Janice Marie Foote wrote:
No comparison, they're shot openly at a school with a line of people behind them!

What senior pictures are you doing? I take clients, and meet clients at many different locations for my senior pictures, and NEVER have a "line of people" behind them.

Janice Marie Foote wrote:
No comparison, they're shot openly at a school with a line of people behind them!

Maybe where you're at, but that's not how it works around here.

Andrew Thomas Designs wrote:
So what's your opinion about senior pictures?

Ha! Now you're talking!

Andrew Thomas Designs wrote:

Maybe where you're at, but that's not how it works around here.

One of you is talking about yearbook pictures, the other senior portraits.

Senior portraits are one of the biggest parts of retail photography.

LaurensAntoine 4 FHM wrote:
Senior portraits are one of the biggest parts of retail photography.

Thats what we are trying to point out.  There are alot of people on MM that just do not differentiate the kinds of images taken from ANY images taken of a "minor".

CGI Images wrote:
Thats what we are trying to point out.  There are alot of people on MM that just do not differentiate the kinds of images taken from ANY images taken of a "minor".

Bingo!

Click Hamilton wrote:

Ha! Now you're talking!

OT:
Click,
I just looked thru your port and thought I couldnt be entertained anymore and then I hit page 2 and saw this! Man you are hilarious! I would be hard pressed to pick a favorite, but the "me-n-u" was over the top!

Andrew Thomas Designs wrote:

So what's your opinion about senior pictures?

There is a big difference between senior pics, and picking up a underage model alone for a drive and shoot for 3 hours.

What planet are you living on?

natalie claire wrote:
I have had some photographers ask me to wear lingerie for a shoot which I politely declined, due to my age at the time and its not what I need for my port. 
I always wonder what they are thinking...
duh... do they really think they'll look good in an orange jumpsuit with little numbers painted on the front?

I'm going to take three deep breaths and pretend I didnt see that.. just let it go, just let it go..... in......out......in......out......in..... out....  There, I didnt see a thing.. I didnt see a thing!

CGI Images wrote:
Damn it.. I cant let it go.. 

Natalie, can you please explain to me how modeling lingerie/underwear done in the right way, is any different than these, which obviously you have no issue with.  But an underwear/lingerie ad would land the photographer in a "orange jumpsuit"?

Haha I noticed that to.

16 year old model check
latex check
killer heels check
Orange Jumpsuite negative

CGI Images wrote:
Damn it.. I cant let it go.. 

Natalie, can you please explain to me how modeling lingerie/underwear done in the right way, is any different than these, which obviously you have no issue with.  But an underwear/lingerie ad would land the photographer in a "orange jumpsuit"?

first of all I should have been clear when I talked about the lingerie I was asked to model, it was a chain mail bra and a thong and not for a legit ad.  I wouldn't mind shooting underwear, however when I think of lingerie, I think VS or Fredericks and at that time, being 16, it was not an option I wanted to consider.

As for the two pics you posted of me, I don't compare them to lingerie or underwear ads at all...beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and in this case maybe you see something I do not in these pics.  A beach pic while I was spinning around and a beautiful dress pic.. hmmmm nope I still don't see it.

natalie claire wrote:
first of all I should have been clear when I talked about the lingerie I was asked to model, it was a chain mail bra and a thong and not for a legit ad.  I wouldn't mind shooting underwear, however when I think of lingerie, I think VS or Fredericks and at that time, being 16, it was not an option I wanted to consider.

As for the two pics you posted of me, I don't compare them to lingerie or underwear ads at all...beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and in this case maybe you see something I do not in these pics.  A beach pic while I was spinning around and a beautiful dress pic.. hmmmm nope I still don't see it.

The difference is in the HOW, if you didnt feel right for you, thats fine.  But dont imply that any underwear/lingerie shoot with models under 18 would land the photographer in jail, thats FAR from the truth. 

And there are lots of VS or Fredericks style shots done with under 18 models that are perfectly legal.  Again its exactly in the how. 

Whether or not you think the company is cheesy and not a benifit to your port or career, thats a personal preference and perfectly respectable. But even a "thong" or even less doesnt make something illegal just based on age.

CGI Images wrote:

The difference is in the HOW, if you didnt feel right for you, thats fine.  But dont imply that any underwear/lingerie shoot with models under 18 would land the photographer in jail, thats FAR from the truth. 

And there are lots of VS or Fredericks style shots done with under 18 models that are perfectly legal.  Again its exactly in the how. 

Whether or not you think the company is cheesy and not a benifit to your port or career, thats a personal preference and perfectly respectable. But even a "thong" or even less doesnt make something illegal just based on age.

I was speaking about my own experience and not painting all photographers with that broad a brush to imply all would go to jail.

As for the legalities, I believe that is best left to those with degrees in that area, or you can always do a search on MM for "underage model in lingerie/nude" threads...
there are always plenty of those :-)

I'm done now... gotta get to classes.

Janice Marie Foote wrote:
No comparison, they're shot openly at a school with a line of people behind them!

CGI Images wrote:
What senior pictures are you doing? I take clients, and meet clients at many different locations for my senior pictures, and NEVER have a "line of people" behind them.

You're talking about senior portraits. She's clearly talking about yearbook photos, which are usually shot at cattle-call events on campus. Line 'em up, rush 'em through.

In my area, the school district has contracted with a studio that not only does the on-campus cattle-call shoots, but at the same time produces the barcoded photo-id card and tag each student carries at school.

Orca Bay Images wrote:

Janice Marie Foote wrote:
No comparison, they're shot openly at a school with a line of people behind them!

You're talking about senior portraits. She's clearly talking about yearbook photos, which are usually shot at cattle-call events on campus. Line 'em up, rush 'em through.

In my area, the school district has contracted with a studio that not only does the on-campus cattle-call shoots, but at the same time produces the barcoded photo-id card and tag each student carries at school.

Yeah, I know the difference, and the conversation was about senior "portraits" to begin with before she jumped in and defined them as open public at school events.

If you'll look back to the first page you'll see that.

They are two different things, but they both go on all the time without issue as well.

Andrew Thomas Designs wrote:
So what's your opinion about senior pictures?

Cherrystone wrote:
There is a big difference between senior pics, and picking up a underage model alone for a drive and shoot for 3 hours.

What planet are you living on?

No shit. And out until 1am with a minor, no less. And flirting with a minor on AIM? WTF???

Lumigraphics wrote:
We had the parents involved, shot age-appropriate material, and everybody had a wonderful time. Some of my best work came out of those sessions.

Lumigraphics sums it up nicely here. Have the parents attend, participate, keep the shoot age-appropriate AND get a model release and things will likely be just fine.  I shoot a ton of kids... as a matter of fact, every shoot this past month (see below for a couple) with only one exception was. Not a big deal at all if you approach it correctly!

Lumigraphics wrote:
I've shot with several minors. We had the parents involved, shot age-appropriate material, and everybody had a wonderful time.

I've only done one photoshoot with a minor, but it went quite well.  Mom was there, and big sister was in some of the pictures.  All innocent, of course.

shooter 88 wrote:
too much headache if they're under age

Hmmmm.....to this poster.....your loss...

To the OP:

Do you have your over 18 models sign releases?  It's just a matter of a legal signature, so if you have the over 18's sign, I would imagine you'd have the under 18's legal guardian sign....In any case, any model under 18 should have a parent/legal guardian with them....period.  I accompany Megan on EVERY shoot.  This protects her and the photographer.  There are a lot of dishonest people out there who would cry wolf out there, and it seems to me that a photographer would want to protect his reputation.  On the flip side, there are creepy photographers out there that would take advantage of a young girl.  My point is - if you are shooting under 18, and have a rule that a parent/guardian is present - getting a signature shouldn't be an issue.  Why should that be a "headache" if everyone is protected????

Just my 2 cents as a parent of a 16 year old model....

Cindy

PS - I realize that there may be big agency shoots where a parent is not permitted with their minor child - and that is not what I am referring to here....

John Jebbia wrote:
Do the shoot. Keep your weener in your pants, and you'll do just fine.

Thank you for being completely irrelevant to the OP's question.