PYPI wrote:
Hey look everyone. I shot a picture of a 14 year old boy without his parents present and without their permission. Not only that, I posted his picture on the internet without their release. Tell me what law I've broken.

they would hang you from the tallest tree in texas !!

KillerShotz Photography wrote:
Can there be kids faking the age and saying they are 16 I could swear I saw a girl that does not look 16 I would say she was atleast 12 but her profile say 16 is that ok and not against the rules as long as her bday says she is 16.


I'm not sure if what I just said made any sense to anyone it sounded better in my head lol

That makes perfect sense! I think it is silly that they assume a kid can't do the math and fake a birth year to get on here. Kids do it all the time...ask the guy who worked for my dad who spent 18 months in jail for statutory because of a girl he picked up in a bar who used a fake ID.

-Jean- wrote:

The parents only need to give permission because a fourteen-year-old cannot sign a release form, the parent needs too.

If it's not professional enough to warrant a release, then as long as he's clothed its fine. It's like taking a pic of your brother and putting it on your myspace

Most of the discussion is about nude/questionable work.

How professional a picture looks has no bearing on the requirement for a model release.

This look professional enough for you? No release. No parents. No permission.



More children. Call the cops now. You might get arrested just looking at this.

PYPI wrote:

How professional a picture looks has no bearing on the requirement for a model release.

This look professional enough for you? No release. No parents. No permission.



More children. Call the cops now. You might get arrested just looking at this.

sicko

LelaHazary wrote:
sicko

What can I say. I like shooting kids from underneath.

Pyramidal Lines wrote:

they would hang you from the tallest tree in texas !!

They might have to hang the SF Mayor Gavin Newsom too as he was sitting about 5 feet away and this horrible incident happened in a bar he owns. I think that might be Lance Armstrong next to him too. Oh the press will have a field day.

DMP Studios wrote:
It happens on a regular basis on most of the model related websites, i get at least one or two a month, i simply refuse to shoot minors or miners for that matter, hell i do not even converse now, and yes most of them are undercover cops, its actually remarkably easy to find out, nothing like telling you they are in a youth hostel,  giving you an address right where a major police headquarters has stood for 100 years. Doh!!!!

I refuse to shoot miners too. Their coal dust gets on my expensive lens.

PYPI wrote:
They might have to hang the SF Mayor Gavin Newsom too as he was sitting about 5 feet away and this horrible incident happened in a bar he owns. I think that might be Lance Armstrong next to him too. Oh the press will have a field day.

That Lance Armstrong...



that's awesome!

PYPI wrote:

They might have to hang the SF Mayor Gavin Newsom too as he was sitting about 5 feet away and this horrible incident happened in a bar he owns. I think that might be Lance Armstrong next to him too. Oh the press will have a field day.

A teacher here got fired for taking her elementary class to the art museum. Because one of the parents complained about the nude paintings from the 16th century.

PYPI wrote:

How professional a picture looks has no bearing on the requirement for a model release.

This look professional enough for you? No release. No parents. No permission.

I never said "professionally-looking" I said professional - i.e. something you do as part of your profession i.e. earning money i.e. selling the images commercially

You really [i]should not[/] sell images commercially without a contract, and an adult needs to sign the contract.

That's all I was saying.

Minneapolis Fashion  wrote:

That Lance Armstrong...



that's awesome!

There's only one.

-Jean- wrote:

I never said "professionally-looking" I said professional - i.e. something you do as part of your profession i.e. earning money i.e. selling the images commercially

You really [i]should not[/] sell images commercially without a contract, and an adult needs to sign the contract.

That's all I was saying.

Again wrong. The profession of the person taking the picture has no bearing on the need for a release. A model release is dictated by usage regardless of who shoots it. And no, I don't need a release to sell the picture for editorial use in newspapers or magazines.

-Jean- wrote:
I never said "professionally-looking" I said professional - i.e. something you do as part of your profession i.e. earning money i.e. selling the images commercially

You really [i]should not[/] sell images commercially without a contract, and an adult needs to sign the contract.

That's all I was saying.

Who said anything about commercial use?

KillerShotz Photography wrote:

Whats the diference I have heard many cases were the females were child predators. Usually not as bad as the male percentage out there but I believe there are still some out there. But then again it might be a young boys dream come true lol But still I think theres males and female predators out there

Trueness.

When you hear about church related molesting, it's a preacher (male) usually.  But then you also often hear about it being a woman when it's school related.  It goes both ways.

Pyramidal Lines wrote:
A teacher here got fired for taking her elementary class to the art museum. Because one of the parents complained about the nude paintings from the 16th century.

A teacher in Florida got fired for doing magic tricks. So? The stupidity of some do not dictate the law of the land.

http://www.tampabays10.com/news/local/a … ryid=79533

PYPI wrote:

A teacher in Florida got fired for doing magic tricks. So? The stupidity of some do not dictate the law of the land.

http://www.tampabays10.com/news/local/a … ryid=79533

holy cow.. wow

Mat Linek wrote:
I swear she told me she was 18.

You're in New Jersey. It should be "I swear she told me she was 16"

PYPI wrote:

A teacher in Florida got fired for doing magic tricks. So? The stupidity of some does not dictate the law of the land.

http://www.tampabays10.com/news/local/a … ryid=79533

Which I think gets to the heart of the matter here...no matter what the situation or the laws in that particular area, if you are dealing with minors in any way and the parents chose to raise hell you're going to be in trouble so your best bet is to have them sign a release in person.

Heather Cruz wrote:

Which I think gets to the heart of the matter here...no matter what the situation or the laws in that particular area, if you are dealing with minors in any way and the parents chose to raise hell you're going to be in trouble so your best bet is to have them sign a release in person.

in pat's case the parents are more likely to try to buy an 8x10

Heather Cruz wrote:
Which I think gets to the heart of the matter here...no matter what the situation or the laws in that particular area, if you are dealing with minors in any way and the parents chose to raise hell you're going to be in trouble so your best bet is to have them sign a release in person.

So let me get this straight. You're using the example of a principal in FL firing a substitute teacher for "wizardry" as the basis for an argument that all photos of minors should require a parent present to sign a release?

Some teacher in Florida had sex with her minor student. Should all classes nationwide be taught with parents present to make sure there is no orgies going on in the classrooms? Use some common sense.

People get kill every minute by cars but you still drive.

KillerShotz Photography wrote:

Whats the diference I have heard many cases were the females were child predators. Usually not as bad as the male percentage out there but I believe there are still some out there. But then again it might be a young boys dream come true lol But still I think theres males and female predators out there

its cuz doods dont tell as often as females do... not that the percentage is that different most boys sexually abused by a woman will never tell or would not tell it as sexual abuse.

PYPI wrote:

So let me get this straight. You're using the example of a principal in FL firing a substitute teacher for "wizardry" as the basis for an argument that all photos of minors should require a parent present to sign a release?

Some teacher in Florida had sex with her minor student. Should all classes nationwide be taught with parents present to make sure there is no orgy going on in the classrooms? Use some common sense.

People get kill every minute by cars but you still drive.

I am using common sense...as in "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure". All I was saying is that no matter what profession you are in, if you are dealing with minors, and more specifically, the parents of minors, covering your ass legally is your best bet. If that is something you chose not to do that is your own decision but it is not a problem that is confided to the models and photographers category as those two examples showed.

Heather Cruz wrote:
Which I think gets to the heart of the matter here...no matter what the situation or the laws in that particular area, if you are dealing with minors in any way and the parents chose to raise hell you're going to be in trouble so your best bet is to have them sign a release in person.

what does this have to do with a release?

WillSpringfield wrote:
its cuz doods dont tell as often as females do... not that the percentage is that different most boys sexually abused by a woman will never tell or would not tell it as sexual abuse.

Like what happened to me last night... I didn't complain.

WillSpringfield wrote:

its cuz doods dont tell as often as females do... not that the percentage is that different most boys sexually abused by a woman will never tell or would not tell it as sexual abuse.

Most such boys will wear a silly grin the rest of their lives.

John Jebbia wrote:

Yeah. Could be the case.. but according to "To catch a predator", the cops always wait for you to come to them. could be entrapment otherwise.

Yep, this is true.

Tracy Scott Photography wrote:
Oh, okay. I didn't read that before.

There's no way to enforce that age limit on MM.  I've seen models who were 13 and 14 with portfolios here.

Heather Cruz wrote:
Which I think gets to the heart of the matter here...no matter what the situation or the laws in that particular area, if you are dealing with minors in any way and the parents chose to raise hell you're going to be in trouble so your best bet is to have them sign a release in person.

PYPI wrote:
So let me get this straight. You're using the example of a principal in FL firing a substitute teacher for "wizardry" as the basis for an argument that all photos of minors should require a parent present to sign a release?

Some teacher in Florida had sex with her minor student. Should all classes nationwide be taught with parents present to make sure there is no orgy going on in the classrooms? Use some common sense.

People get kill every minute by cars but you still drive.

Heather Cruz wrote:
I am using common sense...as in "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure". All I was saying is that no matter what profession you are in, if you are dealing with minors, and more specifically, the parents of minors, covering your ass legally is your best bet. If that is something you chose not to do that is your own decision but it is not a problem that is confided to the models and photographers category as those two examples showed.

Common sense would dictate that you have a good understanding of the law to know what is legal and what is not legal and to act within the law. You can live your life in a bubble to prevent anything from happening or you can educate yourself on what is acceptable and act accordingly.

Having a parent sign a release in no way protects the photographer against inappropriate allegations. A model release is nothing more than a document addressing how images are to be used. It is not a rape shield or a get out of jail free card. It is also not a permission to shoot document.

daninredondo wrote:
There's no way for them to enforce that age limit.  I've seen models who were 13 and 14 with portfolios here.

If you know they are 13 or 14, they don't belong here. Report them in CAM.

-Jean- wrote:
Most of the discussion is about nude/questionable work.

The discussion is always about nude work but most people don't get it.  I doubt that there is anyone here shooting any nude or questionable photos of minors.

To me this is all about paranoia.  Behave yourself properly and stop worrying so much.

Alan from Aavian Prod wrote:

The discussion is always about nude work but most people don't get it.  I doubt that there is anyone here shooting any nude or questionable photos of minors.

To me this is all about paranoia.  Behave yourself properly and stop worrying so much.

Yes it's about paranoia, but I would say that it's not about our paranoia. but rather about society's. Seriously, the fact that the cops feel so strongly that everybody who would even think about shooting a minor is a potential kiddie pornographer says more about our warpoed society than it does about photographers.

Jade M Hernandez  wrote:
This is why I never shoot anyone under 18.

And thus you play right into the hands of those who claim that only perverts want to work with models under 18. By treating under-18s as some sort of sacred beings that "responsible photographers don't ever shoot" you thereby portray those of use who DO work with anybody who's look we like, be they 14 or 40, as (at best) irresponsible or (at worst) perverted molesters.

Christine Eadie wrote:
Sure, I'll work with them, but only if their parents are present, or if they have a notarized release from their parents and bring along an escort over the age of 18.
When I turned 17 yr old down, he told me he felt very "insulted."
Well, better for him to feel insulted than to take any chances.

I'd have shot with him for $100.



No need for parents, a release, or anything. If he wants pictures I'm here to take them!