That is your prerogative as well as your preference and experience.

Lumping ALL the photographers together. I may be naive i may be an amateur, but I also want to look out for my own safety.  As would an new model with a good head on his/her shoulders who wants to make sure that there is someone there just in case anything might happen.

Sad reality.

Rosalind wrote:

As a rather cynical person, I do prefer at least on the FIRST meeting to have an escort with me.  Whether the person stays with me through the shoot or comes back to pick me up after the alloted shoot time is  up to the discretion of not only MY comfort level with said photographer but the comfort level of the photographer as well.

If we do a pre-shoot meeting at Starbucks or whatnot I don't care who the model has along.  I, and pretty much all the photographers I know, also don't care about a driver who brings you to the shoot, carries your stuff in, meets me & the crew, and then pisses of to Starbucks WHILE we shoot.  You can even text that person during the shoot when we're changing lights & such.  That way someone knows for SURE where you are & who your with & when to come get you, but absolutely won't be interfering with the shoot itself.

I WILL say that the whole "FIRST meeting" thing is a red herring.  People know models do that & they abuse it.  I mentioned a predator in Florida in your other post on releases.  Don't get the idea predators are common, because they're not, but there is ONE other active predator I know of in Florida, in the Daytona Beach area (PM me for his name, he doesn't have active public criminal issues going on against him like the other guy does so I won't post his name in public) who INSISTS that models bring escorts for first, and sometimes up to fifth, shoots.  That gets the models comfortable, relaxed, and trusting, and THEN he pulls shit on them.  There's a guy in Portland/Seattle who does the same thing, he's even bragged about it online in escort threads.

And honestly, that whole thing is one of my big problems with the whole escort idea... It tends to stop people from applying logic and reasonable precautions to the situation, they just ASSUME someone who's OK with an escort must be OK, when, in fact, someone who says "no" to one is INVITING more scrutiny.  You should check out these articles
http://modelinsider.com/content/articles/duediligence     and     http://modelinsider.com/content/articles/safety
to get a better idea of what you SHOULD do to stay safe if you take an escort or not.
I'll also note, along those lines, that scammers know new models frequently have the false idea that escorts are "common, necessary, and acceptable" and so will do things like put this in a scam email:

    ESCORT:
    As matter of choice, you can bring along anybody of your choice as your escort to the shooting venue. All traveling Expenses, Foods and Accommodations will be cover by us. Our company will cover all the expense on your escort as well.

to make themselves SEEM legit.

And finally, on a personal level, tho I've been in Md for a year now I shot in Florida for 20 years before that.  I can point you to people going back to when I started shooting who'll vouch for me, as well as dozens of other models all over the US, including many who've stayed as guests in my home when they travel.  I have a spotless rep as far as safety & my treatment of models on shoots.  I WROTE one of those safety articles & encourage people to use those steps to check me out.  I almost always work with an MUA, rigger, or assistant (usually female) who also have their own references & reputations.  Like I noted, I'm happy to meet your driver pre-shoot.  Given all of that, a model who STILL says "I just don't feel safe & comfortable enough to shoot with you unless I have someone looking over your shoulder" probably is not going to be a good match for me to shoot.  Now if I were some guy off Craigslist with a disposable cell, no email, and a first name, it might be different. 

I really don't care if the talent brings an escort, I suppose I'm not hindered by a lack of space, so maybe that is a factor in my ambivalence towards escorts. I  don't understand the emotions behind the dislike of escorts, after all, I'm not trying to fuck or kill my talent, so what should it matter to me. Someone that escorts a talent, and then try's to manipulate equipment, is no longer an escort, they are an impediment. Make that person wait outside, or call off the shoot.

Meeting at a Starbucks to converse about the shoot is a waste of time. Have the talent show up at the appointed time with whatever accessories agreed upon, and start shooting. What the hell do you need an intermediate meeting for?

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

I really don't care if the talent brings an escort, I suppose I'm not hindered by a lack of space, so maybe that is a factor in my ambivalence towards escorts. I  don't understand the emotions behind the dislike of escorts, after all, I'm not trying to fuck or kill my talent, so what should it matter to me. Someone that escorts a talent, and then try's to manipulate equipment, is no longer an escort, they are an impediment. Make that person wait outside, or call off the shoot.

Bob, part of that is where you're in a different market than many of us.  Most of us don't have that kind of space, for starters.  Also, the "escort that interferes," far more often by manipulating the talent than the equipment, is a FREQUENT issue and throwing them out's rarely an option... it usually comes down to ending the shoot.  Since we're often paying or investing our time & not working with agency people & paying clients, WE are out time & money when we have to do that.  So while some models say they use the "escort question" to screen photographers, many of us working independently in the online market (meaning often we're shooting nudes, fetish, & glam) have found that screening models based on them demanding an escort's a good way to avoid wasting time & resources.  As i often note, it's rarely the escort (tho they can and do cause issues) but usually the attitude and demeanor of the model who demands one that's a problem.

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

Meeting at a Starbucks to converse about the shoot is a waste of time. Have the talent show up at the appointed time with whatever accessories agreed upon, and start shooting. What the hell do you need an intermediate meeting for?

Pre-shoots are not super common for me, and I certainly don't do them when I'm really booked or busy, or when I travel.  But, again, allowing for differences in market, the people I'm shooting are clients, and much as a wedding photographer might meet a bride & groom for coffee & planning before a wedding I'll sometimes meet a local model or want-to-be (as opposed to wannabee, different things) model who's new to it all & work out details in person.  Thirty minutes over coffee can save hours of shoot time.  Dealing with pros, as you do, it's less of an issue.

SLE Photography wrote:

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

I really don't care if the talent brings an escort, I suppose I'm not hindered by a lack of space, so maybe that is a factor in my ambivalence towards escorts. I  don't understand the emotions behind the dislike of escorts, after all, I'm not trying to fuck or kill my talent, so what should it matter to me. Someone that escorts a talent, and then try's to manipulate equipment, is no longer an escort, they are an impediment. Make that person wait outside, or call off the shoot.

Bob, part of that is where you're in a different market than many of us.  Most of us don't have that kind of space, for starters.  Also, the "escort that interferes," far more often by manipulating the talent than the equipment, is a FREQUENT issue and throwing them out's rarely an option... it usually comes down to ending the shoot.  Since we're often paying or investing our time & not working with agency people & paying clients, WE are out time & money when we have to do that.  So while some models say they use the "escort question" to screen photographers, many of us working independently in the online market (meaning often we're shooting nudes, fetish, & glam) have found that screening models based on them demanding an escort's a good way to avoid wasting time & resources.  As i often note, it's rarely the escort (tho they can and do cause issues) but usually the attitude and demeanor of the model who demands one that's a problem.

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

Meeting at a Starbucks to converse about the shoot is a waste of time. Have the talent show up at the appointed time with whatever accessories agreed upon, and start shooting. What the hell do you need an intermediate meeting for?

Pre-shoots are not super common for me, and I certainly don't do them when I'm really booked or busy, or when I travel.  But, again, allowing for differences in market, the people I'm shooting are clients, and much as a wedding photographer might meet a bride & groom for coffee & planning before a wedding I'll sometimes meet a local model or want-to-be (as opposed to wannabee, different things) model who's new to it all & work out details in person.  Thirty minutes over coffee can save hours of shoot time.  Dealing with pros, as you do, it's less of an issue.

I tend to look at things through my own glasses, not allowing for much deviation from my norm. Sorry for being a taod.

Rosalind wrote:

ADMIN NOTE:  This thread was spun off from a discussion of do's & don'ts in model profiles, found HERE

As a rather cynical person, I do prefer at least on the FIRST meeting to have an escort with me.  Whether the person stays with me through the shoot or comes back to pick me up after the alloted shoot time is  up to the discretion of not only MY comfort level with said photographer but the comfort level of the photographer as well.

Any friend or escort will more than likely be the type of person to be willing to help out or stay out of the way depending on the needs of the photographer.  That and they'd also know that I wouldn't ask something of them that i'm not comfortable doing myself.  So if that person ends up doing a shoot or needed a hand on running a shoot themselves, then they'd know that i'd be more than willing to help.

As for the Miss/Ms ____ portion... one of my favorite friends as well as a model here on MI has a Ms in her name and she's one of the best people i know, both as a friend and as a model.

It has been my experience that there are several classifications of folks who tag along on a shoot - some offer value added to the shoot, some do not.  I'm more than happy to allow a model to bring a stylist or MUA on a shoot.  I am very unreceptive to so-called "escorts" who are along for "security" purposes.  As most of the photographers on this site know, "escorts" offer nothing and, at best are pests, and at worst, actual threats to the security of the photographer.  Let's face it, there is only one purpose for an escort and that is to beat up the photographer if the escort doesn't like the way the shoot is going.  Sooner or later, most photographers who allow "escorts" will find themselves in a confrontation with the escort.  I was once kind enough to allow a model to bring her fiance along on a shoot.  She told me he was interested in photography and wanted to watch the shoot in an non-intrusive manner.  I had shot her several times in the past without him, so I figured it was OK.  What she didn't tell me was that he was a rather large motherfucker and extremely possessive.  She had also not told me that she had never told him that she was doing modeling until about an hour before the shoot.  He became violent towards her during the shoot.  Had I not had my own escort with me, he may have become violent towards me.  Thankfully, Mr. Glock has a way of encouraging good manners.

Again, it call comes down to why the model feels she needs an "escort."  If the model wants someone to do her hair and makeup, good call.  If she's a frightened little bunny rabbit that needs a white knight to protect her virtue, then she needs to get out of "modeling" and find another distraction in her life.  The fact of the matter is, she is more likely to be raped by her father or brother than she is by a photographer.  I don't know how it is in the rest of the country, but here in the Chicago area, "internet" models are often very marginal people.  Many are hookers, escorts, lounge lizards, substance abusers or just plain nuts.  I think most of the photographers I've met in this area are smart enough to recognize the public health issues posed by engaging in sexual relations with such people and avoid such activity at all costs.  It has always tickled me that these same "models" who insist on bringing "escorts" to shoots are more than happy to go out to a club and let some stranger liquor them up 'til they're practically comatose.  Photographers are just not security threats - get over it.

Oh Bob! I love hearing you tell that story!  Brings back warm fuzzy memories.

Well, maybe not fuzzy.  But warm for sure.

Peter Flanagan wrote:

I don't know how it is in the rest of the country, but here in the Chicago area, "internet" models are often very marginal people.  Many are hookers, escorts, lounge lizards, substance abusers or just plain nuts.  I think most of the photographers I've met in this area are smart enough to recognize the public health issues posed by engaging in sexual relations with such people and avoid such activity at all costs.  It has always tickled me that these same "models" who insist on bringing "escorts" to shoots are more than happy to go out to a club and let some stranger liquor them up 'til they're practically comatose.  Photographers are just not security threats - get over it.

Goodness, Mr. Flanagan.  You certainly know how to... speak kindly of those you've worked with in the past.

Rachel Jay wrote:

Peter Flanagan wrote:

I don't know how it is in the rest of the country, but here in the Chicago area, "internet" models are often very marginal people.  Many are hookers, escorts, lounge lizards, substance abusers or just plain nuts.  I think most of the photographers I've met in this area are smart enough to recognize the public health issues posed by engaging in sexual relations with such people and avoid such activity at all costs.  It has always tickled me that these same "models" who insist on bringing "escorts" to shoots are more than happy to go out to a club and let some stranger liquor them up 'til they're practically comatose.  Photographers are just not security threats - get over it.

Goodness, Mr. Flanagan.  You certainly know how to... speak kindly of those you've worked with in the past.

Don't you freeking read?  Did I say that any of the people I worked with fall into those categories?  Um...no I didn't.

Welcome, Rosalind 

Rosalind wrote:

You still are assuming far too much, and i'm sure no one here needs to explain what assuming does to anyone; photographer, model, MUA, hairstylist etc.

Not that I'm defending Peter's statement, but a lot of the idea of a "need" for escorts is also based on assumptions.  I said before the problem's often the crazy mindset of models who insist on them, to the extent of models saying they'r ebeing stalked by Mexican drug gangs or that they can't ever be alone around a man without him trying to rape them.

While you're certainly not in that mindset AND I think intuition can be a valid tool & always tell models "if some guy's giving you a bad vibe, LEAVE," you, yourself, extrapolated a bad vibe to a "who knows what would happen!" scenario:

Rosalind wrote:

Hell, I brought a friend to meet a possible room mate (who a friend had told me about because she knew him), and see the place, and it turned out to be a good thing because I got the creepiest vibe from him.  As a friend of mine put it, he was "greasier than a used car salesman". If it wasn't for my friend who had come along with me, who know what he might have wanted/tried to do.

Slightly different situation, but at the same time, similar.

Ignoring, for a moment, NUMEROUS cases where a photographer has still done rude/inappropriate things WITH an escort present, the "fear of what might be" is a HUGE part of the feeling people have of a "need" for an escort.  We talked in the other thread about RACK, and it turns out that MOST people are VERY bad an accurately assessing personal risk.  This's especially true of women in regards to things like sexual assaults.  Reality is that you're at FAR more risk from someone you know & trust than you are from a stranger, and IF a stranger is your assailant then it's likely to be random... there're something like 2,000 rapes a year in Walmart parking lots in the US, they're crimes of opportunity by strangers.  Guys with profiles on networking sites who exchange emails & phone calls & give you an address and name are less likely to be nutcases because they can be tracked.  There ARE predators who'll put up elaborate charades (one guy in Florida rented a building & built a fake police station then pulled women over & took them in, then told them he'd trade sex for releasing them) but even they rarely want to leave traceable connections.  Not saying it doesn't happen, but what you're FAR more likely to run in to is unwanted pressure (offers of sex for cash, or jobs for sex) than outright assault.

The problem there is that many women are not only unrealistically afraid, but lacking in the strength & self confidence to handle such situations.  They feel that without a friend there to help them they can't deal, and that magnifies the threat in their minds.  Add to that the relentless barrage of media bad news and the idea that male sexuality is evil & predatory (REALLY prevalent in our culture) and you end up with a lot of women who're simply unrealistically afraid and are therefore poor judges of risk.  Read these 2 pieces http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_world_syndrome & http://www.parentdish.com/2011/04/05/is … -snatched/ for a look at how media gives people inflated senses of the dangers around them.

All of that comes right back down to what I keep saying.  It's rarely the escort, but the mindset of the model who demands one.  The statement I see (with various wordings) from photographers who prefer models without escorts is "I'd rather work with a strong, confident woman who's not afraid of me."  Accurate or not, just as many models who want escorts think that photographers who say "no" to escorts are shady, many photographers who say no consider models who demand them to be frightened children who "need to put on their big girl panties or quit modeling."

Ultimately & unfortunately all the craziness about the whole thing hurts us all.

Rachel Jay wrote:

Peter Flanagan wrote:

Rachel Jay wrote:

Peter Flanagan wrote:

I don't know how it is in the rest of the country, but here in the Chicago area, "internet" models are often very marginal people.  Many are hookers, escorts, lounge lizards, substance abusers or just plain nuts.  I think most of the photographers I've met in this area are smart enough to recognize the public health issues posed by engaging in sexual relations with such people and avoid such activity at all costs.  It has always tickled me that these same "models" who insist on bringing "escorts" to shoots are more than happy to go out to a club and let some stranger liquor them up 'til they're practically comatose.  Photographers are just not security threats - get over it.

Goodness, Mr. Flanagan.  You certainly know how to... speak kindly of those you've worked with in the past.

Don't you freeking read?  Did I say that any of the people I worked with fall into those categories?  Um...no I didn't.

Oh, I'm sorry, you didn't clarify, so I just figured that sweeping generalization you made included the people you've worked with.

Nope, not the kind of people I'd work with.