Anybody heard of them, worked for them?
Supposedly they are intersted in me, I'm looking to see if anyone has worked with them, all they want is 15% non-exclusive, and $50 one time fee to build an online portfolio...
Please be in touch, I'm looking to learn anything about this agency.
thanks for the input guys. I'm still not convinced, I mean 15% is a standard agency cut for any work they find you...
And a scam based on $50? I mean the guy already spent an hour on the phone with me, I really doubt he'd go thru so much effort for a possible $50!
Anyone else have good/bad experience w/ Shadowlaw?
For the umpteenth time, your generalities simply don't hold water.
It is perfectly legal for a "model management company" to charge fees.
See if you can find a real "agency" chartered/licensed as an agency for models.
They've all changed over to management companies for that very reason.
Agencies DO charge models, for space in their annual book, for each shoot.
And SAG rules have NOTHING to do with modeling.
Why do you insist on repeating myths long after it's been pointed out to you that your information is either too general or actually incorrect?
Look it up: Ford is NOT an agency. Neither is Next. Not Elite. None of them. They're all MODEL MANAGEMENT companies. And they charge fees.
Employment agencies are the only outfits who still come under those regulations. And many of them are trying to slide out from under by reincorporating as other kinds of "management" groups.
"Eye candy" on a game show or a video is not generally considered modeling. They're called "presenters" or given other titles other than "models."
SAG represents people in film, video, television an other affiliated media. It's Screen Actors Guild. You don't have to speak, but it's for ACTORS. A C T O R S.
When you're talking about models and agencies, SAG doesn't apply. If you're talking about other work, it does.
And when you speak of "agencies" in a broader sense, please realize that the laws relating to employment agencies don't relate to model management companies (which most "agencies" really are). Perhaps in Texas and a few other states, your comments actually meant something. That's why many "agencies" set up shop elsewhere, and they call themselves something different to get around employment agency legislation.
I have not argued that Shadowlaw is legitimate.
But your definition of legit would be impossible for 99.9 percent of real model management firms to match. If you're looking at talent agencies, that's another matter, because they DO deal with SAG and do have to follow those rules.
Model management companies, commonly referred to as "agencies" because they used to BE agencies, have an entirely different set of guidelines. Some of them overlap. Some don't.
My definition of legit is that the outfit, whatever you want to call it, actually procures jobs for the models — and pays them.
The management companies all charge models for services. Whether it's the annual "book" sent to potential clients or the headshots distributed for individual jobs, the money all comes form the model. Some (but not all) of the better model management companies will front the model enough money to start a portfolio and/or produce comp cards. But that money comes out of the first job. These days, from what I hear from real agency owners, that fronting money is no guarantee.
With your last statement, you made as big a leap to a conclusion as you do with your insistence on repeating out-of-date and dubious information that often has plenty to do with actors and screen personalities, but nothing whatsoever with modeling.
As an addendum: One of the SAG actresses I know is constantly on the hunt of new, terrific headshots. With my permission, she once traded some art prints I did of her for her headshots from one of the Hollywood hotshots.
Bottom line: Getting and paying for the headshots was her responsibility, because her talent agent needed them, but could not do the same as a model management firm and send her on a few test shoots.
Ultimately, it all comes out the same, regardless of which set of rules is followed. The talent will pick up the cost of his/her expenses. It may come out of pay (as with the model outfits) or as a personal expense (for the SAG agencies). But the talent will pay.
The only real, universal measure of whether an agency, a management company, an agent or a PR person is doing his/her job is this: Does the talent get more paid work? If so, the operation is at the very least real. So long as they do nothing illegal, I consider them legit.
I just re-read your comments on another thread, concerning whether to get into SAG. Not only were they insightful, they also sent the gal to sites where she can get the real scoop, right from the source.
Your information about SAG and its possibilities is tremendously helpful — in context.
I think we just disagree about the context.