False information from Shoot Organiser, alinkinyourlife

[alinkinyourlife]

First of all, I would like to apologize to the following CS photographers for the recent cancellation of Babe Watch 4 scheduled for 28th March 09:

- MikeElliot
- JayKay
- Alankpy
- Astin
- Final23bong
- wtjong79
- newnikon
- Razoray
- Alvin

To avoid further queries or flaming, I shall write to you here in detail what exactly happened that caused this unhappiness and negative feedback.

On Friday, 22nd March 09, I received sufficient support from photographers listed above to get the shoot going and therefore thank all photographers in the thread for the full house. I sms-ed to the photographers informing of the shoot at midnight as I wanted to ensure that everything goes well and that there were no last min pull-outs. Thankfully, no photographers gave me any issue.

On Thursday, 21st March 09, I called the models, Felicia and Debbie to inform them that the shoot will proceed on Saturday. I even called them on Friday night to confirm their attendance with the shoot and both told me that they would be able to make it. I even called in another model, Willynn to be the back-up in case 1 did not turn up.

It was only close to 8am on a Saturday morning of Babe Watch 4 when I received an sms from both of them stating that they would not be able to make it. Reasons:
Debbie: "I won't be able to make it as I have a bad sorethroat."
Felicia: "Sorry but I won't be able to make it as I have a fever."

Now I believe that these were excuses and called to demand them to turn up but none picked up the phone after repeated calls. I tried getting another replacement model but to no avail which is why I told my assistant Chervin to sms everyone stating that shoot did not proceed due to pull-outs by photographers. I will admit that this was a mistake on my part as I should have informed everyone that it was due to the absence of models. I have always been a person protective of my colleague and also models. This was the first time I work with Felicia and Debbie and by protecting them, I have neglected the feelings of the photographers who were already on the way to Tanjong Beach at Sentosa.

I have learnt from my lesson and sincerely apologize to all photographers who supported me in this shoot and causing you unhappiness was never my intention at all. This was the first and also the most unfortunate incident that has happened since I started organizing shoots. I am in no way sub-contracting you to other organizers nor playing you out. I can only hope that with this explanation, in time you will forgive. Do let me know if you are not satisfied with my explanation and I will try to make it up to you somehow. Thank you.

 

[jeanie]

you should get your models out to apologize to the photogs who signed up too.
also, a suggestion will be to collect deposit from your models first in case they play you out.
say $50?
so if they turn up and do the shoot, you return them the $50 depo and on top of that, their fees for the day.
if they dont, of course, you pocket the $50, and out of goodwill, you should use this $50 to reimburse the transport fees to the photogs.time wasted couldnt be saved.but at least they dont waste the transport fees going to the location, not to mention IF any of them had already driven into sentosa.

that way, i reckon it'll be hard for them to play you out.
just a sugges.

 

[Del_CtrlnoAlt]

you should get your models out to apologize to the photogs who signed up too.
also, a suggestion will be to collect deposit from your models first in case they play you out.
say $50?
so if they turn up and do the shoot, you return them the $50 depo and on top of that, their fees for the day.
if they dont, of course, you pocket the $50, and out of goodwill, you should use this $50 to reimburse the transport fees to the photogs.time wasted couldnt be saved.but at least they dont waste the transport fees going to the location, not to mention IF any of them had already driven into sentosa.

that way, i reckon it'll be hard for them to play you out.
just a sugges.

doubt anyone will work with this 2 models already...

but just so funny, y did the organiser wanna tell the participants that the other participants backed out? care to explain your rationale? U think that the rest won't bother to verify as each of them is a single entity and you and your models won't get implicated?

 

[vince123123]

Well he did say in his explanation that he was trying to "protect" his models and everything. That said, I think that such fly aeroplane models should be named publicly rather than anything else.

I'll go and look in his previous thread to see who the two perps are and mentally blacklist them

doubt anyone will work with this 2 models already...

but just so funny, y did the organiser wanna tell the participants that the other participants backed out? care to explain your rationale? U think that the rest won't bother to verify as each of them is a single entity and you and your models won't get implicated?

 

[vince123123]

I think it will be good enough if he informs the models that their acts and deeds have now been permanently recorded in the largest photography forum in Singapore I doubt they will really apologise or anything.

you should get your models out to apologize to the photogs who signed up too.
also, a suggestion will be to collect deposit from your models first in case they play you out.
say $50?
so if they turn up and do the shoot, you return them the $50 depo and on top of that, their fees for the day.
if they dont, of course, you pocket the $50, and out of goodwill, you should use this $50 to reimburse the transport fees to the photogs.time wasted couldnt be saved.but at least they dont waste the transport fees going to the location, not to mention IF any of them had already driven into sentosa.

that way, i reckon it'll be hard for them to play you out.
just a sugges.

 

[jeanie]

I think it will be good enough if he informs the models that their acts and deeds have now been permanently recorded in the largest photography forum in Singapore I doubt they will really apologise or anything.

sigh...young gals nowadays....where is the sense of responsibility and conscience?

 

[Del_CtrlnoAlt]

sigh...young gals nowadays....where is the sense of responsibility and conscience?

not everyone as old & wise as u lor...

 

[tirimasu]

Just as I expected..

Singaporean girls just don't have the sense of responsibility and commitment.. Maybe they are still not matured enough irregardless of their age..

I myself have also witnessed many cases of airplanes flying every now and then..

 

[JayKay]

you should get your models out to apologize to the photogs who signed up too.
also, a suggestion will be to collect deposit from your models first in case they play you out.
say $50?
so if they turn up and do the shoot, you return them the $50 depo and on top of that, their fees for the day.
if they dont, of course, you pocket the $50, and out of goodwill, you should use this $50 to reimburse the transport fees to the photogs.time wasted couldnt be saved.but at least they dont waste the transport fees going to the location, not to mention IF any of them had already driven into sentosa.

that way, i reckon it'll be hard for them to play you out.
just a sugges.

doubt anyone will work with this 2 models already...

but just so funny, y did the organiser wanna tell the participants that the other participants backed out? care to explain your rationale? U think that the rest won't bother to verify as each of them is a single entity and you and your models won't get implicated?

I am glad that the organiser has come clean and absolved the photographers from blame for the cancellation of the shoot.
I am not concerned whether the organiser gets the models to apologise or explain but I feel he should alert the models that this accusation has been made in a public forum and give them the opportunity to respond if they so wish.
As for why he tried to protect the models, I do understand that sometimes people can have a misplaced sense of camaradie and even trained officers may not be stern enough to shoot a deserter.
However, we should come up with some way to curb errant models from failing to fulfil their obligations especially since there have been 3 reported cases in just one weekend. The links to the other two are

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4937078#post4937078

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4938720#post4938720

If I may, I would like to borrow from Jeanie and expand on her suggestion. The administration is raising the subscription from shoot organisers. My suggestion is not to increase the shoot organisers' rates but instead to register and levy a subscription in similar fashion on models who want to work the photoshoots. Afterall, they are earning income and not being taxed at all. If they have paid a subscription up front, I believe they will have to work at recovering the cost and be less inclined to flake out.
Hopefully, this system will instill some sense of responsibility and a bit of professionalism amongst them.

 

[Long Thai Bean]

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4937078#post4937078

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4938720#post4938720

I think these 2 incidents are by the same model ... so i wouldn't really call it 3 cases in this instance ....

My suggestion is not to increase the shoot organisers' rates but instead to register and levy a subscription in similar fashion on models who want to work the photoshoots. Afterall, they are earning income and not being taxed at all. If they have paid a subscription up front, I believe they will have to work at recovering the cost and be less inclined to flake out.
Hopefully, this system will instill some sense of responsibility and a bit of professionalism amongst them.

I believe this a good suggestion. A fee/levy should be placed on all the models that are "advertising" their services in the Services Offered section. Or maybe a paid subsciption should also be imposed on the models ...

 

[JayKay]

I think these 2 incidents are by the same model ... so i wouldn't really call it 3 cases in this instance ....



I believe this a good suggestion. A fee/levy should be placed on all the models that are "advertising" their services in the Services Offered section. Or maybe a paid subsciption should also be imposed on the models ...

We should not split hairs but there are actually 3 models involved - Olivia, Felicia and Debbie.
Let's focus our discussion on how to prevent irresponsible people taking advantage of members.

 

[zechraffie]

independent observer here:

1. first the organiser told a lie by stating that the cancellation was due to photogs backing out
2. then the organiser lied again by closing the thread that the shoot was carried out successfully
3. now the blame is pinned on the models.

without the models being informed of this thread and speaking up for themselves, i find it hard to believe the convenient excuses.

perhaps whose who know the models should inform them their reputes at stake here, if they're interested.

 

[sORe-EyEz]

We should not split hairs but there are actually 3 models involved - Olivia, Felicia and Debbie.
Let's focus our discussion on how to prevent irresponsible people taking advantage of members.

to get the facts right if have to split hairs, have to split. no short cuts.

 

[zechraffie]

We should not split hairs but there are actually 3 models involved - Olivia, Felicia and Debbie.
Let's focus our discussion on how to prevent irresponsible people taking advantage of members.

so far as i can tell, short of the models coming forth to refute the allegations against them, the only irresponsible party seems to be the organiser, in the manner they have conducted themselves.

 

[AhV]

as an ex-organiser ... frankly, there are more than THREE la ... have you not heard of models who jumped ship from one organiser to another organiser ? :sweat: ... whose fault was that ?

Organiser ? or Model ? ... bcos they switched shoots... earlier agreed shoot got affected .. is that a definiton of " no show " ? ... they showed up on the same day BUT on a different shoot .... it is still happening ... so tough luck to some organisers

 

[vince123123]

As another who has attended many shoots and organised many more, I'll say that that organisers should also consider posting their bad stories on models on the thread, just as how Venom81 has done in his thread.

There's really no point in trying to shield the models - I don't see why we should make concessions just because they are females.

as an ex-organiser ... frankly, there are more than THREE la ... have you not heard of models who jumped ship from one organiser to another organiser ? :sweat: ... whose fault was that ?

Organiser ? or Model ? ... bcos they switched shoots... earlier agreed shoot got affected .. is that a definiton of " no show " ? ... they showed up on the same day BUT on a different shoot .... it is still happening ... so tough luck to some organisers

 

[airforce1]

I think the shoot organiser have to do services recovery for the irresponsible attitude. Let say if this matter was not mention by the cs member ,the organiser escape scott free thus blaming the models for the bad records.

 

[azul123]

If models are the ones flying planes.. then find a common agreement between all organisers to make sure that none use them again, this way they can't switch from one organiser to another and if they fly planes at last minute they won't appear on CS anymore.

But the Organiser made a huge flaw in his/her decision by putting blame on innocent parties (photographers) as what was stated below... that is more then bending the truth.

Now I believe that these were excuses and called to demand them to turn up but none picked up the phone after repeated calls. I tried getting another replacement model but to no avail which is why I told my assistant Chervin to sms everyone stating that shoot did not proceed due to pull-outs by photographers. I will admit that this was a mistake on my part as I should have informed everyone that it was due to the absence of models. I have always been a person protective of my colleague and also models. This was the first time I work with Felicia and Debbie and by protecting them, I have neglected the feelings of the photographers who were already on the way to Tanjong Beach at Sentosa.

And yet again outright put a posting that it was a successful shoot? when the shoot did not even happen? wah damn daring or in this case it is like shooting yourself in the foot.

What I am more concerned, is that alinktoyourlife cancelled the shoot 55mins before the shoot start, and then on the same day posted in Clubsnap "Thanks to all participants who made this shoot a success~!" in bold red fonts.

Overall, although the models caused the initial problems, but organiser made a bigger mess.

../azul123

 

[JayKay]

as an ex-organiser ... frankly, there are more than THREE la ... have you not heard of models who jumped ship from one organiser to another organiser ? :sweat: ... whose fault was that ?

Organiser ? or Model ? ... bcos they switched shoots... earlier agreed shoot got affected .. is that a definiton of " no show " ? ... they showed up on the same day BUT on a different shoot .... it is still happening ... so tough luck to some organisers

I was only aware that it happened in 3 of last weekend's shoots. Were there more over the weekend?
As for models switching allegiance from one agency/manager/organiser to another without breaching any contract, I see that as a private matter. However, I believe you are thinking about free-lancing models who are not contracted. If so, yes, I have noticed that there were cases where models were advertised for different shoots on the same day, withdrawn from one shoot and advertised on another, etc. In those cases, many parties are at fault for allowing it to happen - the model(s), the organiser and the participating photographers.
In the case between the model and the organiser with whom she agreed to do the shoot with first, the model has breached a contract. Unfortunately, most free-lancers are minors and there is therefore little recourse for the organiser than to consider if they can possibly take action against the other organiser who poached the model. That's why in another thread, I previously suggested that CS should only allow models who are registered with a agency or company. In that case, the aggrieved party can go after the agency.
Finally, photographers who supported the latter shoot by joining it, have actually abetted the breach of agreement.
So it all boils down to whether the community as a whole condones such behaviour.

 

[Del_CtrlnoAlt]

Lets put this in perspective.

1) The organiser should be accountable for their clients, its a breach in this, and his failure to rectify the issue and giving a 1/2 baked excuse is not only not going to help, but made it worse when he tried to cover it up with a 'success' post. The organiser owe direct duty to the participants, no excuses are going to relieve themselves from this incident.

2) The models are contracted by the organiser, they don't owe the direct duty to the participants, but we're not sure what is going on, the organisers are supposed to have all the things covered and should be able to identify and address the issues if it happens. Pushing the blame to the models is not the way to do a service recovery. Contingency plans, refunds, alternative reshoot should be settled asap without the need for members to seek redress. It makes the organiser look really bad.