That's an interestingly high percentage of flakery.

Peter Flanagan wrote:

Nah, not interesting.  Just another indication of the overall lack of responsibility exhibited by our youth.

sorry but I don't think I've had 18 flake on me in my entire life.  In fact I'm sure of it. Maybe change aftershave?

Maybe a larger codpiece would help . . . .

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

Emeritus wrote:

Maybe a larger codpiece would help . . . .

It's been my experience that God has an enormous sense of humor. Evolution is intrinsically tied to genetics, and a tool God uses to weed out the grain from the chaff is uniformity. For instance, in an effort to keep stupid people from procreating, mental capacity and penis size have, over time,  become relative to one another. I suggest Peter needs a new thimble!

Don't you just love the adianoeta in that statement?

Wow... I didn't know John Holmes and Long Dong Silver where super geniuses!

I knew they had no problem delving deep inside the subject at hand...
but didn't know that took such prodigious intellect to do so.

How about charging her a flake deposit, to be returned on finally showing up? Rate based on your normal rate + all the other folks she inconvenienced by not showing.

Rachel Jay wrote:

Paul, I started a thread on "how many chances" that might interest you: http://www.modelinsider.com/forums/topic?id=2619

I read that entire thread and it seems that a large percentage of photographers will not give a "flake" another chance. Flake is defined differently by photographers. It seems that one photographers flake is another photographers "maybe a second chance". I guess it's a personal choice.

Thank you,
Paul

I know of a photographer that has a "list" of models and is the admin of a "group" that is all about models that flake. I am not part of the group, nor do I want to be as I feel that it is not in the best interest of any parties involved and could lead to big issues not the least being legal issues.

If you could be part of a group like this, would you or not??

Paul

Paul Rupp wrote:

I know of a photographer that has a "list" of models and is the admin of a "group" that is all about models that flake. I am not part of the group, nor do I want to be as I feel that it is not in the best interest of any parties involved and could lead to big issues not the least being legal issues.

If you could be part of a group like this, would you or not??

Paul

There's a local photographer who added me to a Google doc years ago that listed flaky models.  He added me without asking first, though he did say he'd remove anyone who didn't want to be a part of it.  The doc listed the model's name, MM link, and had a column to explain the "instance".  It also had a place to list who posted the information with a link to their MM.

He took it upon himself to add people I had mentioned having issues with in the past to the list, AND attributed my name and MM# to the accounts.  In a couple cases, what he said and what actually had happened didn't quite jive.  I asked that he remove them, and never note that I've recorded something if I haven't actually done so.  He did, and apologized, though he didn't see why it was a problem    Since I had told him things, he could add them to the list, and even though he got some details wrong, it was JUST the same as my adding someone's name to a spreadsheet.  Notsomuch.  I can't recall if I asked to be removed or not.

We're no longer talking, though last I checked nearly a year ago, I still have access to the document, which hasn't been updated since my complaint.

I don't think I'd willingly join a group like that, though I might stick around silently monitoring it.

Curtis Wood wrote:

-joining and participating in a group like unto what you are describing is a recipe for disaster both in the business arena and very possibly a court of law.

My point exactly!

I've had a large number of flakes this year also. Granted I'm also dealing with amateur models more then established ones which I attribute to being the biggest cause of flakery.

Rick Gordon Photography wrote:

Peter Flanagan wrote:

LOL, today's no-call/no-show brings this year's tally up to 18 of 22 booked shoots flaking!  Keep up the good work, gurls!  LOL

Hmmmmm 18 out of 22 booked shoots have flaked? Then you say "keep up the good work gurls!"??? WTF, Peter!??

Sorry but I don't buy into this bs of blaming the "flake" model if your percentages of flakes/no-calls is as high as you've stated. I've shot hundreds of models in the last 10 years and know I've not had 18 No-Call/No-Shows in my entire 20+ year career. Fact is, I'd be inclined to wager that I haven't had 10 in the past 20 years, and I shoot from Playboy/artistic levels up to and waaay beyond "Oh Gawd, I hope my family never finds out about this" hardcore adult/fetish, and then some. This includes both TF and paid gigs!

It, quite frankly, leads me to believe that your organizational skills are sorely lacking as much, if not more, than those flaky models you're writing this "models are flaky" post about. If not this, then you surely aren't communicating well with the models and "selling" your services, or the shoot itself, effectively at the very least.

Your statement leads me to several questions, especially when you have stated your flake/no-call percentage is almost 82% this past year!

1)What venues are you using to recruit these models to shoot from? Or more realistically, NOT getting these models from?
2) What style shoots are being offered/done?
3) Are these shoots TF or paid gigs, as that always makes a huge difference in the "flake ratio"?
4) How much communication did you do with these models beforehand?
5) Were any of these no-call/flaked shoots confirmed 24hrs in advance via the phone, or cancelled if they were not?
6) Did you have any other model set up as a potential "Plan B" (just in case) so that you weren't left with an open date?

In my personal experience, IF the model sees value in the shoot, either as a TF or paid gig, and IF the communication has been good, the percentages of flaking drops to almost nil. In your stated case above, if the flake ratio is as high as it is, I'd be far more inclined to look at your way doing business OR your organizational skills as being suspect then to buy into your blanket statement of "Keep up the good work gurls!"

But hey, wtf do I know, as like others around here I've barely learned how to take off my lens cap!

I've had 1.5 flakes in my entire career. A stripper Chris Keeling introduced to me was a total no show, and MadCityChel from MM showed up 4 hours late, so I didn't let her in the studio. I too have shot hundreds of non-pro or aspiring models. Many came from the ranks of Model Mayhem, some were referrals, and some I just approached on the street. In 40 years of making my living with a camera, I think 1.5 no shows is an acceptable number.

I can only offer a guess as to Peter's problems with talent, but I'm pretty sure he wouldn't like my guesses, so I'll keep them to myself. I will offer that until something changes drastically for him, his flake rate will probably remain consistently high.

Rick Gordon Photography wrote:

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

I've had 1.5 flakes in my entire career. A stripper Chris Keeling introduced to me was a total no show, and MadCityChel from MM showed up 4 hours late, so I didn't let her in the studio. I too have shot hundreds of non-pro or aspiring models. Many came from the ranks of Model Mayhem, some were referrals, and some I just approached on the street. In 40 years of making my living with a camera, I think 1.5 no shows is an acceptable number.

I can only offer a guess as to Peter's problems with talent, but I'm pretty sure he wouldn't like my guesses, so I'll keep them to myself. I will offer that until something changes drastically for him, his flake rate will probably remain consistently high.

Ok, and out of those 1.5 flakes, one was a stripper referred by Keeling... Does this not fall into the 1 flake referring another category? case closed! lol j/k Keeling, don't get your shorts in a wad! 

And while 4 hrs late is definitely "just cause" to cancel the shoot, I've had times when it's occurred and STILL did the shoot. Hey we needed the content and were under a deadline! You occasionally make allowances IF the model is a serious hottie and you're under the gun. Chastise her later and get the job done now!

So Bob, your percentages are far lower than the norm. Might I assume your organizational skills combined with the quality level of your work, plus your overall rep within the biz just might have made a difference?

Peter, take notes here. We have seen a pro respond to your post here who's had 1.5 flakes in a 40 year career specializing  in mainstream/agency work with very reputable career. Me, who's had very few model flakes working in the adult industry full time, and who's rep will never be compared to Bob's in a positive manner by anyone working in the mainstream. Then there's you who has the lofty 82% flake ratio working somewhere in the industry between Bob and me. So, I ask you again, WTF Peter??

I doubt Peter will seriously consider any of what you or I have said. Why, just the other day on a public forum, he called me a faggot for getting all up in his shorts. I'm thinking of going to the Chicago meet and greet just to see what he's all about. My guess is he's 5'7", 145 lbs, and wears glasses.