Michael DBA Expressions wrote:
"...Looking at photos on the web site of an erstwhile competitor..."

Why?

Howard Tarragon wrote:
One who's not quite right in the head or is that certifiable?

Damn. Beat me to it.

Reminds me of a guy I knew in the military who claimed to be a black-belt in Tai Chi.

CliveStJohn wrote:
Doesn't really mean anything.

It's offered by 'JN Photography' in Virginia - not even an organisation.

Pass a background check and promise to be good!

The good news is they charge $25 a pop for every 'certified model' application!

Jaysus... what next - a photographer giving out modelling degrees to anyone with $50?

If it's a Doctorate and the diploma is in colour I have $100 ready to go!!!!!!

Hey, I’m on ya. Heck, I’ll even slap a gold foil seal of approval on it. Send your $100 NOW via certified check.

Michael DBA Expressions wrote:
Just stumbled across something new to me. Looking at photos on the web site of an erstwhile competitor, and I notice mention that a model he used is a “certified model” who, it is claimed, had to pass a national test and background check. No certifying organization was specified, however, and I have never heard of “certified models” before. Who is behind this designation? What are the criteria for certification?

It is exactly the same as a certified photographer.

Shadow Dancer wrote:
It is exactly the same as a certified photographer.

Uh, no, it absolutely is not the same as a certified photographer.

Not even close.

The CPP is awarded by a well known and respected industry organization. Qualifying for it requires passing a difficult and intensive written exam on the technical, business, and legal aspects of photography, as well as having a portfolio of your work approved by a panel of accomplished photographers, and of course that background check which doesn’t just look for public records of criminal behavior, but also inquires of your reputation amongst both the public and the photo community.

Near as  I can tell “certified model” requires the criminal background check only, plus that the single photographer involved photograph you (at your expense). If you see no difference, you have my sympathy.

Shadow Dancer wrote:
It is exactly the same as a certified photographer.

Michael DBA Expressions wrote:
Uh, no, it absolutely is not the same as a certified photographer.

Not even close.

The CPP is awarded by a well known and respected industry organization. Qualifying for it requires passing a difficult and intensive written exam on the technical, business, and legal aspects of photography, as well as having a portfolio of your work approved by a panel of accomplished photographers, and of course that background check which doesn’t just look for public records of criminal behavior, but also inquires of your reputation amongst both the public and the photo community.

Near as  I can tell “certified model” requires the criminal background check only, plus that the single photographer involved photograph you (at your expense). If you see no difference, you have my sympathy.

Yes, many differences and for many reasons.
Sorry, I found the title and the OP to be both a bit snarky and completely devoid of tangible facts. Vague insinuations based on ???
Quite a few of the replies are snarky as well, oh joy another snarky Tog thread in the Model forum.

Now this does amuse me, from the OP...
"No certifying organization was specified, however,"
"Near as  I can tell "
and, from your reply...
"The CPP is awarded by a well known and respected industry organization."
And, who would that be?
Pot meet kettle? Or both pot and kettle? Hmmm...

PPA? I googled it. Known of them for decades. I understand why a career photographer would use them.
The insurance alone is probably worth it. I'm sure the education is good and less expensive than college.
The membership numbers are likely inflated by the free memberships, same as here on MM.
There is a bit of irony in a non-profit organization teaching people how to make a profit but it's not really much different than Salvation Army in that respect.

Photography can be a lifetime career, modeling not so much.
Photographers can be butt ugly to a mud fence, models not so much.
Photographers can have an MFA from a prestigious institution and still not take great photos.
I play in a dance band, well over 2,000 gigs and counting. There is no certification for "dance band" either. So what?

If you are working with freelance models, do your research. If you are working with agency models you have a potentially more reliable structure.

Perhaps it would have been better to simply ask if anybody had an knowledge regarding programs for Certified Models?
The snark may well have driven off anybody who might have considered sharing what they know.

Good luck!!!

Michael DBA Expressions wrote:
The snark you see is entirely in your own head (and post). I meant none, either in the OP or in my response to you. The OP was made seeking information, which was quickly forthcoming from several directions.

Yep, all in my head. We won't argue the point, there is no definition for "snark". I know it when I see it, you see it differently.
I did say...

Shadow Dancer wrote:
Sorry, I found the title and the OP to be both a bit snarky and completely devoid of tangible facts. Vague insinuations based on ???
Quite a few of the replies are snarky as well, oh joy another snarky Tog thread in the Model forum.

You don't get to choose which posts I am allowed to parse, you've made others that are not quite so pretty.
It took two more posts from you and quite a few from others before I made my first post, the one you took exception with.

Michael DBA Expressions wrote:
Said erstwhile competitor does have delusions of grandeur.

CliveStJohn wrote:
Doesn't really mean anything.

It's offered by 'JN Photography' in Virginia - not even an organisation.

Pass a background check and promise to be good!

The good news is they charge $25 a pop for every 'certified model' application!

Jaysus... what next - a photographer giving out modelling degrees to anyone with $50?

If it's a Doctorate and the diploma is in colour I have $100 ready to go!!!!!!

Michael DBA Expressions wrote:
Hey, I’m on ya. Heck, I’ll even slap a gold foil seal of approval on it. Send your $100 NOW via certified check.

This thread is not an inviting environment to share information. If somebody had anything to share why would they share it here among the scoffers and the puffed up egos?
I didn't see the information you mentioned. I did read every post.

Also no luck with pinning down certified models or even certified photographers. There seem to be many different options for photographers, confusing.

CliveStJohn wrote:
Reply to Shadow Dancer

"Sorry, I found the title and the OP to be both a bit snarky and completely devoid of tangible facts. Vague insinuations based on ???"

Hi ShadowDancer - I must admit I also saw no hint of the OP being snarky and, in fairness, a question (by definition) is usually devoid of facts as it is asking for others to give the info.

As for myself, the question was: "I have never heard of “certified models” before. Who is behind this designation? What are the criteria for certification?" My answer was: "It's offered by 'JN Photography' in Virginia - not even an organisation."

I think, realistically, it's difficult to argue that you can equate 'certified model' given out by a photographer with 'certified photographer' from an organisation.

I was humorously critical of it, as were others, because a photographer who purtorts to being some sort of awarding body deserves ridicule. But I don't think humour in any way prevents contribution.

I was a bit thrown by your statement "there is no definition for "snark". I know it when I see it, you see it differently." The dictionary lists it as 'make snide and sharply critical comments'.

And, in your defense, there probably were a few of those throughout the conversation.

Modelling can be pretty hard work to make a real go of it without lone photographers offering something for sale that has no real value and unrealistic expectations. I'm sure we can all agree on this.

A polite, sensible reply. Thank you. Below is a play by play and then my comments and questions on the topic of  "certified" photographers. FWIW, I have an Associate of Science with Technical Certificate in Photography, read on to see what that entailed.

1.OP - opinions differ, context changes as thread goes on.
2. "Bootcamp models?
3. Edging up to the snark. First comment made on "certified photographers."
4. Could be re-mis-interpreted many ways, will let it pass.
5. Snark.
6. Both infromative and a bit snarky
7. Snark
8. Snark
9. OP - Casting aspersions on an unnamed "competitor." If one could be bothered, a search might yield results. This post influenced my read on the OP
10. You, starts out informative but slides snarkward.
11. Snark although funny at least
12. Snark
13. OP - Snark
14. You, a bit of a jab.
15. Snark
16. Me, snarking but also serious (more on that below)
17. You, commenting on the viability of "certified photographer".
18. A question relevant to the topic
19. OP replies to my post. He touts certification from "a well known and respected industry organization" but despite noting that his "competitor" did not mention where the model "certification" came from, he fails to mention who this organization is by name. Not snark.
20. I reply. I am polite. I inquire as to the organization that certifies photographers (still unanswered). I suggest a more neutral OP might yield more useful responses.
20. OP replies to me. He is partially correct.
21. I reply to the OP. I repeat my statement about the thread not being an inviting environment for sharing potentially useful information.
22. You reply, you are polite. Our opinions differ.
23. See below

We still don't know which organization the OP was referring to, I've mentioned PPA as they are very well known but no answer yet. With regards to important things like "hands on training", and testing in general, I have questions.
I will concede that things have changed a great deal in terms of expediency in our digital world. I made the changes, I prefer digital. The basics remain the unchanged - lighting, exposure and knowing WHEN to fire the shutter are still paramount.

I did find that PPA does have some hands on seminars. Are they required for certification? Is the final an open book test taken online from the privacy of one's home once you've paid the considerable fees? Do you get a second chance or must you re-up?

I had an opportunity to take classes at a fantastic facility in a community college in Fresno CA. The head of the department was a Brooks Graduate who held very high standards for students. If you performed to his expectations he would spend however much time it took to work with you.

Film based, we had everything you could want. Cameras from 35mm to 8x10. I checked out a Sinar 4x5 with Rodenstock lens for 2 semesters. 6 B+W film developing stations, 4 color film developing and printing stations (JOBO equipped), 16 B+W printing stations, a studio with ceiling mounted rack lighting, modifiers, a set of hot lights, reflectors, gobos etc.

It was a great place to learn. I took over 60 units there, just in photography.

Two assignments come to mind. Both were in Commercial and Industrial Photography, which was taught by the head of the department and included a session with John Tenney, a professional shooting architecture.

We all had to shoot The Box. A cube, 15" on each side and painted a medium gray. A 4x5 camera was required and the framing of the subject was close up. The left side of the box was to be evenly lit, the top of the box was to be evenly lit one stop darker than the left side. The right side of the box was to be evenly lit one stop darker than the top (two stops darker than the left side). You could have 5 tries at this one, then no more film. You could use anything in the studio to light it. The instructor would take your developed film and check the exposure with a calibrated densitometer. All 4 corners and the center of each side had to match. I shot this 3 times, the 3 shot got me 100 points out of 100. It sounds simple and in the end it is. Working with the image taught me more than reading 100 books would have ever taught me.

As an extra credit assignment, we were to shoot a shiny object from the school's stash of such things. I chose a chrome plated coffee pot, shiny like a mirror and cylindrical. We were to use the 8x10 camera. You were given one sheet of film, it's get it right or forget it. The assignment was to make a close up image of the object without the photographer or the camera showing in the reflections of the object. That took a few hours to set up. I got 100 points on that project as well.

So, I would like to know more about the sorts orf experiences a "certified" photographer MUST complete to be certifed and what opportunities are available for those who sincerely strive to improve their craft. I will repeat that I understand the benefits of PPA include an excellent insurance program. If you were a pro shooter (I am not and have no aspirations to do so), membership would be a must simply for the insurance.

In the end, it is the images that are created that imply status of either a photographer or a model. Rating those is subjective, there is no standard. A great product photographer for one client might not be quite the thing for another and so on...

Have fun, we are not going to be here forever!!!!

Michael DBA Expressions wrote:
Just stumbled across something new to me. Looking at photos on the web site of an erstwhile competitor, and I notice mention that a model he used is a “certified model” who, it is claimed, had to pass a national test and background check. No certifying organization was specified, however, and I have never heard of “certified models” before. Who is behind this designation? What are the criteria for certification?

Shadow Dancer wrote:
It is exactly the same as a certified photographer.

I'm a certified GWC.

Michael DBA Expressions wrote:
No certifying organization was specified

The Velvet Jones School of Modeling?

veypurr wrote:
I have only ever used certified models, it's too risky not to.

I've shot with some certifiable ones. Wayyy certifiable.

Michael DBA Expressions wrote:
Just stumbled across something new to me. Looking at photos on the web site of an erstwhile competitor, and I notice mention that a model he used is a “certified model” who, it is claimed, had to pass a national test and background check. No certifying organization was specified, however, and I have never heard of “certified models” before. Who is behind this designation? What are the criteria for certification?

So . . . I just went into Google and typed in "how to become a certified model" . . .

A bunch of stuff came up relating to Certified Model Builders (guess that's a legit profession)

AND . . . then there was this:  https://www.jnphotographyva.com/product/become-a-model/

The requirements are:  "good standing in the community. We believe models are role models and should conduct themselves with dignity, respect, and with an open mind. We take this seriously because free-agent models reflect the professionality and respectability of our company when they work with us. Please answer all the questions in the next section in full. Your answers or lack thereof may or may not have weight on your application."

Go Figure !

Ken Marcus Studios wrote:

So . . . I just went into Google and typed in "how to become a certified model" . . .

A bunch of stuff came up relating to Certified Model Builders (guess that's a legit profession)

AND . . . then there was this:  https://www.jnphotographyva.com/product/become-a-model/

The requirements are:  "good standing in the community. We believe models are role models and should conduct themselves with dignity, respect, and with an open mind. We take this seriously because free-agent models reflect the professionality and respectability of our company when they work with us. Please answer all the questions in the next section in full. Your answers or lack thereof may or may not have weight on your application."



Go Figure !

and its Virginia based as well - what a coincidence