TF* - Kills the Industry

I don't know if anyone else has seen this, but there is a trailer out for a film aptly called Time for Prints. It is a documentary that will be released next year. I can see how TF* based shoots are killing our industry as I used to get on average 20 requests per day for TF* based shoots. I only do 1 TF* based shoot per month and it's usually for magazine submissions.

Here's the trailer:

http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=oja4VPsVB4U

Thoughts?

I think it that it helps both industries.
Its a good thing for both models and photographers.
They both get something positive out of it.

I think TF* is great for new photographers and models. Once you've proven yourself you simply reply "i'm sorry I don't do TFP work, sessions start at $..."., with some nice words around it to make people feel special. Convert them to paid work.

It's a double edged sword.

On one hand, it's a great way to get started, and to help models just starting out.
On the other hand, yes, it can provide alternatives that don't require models to pay working photographers, and screws models out of paying work.

IMO, good models will still be paid for working, and good photographers will still be paid for their work (so long as the quality isn't sub-par to the TF* shooters they thumb their noses at).

I know a few TF* shooters who are glad to shoot up and coming models in exchange for a signed model release for the images. Basically run their stock business off of that, and it allows them to pay the better models.

TF* is something I would only consider doing once for each client. We each get what we want out of it, and if you want future work, you can pay for it.. it's that simple.

I started out doing TF*, as I needed a way to build my portfolio. Now that I have a decent portfolio, I make it clear that I do not do TF*, unless it's for something innovative that would be good for my portfolio. This still happens. But, I get fewer TF* requests and more TF$$$, now that I have a portfolio for people to see.

As I said, I used to get a lot of requests for TF* but now just don't shoot as much unless it's paid or it's for a magazine submission or otherwise. Found that I was getting people who weren't even models, who thought they could work the TF* angle. Sorry, but no thanks.

As someone new to the modeling scene, TF is a godsend. It allows me to learn the tricks I need and polish the skills I have on people who think they want to be models. I do get some actual models who are just starting out and need a few looks for their portfolios, but the majority of the 'models' I have been shooting are college girls who want good pictures for their MySpace pages. These girls wouldn't pay a professional studio photog the going rates in any case, so I don't feel guilty about taking work.

That's Ok with me, I just want the practice.

i've never done this type of stuff ever, please explain wtf TF is and the different "kinds" i guess there is?

from the responses I'm assuming its shooting models for free so you can gain experience, but not make any money off it, and the models get images of themselves for free for lending their time? total guess

adblink wrote in post #6200050
i've never done this type of stuff ever, please explain wtf TF is and the different "kinds" i guess there is?

from the responses I'm assuming its shooting models for free so you can gain experience, but not make any money off it, and the models get images of themselves for free for lending their time? total guess

Good guess. The clip above has a girl explaining what it is about.

TFP is Time for Prints. This is, these days, a holdover from the days before digital cameras, in which the model would receive actual prints. Some folks still do this, though it is getting rarer.

There are variations. TFCD (Time for CD where the model receives a CD of digital images) is popular.

My usual arrangement is that the model will get a CD of images that I select (for quality) that have had the basics done to them (levels, contrast, color & white level corrections etc) and they get to choose 3 images that I will do retouching on. In exchange, they pose for me, sign a release/contract that says the model cannot modify the images, cannot sell the images and must, if displayed on line or for self-promotion, credit the photographer.

I remember shooting TFP back in the 80's. It didn't kill the industry then, and its not going to kill it now. I still shoot with some models for TFP if its something for my portfolio, the model is very experienced, and they have a look I am after. I get TFP requests all the time, and 90% of them I turn them down and send them my rate sheet.

What I do find is there is a influx of new models into an industry that was extremely competitive to start with. But, there are also a lot more photographers entering the industry as well, and they seem to balance themselves out. There are a lot more new models doing TFP, and a lot more photographers shooting TFP with them. At the low end of the market, there is a flood of TFP arrangements, where in the past is less.

However in the mainstream market, I'm still paying models the going rate, which can be anywhere from $100 an hour to $2,000 per day or more depending on usage. And while there are many more photographers doing TFP, it hasn't made a dent in my rates. So all in all, it hasn't seemed to make much difference at the professional level, but seems to have exploded at the lower end.

For those new to the industry, its a good deal for both sides. For anyone trying to make a business off model portfolios, and low end model agencies that make a significant income off the photography rather than booking jobs, I'm sure it hurts. But for the industry at large, it hasn't changed things all that much IMO.

My thoughts are that I don't concern myself with that which I have no chance of changing. TF* is a regular part of (amateur/beginner) photography now. It's not going away so no need to give it any concentration that I could better direct at my business

Bobby

I'm willing to do TF* if I think it's going to benefit my portfolio or skill set in some way. I don't care what anyone else thinks.

I don't think it's going to kill the industry... nor is it going to go anywhere. I think the industry's undergoing change with the influx of DSLRs and hordes more shooters wanting to be a part of it but I don't think that's going to kill it off, either... not yet, anyway. I'd be more worried about microstock.

Well said Jim G.

TF* was going on back in the 70s when I was first getting started. It was a viable part of the food chain then and it remains so now. There are always going to be folks looking to build portfolios on both sides of the camera, it didn't kill the business in the past and I see no reason why it should in the future. Microstock and people willing to give away images for nothing more than their name in fine print somewhere are a far bigger and more dangerous issue to the photography industry.