Model
NejiArias
Posts: 31
Brooklyn, New York, US
im 16 years old, and my mom would be there or even my brother that is 23 years old. my mom wants me to become a model, so she wouldnt have a problem, she never had a problem when i was on the front page newspaper in my hometown (pool) i dont think she ever will unless im shooting nude which i will not do! but yeah you should meet up with the parent to sign a form or something before the photo shoot and invite her to the photo shoot but, if she doesnt go to the photoshoot then its not your problem. at least you got the parent to sign the form 
Photographer
Image K
Posts: 23400
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
VintageNEJi wrote:
im 16 years old, and my mom would be there or even my brother that is 23 years old. my mom wants me to become a model, so she wouldnt have a problem, she never had a problem when i was on the front page newspaper in my hometown (pool) i dont think she ever will unless im shooting nude which i will not do! but yeah you should meet up with the parent to sign a form or something before the photo shoot and invite her to the photo shoot but, if she doesnt go to the photoshoot then its not your problem. at least you got the parent to sign the form Why would you bring your brother?
Model
NejiArias
Posts: 31
Brooklyn, New York, US
Image K wrote:
Why would you bring your brother? just in case my mom is not available ..
Photographer
Image K
Posts: 23400
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
VintageNEJi wrote:
just in case my mom is not available .. Your brother isn't a parent or legal guardian, so his signature on the release would be meaningless.
Photographer
Photons 2 Pixels Images
Posts: 17011
Berwick, Pennsylvania, US
Image K wrote:
Your brother isn't a parent or legal guardian, so his signature on the release would be meaningless. Does every photo shoot need a release?
Photographer
Velvet Paper Photo
Posts: 468
Lexington, Kentucky, US
How about this... just check your local laws & see what you legally can & can't do.
Don't listen to all this idiocy on here because that's all it is; idiocy.
Photographer
Image K
Posts: 23400
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
Photons 2 Pixels Images wrote:
Does every photo shoot need a release? Nope
Photographer
Ken Marcus Studios
Posts: 9421
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
Photons 2 Pixels Images wrote:
Does every photo shoot need a release? No . . . but it might need 2257
Model
Izrah
Posts: 264
Elk Grove Village, Illinois, US
Image K wrote:
Nope THIS! none of the photoshoots ive been in have needed a model release form and both times were when i was under 18. i think as long as its not editorial or going to be publicated you should be okay. I mean its for your own portfolio, right?
Photographer
Image K
Posts: 23400
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
Al Salerno Photography wrote:
Well first lets clarify the situation. Having the parent there (in my statement) is also to imply that they have signed a release or authorization that you have permission to shoot their child. If you shoot seniors over 18 that walk in without parents permission well hopefully you have some sorta clause in writing in case you come across a very dominant parent that tries to sue you for dolling up his kid without permission....that's your risk. Even though she or he may be legal you really think someone with money wouldn't drag you butt to court for a good fight? Now if I asked my friend if I could shoot his daughter and he signed a waiver and she was on board but he couldn't be thee for the shoot I dont disagree with that either...Im not paranoid...I just dont think its worth the sell. Id rather work with someone who is def into it for their reasons too not just mine.
That being said I still wouldn't be alone with an 18 year old in either situation even if they had consent because there is no third party or witness to anything that could be mis interpreted or hell just made up by a wacky kid trying to get attention or money....why leave anything to chance? With everyone lawsuit happy these days even if your right in all matters legal, in a high school community would you really want news spread about foul play from your studio among hundreds of mothers? Such talk I believe could kill a business if not end it. 20 years? I guess your at the right place and working in a very trusting area. Around here (NY/NJ)no one would take that chance...I def wouldn't. Wow...a lot of paranoia here.
Photographer
Image K
Posts: 23400
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
Maggie Mayhem Judge wrote:
THIS! none of the photoshoots ive been in have needed a model release form and both times were when i was under 18. i think as long as its not editorial or going to be publicated you should be okay. I mean its for your own portfolio, right? Depends on the situation.
Does your local high school or "Glamor Shots" need a release to take your photo? No
Do most photographers feel more comfortable with a release signed by a parent/a parent present or guardian for a bikini shoot on the beach with a minor? In MANY cases...YES.
Photographer
Justin Foto
Posts: 3622
Alberschwende, Vorarlberg, Austria
Brian Baybo wrote:
Anal? How do you figure? Most states do not allow photography of minors without the parents or legal guardian present, TF or commercial. Check your local laws before you cry "anal". "Professional" comes to mind. I call bullshit. Please provide links to the relevant statutes.
Photographer
AVD AlphaDuctions
Posts: 10747
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Velvet Paper Photo wrote:
How about this... just check your local laws & see what you legally can & can't do.
Don't listen to all this idiocy on here because that's all it is; idiocy. why would someone need to check for laws that don't exist?
I could suggest you check for laws governing what you can and cant post on MM and that would make as much sense.
Several ppl have claimed existence of "some" state laws and when called on it been unable to post anything, even with the magic of Google at their fingertips. There is a reason for this...
Photographer
Gaze at Photography
Posts: 4371
Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, US
![https://i660.photobucket.com/albums/uu328/zerosignal/dead-horse.gif]() Again. If you're not a lawyer, you shouldnt be passing out legal advice. You can certainly tell people how YOU do business, right or wrong. Releases, for some reason, have been a sticky point here many times. Many states require them if the photographer is going to use the pictures in any one of a plethora of ways. And shooting a minor without one, in my opinon, is danergous to say the least. But you all can do business any way you please. Just don't shove your stupidity down other's throats from your soapbox stance on something you know little about. Question: Staying on topic: If I post my pictures on a website based out of California, it being one state that requires a model release for my own promotional needs, do I need a release that contains verbiage adeaquate for California, and who signs it if the girl is only 15 years old?? Her big sister?
Photographer
Vito
Posts: 4581
Brooklyn, New York, US
David Gaze wrote:
![https://i660.photobucket.com/albums/uu328/zerosignal/dead-horse.gif]()
Again.
If you're not a lawyer, you shouldnt be passing out legal advice. You can certainly tell people how YOU do business, right or wrong.
Releases, for some reason, have been a sticky point here many times. Many states require them if the photographer is going to use the pictures in any one of a plethora of ways. And shooting a minor without one, in my opinon, is danergous to say the least. Again, unless you're using the photos for commercial use, YOU DON'T NEED A RELEASE! And you may not even want a release. Why is it "dangerous"? What in a model releases removes the "danger" from shooting a minor? All a release is supposed to do is give up rights that a model has to a photographer. Does this include giving up the right to be dangerous? Makes no sense....
Photographer
Photons 2 Pixels Images
Posts: 17011
Berwick, Pennsylvania, US
Vito wrote:
Again, unless you're using the photos for commercial use, YOU DON'T NEED A RELEASE! And you may not even want a release. Why is it "dangerous"? What in a model releases removes the "danger" from shooting a minor? All a release is supposed to do is give up rights that a model has to a photographer. Does this include giving up the right to be dangerous? Makes no sense.... And technically, unless the photographer is also the publisher, the photographer isn't the one who needs the release. Keep in mind that some places consider online portfolios as a form of publishing. What kind of legal action could you get if you put them in your online portfolio without a release?
"Hey. Take those photos down."
"OK. They're down."
Photographer
Fashion Frenzy Photos
Posts: 852
Charlotte, North Carolina, US
Does your local high school or "Glamor Shots" need a release to take your photo? No
+++++
Correct. BUT to further clarify on the High School side of things.... they can TAKE pictures of you all day long at High School, but without the parental consent form that gets sent home the very first day of school signed(and YES there is one given out at EVERY school -elementary to high school -in the US and even the military DODD schools), the High School is not even allowed to PUBLISH their pictures in the yearbook or post them on the school website!!! They send a blanket release form home to the parents that covers the ENTIRE school year including any extracurricular/sports activities that they may be photographed at.
++++
You can TAKE pictures of ANYONE you choose at any age you choose, so long as you do not trespass or conduct surveillance or depict sexual content with a minor while doing so. It's what you do with those pictures AFTER you take them that can land your butt in jail or the courts, depending on whether you commit a Civil (libel/slander) or a Criminal violation (violating the Right to Publicity/Privacy Act of 1998).
The biggest concern is that the model OR the parent may cry Wolf and start a nightmare that's not worth the risk. There's a term called Risk Assessment... I would employ that here and get a better feel for the overall situation.
Photographer
JRJ Imaging
Posts: 22
Raleigh, North Carolina, US
C.Y.O.A.
If you don't know what that means.....keep a lawyer on retainer.
Photographer
Escalante
Posts: 5367
Chicago, Illinois, US
all these 'boys' scared shitless by a lil 15 yr old ...
sheesh
Photographer
rey sison photography
Posts: 1805
Los Angeles, California, US
ESCALANTE wrote:
all these 'boys' scared shitless by a lil 15 yr old ...
sheesh It's not the 15 yr old. It's the angry, suspicious parents and the legal system. You would understand if you ever had to go to court to defend yourself. It's costly in terms of money, time, and your reputation, even if you are innocent.
Photographer
Images by MR
Posts: 8908
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
MMDesign wrote:
Call the parents and ask them if they have a problem with it. If not, shoot it. If they do, then don't. This and the fact her older sister is there...
Photographer
Gaze at Photography
Posts: 4371
Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, US
ESCALANTE wrote:
all these 'boys' scared shitless by a lil 15 yr old ...
sheesh Why does this not surprise me, coming from you?
Photographer
Marc-Antoine Astier
Posts: 290
Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
ESCALANTE wrote:
all these 'boys' scared shitless by a lil 15 yr old ...
sheesh Lawsuits involving minors are not the most pleasant ones to deal with...
Photographer
A-M-P
Posts: 18465
Orlando, Florida, US
I shoot with models that are sent from the agency that are under 18 and the parents are not present. Also I have shot senior photos before and the parents don't need to be present. If you are not using the images for commercial purposes where you will need a signature on a release then you should be fine.
Photographer
ClickMore
Posts: 563
Cranleigh, England, United Kingdom
If older sister is there and parents are OK just get on.... If she suits your portfolio then go get wicked images...
Photographer
BTHPhoto
Posts: 6985
Fairbanks, Alaska, US
If you own a camera and you speak to someone under 18, you'll be declared guilty of perversion, child pornography, and impure thought and you'll have to go to solitary confinement in a maximum security Mexican gulag in Siberia for the rest of eternity. I know it's true 'cause I checked with the guys on Model Mayhem.
Photographer
Andrew Thomas Evans
Posts: 24079
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US
Vito wrote:
Again, unless you're using the photos for commercial use, YOU DON'T NEED A RELEASE! And you may not even want a release. Why is it "dangerous"? What in a model releases removes the "danger" from shooting a minor? All a release is supposed to do is give up rights that a model has to a photographer. Does this include giving up the right to be dangerous? Makes no sense.... I'm sure some people on MM put giving up the right to be dangerous in a release!
Andrew Thomas Evans
www.andrewthomasevans.com
Photographer
Swank Photography
Posts: 19020
Key West, Florida, US
MEK Photography wrote:
Not having at least one of the parents there for the 15yo would be a mistake. + 1 million, times square
Photographer
O b s c u r a L L C
Posts: 616
New York, New York, US
Brian Baybo wrote:
Seriously? No adults, no minors. Plain and simple +1
Shooting minors alone = Possible major offense
Photographer
Vito
Posts: 4581
Brooklyn, New York, US
O b s c u r a L L C wrote:
+1
Shooting minors alone = Possible major offense Major offense of what? There's no law against it. There's no ethical or moral argument not to. What do you mean?
Photographer
Tropical Photography
Posts: 35564
Sarasota, Florida, US
For all those that keep saying you need to have a parent there, is it to protect yourself from being accused of something? Because seriously, if ANYONE thinks the parent is going to side with you, you're nuts.. A parent is going to side with their kid. While I do require a parent to be on the shoot or a parent approved guardian, under certain circumstances I have shot with a minor without a parent/guardian, it is ONLY for assistance with wardrobe and to sign an agreement as to what the model will receive, that way we avoid any confusion. But seriously, I really hope some of you never go outside with all the paranoia being expressed in this thread. 
Photographer
Jake Garn
Posts: 3958
Salt Lake City, Utah, US
Everyone's paranoid fantasies on these forums are beyond ridiculous. It's no wonder they post so much on the forums, they're probably paranoid to leave their house!
Yes you can shoot a minor without their parent's there, minors are also allowed to work in restaurants, amusement parks and gasp, even photo studios. Do you think their parent's have to go to work with them every day? No. California, as someone said, does have stricter rules... which is why many productions stopped filming there.
Photographer
Jake Garn
Posts: 3958
Salt Lake City, Utah, US
Angela Michelle Perez wrote:
I shoot with models that are sent from the agency that are under 18 and the parents are not present. Also I have shot senior photos before and the parents don't need to be present. If you are not using the images for commercial purposes where you will need a signature on a release then you should be fine. This is correct. I don't even need to times it by a million, a fact is a fact. :-)
Photographer
TerrysPhotocountry
Posts: 4649
Rochester, New York, US
MEK Photography wrote:
Not having at least one of the parents there for the 15yo would be a mistake. I agree. A parent should at least be there ti sign a permission form for the 15 year old.
Photographer
Andy Wanderlust
Posts: 259
San Jose, California, US
Magic Image Photography wrote:
I shot two sisters once just once and never again. One sister was 21 and the other was 16 years old. The sister signed the release as adult parent I got a few emails from the mother wanting to take me to court for takeing pictures of her young daughter. We did a Catwoman and Pinguin look something very kewl and sweet the 16 year old was the Pinguin and the sister Catwoman. All the 16 year old wore was this Tuxedo top and ruffled white panties and fishnets and bow tie which covered any private areas but the mothe thought it was porn cus the panties showed ass cleavage. I had to take all of her images down and since it was not signed by her. "All the 16 year old wore was this Tuxedo top and ruffled white panties and fishnets and bow tie which covered any private areas..."
You had me up til that point. Yikes!
Photographer
MLRPhoto
Posts: 5766
Olivet, Michigan, US
Magic Image Photography wrote:
I shot two sisters once just once and never again. One sister was 21 and the other was 16 years old. The sister signed the release as adult parent I got a few emails from the mother wanting to take me to court for takeing pictures of her young daughter. We did a Catwoman and Pinguin look something very kewl and sweet the 16 year old was the Pinguin and the sister Catwoman. All the 16 year old wore was this Tuxedo top and ruffled white panties and fishnets and bow tie which covered any private areas but the mothe thought it was porn cus the panties showed ass cleavage. I had to take all of her images down and since it was not signed by her. Light Color and Shape wrote:
"All the 16 year old wore was this Tuxedo top and ruffled white panties and fishnets and bow tie which covered any private areas..."
You had me up til that point. Yikes! X2.
I'm pretty sure the penguin in fact didn't wear "ruffled white panties and fishnets."
![https://www.batman-legacy.com/images/batmanreturnsdvd.jpg]()
Yep. He doesn't.
Any reason the 15 year old penguin couldn't have worn slacks?
Photographer
exartica
Posts: 1399
Bowie, Maryland, US
MikeRobisonPhotos wrote:
I'm pretty sure the penguin in fact didn't wear "ruffled white panties and fishnets." Thankfully, no. scary
MikeRobisonPhotos wrote:
Any reason the 15 year old penguin couldn't have worn slacks? Because she's not Danny DeVito. Pants are for grownups. :-)
Photographer
Nicely Disturbed
Posts: 1765
New York, New York, US
Raven Shutley wrote:
I'm shooting a 21 yr old model on Wednesday on a completely TF shoot, and she asked if I'd want her sister to model, as well. I said it depended on her look and her age. {The shoot is a fairy/fantasy shoot, so nothing inappropriate.} She has a good look, but I've found out that she's 15. Since her parents won't be there to give consent or anything, should I just skip the 15 yr old this time?
Do you have to have parents there? I know it's a good idea. Does she have to sign anything if the rest of us aren't? You mentioned her parents won't be there to give consent, so I get the feeling this worries you in a few ways yes?
Why not seek the advice of a local lawyer? I bet it would be a quick simple informational phone call and youd have all the legal ammo you need to go forward with your choice on this matter.
No matter what anyone else here says, it's your ass on the line. Take the time to find out for sure what's what in your area.
Photographer
FALT Photographics
Posts: 388
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
I would pass, it has the potential to really bite you in the rear later on.
Photographer
BrooklynHill
Posts: 4790
Newport Beach, California, US
O b s c u r a L L C wrote:
+1
Shooting minors alone = Possible major offense This is funny. Whether the accusser is 15 or 26, you'll get just about the same thing. The kitty molester cell block will be the only difference.
|
