Retoucher
R E T O U C H - MM
Posts: 388
London, England, United Kingdom
hey, just looking for advice.
I've only just started photography, and a 16 year old, (close relative) wants me to photograph her glamour, but not topless, just bikini top or bra/jeans, sexy pout/makeup etc, her mother doesn't mind as she was a model,
But is it allowed, even with mothers consent? in the UK? if allowed, what type of form would i need for her/her mother to sign?
Thanks.x
Photographer
WMcK
Posts: 5298
Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Don't. It's not worth it. Since the law has never really been tested, would you like to become that test case and potentially land on the sex offenders register?
Photographer
Chixpix
Posts: 427
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Retoucher
R E T O U C H - MM
Posts: 388
London, England, United Kingdom
WMcK wrote:
Don't. Im not asking what some peoples views are, Legally i would like to know what is allowed
Photographer
WMcK
Posts: 5298
Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
StaceyMarie-Retouch wrote:
Im not asking what some peoples views are, Legally i would like to know what is allowed Well, get as lawyer and ask his views. This is not a legal forum. People's views are all that can be expressed here, they have no legal weight. If you don't want them don't ask, pay a lawyer.
Photographer
Good Egg Productions
Posts: 16713
Orlando, Florida, US
StaceyMarie-Retouch wrote:
Im not asking what some peoples views are, Legally i would like to know what is allowed Ask a photographer if he'd shoot it.
Ask a lawyer if it's legal.
Photographer
Virtual Studio
Posts: 6725
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
WMcK wrote:
Don't. It's not worth it. Since the law has never really been tested, would you like to become that test case and potentially land on the sex offenders register? Exactly!
Photographer
A_Nova_Photography
Posts: 8652
Winston-Salem, North Carolina, US
Wow... How do all these 16 year old models end up in catalogs if no one will shoot them???
Model
MissSybarite
Posts: 11863
Los Angeles, California, US
WMcK wrote:
Well, get as lawyer and ask his views. This is not a legal forum. People's views are all that can be expressed here, they have no legal weight. If you don't want them don't ask, pay a lawyer. This...
Model
MissSybarite
Posts: 11863
Los Angeles, California, US
ACPhotography wrote:
Wow... How do all these 16 year old models end up in catalogs if no one will shoot them??? I know...
Photographer
Jay Kilgore
Posts: 798
Edina, Minnesota, US
WMcK wrote:
Don't. It's not worth it. Since the law has never really been tested, would you like to become that test case and potentially land on the sex offenders register? Looking at some of the stuff that comes out of the UK, this sounds relatively minor.
However, if you have to ask,maybe it's something you should stay away from? While it might be totally legal, do you want that rep?
Cheers,
Jay Kilgore
http://www.jaykilgore.com | http://www.meetingofthemasters.com
Photographer
Fashion Photographer
Posts: 14388
London, England, United Kingdom
It would depend on exactly what you were trying to create. Your description suggests rather innocuous photographs, like you'd see in a mainstream magazine or TV ad. If your pictures could run in a mainstream ad, you'd almost certainly be acting within the law. The relevant criminal provisions are such that, because the girl is under 18, if you make indecent images of her, indecent images being images which lack propriety according to contemporary standards, you will commit a criminal offence. Obviously this is vague, and so involves an element of risk and prosecutorial discretion. As such, because of the risk involved, many will advise you to stay clear of combining any sexual connotations with people under 18. Others, such as many fashion photographers, won't hesitate to shoot very sexual, fetishistic themes with young models. Technically, if you took 500 images, and one of them was indecent, you would have committed an offence. Obviously, if you deleted it as soon as you realised, it would be unlikely that you would be prosecuted. Perhaps ask yourself whether you are going to make her look like a typical sexy teen celebrity, or like a page three girl. If you were really taking the consideration of the law seriously, you might consider that whilst this picture reflects contemporary standards for 16 year olds: ![https://zanypickle.com/wp-content/gallery/pickle-jar/miley_cirus_pole_dance_0.jpg]() prosecutors and juries tend to be middle aged policemen and housewives respectively
Photographer
Brooklyn Bridge Images
Posts: 13200
Brooklyn, New York, US
ACPhotography wrote:
Wow... How do all these 16 year old models end up in catalogs if no one will shoot them??? Because MM has nothing to do with the real world and photographers who end up getting work in print.
OP its a total waste asking your question here all you will get is rampant paranoia and fear mongering.
Photographer
pH Photo
Posts: 572
Chattanooga, Tennessee, US
I don't shoot anyone under 18.
Why, Cuz I don't want to be on a list and have to notify the cops when I move.
Tell her to take the Chunnel to France. Things should be more liberal there.
For me. RUN!!! and don't look back.
Photographer
Yan Tan Tethera
Posts: 4185
Biggleswade, England, United Kingdom
My avatar is of a 16 year old.
She's a great model.
There is nothing illegal in the UK about what you're proposing.
But you'll already have learnt that there's a transatlantic difference in thinking on this topic fuelled by a real paranoia amongst our US colleagues.
PM if you want to discuss further.
Photographer
PETER GEORGAS
Posts: 1183
Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada
You run a fine line with minors,i have worked with 16 year olds,best to have there mother escort them. Peter
Photographer
Virtual Studio
Posts: 6725
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
ACPhotography wrote:
Wow... How do all these 16 year old models end up in catalogs if no one will shoot them??? The law enforcement officials give a lot more leeway (and IMHO rightly so) to professional photographrs working with agency represented models in a studio with an assistant, MUA, admin assistant etc than thy do to a guy shooting his friends cousins kid in the living room.
Why can you go pay $200 to watch a boxing match where the boxers are lauded as heros yet two guys fighting in the street are both arrested for assault and breach of the peace? Same same.
Photographer
tenrocK photo
Posts: 5486
New York, New York, US
ACPhotography wrote:
Wow... How do all these 16 year old models end up in catalogs if no one will shoot them??? The pixels are all made up from scratch in Photoshop. 16 years old models don't even exist.
OP, keep the shoot clean so you don't have to worry too much about what people think. Get the parents to sign your usage agreement and, if you plan to publish, your model release. The way these 2 documents are written could make a difference in the amount of trouble you could get into. Educate your family about the meaning and consequence of these docs.
Photographer
Aethereal Visions
Posts: 44
Bedford, England, United Kingdom
It is legal to take any photograph of an under 18, even nude, as long as the resultant photograph isn't considered indecent - the problem is, what is the definition of indecent? The relevant acts do not define indecent, nor is the intent of the photographer or model relevant From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection … n_Act_1978 "Whether or not a photograph or pseudo-photograph is indecent is a question of fact, and as a question of fact it is something for a jury or magistrate to decide. The jury should apply the standard of decency which ordinary right-thinking members of the public would set - the "recognised standards of propriety" as R v Stamford [1972] puts it" So whereas some people might not have any problem with lingerie, bikini or sexy poses, it would only take one complaint to the police and for the police to then feel there is enough doubt to warrant action and you are potentially in trouble
Photographer
Virtual Studio
Posts: 6725
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Aoxomedia wrote:
My avatar is of a 16 year old.
She's a great model.
There is nothing illegal in the UK about what you're proposing.
But you'll already have learnt that there's a transatlantic difference in thinking on this topic fuelled by a real paranoia amongst our US colleagues.
PM if you want to discuss further. With all respect your Avatar is a very cute 16 year old who has ben photographed (well) in a compltely unsexualised way. Compltely wholesome legal and nice photo.
Put her in somthing from ann summers, a salacious leer and bit too much makeup and you're in danger of going to court. But that would be an utterly different picture I think.
Photographer
Robert Winn Photography
Posts: 2097
Virginia Beach, Virginia, US
Legally, what you are asking, is fine. The laws in the UK allow you to shoot a 16 year old model nude if you wish. What you described would even be legal in the US. Many people you find on here on MM are extremely reactionary to the issue of photographing minors. These people often don't have a clue to what the law actually is.
Photographer
D K P
Posts: 43
Loughborough, England, United Kingdom
Have you thought about a minor's model release/image usage form signed by the parent(s) and looked over by a solicitor or the CAB (Citizen's Advice Bureau) before the shoot happens? She is 16 and the age of consent within the UK but personally I wouldn't shoot anyone below the age of 18 in a way that exposed a lot of flesh. If you really aren't sure then don't do it.
Photographer
Brooklyn Bridge Images
Posts: 13200
Brooklyn, New York, US
Linux99 wrote:
With all respect your Avatar is a very cute 16 year old who has ben photographed (well) in a compltely unsexualised way. Compltely wholesome legal and nice photo.
Put her in somthing from ann summers, a salacious leer and bit too much makeup and you're in danger of going to court. But that would be an utterly different picture I think. Do you have links to any such cases ??
Why arent the people who published this in jail now ?
![https://1.bp.blogspot.com/_RaOrchOImw8/SVz8Mink8OI/AAAAAAAAGQQ/IF0bFsw50Jo/s400/miley_cyrus_vf_0430.jpg]()
Photographer
FKVPhotography
Posts: 30064
Ocala, Florida, US
I was contacted by this young lady's mother to shoot a portfolio for her.... ![https://fkvphotographics.zenfolio.com/img/s2/v1/p977614511-4.jpg]() At the time I took this shot....she was twelve! Now, she is sixteen and has been modeling for 4 years. From her last catalog. ![https://fkvphotographics.zenfolio.com/img/s2/v1/p980136704-4.jpg]()
Photographer
Fashion Photographer
Posts: 14388
London, England, United Kingdom
Linux99 wrote:
With all respect your Avatar is a very cute 16 year old who has ben photographed (well) in a compltely unsexualised way. Compltely wholesome legal and nice photo.
Put her in somthing from ann summers, a salacious leer and bit too much makeup and you're in danger of going to court. But that would be an utterly different picture I think. Anyone who puts anyone else in anything from ann summers ought to go to court.
Photographer
Gil Rivera
Posts: 553
New York, New York, US
From what you said I don't see any legal issue that would cause any problem. Just ask yourself how would the locals in your area view it. Would it hurt you from getting work from them?
Photographer
ontherocks
Posts: 23575
Salem, Oregon, US
when i shoot minors they have to be wearing street clothes and i run it like a senior portrait session, not a glamour shoot with a model. i just see too much risk in doing otherwise. but i'm in the US.
Photographer
Virtual Studio
Posts: 6725
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Davepit wrote:
Anyone who puts anyone else in anything from ann summers ought to go to court. "So lets get this straight - explain to me like I am a 5 year old - she's 16 and you took glamour photos, I repeat glamour , not portrait, not lifestyle, not fitness, but glamour photographs of her?
Now isn't glamour what they call NUTS, FHM, Playboy? All those magagazines, Glamour Magazines they put on the top shelf so children cant see them? Kids of 16, who are still children, cant see these pictures, cant buy these picturs but you thought it was OK to have them star in them? These "Glamour" photographs of yours?
Explain to me, and take all th time you need, how you thought this was OK?"
oooohhhhhhh - you better hotp you have terrence rattigan writing the defence for that one.
Photographer
FKVPhotography
Posts: 30064
Ocala, Florida, US
Linux99 wrote:
"So lets get this straight - explain to me like I am a 5 year old - she's 16 and you took glamour photos, I repeat glamour , not portrait, not lifestyle, not fitness, but glamour photographs of her?
Now isn't glamour what they call NUTS, FHM, Playboy? All those magagazines, Glamour Magazines they put on the top shelf so children cant see them? Kids of 16, who are still children , cant se these pictures, cant buy thse picturs but you thought it was OK to have them star in them? These "Glamour" photographs of yours?
Explain to me, and take all th time you need, how you thought this was OK?"
oooohhhhhhh - you better hotp you have terrence rattigan writing the defence for that one. What it really boils down to is the definition of "glamour"....
That could keep this thread going for years!!!...
Photographer
Fred Gerhart
Posts: 747
San Antonio, Texas, US
StaceyMarie-Retouch wrote:
hey, just looking for advice.
I've only just started photography, and a 16 year old, (close relative) wants me to photograph her glamour, but not topless, just bikini top or bra/jeans, sexy pout/makeup etc, her mother doesn't mind as she was a model,
But is it allowed, even with mothers consent? in the UK? if allowed, what type of form would i need for her/her mother to sign?
Thanks.x Interesting legal question to ask of a bunch of photographers and models. Maybe one or more are expert in UK law and can assist you. However you would be best to open up your phone book and call a practicing lawyer in your area.
Photographer
Dodys
Posts: 244
Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan
Good Egg Productions wrote:
Ask a photographer if he'd shoot it.
Ask a lawyer if it's legal. problem solved. simple.
Photographer
Virtual Studio
Posts: 6725
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
FKVPhotoGraphics wrote:
What it really boils down to is the definition of "glamour"....
That could keep this thread going for years!!!... Exactly right - and that's the point. My "portrait" is your "glamour" is his "obscene picture" - while there aren't any clear guidelines it's safest to stick far far on the right side of the law.
Street clothes (or equivalent), swim suit only if you are on a beach and in damn public view, not "sexy" or provocative poses and a parent present.
Photographer
Chanel Rene
Posts: 6780
Huntington Beach, California, US
StaceyMarie-Retouch wrote:
hey, just looking for advice.
I've only just started photography, and a 16 year old, (close relative) wants me to photograph her glamour, but not topless, just bikini top or bra/jeans, sexy pout/makeup etc, her mother doesn't mind as she was a model,
But is it allowed, even with mothers consent? in the UK? if allowed, what type of form would i need for her/her mother to sign?
Thanks.x A 16 year old in swimwear.... oh no! Does this mean I'm going to jail?
![https://chanelrene.smugmug.com/Models/Yuliya/IMG2349x/984366678_DAfDq-M.jpg]()
C'mon people!
First off, she's a female photographer.
Secondly, swimwear and bikini top with jeans isn't all THAT racy.
Everyone's definition of "glamour" is different. But from what I can tell from the OP, we're talking amped up Senior Pictures, not the cover of Playboy.
Photographer
Yan Tan Tethera
Posts: 4185
Biggleswade, England, United Kingdom
Baba Dody wrote:
problem solved. simple. You say that but I have two close friends who are solicitors and they wouldn't know the answer.
You see the law has never been tested in the UK ( to the very best of my knowledge ).
Photographer
Gold Rush Studio
Posts: 378
Sacramento, California, US
Do the shot but...
1. Videotape the entire shoot to document what's happened. There's no your-word-against-anyone-else's when there's video.
2. A parent must be present at the shoot.
3. Have your own crew present; a grip, a MUA, etc.
4. Model release signed by the model and her parents...both of them.
5. An underage work permit if needed.
And then you'll be just fine.
Photographer
exartica
Posts: 1399
Bowie, Maryland, US
Linux99 wrote:
"So lets get this straight - explain to me like I am a 5 year old - she's 16 and you took glamour photos, I repeat glamour , not portrait, not lifestyle, not fitness, but glamour photographs of her?
Now isn't glamour what they call NUTS, FHM, Playboy? All those magagazines, Glamour Magazines they put on the top shelf so children cant see them? Kids of 16, who are still children, cant see these pictures, cant buy these picturs but you thought it was OK to have them star in them? These "Glamour" photographs of yours?
Explain to me, and take all th time you need, how you thought this was OK?"
oooohhhhhhh - you better hotp you have terrence rattigan writing the defence for that one. You might want to check out
http://trueteenbabes.com/
"America's Premier Teen Glamour Publication"
and the 16 year old girl in sheer lingerie on the front page. Yes, they went to court. Yes, they prevailed in court and are obviously still in business.
Of course, all of this is in the US. It is meaningless from a legal standpoint in the UK where the OP is located. However, taking a glamour shot of a scantily clad 16 year old does not automatically mean the end of the world, despite what so many people post on MM.
Photographer
Patrick Walberg
Posts: 45205
San Juan Bautista, California, US
It is legal! Fear mongers are every where but they can't post a single case where anyone who shot a teenager in art or glamour was prosecuted unless it crossed the line into pornography.
You can buy art books with nudes of teenagers at any major bookstore of David Hamiltons work for example, and there are no laws against it.
Photographer
Patrick Walberg
Posts: 45205
San Juan Bautista, California, US
Aoxomedia wrote:
You say that but I have two close friends who are solicitors and they wouldn't know the answer.
You see the law has never been tested in the UK ( to the very best of my knowledge ). The UK has been even more liberal in the past since you've had a magazine that featured 16 year olds topless. The Sun publishing corporation is based out of England and pays for all the fake gossip news that goes into grocery store rags.
I have shot 16 year olds in the clothing mentioned or even glamour shots. We had these things called "Portrait Studios" where minors would come in and pay to be photographed. MANY 15 through 17 year old "starting" professional models have been photographed and seen with bikinis or even topless in the fashion and art World.
Photographer
FKVPhotography
Posts: 30064
Ocala, Florida, US
exartica wrote:
You might want to check out
http://trueteenbabes.com/
"America's Premier Teen Glamour Publication"
and the 16 year old girl in sheer lingerie on the front page. As a photographer I have no problem with the images
As a grandpa...I do.
As a business person...I'd last about ten seconds here in Ocala!
Photographer
PETER GEORGAS
Posts: 1183
Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada
Gold Rush Studio wrote:
Do the shot but...
1. Videotape the entire shoot to document what's happened. There's no your-word-against-anyone-else's when there's video.
2. A parent must be present at the shoot.
3. Have your own crew present; a grip, a MUA, etc.
4. Model release signed by the model and her parents...both of them.
5. An underage work permit if needed.
And then you'll be just fine.
|
