login info join!
Forums > Model Colloquy > Under 18 Search   Reply
Photographer
Koke
Posts: 22
Bodrum, Muğla, Turkey


OK. I'm sure this was posted before. I went through previous posts quickly but no title on the subject caught my attention. Anyway, I'm sure we all know some of the models say they are 18 and they are barely 17. And besides the Hustler magazine, there's no such thing as barely legal. Any facts on the subject is greatly appreciated. I shoot lingerie, topless and nudes in general. But even for simple headshots, what is the legal procedure for under 18 models?
Dec 26 05 11:57 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
George ephrem
Posts: 981
Jacksonville, Florida, US


don't do it....not worth the possible legal actions that might arise.
it might not happen the first so many times, but it very well may catch up to you and then hink of all the legal issues.
But it's your life....just my 2 cents worth
Dec 26 05 12:07 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
udor
Posts: 21,782
New York, New York, US


Minimum age for becoming a member on MM is 16.

For that reason, we have the "18+" marking requirement for "adult" images, so that the 16/17 years old members can't view them.

Naturally, we don't allow a 16/17 years old member to display images of him/herself that would have to be marked 18+.

UdoR
Moderator
Dec 26 05 12:10 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
oldguysrule
Posts: 6,129


Multiple forms of identification PRIOR to the shoot.
And, no, publishing images shot in the US overseas where the age of consent is lower does NOT minimize the risk. The violation relates to where the image was shot (and in the USA, separately, the display of that shot, so shooting overseas for display here doesn't cut it either.)

Simply said, in the USA, models under 18 should be precluded from your castings for sheers and nudity. Implied nude is legal but not recommended. And NEVER shoot an under 18 without a Guardian's written consent and an unpaid party satisfactory to the Guardian on the set at all times.

Beyond the legal considerations, there is reputation at stake every time you shoot with an under 18 year old in the country. Agency models present less risk in this regard but only modestly.
Dec 26 05 12:38 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Picture This
Posts: 1,776
Albuquerque, New Mexico, US


Might be a good idea to change your avatar, mark it and your 2nd Belladonna and your self-portrait pics 18+. wink
Dec 26 05 12:46 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
D. Brian Nelson
Posts: 5,477
Rapid City, South Dakota, US


Hi Koke.  Been awhile.

Basically if you're shooting anything sexual with a minor you're risking a huge hassle.  Doesn't even have to be nude.  California has a very clear definition of what is and is not allowable, but the feds are getting involved due to the interstate nature of the internet and they don't have well-written laws anymore. Heck, some laws are secret! 

Just don't do it.  Don't shoot it, don't think about it, and if you can avoid it, don't even talk to a minor.  Unless you have fashion or commercial credentials, it's best to avoid headshots as well especially as the majority of your work is sexual.

-D
Dec 26 05 12:59 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
bhphotography
Posts: 27


Never EVER EVER never shoot any one under 18.

Don't care if the parents love your work, want Christmas family photos under the tree, for a family card.

In this age of super PC, ... legtitimate true honest photographer's have GOT everything to lose. I don't even do harmless impromptu innocent "street photography" of kids.

There are several, two models, I can think of, actually really super great under 18 models, who are very known on OMP, and their portfolios are simply outstanding and superb, they're top models, but they are under 18. They are totally legit. They parents contacted me. But no. Just do not work with anyone under 18.

I refuse to do so. We live in weird whacko world nowadays. You could be the all time best super photographer in the world, and next day be in jail, ... it just ain't ... is NOT worth the risk.

And it is such a shame.

My advice is, do not work with any model, under 18, even if it just a harmless portrait in the park, with both parents present.

This is a weird PC world, and you the honest legit photographer, are going to lose.

Michael
Dec 26 05 01:31 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
GPS Studio Services
Posts: 34,615
San Francisco, California, US


Why is everyone so afraid to do a fashion shoot with a minor?  I will never understand that.

If it were really a problem to shoot teen appropriate photos, high schools would not have yearbooks and every portrait studio in the country would go out of business.
Dec 26 05 01:39 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Picture This
Posts: 1,776
Albuquerque, New Mexico, US


Alan from Aavian Prod wrote:
Why is everyone so afraid to do a fashion shoot with a minor?  I will never understand that.

If it were really a problem to shoot teen appropriate photos, high schools would not have yearbooks and every portrait studio in the country would go out of business.

Alan... shhhhh... let them refuse to shoot age-appropriate teen pics -- more paid work for you and me. smile

Dec 26 05 01:43 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
udor
Posts: 21,782
New York, New York, US


Alan from Aavian Prod wrote:
Why is everyone so afraid to do a fashion shoot with a minor?  I will never understand that.

If it were really a problem to shoot teen appropriate photos, high schools would not have yearbooks and every portrait studio in the country would go out of business.

Exactly!

Considering that I have to shoot portfolios for kids, some commissioned by the parents, or test for agencies...

I won't shoot Maxim style shots with a minor, but hey... clothed,  fashionshots... there is no problem at all.

Dec 26 05 01:44 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Peter Dattolo
Posts: 1,669
Wolcott, Connecticut, US


The only real reason that i can see doing a shoot with a minor and having a problem is if it is sexual in any way. Like it was stated its not illegal but if something sexual was involved, even sexual intent would cause a problem for the photog.

I think the people that are so afraid of photographing a minor may have had a scare or maybe even a physical altercation with the police over a issue similiar to this. It happens and it will happen in the future but if your a professional photog and act professional at all times during a shoot....What would you really have to fear?
Now i can agree that during a shoot if a model came across a photog who was blatetly trying to get upskirt, downblouse shots or even trying to get the model in a sexy pose then the model is definetly right in being worried and should definetly call the police or get them involved. That would also go for the little sly remarks about how sexy her legs look, or how nice her body is when she is in a provacative position even though she is fully dressed. It would still scare the model to death to hear it because it is right on the verge of her worst fear and what she was warned about over and over and to avoid during a shoot, which is a perverted photog.

This is only my opinion but in a professional world with professional photogs there is no "Mistake" about if the photog (he/she) was professional or not.
Dec 26 05 02:02 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Ivan123
Posts: 869
Arlington, Virginia, US


This is pathetic.  I don't mean the early posts but the fact that this attitude is so prevelant and what it represents.  I think it is well established that in most places with censorship, self-censorship quickly becomes the strongest censorship.  I remember reading that in Eastern Europe in Soviet times when there was censorship, most writers, etc, rather than pushing the limits, decided to avoid possible confrontation and steered clear of anything that MIGHT bring the censors' wrath.  So in the end, the censors had very little censoring to do, people did it to themselves.  This is understandable but sad and we can see it here. When we make a long list of perfectly legal things and then say we are not going to "risk" doing what is legal, then we all lose not just rights but the protection of law.  I think BH is taking it a bit far;  if he really believes what he says, then parents should not take photographs of their own children, but the  point is clear.  The problem, of course, it that it is in the interest of each of us that some OTHER person challenge the system.  Anyway, last I checked, people took photographs of children without going to prison.
Dec 26 05 02:06 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
newhall243
Posts: 652
Rosedale, New York, US


bhphotography wrote:
Never EVER EVER never shoot any one under 18.

Don't care if the parents love your work, want Christmas family photos under the tree, for a family card.

In this age of super PC, ... legtitimate true honest photographer's have GOT everything to lose. I don't even do harmless impromptu innocent "street photography" of kids.

There are several, two models, I can think of, actually really super great under 18 models, who are very known on OMP, and their portfolios are simply outstanding and superb, they're top models, but they are under 18. They are totally legit. They parents contacted me. But no. Just do not work with anyone under 18.

I refuse to do so. We live in weird whacko world nowadays. You could be the all time best super photographer in the world, and next day be in jail, ... it just ain't ... is NOT worth the risk.

And it is such a shame.

My advice is, do not work with any model, under 18, even if it just a harmless portrait in the park, with both parents present.

This is a weird PC world, and you the honest legit photographer, are going to lose.

Michael

Wow, so what would happen to us teens whom are under 18 years old and photographers take your advice? HUMM! With all due respect, I disagree with your statement. I feel that IF a parent/adult is present, the model AND photographer are comfortable shooting with each other there shouldn't be a problem. Yes, I know that SOME parents WILL allow their underage child to have photos taken that are not age appropriate BUT that is where the photographer draws the line IF the photographer wishes not to take photos of such nature. Conveying messages to photographers NOT to shoot with underage models not even if it is a family portrait is absurd! Granted it is a weird PC world but that is a risk EVERYONE takes when posting their photos. Don't you think?

Just my two cents,

steph smile

Dec 26 05 02:18 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
S W I N S K E Y
Posts: 24,315
Saint Petersburg, Florida, US


bhphotography wrote:
Never EVER EVER never shoot any one under 18.

Don't care if the parents love your work, want Christmas family photos under the tree, for a family card.

In this age of super PC, ... legtitimate true honest photographer's have GOT everything to lose. I don't even do harmless impromptu innocent "street photography" of kids.

There are several, two models, I can think of, actually really super great under 18 models, who are very known on OMP, and their portfolios are simply outstanding and superb, they're top models, but they are under 18. They are totally legit. They parents contacted me. But no. Just do not work with anyone under 18.

I refuse to do so. We live in weird whacko world nowadays. You could be the all time best super photographer in the world, and next day be in jail, ... it just ain't ... is NOT worth the risk.

And it is such a shame.

My advice is, do not work with any model, under 18, even if it just a harmless portrait in the park, with both parents present.

This is a weird PC world, and you the honest legit photographer, are going to lose.

Michael

some of the best models i have worked with have been 14-17 years old
as long as the parents are involved there is not usually an issue.
age appropriate is the key.

katarina on my page has been featured in vouge, teen vouge, seventeen and national dillards ads..most dont have her resume and she is only 14.

Dec 26 05 02:23 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
D. Brian Nelson
Posts: 5,477
Rapid City, South Dakota, US


I think I need to make myself a bit more clear.  If the photographer primarily does sexual or sexy work, then photographing minors is a risk because of the context of his other work.

If a photographer primarily does fashion, he can't avoid shooting minors and shouldn't avoid it.

If a photographer primarily does school pictures and weddings, he also can't avoid it and they provide the bread and butter.  When I made a living working for modeling schools I shot minors all the time.  That was the job.

The risk is primarily to those of us who make sexual photographs.  Koke does.  I do.  For that reason, any work we do with minors will always be suspect, even if the photographs are squeeky clean.

-Don
Dec 26 05 02:23 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
C s p i n e
Posts: 3,920
Portland, Oregon, US


I was told once when asking if something was apropriate for a minor..... 'If you have to ask, don't do it'. I stick by that.
Dec 26 05 02:58 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Ms Kaylee
Posts: 686
Seattle, Washington, US


bhphotography wrote:
Never EVER EVER never shoot any one under 18.

It's because of people like you why we under age models don't have any shoots.

Simply said, don't do it if it doesn't feel/seem right. If there is ever any doubt in your mind, just don't. I don't believe that you can shoot under aged minors nude or sexually. However, the sexuality of an image can be debated as to whether there are sexual implications or not. So to be safe, don't shoot minors if you're afraid to get into legal issues. But there are a lot of great models out there who are under 18 and you'll be missing out in a lot if you so decide not to shoot with them.

Dec 26 05 05:25 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
GPS Studio Services
Posts: 34,615
San Francisco, California, US


D. Brian Nelson wrote:
I think I need to make myself a bit more clear.  If the photographer primarily does sexual or sexy work, then photographing minors is a risk because of the context of his other work.

If a photographer primarily does fashion, he can't avoid shooting minors and shouldn't avoid it.

If a photographer primarily does school pictures and weddings, he also can't avoid it and they provide the bread and butter.  When I made a living working for modeling schools I shot minors all the time.  That was the job.

The risk is primarily to those of us who make sexual photographs.  Koke does.  I do.  For that reason, any work we do with minors will always be suspect, even if the photographs are squeeky clean.

-Don

Put in that context, I understand your point. 

To be simple, one should not be a high school portrait photographer by day and a pornographer by night and not expect a few eyebrows to be raised.

I can't argue with that.

Dec 26 05 06:09 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Koke
Posts: 22
Bodrum, Muğla, Turkey


If anyone looks at my portfolio (2 of which got marked 18+ by the moderator after my post), you will see that all my shoots are sexual in context whether the model is all nude or fully clothed. I never shot for school books and I don't intend to. I wasn't planning on doing a nude shoot with this girl either. But given the general (sexual) nature of my style, I didn't want to get in trouble by shooting a minor even if she's fully clothed. I think I will take Don's and some other posters' advice and wait for a year until she's 18+ just to make sure. Also for all photogrpahers that are in a similar situation, this girl's profile says she's 18 and tells people she's 18. I called her on her bluff. So just watch out. Thanks to all responders.
Dec 26 05 07:16 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
GPS Studio Services
Posts: 34,615
San Francisco, California, US


Koke wrote:
If anyone looks at my portfolio (2 of which got marked 18+ by the moderator after my post), you will see that all my shoots are sexual in context whether the model is all nude or fully clothed. I never shot for school books and I don't intend to. I wasn't planning on doing a nude shoot with this girl either. But given the general (sexual) nature of my style, I didn't want to get in trouble by shooting a minor even if she's fully clothed. I think I will take Don's and some other posters' advice and wait for a year until she's 18+ just to make sure. Also for all photogrpahers that are in a similar situation, this girl's profile says she's 18 and tells people she's 18. I called her on her bluff. So just watch out. Thanks to all responders.

Put in the context of the nature of your work, you could raise some eyebrows if you shot a 17 year old.

There are still no issues so long as everything you do is teen appropriate, but based on your portfolio, you might subject yourself to some scrutiny, particularly if an image was borderline as to being teen appropriate.

Dec 26 05 07:19 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Jessica Loren
Posts: 516
Baltimore, Maryland, US


I'll be 17 in January and I do get mistaken a lot for older in person. I guess it's my height and well, my build but I would never lie about my age number one and if that means someone won't work with me because of it, OH well. Others will and have. Number two, My mom and I have discussed what I will shoot in 2006 and my portfolio will be changing quite a bit to pretty much all fashion shots...including some swimsuit equivalent of lingerie.
I've been around long enough now to know what my size and figure will work best with and have made fashion my primary target.
I know what that will probably mean IF I am able to finally get representation and work fashion shows and such.
There's a big difference in how you shoot lingerie for one ad as compared to another and who you are selling it to. One is fashion and one is glamour. Not saying one is better than the other, they are just different.
(I'm also not saying that guys don't look at Victorias Secret catalogs...I'm NOT stupid LOL)
Dec 26 05 07:49 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Moraxian
Posts: 2,607
Germantown, Maryland, US


Since I shoot content for adult sites (light bondage/damsel-in-distress) I never shoot anyone who is under 18.  Period.  All models when they show up for a shoot with me the first time must provide ID that is in compliance with USC 2257, meaning a state, federal or foreign government issued ID with a date of birth clearly visible and a photograph of the model.  After the shoot, the model must sign a release indicating they did the shoot voluntarily and there was no coercion of any kind....
Dec 26 05 07:55 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
Justin
Posts: 21,615
Fort Collins, Colorado, US


I don't need an underage model to portray the stuff I want to portray. I have had underage models or their parents write me and offer to work with me. I decline. Given the content of some of my stuff, I don't want any inference to be drawn that I'm doing any form of nude or implied-nude photography with minors.
Dec 26 05 08:01 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
James Jackson Fashion
Posts: 10,929
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US


Ok...I hate to have to be the only one who says this once again, because it makes me feel dirty...why am I the only one who knows that photographing nudes of underage models is not illegal in any way?

PORNOGRAPHY of underage children is illegal.  ONLY PORNOGRAPHY!!!

Pornography it has been decided by our illustrious and wise courts is 'we know it when we see it'...*grumble*...but it is perfectly legal for anyone to photograph for artistic purposes a nude person of any age.

Pornography's loose definition is somewhat guided by the concept in US law of something 'designed or produced with the purpose of sexual arousal of either the producer or an audience'

So, could you shoot nudes of underage models? Yes.
Should you? Your call
Will you be hassled about it? Most likely

But, just consider all the people who would be in jail if those naked pictures of their children in the bathtub were illegal...or even all the artists who would be in jail for taking photos of nude babies, or teens, or children.  There is a lot of nudity in this world...it's how we were made...it's not illegal.
Dec 26 05 08:07 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Fireflyfotography
Posts: 321
Las Colinas, Panamá, Panama


George ephrem wrote:
don't do it....not worth the possible legal actions that might arise.
it might not happen the first so many times, but it very well may catch up to you and then hink of all the legal issues.
But it's your life....just my 2 cents worth

So all the senior portrait JV basketball and all the other highschool sports photographers are in trouble?

Dec 26 05 08:08 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
James Jackson Fashion
Posts: 10,929
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US


by the way, this thread http://www.modelmayhem.com/posts.php?thread_id=2617 contains a long article on the subject, and goes much more in depth than I did
Dec 26 05 08:20 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
SolraK Studios
Posts: 1,213
Atlanta, Georgia, US


raveneyes wrote:
Ok...I hate to have to be the only one who says this once again, because it makes me feel dirty...why am I the only one who knows that photographing nudes of underage models is not illegal in any way?

PORNOGRAPHY of underage children is illegal.  ONLY PORNOGRAPHY!!!
Dec 26 05 09:03 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
SolraK Studios
Posts: 1,213
Atlanta, Georgia, US


sorry Raven that's not completely true ( and yes I am familiar with jock sturges and sally mann's work). How many photographers have the resources to fight a kiddie porn lawsuit ? I would also like to mention that these laws are establish for a reason. I see girls on here that are 17 and under in some very sexual poses that are completely unnecessary. I instantly lose respect for the photographer! I even saw a 16 year old with a see through on! I was amazed at how many people didn't care! I am not an ultra conservative in no way.
  I would like to also state that a style is not based on if the image is sexual or not. A style will remain consistent from image to image even when the subject matter changes. you're confusing style with content. My advice is simple shoot with the model because the photo world is not completely composed of female nudes. You need to look up any laws relating to this topic and/or ask a lawyer. later and good luck koke  :-)
Dec 26 05 09:29 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
GPS Studio Services
Posts: 34,615
San Francisco, California, US


raveneyes wrote:
PORNOGRAPHY of underage children is illegal.  ONLY PORNOGRAPHY!!!

Pornography it has been decided by our illustrious and wise courts is 'we know it when we see it'...*grumble*...but it is perfectly legal for anyone to photograph for artistic purposes a nude person of any age.

Pornography's loose definition is somewhat guided by the concept in US law of something 'designed or produced with the purpose of sexual arousal of either the producer or an audience'

Well, I agree with your point that it is true that photographing a model under 18 in the nude is not, in and of itself illegal, you are slightly overgeneralizing by saying that only "Pornography" is illegal.  The problem is that it is not a federal issue, it is a state issue.  The laws very from state to state.

There are essentially three standards.  There is the Federal standard.  It basically says that it is illegal to shoot a minor involved in real or simulated sex or with a lacivious display of the genitals.  The lacivious display need not be nude.  For example, a minor sitting in shorts with her legs spread and her fingers down her pants might be lacivious.  A lot of states, such as California, have adopted the federal standard since it is well understood and interpretted by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Other states have the less restrictive standard (which the U.S. had before the current law) which made taking "obscene" photos of minors illegal.  That standard was dropped from federal law because it falls in line with the old standard, "I can'd define it but I know it when I see it."  It is a lesser standard though since it does not deal with specific conduct, just obscenity.

The third standard is "prurient interest."  Some states don't want you to take revealing photos of minors that invoke the prurient interests of the viewer.  Basically, they don't want it to be sexually arousing.  Anothe vague standard.

With either of the two latter standards, they tend to be riskier because they are subject to interpretation.  However, the Supreme Court has repeatedly allowed nude photos of minors under the first amendment right to freedom of expression.  That's why people like Jock Sturges and Sally Mann have been able to do their work.

The supreme court has allowed some regulation of sexual nudity on the premise that the protection of minors trumps the first amendment when actual harm can be shown.  They will not allow a blanket permission though to shoot minors in the nude.

All of that having been said, it is not a good thing to shoot minors nude.  Jock Sturges is an example.  He certainly has changed his limits and style since the search of his studio.

If you shoot nudes, you do open the door for some overzealous detective or prosecutor to want to know more.  That is what happened to Sturges.  They saw nude images so they raided his studio.  He was never charged but the damage was over $10,000 and many images were destroyed or lost forever.

So, your point is well taken.  Taking nude images of minors is generally legal.  Is it a wise practice?  As you ahve alluded, not necessarily.  Would I do it.  Not on your life.

Let's also not forget about Martin.  He was arrested earlier in the year in Arizona because they found nude photos of teens on his laptop computer.  He was also charged with other inappropriate conduct.  For those of you who don't know him, Martin worked for Playboy and put on teen photo shoots.

He worked out a plea bargain and is now on probation.  He did manage to avoid prison, but he is not allowed to own a camera or a computer.

Dec 26 05 09:31 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
James Jackson Fashion
Posts: 10,929
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US


Alan from Aavian Prod wrote:
The problem is that it is not a federal issue, it is a state issue.  The laws very from state to state.

If I'm not mistaken, because there *is* a federal law about the matter, the matter can be argued past the state's statute.  If the state's statute is more restrictive than the federal one the state's decision can be overturned in federal court.

Dec 26 05 09:38 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
GPS Studio Services
Posts: 34,615
San Francisco, California, US


raveneyes wrote:

If I'm not mistaken, because there *is* a federal law about the matter, the matter can be argued past the state's statute.  If the state's statute is more restrictive than the federal one the state's decision can be overturned in federal court.

I am not a lawyer, so one of the lawyers needs to chime in here but there is a distinct difference.  The federal government only has jurisdiction with respect to interstate commerce.  So the federal law deals with the posession of images that have been transported over state lines.  That doesn't have to be physical transportation, the Internet is sufficient.  The federal government has no jurisdiction over something that takes place within a state.

The bottom line is that the federal government can only regulate images made for interstate commerce.  It is to the states to promulgate laws with respect to things that take place within their state.

So the short answer is no, the federal law has nothing to do with, nor does it trump, state law.  The states regulate what is legal to be shot within their borders.  Of course, if they passed a law that was unconstitutional, the Supreme Court could overturn it.  But assuming that their statutes fell within the framework of the constitution, they are legal, appropriate and enforceable.

More importantly, the feds can't even regulate conduct that falls solely within a state.  If you were to shoot pornographic images of a minor for you own use, Federal law would not apply since no interstate commerce was involved.  If there were no state law, there would be no way to prosecute you.

But again, I would feel better if a lawyer got involved here.  I am not one.

Dec 26 05 09:53 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
joe duerr
Posts: 4,189
Santa Ana, California, US


Koke wrote:
If anyone looks at my portfolio (2 of which got marked 18+ by the moderator after my post), you will see that all my shoots are sexual in context whether the model is all nude or fully clothed. I never shot for school books and I don't intend to. I wasn't planning on doing a nude shoot with this girl either. But given the general (sexual) nature of my style, I didn't want to get in trouble by shooting a minor even if she's fully clothed. I think I will take Don's and some other posters' advice and wait for a year until she's 18+ just to make sure. Also for all photogrpahers that are in a similar situation, this girl's profile says she's 18 and tells people she's 18. I called her on her bluff. So just watch out. Thanks to all responders.

I will state this as clearly as I know how. If you shoot images that can be interpreted as sexual in nature NEVER, NEVER shoot anyone under 18 unless you are prepared to spend a lot of years in prison. I am not saying you will but I am saying you can, even if you have gobs of money to throw at an attorney you can still go to prison for a very long time. You tell me, is it worth it???

Dec 26 05 09:55 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Glamour Boulevard
Posts: 8,628
Sacramento, California, US


KARLOS MATTHEWS wrote:
sorry Raven that's not completely true ( and yes I am familiar with jock sturges and sally mann's work). How many photographers have the resources to fight a kiddie porn lawsuit ?

Just because they charge you with doing child pornography does not mean you did child pornography. We all know Prosecutors can make up a charge, knowing the person has no way of fighting it because of how much it would cost them. And the Prosecutor gets to add another notch to his belt which is their main goal.Wether they do it ethically or not. Prosecutors make false charges all the time, even against things that are not illegal, knowing the person won`t be able to fight it.

Dec 26 05 09:56 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Koke
Posts: 22
Bodrum, Muğla, Turkey


Thanks for all the posts. I realize I won't gain much by shooting this girl, but risk too much by doing so. If it's not the state, it could be her parents in the future.

I know about Sturges. I've seen his work. While his work for the most part shows the beauty of innocence of nude girls, mine usually shows the beauty of being bad and sin. Or something like that. I do have a perverted mind and vision and that's what I want to portray in my images. I'm not ashamed to say it. (Thanks to someone on this post, you know who you are) Otherwise I'd be shooting cats and dogs, cars or sunsets. I shoot TFP with my models so it's not a matter of me making money with it or a job for the model.

I know some of the 18- models here feel left out. Too bad. Life's not fair and before you know it, you're gonna wish you were that young again and not being photographed be your only problem.

Koke...
Dec 27 05 12:10 am  Link  Quote 
Model
Ashley Jaime
Posts: 254
Los Angeles, California, US


Thank you to all photographers who take the chance and shoot with us underage models.Without you how would we ever get the beautiful shots that we need to build our portfolio and the experience of working with different styles of photography.I have done 5 tfp shots from this site alone with wonderful photographers.I plan to do many more I love the experience.Thank You!
Dec 27 05 10:02 am  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
GPS Studio Services
Posts: 34,615
San Francisco, California, US


JUST THE JAIMES wrote:
Thank you to all photographers who take the chance and shoot with us underage models.Without you how would we ever get the beautiful shots that we need to build our portfolio and the experience of working with different styles of photography.

If it makes you feel any better, because of this thread, I posted a casting call offering to shoot any model under 18 that was looking for someone to get some good images of them.  I did it because I realized that there are a lot of photographers that are uncomfortable shooting fashion or headshots of teens.

As long as there is no nudity or sexually suggestive conduct involved, I am happy to shoot with teens.

Dec 27 05 10:10 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Art Faux-Tows
Posts: 81
Farmington Hills, Michigan, US


The only problem I have is with the models (very few, but they are on this site) who state on their profile that they are 18, and then, mention on the sly as a shoot is being arranged that, "oh, well, I'm not actually 18 yet. I won't be until [such and such a date]."

This is misleading and I think it'd spare everyone involved a potential migraine if these models would simply state their ACTUAL age ...
Dec 27 05 10:37 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Monsante Bey
Posts: 2,111
Columbus, Georgia, US


As long as you're respectful, mature, manerable and professional, with the right witnesses around (parent, guardian, etc...), you should be fine. Especially if you're shooting age appropriate material.
Dec 27 05 11:13 am  Link  Quote 
  Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers