they're all imporant. It shouldn't be exclusively the models, nor should it be excluding the models.

 

[ultramarine]

Im sorry, but I wholeheartedly disagree. The amount of money A list models make a year compared to an A list photographer or A list stylist can NOT be compared to the amount they make. Yes, they get payed little in the begining but NO ONE makes more money than them after they've arrived (except, of course, the fashion houses but then thats a whole different territory)

 

[HoneyAlexi]

Hello I'm new, Exciting .

For me when you talk about how much should a model be paid.. If a models image is going to help sell thousands of the suppliers product, then of course they are worth a lot.

 

[iluvjeisa]

everything is shot digitally nowadays...
the whole crew sees the image on the screen almost instantaneously...
it's a whole new world really...

the photog can certainly make or break a shoot...
but a good experienced stylist can art direct even a mediocre photog into taking decent shots...


in general...
this is not my opinion- this is fact...
think about the vogue movie- the september issue...
they talked about the fact that EVERY story that grace coddington works on is good...
they might kill some images for various reasons- but not because it isn't good...
other stylists can work with the same photog and not get the shots at all...
*we saw that happen in that movie as well...
what i wish they had shown, but didn't, is what is really going on at the shoots and how exactly does that happen...
but they would never divulge that, i guess...unfortunately...

really- it's all about the team...
it's why you see the same photog and editors/stylists working together all the time...
hair and make up too...although they are a bit more interchangeable...
but models come and go depending on the story...
*although, special ones will also work regularly with certain teams if they have meeting of the creative minds...

maybe you guys haven't paid attention...
but this is what is going on out there...
go on, check it out for yourselves...
it's not a big mystery...

Maybe that's the problem. Certainly, there are some editors who have a great eye, such as Grace Coddington, she and some others seem to not be photographers mostly because they don't get of on the type of technology geek stuff that all photographers must love. But it seems to me photographers generally have a better eye for what works as an image.

Yeah, I confess, I don't work with this so perhaps I should stfu but the fact remains that I have collected fashion magazines for a while, and for whatever reason they are just nowhere near as good now as they were before the mid 90s. And it seems that perhaps the technology obsession combined with the editor as being in charge could explain why the standard has gone down. From the perspective of fashion photography as art, that is.

Besides, the model is extremely important. As important as editors or photographers. Sure, you can get decent shots with the proper body, but you can't get great shots unless the model is great. Unfortunately, the qualities that makes a model great - youth, a certain state of mind - are all fleeting qualities that you can't rely on for any length of time (a matter of 2-10 years) and that takes down the importance of the model. After all, why should you pay respect to someone who is only going to be there for a short time?

 

[TianSoFine]

Im sorry, but I wholeheartedly disagree. The amount of money A list models make a year compared to an A list photographer or A list stylist can NOT be compared to the amount they make. Yes, they get payed little in the begining but NO ONE makes more money than them after they've arrived (except, of course, the fashion houses but then thats a whole different territory)

I never said that they should get equal pay. I just meant that they should all be paid well, and definitely more than $150 for a photoshoot IMO. That's because most models don't make it to the A-list and most models don't get that big payoff past the poorly paid beginning. I definitely think they should be paid better. Whether or not they should be paid the same amount as a photographer is a different story.

 

[ultramarine]

I never said that they should get equal pay. I just meant that they should all be paid well, and definitely more than $150 for a photoshoot IMO. That's because most models don't make it to the A-list and most models don't get that big payoff past the poorly paid beginning. I definitely think they should be paid better. Whether or not they should be paid the same amount as a photographer is a different story.

But why JUST the models? The rest of the crew's salary hardly will go up .. waht makes em SO special that they SHOULD get special treatment and get payed BETTER than the rest of the staff? Thats poppycock!

 

[Kayote]

But why JUST the models? The rest of the crew's salary hardly will go up .. waht makes em SO special that they SHOULD get special treatment and get payed BETTER than the rest of the staff? Thats poppycock!

Dont they? I am under the impression that the photographer charges an arm and a leg for the photoshoots

 

[ultramarine]

Yes but who earns more? Top photographers or top models?