$50 is a piss-poor amount to pay a tickle model

[Babyshambles]

In my opinion, paying someone $50 to be a tickle model is nothing short of scandalous.

It seems that I could get away with paying a model as little as $40 to tickle her in a video. In my humble opinion, this is nothing short of completely exploitative, especially given that you would pay $100 minimum to tickle an escort of the same quality of looks and ticklishness.

Why are models so badly paid? £20 an hour seems to be The starting rate in the UK, and some models even do shoots for free to build a "portfolio"!!!

So let me get this straight, there are men out there who get to work with very beautiful women and take pictures of them for FREE! Needless to say if you had a tickle fetish or a foot fetish you could satisfy it in this professio with a quick tickle or a shot of a barefoot in the pose.

What's worse, some women will even PAY a photographer to take pictures of them! Hundreds of pounds in some case.

And there are thousands and thousands and thousands of models in the UK alone.

Does anyone else have any opinions on this. Surely women (and male models) deserve to be paid more - especially given that most won't work with any great frequency and regularity.

Sorry if this is off topic, but I feel strongly about this.

 

[Sandrock74]

A "tickle model" isn't a profession and its not something you train for. At best, its an unskilled freelance "job". Thats it.

 

[Babyshambles]

A "tickle model" isn't a profession and its not something you train for. At best, its an unskilled freelance "job". Thats it.

Fair point.

But the average escort is paid 500% more than an average model. Why is this the case?

 

[Spenser]

Agree with you rather completely Babyshambles.
I would have guessed the absolute minimum was about $150US and upwards from there, at least for tickling kink models. I can only suspect that poorly or naively misinformed models may have been suckered into such ticklsh suffering for pence at those rates.

My foot kink friend Dennis [http://www.dennis-n-mara.com/] pays his models $50 just to walk around in camera view, like they are already doing, barefooted in public such as at Renaissance Faires and Festivals here in the US, or in BoHo neighborhoods of cities (Cleveland, San Francisco, Seoul). Absolutely --nothing else-- is required of them, not even to share in his silly running conversation while the camera is running.

And my missus informed me that the going rate even several years ago, for nothing more that a bit of humiliation play as a Fem Domme could net $250US to $300US per hour, with no sexual contact at all.

Pity the poor model who doesn't value her (or his) performance at the rates it deserves, simply through the error of lack of being fully informed.

And shame on the videographer who tries to take advantage of the new to the scene model by not telling her (or him) of the nature of the game.

 

[marcusb]

I don't know the rates in the UK but you can pay a model any amount she is willing to work for. Pay what you think is fair if it bothers you.

For $20/hr most would likely expect it to be a "hands off" photography shoot... not some tied up bondage/tickling video shoot. The rate varies with the content of the job. (not to mention that a video shoot is going to take several hours to do... not just an hour)

The "free" shoot is called TFP (Time For Prints) and the model generally works for the pictures to build her portfolio when she is starting out as a model. In those cases, I'd be very surprised if you'd find someone willing to do a video... again, that would generally be considered a "hands-off" photography shoot.

The women paying a *photographer*, not a GWC (Guy With Camera), pay to have professional pictures taken for their porfolio to further their career. A photographer just does not "take pictures". Photography is a skilled craft and a photographer can do wonders--that's why women pay.

Your outrage is misplaced. You don't understand the market.

 

[Babyshambles]

Agreed.

It is exploitation in my opinion.

I feel that the photographer community has a big part to play in keeping prices low. They dont want to pay more, and there is always a new girl willing to pose for nothing to get some "portfolio shots".

For some photography work, maybe, but $50 for a tickling model is simply exploitation in my opinion. Unless you're tickling her for about 6 minutes only, but even then it is a but dubious IMO.

Agree with you rather completely Babyshambles.
I would have guessed the absolute minimum was about $150US and upwards from there, at least for tickling kink models. I can only suspect that poorly or naively misinformed models may have been suckered into such ticklsh suffering for pence at those rates.

My foot kink friend Dennis [http://www.dennis-n-mara.com/] pays his models $50 just to walk around in camera view, like they are already doing, barefooted in public such as at Renaissance Faires and Festivals here in the US, or in BoHo neighborhoods of cities (Cleveland, San Francisco, Seoul). Absolutely --nothing else-- is required of them, not even to share in his silly running conversation while the camera is running.

And my missus informed me that the going rate even several years ago, for nothing more that a bit of humiliation play as a Fem Domme could net $250US to $300US per hour, with no sexual contact at all.

Pity the poor model who doesn't value her (or his) performance at the rates it deserves, simply through the error of lack of being fully informed.

And shame on the videographer who tries to take advantage of the new to the scene model by not telling her (or him) of the nature of the game.

 

[Coda]

There are a lot of ways to look at this. Modelling with one's face carries different weight, and requires more bravery, than not. Time spent on different types of videos varies. Some companies can afford to pay more than others. Some models are trying to promote themselves outside of the interest of companies. Some models are more talented than others and might be hired for different roles than others.

It's how prospective models feel about individual jobs' rates that determines whether they're seen.

I would think the appropriate thing would be to expect to see some well-paying jobs which require greater talent and/or desirable physical traits in the models, and some lower-paying jobs which are less selective or less professional.

 

[Babyshambles]

Forgive me for being controversial, but bullshit!

Agreed that cameras and lighting and studios are expensive, but we all know that 99% of girls are never going to make it, and they'd be better off getting paid from a guy with a camera, than selling their digital rights to a pro photographer for free.

Also, I think with the standard of technology today, a GWC (I hate that term) can compete easily with a pro in many circumstances.

I think the term GWC is so patronising. Are you telling me that pro photographers dont get turned on by beautiful women that they are photographing for free. That to me is exploitation.

I don't know the rates in the UK but you can pay a model any amount she is willing to work for. Pay what you think is fair if it bothers you.

For $20/hr most would likely expect it to be a "hands off" photography shoot... not some tied up bondage/tickling video shoot. The rate varies with the content of the job. (not to mention that a video shoot is going to take several hours to do... not just an hour)

The "free" shoot is called TFP (Time For Prints) and the model generally works for the pictures to build her portfolio when she is starting out as a model. In those cases, I'd be very suprised if you'd find someone willing to do a video... again, that would generally be considered a "hands-off" photography shoot.

The women paying a *photographer*, not a GWC (Guy With Camera), pay to have professional pictures taken and for their porfolio to further their career. A photographer just does not "take pictures". Photography is a skilled craft and a photographer can do wonders--that's why women pay.

Your outrage is misplaced. You don't understand the market.

 

[rhiannon]

First of all: I am doing photoshoots as a model as a hobby. So I am one of those TfP Models, I don't pay anything, the photographer doesn't pay anything, unless there are photos taken that I can not use on my portfolio.

In my opinion, paying someone $50 to be a tickle model is nothing short of scandalous

Where in the world did you get that price from!? What is that for, 10 minutes!? I mean, this is about touching the girl!! Usual rates for nude photos are 30 Euro an hour MINIMUM. And that means you don't even get close to touch the girl!

The "free" shoot is called TFP (Time For Prints) and the model generally works for the pictures to build her portfolio when she is starting out as a model. In those cases, I'd be very surprised if you'd find someone willing to do a video... again, that would generally be considered a "hands-off" photography shoot.

The women paying a *photographer*, not a GWC (Guy With Camera), pay to have professional pictures taken for their porfolio to further their career. A photographer just does not "take pictures". Photography is a skilled craft and a photographer can do wonders--that's why women pay.

Signed. That's how it is. And that's perfectly alright! A photographer usually had to train for his job, if he takes professional pictures, possibly in his own studio, and he didn't ask the model to shoot with him because he thinks she would be a good reputation for him, he SHOULD be paid!

Just the other way around! If a GWC asks a model with experience to shoot with him, she will usually not do it for free and take money for it!

So let me get this straight, there are men out there who get to work with very beautiful women and take pictures of them for FREE! Needless to say if you had a tickle fetish or a foot fetish you could satisfy it in this professio with a quick tickle or a shot of a barefoot in the pose.

To use your own words: Bullshit! A photographer does NEVER EVER touch a model! Big no-go! If he wants or needs to touch her, for example to get a pose right, he asks if he is allowed to. Ground rule: Don't get closer than at arm's length to your model if she doesn't allow you otherwise!

I feel that the photographer community has a big part to play in keeping prices low. They dont want to pay more, and there is always a new girl willing to pose for nothing to get some "portfolio shots".

So has the model community! Right now, there are tons of hobby photographers and models out there who work together, and some are really good! If you go in a forum asking for someone who wants to take TfP pictures, you will most likely find someone, maybe not someone totally professional, but in the end, you will have pretty good pictures and didn't have to pay for them! It gets really hard for fotographers to make money today!

I think the term GWC is so patronising. Are you telling me that pro photographers dont get turned on by beautiful women that they are photographing for free. That to me is exploitation.

Yes, I am telling you that pro photographers do not get turned on when they photograph beautiful women - even when they are naked!! Wow, hard to believe, but it is that way! They have something else to concentrate on, namely that the pictures turn out good! My gynaecologist is also not turned on when he touches the breasts of a beautiful woman to check her for cancer! It's the same thing!

People who don't do this have NO IDEA how much work a shoot is. It's stressy, it's technical, and it is NOT EROTIC whatsoever! You have a totally wrong picture of the community!

 

[Babyshambles]

Bullshit.

Men are men. They get turned on by beautiful women period and you buy into the crap of the professional photographer.

You seriously think the men who photograph you dont get turned on?? They do! Of course they dont get a hard on in front of you. Of course they hide it. But if you are attractive, and the photos they are doing for FREE appeal, I guarantee they think of you later in a special moment.

You mentioned that most photographers you work with dont allow boyfriends or husbands on shoot? Why is that???? You know the reason.

First of all: I am doing photoshoots as a model as a hobby. So I am one of those TfP Models, I don't pay anything, the photographer doesn't pay anything, unless there are photos taken that I can not use on my portfolio.



Where in the world did you get that price from!? What is that for, 10 minutes!? I mean, this is about touching the girl!! Usual rates for nude photos are 30 Euro an hour MINIMUM. And that means you don't even get close to touch the girl!



Signed. That's how it is. And that's perfectly alright! A photographer usually had to train for his job, if he takes professional pictures, possibly in his own studio, and he didn't ask the model to shoot with him because he thinks she would be a good reputation for him, he SHOULD be paid!

Just the other way around! If a GWC asks a model with experience to shoot with him, she will usually not do it for free and take money for it!



To use your own words: Bullshit! A photographer does NEVER EVER touch a model! Big no-go! If he wants or needs to touch her, for example to get a pose right, he asks if he is allowed to. Ground rule: Don't get closer than at arm's length to your model if she doesn't allow you otherwise!



So has the model community! Right now, there are tons of hobby photographers and models out there who work together, and some are really good! If you go in a forum asking for someone who wants to take TfP pictures, you will most likely find someone, maybe not someone totally professional, but in the end, you will have pretty good pictures and didn't have to pay for them! It gets really hard for fotographers to make money today!



Yes, I am telling you that pro photographers do not get turned on when they photograph beautiful women - even when they are naked!! Wow, hard to believe, but it is that way! They have something else to concentrate on, namely that the pictures turn out good! My gynaecologist is also not turned on when he touches the breasts of a beautiful woman to check her for cancer! It's the same thing!

People who don't do this have NO IDEA how much work a shoot is. It's stressy, it's technical, and it is NOT EROTIC whatsoever! You have a totally wrong picture of the community!

 

[slacker2114]

You seem to be quite the expert in a field you appear to have limited experience in. Or perhaps you subscribe to the old saw of "all men think alike".

But ok, then what about female photographers? Do they get all hot and bothered during shoots too? Or will you just claim that female photogs are more professional than males?

I think rhiannon's post was made by a person who's been there, done that as far as being a model goes. Yet you try to act as if her personal experiences don't mean jack compared to what you believe, which to me, just appears you are grasping at straws to try and prove your point.

And just to touch on the whole "men get turned on during the shoot" theory, let's leave aside the model/photographer thing for a second. A few months ago, I was able to video a tickle clip between two friends of mine, both very attractive ladies, that was later put on C4S. During the entire shooting, not one time did I feel horny or even aroused. Nor did I feel that way at any time afterward. So that either implies that your whole view on the subject is either full of holes or you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

[Babyshambles]

I never feel horny during these things.

But I do enjoy it for all it's worth later.

Look, a man can be VERY professional. He will convey every sign that the girl taking her clothes off in front of him is just an every day occurence. But if any man find's that girl attractive, he will enjoy it at some point. That in my experience is fact, and I have yet to meet a person this does not apply to.

In my outsiders experience, I dont like aspects of this modelling industry. It stinks and whilst I have limited experience doing these shoots, I have friends with years and years of experience.

They tell me straight - to get to the top in this game, you need to be prepared to sleep with the right people. I'm talking about the very top of the British Glamour Model industry (Jordan, Lucy Pinder and above) That is wrong.

Also, because models buy into the GWC-bad, pro photographer-good, they will sometimes spend hundreds of pounds on a shoot. The truth is that in many cases it achieves very little in furthering a models career in a meaningful way.

Rhiannon asks - "$50 - where did you read about that, as if I am mad - she really is quite a patronising woman". She might want to read the major thread in this sme forum where a guy asks if he should pay a "fake" tickle model the agreed $50. People are filming shoots with naive, gullible girls (who think that photographers are eunuchs) for as little as $50. At least she agrees with the sentiment of my thread (before she hijacked it a bit) that $50 is a piss-poo amount to pay a girl for a shoot.

You seem to be quite the expert in a field you appear to have limited experience in. Or perhaps you subscribe to the old saw of "all men think alike".

But ok, then what about female photographers? Do they get all hot and bothered during shoots too? Or will you just claim that female photogs are more professional than males?

I think rhiannon's post was made by a person who's been there, done that as far as being a model goes. Yet you try to act as if her personal experiences don't mean jack compared to what you believe, which to me, just appears you are grasping at straws to try and prove your point.

And just to touch on the whole "men get turned on during the shoot" theory, let's leave aside the model/photographer thing for a second. A few months ago, I was able to video a tickle clip between two friends of mine, both very attractive ladies, that was later put on C4S. During the entire shooting, not one time did I feel horny or even aroused. Nor did I feel that way at any time afterward. So that either implies that your whole view on the subject is either full of holes or you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

[Mister Scruff]

You think that's bad, you should see what the prozzies in the Costa tourist towns charge for a blowjob 😀

On a serious note my family are mostly share fisherman and squaddies. I've done the share fishing thing myself; £50 is a piss-poor amount of money for 10 18-hour days in a row of slugging trawl doors around, tailing prawns and gutting cod. £2.14 an hour is a piss-poor amount to pay a Paratrooper. Tickle models do just fine.

 

[Oddjob0226]

So let me get this straight, there are men out there who get to work with very beautiful women and take pictures of them for FREE! Needless to say if you had a tickle fetish or a foot fetish you could satisfy it in this professio with a quick tickle or a shot of a barefoot in the pose.

What's worse, some women will even PAY a photographer to take pictures of them! Hundreds of pounds in some case.

In the U.S., for people starting out as non-fetish professionals, this isn't unusual at all. Talent almost always has to pay a photog for decent headshots. So if talent is building a fetish portfolio, it stands to reason that they'd pay a photog to give them decent shots.

Sometimes a model starting out will find a photog starting out and they will both help each other out for free.

Besides, what we "deserve" and what reality is are not always the same thing.

 

[marcusb]

GWC patronising? No. It's completly true. I've heard experienced models use the term often. Technology has nothing to do with it. Proper lighting. Setup. How she is posed. Post processing. It's a skill like anything else.

I do nudes. I do fetish work. No. I'm not turned on during the shoot. It's a job I take very seriously and I conduct myself as a professional and I would never consider "sneaking" in touching as you mention elsewhere--THAT IS INAPPOROPRIATE. What will occur during my shoots is agreeded upon up front and conducted as so.

What you're describing is the GWC mentality...

The rest of your comments. You're just trolling. Your comments could apply to any profession involving a man and a woman.

Forgive me for being controversial, but bullshit!

Agreed that cameras and lighting and studios are expensive, but we all know that 99% of girls are never going to make it, and they'd be better off getting paid from a guy with a camera, than selling their digital rights to a pro photographer for free.

Also, I think with the standard of technology today, a GWC (I hate that term) can compete easily with a pro in many circumstances.

I think the term GWC is so patronising. Are you telling me that pro photographers dont get turned on by beautiful women that they are photographing for free. That to me is exploitation.

 

[rhiannon]

Men are men. They get turned on by beautiful women period and you buy into the crap of the professional photographer

This really sounds like you are projecting your own experience on others! Don't! Photographers see pretty naked women all the time!

If men are men, I should probably find me only female doctors then according to what you say!

You mentioned that most photographers you work with dont allow boyfriends or husbands on shoot? Why is that???? You know the reason.

Because boyfriends and husbands tend to interrupt and get jealous even though they agreed to nude photos beforehand. And you know why they get upset? Because they think like you!

Of course there are cases when model and photographer are attracted to each other, but that is really, really the exception!

There actually might be models who take $50 for a tickling shoot, but then that is their problem...it is NOT the usual rate!

In the U.S., for people starting out as non-fetish professionals, this isn't uusual at all. Talent almost alwasy has to pay a photog for decent headshots. So if talent is building a fetish portfolio, it stand to reason that they'd pay a photog to give them decent shots.

Depends! If the agency approaches a model, yes. If the model approaches the agency or the photographer - no. Then the model pays!

@slacker & marcusb: Well said.

 

[LBFT]

Depends?

I think the price models get paid depends on many things. First I assume each clip/video store/company has a set price they want to pay. Then things may depend on if there is nudity, how many ticklers, the storyline/plot(If Any), how is the clip/video, & maybe the kind of bondage model will be in. The bottom line is if $50.00 is not enough for the model they can pass, but I'm sure there are other models who won't pass on the price.

Thank you,
LBFT

 

[rhiannon]

An example: Fusskitzler, a German producer, pays from 90 Euro up to 220 Euro for a 3 hour shooting. Depends on if the face can be seen, what the model is wearing, if there's erotic content included (like vibrator play) and where the model allows tickling.

 

[Babyshambles]

Being professional, you presumably have a portfolio of nudes and fetish work involving men (lots of nude men in poses) and old ladies.

If you don't have these, I presume you are using photography to get your kicks. I find that morally reprehensible.

Unless you are upfront about it, which is cool. I just find the whole modelling profession to be very seedy and built upon lies and charades.

Hats off to photographers. You have managed to convince a legion of women that you are posing them and taking pictures for the sheer art of it. I dont believe that is the case.

GWC patronising? No. It's completly true. I've heard experienced models use the term often. Technology has nothing to do with it. Proper lighting. Setup. How she is posed. Post processing. It's a skill like anything else.

I do nudes. I do fetish work. No. I'm not turned on during the shoot. It's a job I take very seriously and I conduct myself as a professional and I would never consider "sneaking" in touching as you mention elsewhere--THAT IS INAPPOROPRIATE. What will occur during my shoots is agreeded upon up front and conducted as so.

What you're describing is the GWC mentality...

The rest of your comments. You're just trolling. Your comments could apply to any profession involving a man and a woman.

 

[Babyshambles]

And why do you think these male photographers chose to work in a profession with lots of pretty naked ladies? Huh?

Please, women. Men are mostly motivated by one thing - SEX AND SEXUALITY.

I think you are being naive to think that a photographer who works with nudes and on fetish shoots is doing the work for the sheer artistic thill. Nope they are doing it to get to meet lots of very pretty, sometimes naked ladies.

Do they want anything to happen - No. Do they want to touch - No. Do they want sex with the model - No.

Do they want to be in the company of lots of attractive women - Yes.

This really sounds like you are projecting your own experience on others! Don't! Photographers see pretty naked women all the time!

If men are men, I should probably find me only female doctors then according to what you say!



Because boyfriends and husbands tend to interrupt and get jealous even though they agreed to nude photos beforehand. And you know why they get upset? Because they think like you!

Of course there are cases when model and photographer are attracted to each other, but that is really, really the exception!

There actually might be models who take $50 for a tickling shoot, but then that is their problem...it is NOT the usual rate!



Depends! If the agency approaches a model, yes. If the model approaches the agency or the photographer - no. Then the model pays!

@slacker & marcusb: Well said.

 

[marcusb]

I rest my case. You're just trolling to stir the pot.

Over and out.

Being professional, you presumably have a portfolio of nudes and fetish work involving men (lots of nude men in poses) and old ladies.

If you don't have these, I presume you are using photography to get your kicks. I find that morally reprehensible.

Unless you are upfront about it, which is cool. I just find the whole modelling profession to be very seedy and built upon lies and charades.

Hats off to photographers. You have managed to convince a legion of women that you are posing them and taking pictures for the sheer art of it. I dont believe that is the case.

 

[Leostar]

50.00 is a joke, thats why most of the girls that do it for that little money realy are not that ticklish. If you want to get girls that are off the wall ticklish you must pay big, because it is realy torture for them, Now you might get lucky where the girl gets off on tickle torture, but dont count on it. Pay if you want to play.

 

[rhiannon]

Being professional, you presumably have a portfolio of nudes and fetish work involving men (lots of nude men in poses) and old ladies.

There are photographers who do that. There is just no big market for that. Nobody wants to see it! So why waste your time with it?

How do you explain that female photographers take pictures of mostly female models? Oh, yeah, I know...all lesbian, right?

Unless you are upfront about it, which is cool. I just find the whole modelling profession to be very seedy and built upon lies and charades.

Hats off to photographers. You have managed to convince a legion of women that you are posing them and taking pictures for the sheer art of it. I dont believe that is the case.

It is very obvious that you are pretty envious of the photographers. You have no clue what you are talking about, sorry to say that, but that's how it is!

I think you are being naive to think that a photographer who works with nudes and on fetish shoots is doing the work for the sheer artistic thill. Nope they are doing it to get to meet lots of very pretty, sometimes naked ladies.

You know what? It's because of people like you that photographers and models have a bad reputation! Just because some people do not have their fantasies under control!

I'm just waiting for you to say that Lagerfeld does fashion for that reason too!

I agree, there are guys (not photographers!) who go buy a camera and then look for models just to see them naked! But I can assure you, take one look at their photos, exchange a few mails, and you know what they are up to!

 

[Babyshambles]

50.00 is a joke, thats why most of the girls that do it for that little money realy are not that ticklish. If you want to get girls that are off the wall ticklish you must pay big, because it is realy torture for them, Now you might get lucky where the girl gets off on tickle torture, but dont count on it. Pay if you want to play.

Agreed.

Travelling expenses alone are probably higher than $50, especially when you consider eating and drinking and loss of other income-opportunity.

In economic terms, the opportunity cost of being tickled for fifty bucks is just not very compelling.

Some people have suggested that a tickle model is an "unskilled job" and $50 might even be a little too high.

But given that your face will be forever associated with weird tickling porn, $50 really amounts to exploitation.

I believe that you should pay a tickle model the same amount as an escort (up to $200 per hour) and then some for her digital image to be forever associated with this little perversion of ours.

But I guess people want cheap prices, so that's not going to happen on a consistent basis.

 

[Babyshambles]

There are photographers who do that. There is just no big market for that. Nobody wants to see it! So why waste your time with it?

How do you explain that female photographers take pictures of mostly female models? Oh, yeah, I know...all lesbian, right?



It is very obvious that you are pretty envious of the photographers. You have no clue what you are talking about, sorry to say that, but that's how it is!



You know what? It's because of people like you that photographers and models have a bad reputation! Just because some people do not have their fantasies under control!

I'm just waiting for you to say that Lagerfeld does fashion for that reason too!

I agree, there are guys (not photographers!) who go buy a camera and then look for models just to see them naked! But I can assure you, take one look at their photos, exchange a few mails, and you know what they are up to!

Wow Rhianon,

Can you take this somewhere else.