If you can’t be bothered reading my long drawn out discussion then the short answer is ‘Yes’. You should pay models.

But let me quickly clarify my stance on this. The following relates to situations where photographs are taken with the intention marketing those photos for sale, in particular, stock photography. It doesn’t apply to situations where a new model is looking to build their portfolio but can’t or doesn’t want to pay the extortionate prices charged for those dodgy looking makeover photos.

Every now and again, this question pops up on photography forums and invariably, the discussion is quickly polarised into those who think you should pay a model and those who vomit at the very thought of it. So why is this such a tricky question to answer?

Remember, this discussion relates to situations where photographs are taken with the intention of marketing those photos for sale.

I can’t think of any other job where you would or even could get someone to work for you on a project that makes money for everybody involved except them. And that’s how I see the situation here. Some photographers take great pride in the fact that they can get models to work for them for free when they clearly intend to sell the  images made during the shoot. Not only that, one proudly claims to get the model to work for free AND…….. this takes some believing………. then gets the model to pay for the services of the make up artist. What next? Should the model hire the studio, buy some camera equipment for the photographer and get the coffees in?

In this situation, the photographer makes money from the sale of the photos, the agency selling the photos get their commission, the make up artist gets paid for their service (by the model in some cases). But the model is expected to work in exchange for a few prints or a copy of some of the images on a CD and then, is expected to sign a model release that takes away all rights in respect of how their likeness can be used. It hardly seems fair to me. OK it may be legal but morally and ethically it doesn’t sit well.

So I see it like this. If the resulting images are intended to be sold then it should be regarded as a collaborative venture, each party brings their particular skill or competency to the venture and should be paid accordingly dependent on the work and effort given. Of course some people will have paid up front to make it possible, studio hire, cost of equipment and other resources etc. so their risk is greater…. but so are their rewards when it works out. But….. people and the time they give up as work for hire are resources and they should be compensated accordingly for their time and skill and presence. if you don’t think models are essential to model shoots then try doing a shoot without one.

Bear in mind Remember, this discussion relates to situations where photographs are taken with the intention of marketing those photos for sale.

Now I disagree with the argument that the images may not sell so it may be a venture that loses money. Well, it may be but try taking your camera or lens back to the shop and claiming a refund because nobody wanted to buy the photos that came from them. Try asking for your money back for the studio hire because the photos didn’t sell. I would suggest the model’s fee and should be considered as an up front payment much like the studio hire and equipment costs, as I said, you can’t do the shoot without the model.So the argument that there is a risk that you may not sell the photos is not a valid one to excuse what amounts to exploitation. And I bet the model’s fee comes to a  lot less than the studio hire or the cost of equipment. But then it’s easy to exploit individuals and not so easy to exploit other businesses that are making money.

Ahhh…. but what about giving them prints or CD’s instead of payment? Well that’s a nice idea but why not pay them and give them a few prints or a CD as well, you know, that’s just the right thing to do. In my opinion, prints and CD’s should be given as a bonus to payment, not instead of.

It wouldn’t kill anybody to pay minimum wage would it? And you get the added bonus of being able to sleep soundly at night, safe in the knowledge that you haven’t exploited anybody today.

The following situations would never happen.

Go to the camera store to buy  a new camera, instead of paying them, offer to give them some prints of the photos you take. It’s not going to happen is it?

Hire a studio and instead of paying for the hire, offer to give them some prints of the shoot instead. That’s not going to happen.

Hire a technician in the studio to set up and operate the lights for you and then offer some prints in exchange for his services? What do you think he’s going to say?

A model goes to a department store and fills up her basket. The cashier says, ‘That will be 50 (insert your currency here) please’ and the model replies, Have you got change for an 8 x 10?