Using models for wedding portfolio?

JMichaelK

Just curious as how others feel about using staged weddings with models as portfolio images. I was browsing through some local wedding photographers sites here in Nashville and noticed the same people getting married on four different sites. It was almost exactly the same photos except for slightly different angles and photo treatments. It was obvious to me the the couple were models and even the guests. Anyway, it felt a little dishonest, because a controlled shoot is nothing like a wedding. I know this goes on all the time, just curious what others think. I also realize these same photographers will probably be out of business by the time I post this.

chris5olson

I think it would be okay, especially for someone who's just starting out. So they get a little more practice. I feel thought that maybe they should specify to any client that it was a controlled shoot with models etc.. that way the client was aware and thered be no dishonesty.

VayCayMom

I know a very young photographer that went to a weekend session with a famous wedding photographer with a lot of others and everything was staged for them, like a model shoot and all the students had to do was shoot. She posted the photos along with regular photos and did not use a disclaimer. As soon as I saw them I knew something was not right, then I put two and two together... I feel it was VERY dishonest, unsportsman like conduct, lol. It was to the extreme due to incredible props, location in a field etc.
As long as a notation is made regarding the fact the photos are not from a REAL wedding, I think it's ok.

ShepsMom

I can see doing trash the dress or even engagements with volunteers. Maybe a bridal portrait with a bride. Setting up a whole wedding, where everything is controlled and timed? Hmm.... I think it's dishonest, and how will that help? This is in NO way an experience, but who am i to say?

Qarik

JMichaelK wrote: »

Just curious as how others feel about using staged weddings with models as portfolio images. I was browsing through some local wedding photographers sites here in Nashville and noticed the same people getting married on four different sites. It was almost exactly the same photos except for slightly different angles and photo treatments. It was obvious to me the the couple were models and even the guests. Anyway, it felt a little dishonest, because a controlled shoot is nothing like a wedding. I know this goes on all the time, just curious what others think. I also realize these same photographers will probably be out of business by the time I post this.

a big boo on that. anyone can make great photos with models and a great location and all the time in the world and such.

dawssvt

I think it's ok. Just make sure you let your future clients know that you need ample time to make the images that you show on your website. it's so much easier to create beautiful images when there is nothing else to do that day and you have an hour or two to shoot the couple. If a couple gives you 20 minutes in the middle of the wedding day, they should know their images may suffer due to this lack of time.

Qarik

dawssvt wrote: »

I think it's ok. Just make sure you let your future clients know that you need ample time to make the images that you show on your website. it's so much easier to create beautiful images when there is nothing else to do that day and you have an hour or two to shoot the couple. If a couple gives you 20 minutes in the middle of the wedding day, they should know their images may suffer due to this lack of time.

sorry, it's not JUST time. it's the location, it's the models, it's the lightng equipment that may or may not be yours, it's the posing that may or may not be yours, it's compositions that may or may not be yours, etc.

Your portfolio should not need any explaining or qualifications. You are a wedding photographer...not a a fake wedding photographer.

VayCayMom

Qarik wrote: »

sorry, it's not JUST time. it's the location, it's the models, it's the lightng equipment that may or may not be yours, it's the posing that may or may not be yours, it's compositions that may or may not be yours, etc.

Your portfolio should not need any explaining or qualifications. You are a wedding photographer...not a a fake wedding photographer.

I agree here,and there is a HUGE difference too if you just have your cousin running around in gown and the type of paid weekend seminar like I referred to which looked like it was straight out of a wedding magazine. Just having a model that knows how to pose is going to look better than what most brides can expect. Not to mention high end MUH people. It's like shooting movie stars on the red carpet compared to shooting people off the street.

Moogle Pepper

qarik wrote: »

sorry, it's not just time. It's the location, it's the models, it's the lightng equipment that may or may not be yours, it's the posing that may or may not be yours, it's compositions that may or may not be yours, etc.

Your portfolio should not need any explaining or qualifications. You are a wedding photographer...not a a fake wedding photographer.

+1.

tenoverthenose

I have no problems with using models for portfolio so long as...

(1) You took the shot. And by this I mean you set it up, you posed it, you lit it. You made it happen.
(2) You can deliver the same quality of imagery on a paid shoot under circumstances of a paid shoot.

Every once and a while I will hire a model/models for the day to go play around and experiment/push the envelope. Yes, these images will end up in my portfolio because I am responsible for 100% of the image. I also make sure to tell my clients "Yes, that is a model. I hired her at the rate of $200 per hour to make these images that I had stuck in my head become reality. I take my work seriously and invest in it." I know that some people (most other photographers) don't like this approach, but it's what I do. I love to work out ideas for personal satisfaction on my own time. Besides, wouldn't you expect a professional sports team to practice too?

Also of note, I really don't approach model shoots any differently that I would a wedding. Same amount of time to take a photo, same lighting, same lack of attention to details

Art Scott

I know most of the response has been on the negative side...however...........I personally know many a photog that used set up wedding pix, and also other photogs pix as their own.......none of these photogs used signed images by others but ones they found in estate sales and auctions....some local and some in other states....but they made sure they could replicate the image on demand.....some of my previous employers did this and I did not agree with the practice but it was their call not mine, I was just a shooter for them and when asked for a specific shot to be reproduced, I simply and honestly replied that I had not been shown the secrete of producing that image by my employer.............I also know of a local photog that in her studio she used images of her own wedding and a wedding of a relative that was done by another photog....so nothing in her first studio was her work to begin with........so it is not uncommon to plagiarize someone else's work as their own in the beginning....it may be honest, but it has been done for a very long time.........I read books written back in the 40's and 50's and it was suggested to do this and then filter those out with your own as soon as you got your own work to show......
Some of the books also suggested going to all the weddings you could and taking pix as the hired photog set them up...do not interfere with his shooting but as soon as he fired then fire right after the hired photog, while his flash was recycling.....then quietly leave.......but in my area no newspaper gives dates, times and locations of weddings any longer so that is neigh on impossible to do in this area anyway................the reason they quit was do to the many many upset ex-boyfriends, husbands and such, of local celebs that their weddings were crashed by their EXes .......

sweet caroline

I would say that it's okay to use models for examples of bridal portraits, if the photographer is the one setting up the lighting, posing, composition, etc. The resulting images would be comparable to images from a bridal portrait shoot.

mmmatt

tenoverthenose wrote: »

I have no problems with using models for portfolio so long as...

(1) You took the shot. And by this I mean you set it up, you posed it, you lit it. You made it happen.
(2) You can deliver the same quality of imagery on a paid shoot under circumstances of a paid shoot.

Every once and a while I will hire a model/models for the day to go play around and experiment/push the envelope. Yes, these images will end up in my portfolio because I am responsible for 100% of the image. I also make sure to tell my clients "Yes, that is a model. I hired her at the rate of $200 per hour to make these images that I had stuck in my head become reality. I take my work seriously and invest in it." I know that some people (most other photographers) don't like this approach, but it's what I do. I love to work out ideas for personal satisfaction on my own time. Besides, wouldn't you expect a professional sports team to practice too?

Also of note, I really don't approach model shoots any differently that I would a wedding. Same amount of time to take a photo, same lighting, same lack of attention to details

I agree with this. Portfolios are to show your experience, quality and style. Kinda like lying on a resume otherwise.

mmmatt

sweet caroline wrote: »

I would say that it's okay to use models for examples of bridal portraits, if the photographer is the one setting up the lighting, posing, composition, etc. The resulting images would be comparable to images from a bridal portrait shoot.

They would also imply that you have wedding experience though...

Sam

These kind of threads get to me.

There is right and there is wrong. It ain't real complicated.

The examples here range from disingenuous to outright and
actionable fraud.

You get to decide your values, who you are and who you want to be.

Sam

Let the flames begin.

Matthew Saville

The core of the issue is, of course, ...is it mis-representation?

It's not mis-representation if you have the same ability to pose, find good light, and compose / time your shots no matter whether your subjects are models or clients. If your portfolio just so happens to include some models, that's fine!

However, that's not what I see from day to day. I see a lot of newbies shooting over pro's shoulders, or getting a friend to model for 3 hrs till they get the shot right; and then using those images to book a bride who is probably a little self-conscious about herself and only has 30 minutes for portraits. It's just a bad recipe.

So I just can't condone it, not unless there is disclosure and understanding.

=Matt=

DWS

Qarik wrote: »

Your portfolio should not need any explaining or qualifications. You are a wedding photographer...not a a fake wedding photographer.

totally agree!

FedererPhoto

Qarik wrote: »

Your portfolio should not need any explaining or qualifications. You are a wedding photographer...not a a fake wedding photographer.

Perfectly worded.

dawssvt

Qarik wrote: »

sorry, it's not JUST time. it's the location, it's the models, it's the lightng equipment that may or may not be yours, it's the posing that may or may not be yours, it's compositions that may or may not be yours, etc.

Your portfolio should not need any explaining or qualifications. You are a wedding photographer...not a a fake wedding photographer.

just hit hard with my clients that they need to give me ample time to produce the bride/groom images that are shown on my site.

ccraft

You'll still want to go along and second shoot or get real experience at a wedding before you do one on your own (or market that you are skilled at handling such a high-pressure event on your own). However, I do believe in hiring models to display your talents in taking wicked creative images.

Buy a wedding dress from a used store (I pay about $40 a dress at the Salvation army). Hire a model from a local agency (cost will be about $50 an hour). Build up a portfolio of stuff that you want to represent *you* - do your experimenting with a model... create your portfolio this way... and the RIGHT clients will find you!! If you work with clients... they will dictate how they want you to shoot. It was hard at frst to be creative with clients because they didn't trust me. I had to do a lot of convincing to begin doing creative stuff... however, it's now the creative stuff that attracts new clients.

Christina
http://www.funkytownphotography.com
Ranked as one of the top 20 wedding photographers in the world
Costa Rica Wedding Photography

Agnieszka

Yeah, there are many workshops you can get those photos taken ... nah ... not my sorta deal. I'd only feel ok doing it if I were already a good photographer, but would need to get a wedding portfolio because I want to switch businesses. Anyway .. not saying the workshops are bad (though, it probably really only teaches you about posing people, since dealing with "normal people" in a stressful situation is a whole other cookie.

Having said this, I am currently playing with the idea of just getting some models in front of my camera so I can rework my portfolio. I've been doing weddings for way long (well, sorta), so I feel pretty ok doing this. All I really want is to book edgier weddings / couple ... but of course those won't book you if you have only a certain style of photos in your portfolio ... All I am missing are photos with certain details (like in the hair, certain jewelry, or whaterver.....) Nothing a "normal bride" couldn't have the day off ... but *my* brides usually don't because they're far away from being edgy.

Nothing wrong with playing around with models, but you gotta know that you'll have to live up to people's expectations, or else ...