Kevin Alex Photography wrote:
I was always taught to get a model release signed. This includes parental signature or legal guardian if under the legal age to legally self represent. If the question is, should I do this, you have the answer. Not 100% sure on the possible legal ramifications teetering towards the worst but, why take the chance? Plenty of legal aged models out there.

The worse case scenario: you do a shoot with an under aged model, she (or he) decides to use the photographer as a cash cow and shouts RAPE! Who do you think the courts will believe given the scenario? Your word against an under age model with no witnesses. Four words, SOAP ON A ROPE.

paranoia thee destroyaa (the kinks)

Karl Blessing wrote:

Guessing you shoot without a model release then.

Why do I need a model release ?

Images by MR wrote:

Why do I need a model release ?

+100

PhotographybyT wrote:
Yikes! What is it that you plan on doing with the 17 year old?

My thoughts too!

I pity the poor shop keeper that has to sell this girl earrings!  Or the poor store clerk that has to.... OMG, bring coats to this girl near the dressing room door where she is trying on other coats.  Oh my!  stuff that.  Better check with a lawyer!

Can you imagine the poor slob who runs that photo studio on Main street?  What will he do when this girl wants in, plunks down $75 and says: " I would like to have my portrait taken for a surprise birthday gift for my grandma 2000 miles away.......
Yikes, he better run away!  Because, as we all know, taking the portrait of a 17 year old will get you a 20 years sentence.

Mirror With A Memory wrote:
http://www.fox59.com/news/wxin-teen-say … 385.column

Irrelevant.

ANYONE of ANY AGE can make ANY allegation.

I am not a teen.

If I wanted to allege that my dentist fondled me, I could.

Age is irrelevant.  As is the link to that story in this thread.

Mirror With A Memory wrote:
I don't know why guys are so fixated on these  underage girls.

Not fixated on, just open to and appreciative of their look.


17 at the time (I'd been shooting with her since she was 14). She did her own makeup and didn't require much. Postprocessing was pretty fast and easy with that face.

They do sometimes have their drawbacks. Younger models often have less understanding of the power of subtlety.

Orca Bay Images wrote:

Not fixated on, just open to and appreciative of their look.


17 at the time (I'd been shooting with her since she was 14). She did her own makeup and didn't require much. Postprocessing was pretty fast and easy with that face.

They do sometimes have their drawbacks. Younger models often have less understanding of the power of subtlety.

How long did you spend in the Pen?  And, was the food as bad as they say?

Digitoxin wrote:
How long did you spend in the Pen?  And, was the food as bad as they say?

I joined the French Foreign Legion. Zoot alours and pass the ammunition, y'all.

Kevin Alex Photography wrote:
I was always taught to get a model release signed. This includes parental signature or legal guardian if under the legal age to legally self represent. If the question is, should I do this, you have the answer. Not 100% sure on the possible legal ramifications teetering towards the worst but, why take the chance? Plenty of legal aged models out there.

The worse case scenario: you do a shoot with an under aged model, she (or he) decides to use the photographer as a cash cow and shouts RAPE! Who do you think the courts will believe given the scenario? Your word against an under age model with no witnesses. Four words, SOAP ON A ROPE.

Legal age for what? Do they smoke or drink while they shoot?
It depends on what your intentions are...

Kevin Alex Photography wrote:
The worse case scenario: you do a shoot with an under aged model, she (or he) decides to use the photographer as a cash cow and shouts RAPE! Who do you think the courts will believe given the scenario? Your word against an under age model with no witnesses. Four words, SOAP ON A ROPE.

Why is your analysis limited to underage models?  Why not 22 year old female models or 19 year old male models?  Both of them can assert the same allegations, right?  And, before you head down the path that "underage girls are more prone to make allegations......" ..... Please be sure to back that assertion up with actual compiled statistics......

Digitoxin wrote:

Why is your analysis limited to underage models?  Why not 22 year old female models or 19 year old male models?  Both of them can assert the same allegations, right?  And, before you head down the path that "underage girls are more prone to make allegations......" ..... Please be sure to back that assertion up with actual compiled statistics......

I think it's because people take it more seriously with an underage model. Sad but true. And yes, probably more common too. Also very sad.

LaurensAntoine 4 FHM wrote:
If you're going to be in the photography business and shooting models, you better be able to figure out a way to shoot minors.

well said.

"Legal age for what? Do they smoke or drink while they shoot?
It depends on what your intentions are..." -SB Glamour Photos

I merely stated that making the small effort of getting a signed model release is in good practice. You can do what ever you want, as you will. I threw in my 2 cents. CHILL...

"Why is your analysis limited to underage llamas?  Why not 22 year old female llamas or 19 year old male llamas?  Both of them can assert the same allegations, right?  And, before you head down the path that "underage girls are more prone to make allegations......" ..... Please be sure to back that assertion up with actual compiled statistics......" - Digitoxin

The subject of this mess is about photographing llamas under the age of 17. You did know that, right?"

And seeing that the subject is of llamas under the age of 17, yes, a court (in the event there is an issue) will also add on the thoughts of pedophilia. The scenario I had mentioned ALSO was labeled as the WORSE case scenario.

At no point did I say that photographing a llama under the age of 17 shouldn't be done.

S W I N S K E Y wrote:
i'm not afraid of 17 year old girls....i'd probably shoot her in some age appropriate imagery..

heres a 17 year old, alone with me in mahattan, at night:

What an amazing capture!

La Lana  wrote:

What an amazing capture!

And she was never seen again. LOL. just kidding

Kevin Alex Photography wrote:
The worse case scenario: you do a shoot with an under aged llama, she (or he) decides to use the photographer as a cash cow and shouts RAPE! Who do you think the courts will believe given the scenario? Your word against an under age llama with no witnesses. Four words, SOAP ON A ROPE.

I'm going to do something pretty outrageous here...

The worse case scenario: you do a shoot with a 54 year old llama.  She (or he) decides to use the photographer as a cash cow and shouts RAPE!  Who do you think the courts will believe given the scenario?  Your word against an 54 year old llama with no witnesses.  Four words, SOAP ON A ROPE.

Now tell me Kevin, how is my scenario any less likely to happen than yours?

Also, a signed release will not reduce that risk.
Also, a parent/guardian PROVIDES for a false witness should they both choose to use the photographer as a cash cow.  But now they have a witness along with the victim. 

"I couldn't believe it.  I used the restroom and I was gone for...gosh, only about 10 minutes when I came out, he had pulled her pants down and was raping her!!  I shouted at him and he got up and apologized. Said his belt came loose and his pants slipped and caused him to trip and land right on top of her.  Disgusting creep!!"

"But they signed a release!!!"

Kevin Alex Photography wrote:

And she was never seen again. LOL. just kidding

Least she went out with a bang! :p

Kevin Alex Photography wrote:

And she was never seen again. LOL. just kidding

Least she went out with a bang! :p

patrick otoole wrote:
Hi All.
So the age old topic....

So I'm setting up a shoot...and I contact a newby model on MM
who is currently 17.
I tell her...that of course if she is 17 day of shooting...a parent (or guardian) needs to sign a release AND attend the shoot.

I got this interesting reply....

"Okay well my dad is the one that takes care of me and he's in a wheelchair because he doesn't have legs. He usually talks on the phone to the photographers or writes them a note. "

I can only image what the 'note from her dad' must be.

I'm NOT planning to work with her now...but...
it sounds like many other photographers have.

Thoughts anyone??

I'd be afraid for the photographers...
and if a minor IS shooting with photographers (alone)..I'd be afraid for the model too!!

She could atleast try to be more convincing with her excuse.
"My dad is in a wheelchair because he doesn't have legs"???

Christopher Hartman wrote:

Please lets not bring common sense, logic or critical thinking into this...
The topic is baseless Irrational fear and paranoid delusional scenarios
Stay on topic
Thanks

Christopher Hartman wrote:

I'm going to do something pretty outrageous here...

The worse case scenario: you do a shoot with a 54 year old model.  She (or he) decides to use the photographer as a cash cow and shouts RAPE!  Who do you think the courts will believe given the scenario?  Your word against an 54 year old model with no witnesses.  Four words, SOAP ON A ROPE.

Now tell me Kevin, how is my scenario any less likely to happen than yours?

Also, a signed release will not reduce that risk.
Also, a parent/guardian PROVIDES for a false witness should they both choose to use the photographer as a cash cow.  But now they have a witness along with the victim. 

"I couldn't believe it.  I used the restroom and I was gone for...gosh, only about 10 minutes when I came out, he had pulled her pants down and was raping her!!  I shouted at him and he got up and apologized. Said his belt came loose and his pants slipped and caused him to trip and land right on top of her.  Disgusting creep!!"

"But they signed a release!!!"

WHAT! Clearly you aren't getting the point of the conversation here. Or perhaps you're running a fantasy in your mind.

My reasoning for bringing up model releases was what appears to be my mistaken in giving people credit in thinking that the idea of such a scenario is mute in this particular topic.

Man I forgot how people just love to comment for the sake of commenting.

Kevin Alex Photography wrote:
The subject of this mess is about photographing models under the age of 17. You did know that, right?"

And seeing that the subject is of models under the age of 17, yes, a court (in the event there is an issue) will also add on the thoughts of pedophilia. The scenario I had mentioned ALSO was labeled as the WORSE case scenario.

At no point did I say that photographing a model under the age of 17 shouldn't be done.

First, most people who use phrases like "worst case scenario" appear to have limited imaginations.

Second, VERY few 17 year old females, if any, are going to appeal to a pedophile.  Ten year olds, maybe.

Orca Bay Images wrote:
I've shot with models from 4 to 64. Plenty of under-18. No problem. I shoot age-appropriate. The parents are involved every step of the way and are present at the shoots, though with one under-18er I'd shot with plenty of times, we checked in with the mom and then the two of us would shoot at a scenic location a few blocks from their home.

I, too, don't understand the paranoia.

I do.

There are a lot of halfwits who can't think for themselves and are easily manipulated. The danger is when they are a  third party and had nothing to do with the shoot.

Someone wants to screw with you for their sick pleasure, which is unfortunately a very real thing, so they say "Did you hear ______ shot a 17 year old girl - can you believe that??? It's soooo in approrpriate!"  "Really, why is that?" "What's wrong with you? You don't think it's inappropriate? You must be sick too. I can't tell you what he did, but don't you think an interest in underage girls is wrong? Why would someone be interested in underage girls when there are so many great 18+ models? He wouldn't shoot an underage girl unless he was interested in her, right? So instead of shooting someone over 18, he chose to shoot an underage girl."

No one would shoot someone they weren't interested in, so that part is true. The suggestion that it's cause/effect from being underage is a suggestion and the halfwit sees it as logical since they don't think it through, so they believe their own logical conclusion.

They're curious and they ask someone else "Do you know what happened on that underage shoot?" "No. Did something bad happen?" "I don't know for sure, but it sounds like something wasn't right, why did he shoot an underage girl? Something must have been going on."

If that person is emotionally reactive they will let their imagination get out of control and build up a story they believe and it gets legs of its own, with no basis in fact. The underage model probably flaked any way.

The thing is, perceptions are very easy to manipulate and "underage" is an objective description that has a strong negative emotional meaning.

People aren't paranoid about the model or the shoot, they're paranoid about people who weren't there who are easily manipulated.

Christopher Hartman wrote:

I'm going to do something pretty outrageous here...

The worse case scenario: you do a shoot with a 54 year old model.  She (or he) decides to use the photographer as a cash cow and shouts RAPE!  Who do you think the courts will believe given the scenario?  Your word against an 54 year old model with no witnesses.  Four words, SOAP ON A ROPE.

Now tell me Kevin, how is my scenario any less likely to happen than yours?

Also, a signed release will not reduce that risk.
Also, a parent/guardian PROVIDES for a false witness should they both choose to use the photographer as a cash cow.  But now they have a witness along with the victim. 

"I couldn't believe it.  I used the restroom and I was gone for...gosh, only about 10 minutes when I came out, he had pulled her pants down and was raping her!!  I shouted at him and he got up and apologized. Said his belt came loose and his pants slipped and caused him to trip and land right on top of her.  Disgusting creep!!"

"But they signed a release!!!"

You've made an excellent point.

While they're are false charges of rape filed, police and courts are pretty good at focusing on facts. So they way your are looking at it is right.

If you make it not about a court, it's different. It doesn't have to be about fact and they're aren't professionals who've been trained to point out things that are hearsay and not fact.

So two adults, people will assume the 54 year old was capable of taking care of themselves and that the truth must be in the middle unless they were really really stupid.

But when there's an age imbalance, we all see that as a imbalance of power and we accept an incomplete story from - that's the key. We accept an incomplete story when a young person is involved and the story doesn't have to come directly from the young person to still be accepted while it's incomplete.

It's not paranoia about the specific individual it's paranoia about the vulnerability you're setting yourself up with.

Art of the nude wrote:

I go for a bit more security than someone in another country saying I "don't necessarily need" a release.  Where you need them, what you need them for, and what they have to say, vary greatly from state to state, and as a practical matter, from court to court.  I'd rather be safe.

Especially since putting it in your own online portfolio is deemed "using it commercially" in some cases.

Please show us a single court case where a portfolio has been deemed a commercial use.

Regardless a release doesn't protect you from false allegations or inaccurate perceptions.

MC Photo wrote:
Please show us a single court case where a portfolio has been deemed a commercial use.

Regardless a release doesn't protect you from false allegations or inaccurate perceptions.

Why?  If it MIGHT be an issue, why not just protect yourself, there is no downside.

That's not what it's for.  It DOES show, in the case of a minor, that the parent was aware of the shoot and consented to it, which can't be a bad thing.  NOTHING can prevent "false allegations or inaccurate perceptions" 100%.  Being, and appearing to be, totally professional can help.