Is TFCD an outdated concept?

Question

I think that the traditional concept of "TFP" or "Time for Print" is outdated, since almost all photographer shoot digital. The newer standard of "TFCD" which is "Time for CD", is completely unfair to the model.

Nowadays, CDs cost around $1 each and $1 to send. It takes 30 minutes on a slow machine to burn a few hundred jpegs. You can do it from home. You can do it at the shoot, from your laptop, while you are taking down the equippment.

Modeling for prints is fair because the photographer has to go thru time and expense to get the film developed and prints made. This was not a cheap process, for 5 prints or however many the model's time was deemed worth.

THE PHOTOGRAPHER WAS PAYING THE MODEL WITH EQUAL BARTER!

How come photographers and guys with cameras seem to be still operating under the old principles with the new media?

I am curious to hear other opinions and comments on this...

... so isn't this why you should just pay the model, atleast something (or make another type of barter) instead of doing TFCD? I have NEVER complained about not getting images back from paid shoots, or those where other expenses were paid. As far as the costs of a stylist, makeup, and rental studio- I totally understand the cost, but sadly it's a few bad apples... It's interesting the difference in opinion I got from female photographers I posed this question to...

Answer 1

Hey Jessie,

I agree with you. Times have changed and so should the principles should be updated to reflect a standard of fairness.

Answer 2

for me The cost of the cd is worthless what makes me not want to do tfcd is the time it takes to convert any pictures the model may want on the cd from raw into jpeg or other more commonly readable format. taking like a 15 meg raw and converting it into just even a jpeg takes a few minutes per picture times how ever many were shot and if you shot a couple hundred images this sure does take a lot of time, not to mention any touch ups which would tack up at least an extra 50 to the bill to anyone who would normally be paying for pictures. Models often don't seem to understand the thousands of dollars that go into finding a studio space lighting make up, wardrobe, stylists and everything that goes into making a shoot happen. I personally rarely do tfp/ or tfcd there are to many models who are willing to pay for the same service and when they pay you know they will definitely show up. From what I have experienced when doing tfp/cd 35% of the models who claim they really want you to shoot them. don't show up to the first meeting or shoots, because they have nothing to lose but the cd.
After doing that a few times and spending a few grand on models who don't show up. you start to not want to give them anything for free when you know some one else will pay for it. so I personally only trade or pay models who I know well and or have a good track record with other photographers and references. but even then like I say, making a CD for a model can take days even weeks if you have another job and 100s of pics to convert. hope that answers that for ya and doesn't piss you off to much. But considering your experience and references I'm sure people will tfcd with ya. Everyone has there reasons for there own way doing things ya just gotta find one that matches what you are looking 4 bit as I say

Why buy the Milk when you can get a Cow for free? or
You cant get people to spend money on you for the same service others will pay them for.

Answer 3

Times they are a changing!
.
If you were only given prints, then you would have to spend money to scan and turn them back to a digital file for submission to some agencies that now only accept digital files. The images scanned from a print would lose quality in this second generation reproduction. Giving you an original file is like giving you a negative. You could use this image in a bazillion ways for self promotion on your website and for all sorts of brochures of any size or print type and you would retain the original quality without spending more money to make it digital again.
Some photographers will only give you prints in hopes of a future media or reprint reorder from you.
I guess it depends on how you choose to look at it. Before digital, the photographer would never have relinquished the negative!
Each negotiation must stand on its own. If both parties agree to the terms and both parties recieve benefit from the transaction, then the deal is fair. Be assertive and state your terms of the exchange firmly and politely. Letting someone know what you want, in a direct and friendly way, is half the battle. If you feel unfairly treated, this will show in the pictures. Find someone to work with who will agree to your terms.

Answer 4

Personally I think the trade is still valid. How much do you spend to model for a particular shoot? Both the photographer and model spend about the same time for the shoot. If they are both professionals, who is to say who's time is more valuable?

Instead of just accepting a tfcd say you want a good quality 8x10 or at least a high enough resolution image on your cd to print one for your portfolio

I would rather have a model ask me to print an image of her/his choice so I can make sure it meets my standards. I have seen many photo labs (make up artists and models) print terrible photos that i really wouldn't want my name on

Answer 5

Guess you just got to see the photographers point of view.
I use TFP, CD and prints (What most photographers are doing now), as an intro. to a model I've never worked with before.

By the time I lay out for make-up artiest (150.00 to 200.00)
costume/ wardrobe (5.00 to 200.00 or more)
set aside time in the studio (when I could be making about 800.00 an hour) I've already put out a lot of cash not even knowing if she'll show up, show up blitzed out of her mind, show up with an escort that's disruptive or gets in the way, or jumps around like shes on speed or something. Given 90% show up and do a great job, but its that other 10% that make me real hesitant to pay before meeting and working with someone.
Should you run into a photographer who just wants to do TFP and nothing else hes taking advantage of you, No two ways about it!

Answer 6

Generally, I agree with you. I don't think TFCD is outdated, but I think if that's the deal then models should get a CD of *most* of the images either at the time of the shoot, or within a few days. I'll explain the "most" later. The old model of 6-7 prints of the best shots was fine for actual prints, because of the cost. But "burn a CD while taking down the lights" doesn't always work either.

Digital photography has changed some things, but others remain constant. I agree, that the cost of film & processing have been eliminated (actually, replaced by the huge investment one makes in digital camera bodies which rapidly become obsolete), but the "processing time" has actually increased in some cases. Photographers usually still absorb the cost of studio time, make-up artist if any, wardrobe, wear & tear on their equipment, etc.

First off, no photographer wants the bad/unusable images to see the light of day. Whether the model moved at the last second, or the autofocus sensor decided the electric cable 5 feet behind the subject was more interesting than the models eyes, or the strobes didn't fire- every shoot has plenty of images that are simply crap, and photographer doesn't want ANYONE seeing those- let them be cast into fire. They want the opportunity to eliminate those images from any final product they give to anyone-model, corporate client or otherwise. In addition, many of the good images still require retouching or light editing. This too, is a slow process- even if you're talking 5 minutes per image, multiply that by the 200+ images from a typical shoot!

In the past, most photogs dropped off their film at a lab, and those people handled the process of adjusting the developing time according to the photog's instructions if any, and making proof sheets. With slides, the photographer could just pull the bad ones out. With proof sheets, the photog & model could meet and look over the proofs. Then the agreed-upon # of prints could be made at the photogs expense. In many cases models might want more than those, which good photogs would offer at their cost.

The thing to keep in mind is that these days, the digital images on disk are essentially the NEGATIVES. Photographers were never into giving those away, unless it's for clients that paid them a nice fee (and some argue even then). Models needed prints for their books, photographers owned rights to their work, and everyone was happy. But in general, rights to the images go in the opposite direction of the money. If someone was paid for a shoot, the payee own rights to the images. What I find hilarious are models that want to be paid a high hourly fee, and on top of that think they're entitled to all the images. But hey, I can't help those who won't put down the crackpipe.

Now in TFCD, the normal deal is that both model & photog have equal rights to all images from the shoot (I'll amend that to say all USABLE images, which is a real sticking point for many)- most TFCD releases state that neither party may sell them for commercial gain without further consent of the other, but both have unlimited rights for promotional use (i.e. non-member websites, Comp cards, etc)

Unfortunately rip-opff artists exist on both sides. Sometimes so-called photographers never deliver the CDs they've promised, leaving the model with nothing to show for her time. Sometimes models post pics from a TFCD shoot on their paysites. But that's a people problem, and you run into that in every business. That's where reputations come in.

A big issue is that many photographers shoot RAW images, which are the equivalent of digital negatives- raw images offer the highest quality results, but aren't viewable outside of the camera until run through special software. While Photoshop can handle most RAW formats, sometimes the results aren't nearly as good as using the software bundled with the camera- and this conversion is a time-consuming process- it take hours to convert a few hundred images- in photoshop you're talking converting them one at a time. Moreover, The RAW file formats for Nikon is different from Canon is different from Fuji- so giving a model a disc full raw images isn't useful to her, unless she's a photoshop pro & happens to have the correct software filters.

Digital is a double-edged sword. The everyday nature of the technology has made it trivial for images to be stolen, both from photographers and models, if either maintains a website. If we're talking websites with paid subscribers or members, that's lost revenue & in some cases, lost opportunities for future work.

This is an enormous problem since many rogue site don't pay for any content, they just steal it, forcing many photographers to use watermarks to identify their photos- but people crop them out, etc. This is another reason (besides quality) that many photographers prefer to shoot RAW- because with JPEGs, you can have a rough time trying to prove that your images are really yours- there's no distinguishing one copy of the file from another. With RAW images, it's easier to prove that yours are the originals from which lower-quality jpegs were generated.

If models were willing to handle retouching on their own, that elmininates much of the delay. But not all models are proficient in image editing. And since TFCD shoots don't pay the bills, lots of photogs have to relegate post-shoot editing to breaks in their 9-5 work schedule.

If all TFCD shoots were done in JPEG instead of RAW, models could get their images almost immediately. But trying to convince photogs whose reputation & (and in some cases, livelihood) is based upon the quality of their images to do this, can be difficult.

I think getting the model a CD of all usable images (unretouched, she's on her own removing mascara runs & scars) at the time of the shoot, or edited/cleaned up images within a week, is fair.

Answer 7

It all depends on the skill of the shooter and the photogs end usage market.TFCD is fair for portfolio usage for both parties,less so for
"shipped" images.