Alan from Aavian Prod wrote:
I know the answer.  It is because guys like Glamour Blvd and myself need silly reasons to be up posting on MM at 4:00AM.  I know why I am up, I have a dawn shoot for a client.  I need the sun from the East rather than the West for the locaition or I would not be up at this crazy hour.

So why are the rest of you craziy's talking about such academics at this rediculous hour?  Haven't you got enough sense to be in a nice warm bed?

Good morning to all of you and thanks for the good comments!

I am still trying to fix some coding for my website. I missed my self imposed 1/1 actual opening of the site due to some errors that I am working on fixing. But being up at this hour is nothing new to me,lol.

Alan from Aavian Prod wrote:
Bump

dammit, ya made me spill my coffee!

Glamour Boulevard wrote:

dammit, ya made me spill my coffee!

I bumped because you were post number 40 and it wasn't going to appear until number 41 (or in this case 121) was posted.  I was sitting on baited breath and I couldn't wait to hear your words of wisdom.

Alan from Aavian Prod wrote:

I bumped because you were post number 40 and it wasn't going to appear until number 41 (or in this case 121) was posted.  I was sitting on baited breath and I couldn't wait to hear your words of wisdom.

smarticus assimus,,,,,,,prime - Rusell Crow impression-

nathan combs wrote:
it is DECUSTING to wont to photo some one under age nude i ALLWAS look at the age and RESPET it

I'm not the Spelling Police, but please!

~Krista~ wrote:
I am not into underage people (girls or boys) put into sexual poses, whether they be nude, thonged, or fully clothed with suggestive body language. I know that people are sexual before 18, I know that it is an arbitraray age, but I respect that line.

I DO NOT think that todays teenagers need to grow up any faster. In the same sense, if a woman wants to celebrate her 18th birthday by doing a nude photoshoot (there was a thread on that a few months ago) I think that is fine. She is celebrating her legal adulthood the way she sees fit. So, it is not the 'nudity' that bothers me as much as minors being made into sexual objects for people that are attracted to such images.

I'm so glad you wrote that.  I've been getting so angry at the way some photographers photograph younger girls and some comments that are placed on the photo.

yes, at 16 girls are begining to discover their sexuality and becoming more playful in their poses, but as adults we have the responsibilty to protect their youth. 

Not that long ago, I saw two messages under a 16 year old's photo that said, SEXY and they were men between the ages of 23 and 26...I found myself getting so angry.

Perhaps this needs to be a new thread, posing that question.

If we don't protect the innocence of our youth in the images we take of them, how do we protect them from the preditors that are out there?

Glamour Boulevard wrote:
Really? How so?

isn't he just saying that he treats WOMEN / models like WITH some RESPECT like persons, and not pieces of meat
kudos and thanks... if so

;-)

as for under age posting sexy nudes of themsleves

i would hope that would spark off 'child protection services'?
I'd expect it to, in the UK, or else anyone could simply report it to them.
parents, or any one in loco parentis, might be held resposible and questioned...

Is any one seriously suggesting here that in the USA it might start a court case against her ?!?
...which would fail unless she were over 18...
but nothing here surprises me any more!

Anjel Britt wrote:
as for under age posting sexy nudes of themsleves

i would hope that would spark off 'child protection services'?
I'd expect it to, in the UK, or else anyone could simply report it to them.
parents, or any one in loco parentis, might be held resposible and questioned...

Is any one seriously suggesting here that in the USA it might start a court case against her ?!?
...which would fail unless she were over 18...
but nothing here surprises me any more!

Anjel, why are you so OBSESSED with child protection services?

Would you call CPS because a 16 year old decided to look at herself in the mirror?
How about if a 15 yo boy decided to nude sunbathe?
Or *gasp* what if you caught a 17 yo girl *gasp* masturbating... with a DILDO!!!! OMFGHMAFTD!@#$E!!

Look, one...last...time...

if you are confused about the legalities of photographing a minor nude, please go to your local newsstand, pick up this month's issue of W magazine (featuring a girl in a white bowler hat [derby] on the cover) and turn to the first fashion spread.

Further, while you're at the newsstand, pick up a few issues of euro and american fashion mags related to runway shows...

Dara Dalton wrote:
I'm seventeen and I've been on the site for a few weeks. I've had tons of people wanting to shoot nude. Most of which want to wait until I'm 18 (wise choice) but a few don't. Some of them have asked for nude "samples" for personal uses. One guy is offering me extra money to do a private shoot following the regular one. He said he has a private portfolio of every model he has shot but don't worry! Only one of them is underage. I've been considering calling the cops on this guy. He wont let this nude thing go! So yes, there are alot of perverts on MM begging teenagers for nude pictures.

and you should call the cops on the dude.
The scumbag peds who shop here trolling for underage models disgust me.
Personally I think there should be a TEEN MM.. so underage models
A. Dont have access to the adult content
B. Hopefully it would curb the PED traffic here.
DES

Bodyshots Photography wrote:
1.  I think you yourself have argued shooting underage nudes isn't necessarily illegal if it's not sexual.

2.  There are many GWCs who know much less about the law than you and will ask anything of anyone.

3.  Unfortunately, many photographers don't pay attention to age or much of the other information written on a port.

4.   Undeage models are well: young.  Don't expect what they write or don't write to be well thought out.

Just for clarification,   Who is this directed at by the way?

Bodyshots Photography wrote:
1.  I think you yourself have argued shooting underage nudes isn't necessarily illegal if it's not sexual.

So we are clear, what I have said is that it is, in many cases, not illegal, but it is a bad idea.  There is no blanket statute in any state which prohibits shooting a minor nude, but there are many statutes which prohibit shooting real or simulated sex, lewd conduct or a lascivious display of the genitals.  If all nudity was illegal, you couldn't have a movie like "American Beauty," "Chapman" or "The Return to the Blue Lagoon" which clearly featured models under the age of eighteen with some degree of nudity.

People love to twist my words on this all the time though.  While I have said that there are circumstances where it is not illegal, I have also said, even more often, that there is no reason here for someone here to be shooting minors in the nude.  The lines are blurry and there are clearly over-zealous police and prosecutors who would go after someone on the "big stick" theory, even if it was probably legal.

I remember when Reese Whiterspoon did her nude scene in "The Man in the Moon" when she was just fourteen years old.  Robert Mulligan was on one of the talk shows being grilled about why he used such a young actress and his response was that he didn't understand the controversy since they only showed her bare butt (in the scenes from the front she wore a flesh colored body suit).  The difference is that he is a well known director shooting a major motion picture for a well known studio.  Most of the people here are amateurs or semi-professionals who are seeking talent off the the Internet.

So that people stop mis-quoting me, I will articulate my position clearly.  It is possible to shoot a minor topless or nude and not have it be illegal.  On the other hand, many photos of minors in the nude will, in fact be illegal.  It is also possible to shoot a minor with her clothes on and still have it be illegal if there is a lascivious display of the genitals.

There is no reason to shoot a minor in the nude or to do any kinds of sexually suggestive lingerie, etc.  Anyone who even gets close to the line is using poor judgment.  If there is a model that you really have to shoot nude, then wait until she is eighteen. 

DES1208 wrote:
Just for clarification,   Who is this directed at by the way?

Obviously it is directed at me, but for the record, this is a very old thread that just, somehow, got brought back to life.

DES1208 wrote:

Just for clarification,   Who is this directed at by the way?

The OP.

ei Total Productions wrote:
I am just curious about something.  I am seeing more and more models, under 18, adding the words "No Nudes" or other similar phrases to their profiles. 

My question is why would they need that?  I understand why older models do, but are teen models getting that many offers for nude work that they need to make it clear they won't accept nude offers?  Does that also mean that some teen models on this site are doing nude work?

Alan

I've worked with several teenagers (under 18) who have said they got requests for nude work. Not to beat the dead horse about legality but it does seem foolish for any photographer to approach 16-17 year olds for nudity, especially when there are plenty of models over 18 who are happy to pose nude.

ei Total Productions wrote:
I am just curious about something.  I am seeing more and more models, under 18, adding the words "No Nudes" or other similar phrases to their profiles. 

My question is why would they need that?  I understand why older models do, but are teen models getting that many offers for nude work that they need to make it clear they won't accept nude offers?  Does that also mean that some teen models on this site are doing nude work?

Alan

To answer your first questions:

YES,all the time. My age is clearly displayed on my profile,but I'm not sure if they don't take the time to read it, or care.

As for your second question- I hope not!

Bodyshots Photography wrote:
ei Total Productions:

I don't think I was misquoting you or misrpresenting you.   I in fact agree with all you have said.    I shoot art nudes, but can't image shooting anyone underage, even it it appears to be in with in the letter of the law.  I certainly didn't mean to imply you thought shooting minors was a good idea.


My point, was I can see why somone would state in their profile that they are not willing to do something that while legal, but they believe unwise.

For the record, I wasn't suggesting that you were misquoting me, and in fact you did not.  I struggled with the wording of that paragraph to try to make it clear.

My reason for those words is that, inevitably, someone will read what I say and then come back and suggest that I am endorsing the idea of shooting minors in the nude.  In fact it is exactly the opposite.  I think it is foolish unless you are involved with a major publication or production company, such as Vogue or Paramount, where the issues have all been thought out.

So if you thought I was referring to you, I apologize. I did not mean to suggest that you were misquoting me.

Cori Lady wrote:
i have had some offers to be in a nude or langere or even a naked nude drawings. It happens alot for younger girls and i am not surprised but some phtogs should be more careful when asking younger girls to do so.

Ahh yes, but you are over eighteen.  It is your right to not want to do nudes, but there are no legal issues for a photographer to ask you.  On the other hand, depending on how it is presented, it could be inconsiderate since you have made your feelings on the matter clear, but that is a different issue.

nathan combs wrote:

i got a ??? what is the diff between a 14year old in a thong or other reviling clothing and nude to me there is NO difference and should be baned

Spell check is your friend.

ei Total Productions wrote:
If all nudity was illegal, you couldn't have a movie like "American Beauty," "Chapman" or "The Return to the Blue Lagoon" which clearly featured models under the age of eighteen with some degree of nudity.

A big-budget Hollywood movie or big-name catalog shoot has a lot more respectability and doesn't trigger people's perv alerts.

Take a middle-aged male photographer and a 17 year old female model wearing the skimpiest lingerie in the Victoria's Secret line.   If the shoot is for the V.S. catalog, no one is going to bat an eye.  V.S. is a household name and therefore respectable in most people's eyes.

Now take the same photographer, same model, same lingerie, same lighting and poses... just change who they're shooting for.  If it's for his (or her) portfolio instead of the respectable catalog,  all of the sudden the photographer is automatically assumed to be a perv who's looking to take advantage of the poor innocent model.

Reality doesn't matter.   People's perception of reality does.

ei Total Productions wrote:
I am just curious about something.  I am seeing more and more models, under 18, adding the words "No Nudes" or other similar phrases to their profiles. 

My question is why would they need that?  I understand why older models do, but are teen models getting that many offers for nude work that they need to make it clear they won't accept nude offers?  Does that also mean that some teen models on this site are doing nude work?

Alan

There has been some threads here of people asking about nudity and under age models, that should be a bar to know there are indeed people wanting to take photos of nude teens, as Stephen Eastwood said the worst is that there are thousands of models above 18 that are willing to do nudes but there are always people wanting to shoot the under 18 models... it goes beyond me.

There will always be creeps, there will always people that don't pay attention to the age in the model profile, etc, etc. hence the need to clarify it as much as the model can to avoid any problem.

While not in the same league it has happened twice that I have been contacted to do a TFCD by models and when I stated that I wasn't in their country they realized they didn't read the info in the profile

nathan combs wrote:
it is DECUSTING to wont to photo some one under age nude i ALLWAS look at the age and RESPET it

It may be "disgusting" to you - but there is NOTHING illegal about shooting nudes with teen models.  The only thing illegal to shoot with under-18 models is porn.

Eduardo Frances wrote:

There has been some threads here of people asking about nudity and under age models, that should be a bar to know there are indeed people wanting to take photos of nude teens, as Stephen Eastwood said the worst is that there are thousands of models above 18 that are willing to do nudes but there are always people wanting to shoot the under 18 models... it goes beyond me.

There will always be creeps, there will always people that don't pay attention to the age in the model profile, etc, etc. hence the need to clarify it as much as the model can to avoid any problem . . .

The REAL "creeps" are the one's who assume that shooting nudes with teen models is automatically "immoral".  They read their own disgusting fantasies into it.

Honi soi qui mal y pense!

Cookie Shooter Photos wrote:
Because there are alot of horny dicks on this site.
Thats why teens get those offers.

The underage thing, as well as nude photography or painting, is a problem that has been tagged with "photographers" and "artists" from the beginning of time!

I feel that a model, underage or not, SHOULD post her feelings about it on her page...just as you see postings for "NO GOTH" OMG...


As a side note...most photographers do not have the vision or experience (in lighting or croping and so on) to shoot nude picks anyway. It is considerably more difficult to shoot than a clothed model.....horny dicks or not!

Just my Freggin $0.02

Nick

ei Total Productions wrote:
....My reason for those words is that, inevitably, someone will read what I say and then come back and suggest that I am endorsing the idea of shooting minors in the nude.  In fact it is exactly the opposite.  I think it is foolish unless you are involved with a major publication or production company, such as Vogue or Paramount, where the issues have all been thought out...

From what I've seen you usually give very objective answers which reflect the real world, not opinion.  It's unfortunate people jump to other conclusions.

Have a happy Thanksgiving.

Kenzphotos wrote:
I feel ModelMayhem membership should be for people over 18 years of age ONLY.

That would be punishing the underage models. It would also interfere with the photographers who play by the rules -- operating well within the intent as well as the letter of the law -- and do completely legit work with the girls. Just ban the photographers who make inappropriate requests to underage models.

Forcing minors off MM may well make them even more vulnerable to the most nefarious GWCs. With no database of photographers available to the girls, what are their options? Ads in those free advertiser papers anyone can pick up at 7-11?

ei Total Productions wrote:
I am just curious about something.  I am seeing more and more models, under 18, adding the words "No Nudes" or other similar phrases to their profiles. 

My question is why would they need that?  I understand why older models do, but are teen models getting that many offers for nude work that they need to make it clear they won't accept nude offers?  Does that also mean that some teen models on this site are doing nude work?

Alan

I used to get offers before I turned 18. Some unprofessional photogs don't care.  Some photogs don't even look at your age before they message you.  They would be like "oh wow I didn't know you were 17".

AcmeStudios wrote:
No offense to anyone, but OP you are trying to figure out a teen girl?

It would be easier to nail jello to a wall.

Im a parent, can you tell?