Excellent, very clear post, Rubinski.
Focusing on each of the steps of the process as you have I think helps us all to appreciate/understand it better.
I just though I'd address something else Pepper II mentioned:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper II
The exception being if the same name appears in different shoots in different magazines then that may be more acceptable.
|
He seems to be suggesting that if a model appears under the same name in two different mags, he thinks that name/id is stronger when the second mag. appearance comes from a different pictorial/photog. session, but not (as much) if it is simply further pictures from the same photog. session/pictorial as the first mag. appearance.
I'm sorry if I'm sounding picky but I don't think I agree.
Finding additional, different content for a model is excellent
--for "rare"/uncommon models it's like gold dust,
particularly as it may open up further avenues for investigation/discovery of her work--but to me that seems quite separate from the name/id issue. If two different mags. call the same model by the same name, that greatly strengthens that name's claim to be an id candidate, especially if it's a 2-part name, and I think that regardless of whether the second pictorial is simply a repeat/re-hash of the first or not.
I think Ruby is correct, though, when he suggests that the same model name used by two different & independent sources/mag. publishers is a stronger case than the same name used twice
within a single mag. publisher's portfolio/stable of mags., etc. Again regardless of whether the pictures are different or not.
I'd also like to include the following comment from beutelwolf regarding sources of published names in this thread/discussion, because I think it's pretty important/worth keeping/remembering:
Quote:
Originally Posted by beutelwolf
I take the reliability of tabloids [regarding model names] over that of sex mags any day of the week.
|