Hair Stylist
DoomBunny
Posts: 487
Indianapolis, Indiana, US
Conceptually Black wrote:
Maybe he likes Terry Richardson "style" shoots. I lol'd for real.
Also, the horrible thread that just won't die.
Photographer
JStone
Posts: 645
Chicago, Illinois, US
Chris Baylor wrote:
17 on film will likely get you 5-10 in full lockdown with some very bad company.
And for what.. proof in court? Michelle Johnson 17 yo topless in Blame it on Rio
Cynthia Myers 17 yo Nude in playboy
Jessica Biel 17 yo nude in Maxim
Thora Birch 17 yo topless in American Beauty
theres more to prove the ignorance of the masses but I think thats enough...
Photographer
JStone
Posts: 645
Chicago, Illinois, US
A minor in many jurisdictions can be completely nude without being illegal. If the photo is 'obscene' judged by community standards then its illegal.
Read a case in Illinois showing completely nude minors with a 30 something yo male. Nude male next to nude female minor in the river - not illegal. Nude male erect with female minor face near male - illegal.
Each state varies based on their law. Generally its what I said in the first sentence. Thats why museums stay open and depict cherubs (naked babies).
Photographer
D K P
Posts: 43
Loughborough, England, United Kingdom
-jmp- wrote:
Yeah I'm feeling I shouldn't have asked the model this, but again, with the shots she has in a swim suit I can't help but wonder what the big deal is. Apparently everyone else replying to this is borderline offended by me even asking, but I'm still trying to understand why it's wrong. And if it is so wrong, why swimsuits aren't wrong.
Isn't shooting a model in a two-piece swimsuit up against a wall the same intent of showing her body as shooting her in bra and panties up against a wall? Or is the viewer somehow comforted in the thought that maybe the swimwear image was shot in a studio in Miami and maybe they were about to go to the beach after the photo shoot? Are minors even allowed to be shot in swimwear? I know I wouldn't be happy with doing that and I'm new to this trade too.
Wouldn't it be easier on you as a photographer just to stick with models 18 or older for any type of 'suggestive' shoot and yes, even swimsuits (tankini/bikini/one piece) I would count as suggestive because they show alot of upper thigh area and cleavage.
I wouldnt want to shoot anything that made a minor look sexual.
Didi. (from England so a minor here is counted as anyone under the age of 18, maybe in America and other countries laws are different)
Photographer
mwaka photography
Posts: 179
Rapid City, South Dakota, US
As long as it doesnt show anything and isnt sexual in nature (i.e. her making out with another girl and grabbing each other in places) then i think you should be fine. if you want to use it for commercial use get the parents to sign a release. people will probly not like it and you will probly get harassed about it. Like the little cheerleaders that dressed provocative and did a dance to single ladies people were outraged by it. To be safe probly stay away from anything that can be percived as sexual in nature. (lingerie = Sex in alot of peoples minds)
Photographer
Barry Kidd Photography
Posts: 3351
Red Lion, Pennsylvania, US
JStone wrote:
Michelle Johnson 17 yo topless in Blame it on Rio
Cynthia Myers 17 yo Nude in playboy
Jessica Biel 17 yo nude in Maxim
Thora Birch 17 yo topless in American Beauty
theres more to prove the ignorance of the masses but I think thats enough... Don't forget good old Brook Shields. She can't be left out.
From the age of 12 you would wonder if she knew what clothes were. Not sure if she did nudes before Pretty Baby but she sure did a lot of nude work after that.
Strange Movie. At least I thought so.
Photographer
Magic Image Photography
Posts: 3606
Temple City, California, US
-jmp- wrote:
= bad form??
Just curious. I'm wanting to work with a 17 yr old and asked her to bring lingerie to shoot in and didn't think twice about it. She said she doesn't do lingerie shoots, but she has a couple of shots in her portfolio with her in a swimsuit and got me all confused-like.
Do you think it's taboo to shoot minors in lingerie because of the word "lingerie"?? Maybe lingerie implies some uber seductive glamour images.. which isn't the idea at all... Are two piece swimsuits just more acceptable although they show the same if not more skin? Hmmm...
The model is bringing her mom, of course, and I backed off and said we'd just shoot the fashion images... but I'm still confused... I've never really encountered this before and would love to hear your thoughts. The word Lingerie sugjest in the bedroom where swimsuit would implie at the beach. It's like This model has Breast milk for my coffee or should i just get some from the dairy.
Two totally different kinds of milk buddy.
Photographer
Pure Visions Photograph
Posts: 1507
Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
I got up to page four then lost interest tbh.
Too much BS and fluffing around really.
OP, if you are asking a model to bring underwear to a shoot to change into for the clothes that go over the top it is not a problem and is a given. I have it on my website on my rundown shoot tips. "Please bring a matching pair of bra and panties in white, black and nude".
Don't see a problem with that.
However, as you might have realised it is a very fine line to cross on whether or not you are shooting a minor in something that is deemed to be adult in nature. If the underwear looks like it belongs on an adult but it is on a minor then it can be seen as a perception of portraying a minor in an adult way (sexualising) and that is a very hairy situation.
Lingerie comes in many shapes and forms. Lingerie is NOT the same as undergarments. You can easilly look that up in the Oxford Dictionary definitions.
Lordie, you have Teddies, see-through panties, french knickers, boyshorts, g-strings, c-strings, briefs, low cut briefs, push up bras, lace, cotton, pvc, corsets, suspenders.... they all fall under the wordings of "Lingerie".
TBH, there are many issues that have come up with this thread, whether it is double-talk, or just the OP thinking in different lines as it progresses I have no idea and frankly don't really care that much.
OP, don't shoot in something that can be portrayed as Bedroom attire on a Minor. It'd just save you a hell of a lot of grief.
Model
Jennifer R K
Posts: 729
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
I agree with the difference people have pointed out earlier. It is not about the skin, it is about the context.
SWIMSUITS are worn by people of all ages in public places.
LINGERIE is worn in private places and intimate situations.
By the way, most 17 year olds I've ever known don't even own matching lingerie sets.
Model
Abigail Rose Hill
Posts: 540
Newcastle upon Tyne, England, United Kingdom
D K P wrote:
Are minors even allowed to be shot in swimwear? I know I wouldn't be happy with doing that and I'm new to this trade too. Yeah, they are. A friend of mine is 17 (it's not even like she will be 18 soon) has comfortably shot in lingerie and some of it has been way too sexual for her age. Admittedly she's one of those that doesn't look her age, but it looked like she was glamour modelling which is wrong IMO for anyone under 18 regardless of how old they look.
Photographer
D K P
Posts: 43
Loughborough, England, United Kingdom
Abi Hill wrote:
Yeah, they are. A friend of mine is 17 (it's not even like she will be 18 soon) has comfortably shot in lingerie and some of it has been way too sexual for her age. Admittedly she's one of those that doesn't look her age, but it looked like she was glamour modelling which is wrong IMO for anyone under 18 regardless of how old they look. Thankyou Abi for telling me, to be honest I wouldn't have had a clue and if a minor had asked me to shoot swimwear with her, I would have said no to play safe. Its a very controversial issue I guess, there are so many boundaries that could easily be crossed and all this over clothing garments. I'm glad that I've stated that minors should bring a guardian to any shoot I do with them. As you can tell, I'm probably being OTT but I don't want to get into trouble whilst I'm still new to this.
Is there a law/list (England) somewhere that states what photographers can shoot regarding minors? Something like that would be very educational for me.
Photographer
Brooklyn Bridge Images
Posts: 13200
Brooklyn, New York, US
Wow only 11 pages u guys are slowin down
I would have expected this to top 20 by now
Model
Abigail Rose Hill
Posts: 540
Newcastle upon Tyne, England, United Kingdom
D K P wrote:
Thankyou Abi for telling me, to be honest I wouldn't have had a clue and if a minor had asked me to shoot swimwear with her, I would have said no to play safe. Its a very controversial issue I guess, there are so many boundaries that could easily be crossed and all this over clothing garments. I'm glad that I've stated that minors should bring a guardian to any shoot I do with them. As you can tell, I'm probably being OTT but I don't want to get into trouble whilst I'm still new to this.
Is there a law/list (England) somewhere that states what photographers can shoot regarding minors? Something like that would be very educational for me. No problem DiDi
With regards the law I haven't come across anything beyond saying you can't shoot a minor nude (stating the obvious!) but there may well be something lurking in some clause of a lesser known law. I've seen plenty of shoots that would fall foul of it that's for sure. My friend's shots did come out very glamour-esque but that is the sort of look her styling lends itself to, despite her age.
I think there probably is a way of shooting a minor in swimwear without it being seen as over-sexy, but it needs the talent to be there to find it. Lingerie i'm not so sure about...possibly the connotations as soon as someone says lingerie (my mum was worried about this when I shot in my corset, and i'm 18!)
Photographer
D K P
Posts: 43
Loughborough, England, United Kingdom
Abi Hill wrote:
No problem DiDi
With regards the law I haven't come across anything beyond saying you can't shoot a minor nude (stating the obvious!) but there may well be something lurking in some clause of a lesser known law. I've seen plenty of shoots that would fall foul of it that's for sure. My friend's shots did come out very glamour-esque but that is the sort of look her styling lends itself to, despite her age.
I think there probably is a way of shooting a minor in swimwear without it being seen as over-sexy, but it needs the talent to be there to find it. Lingerie i'm not so sure about...possibly the connotations as soon as someone says lingerie (my mum was worried about this when I shot in my corset, and i'm 18!) Looks like I'll be just doing lingerie shoots for you over 18s and maybe think about swimwear and under 18s when I'm a bit more experienced when it comes to whats right and whats not.
ps: fingers crossed for good results with those exams.
Photographer
Studio LWP
Posts: 525
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
This site is filled with a bunch of nervous nellies and amateur attorneys. Let's not give legal advice should we not have an expertise in the field. The best thing to do is solicit legal advice from an expert in your area (you're in NYC so that shouldn't be too difficult) and ignore the legal ramblings offered in this forum. None of the users of this forum are going to represent you in court so such advice is meaningless. Advice and Legal Counsel received for free is usually worth the price you paid to obtain it.
There are so many variables to consider and one has to choose his/her own path. The context of any such images would be paramount in my opinion. Are they boudoir/bedroom images or being shot in a very basic catalog style? How and where are these images going to be used? Are these images for the model's myspace, facebook account or has her agency directed her to create images for their site?
Is their a legal risk in creating these images; would the risk be worth the reward and what is the reward? I'm sure you can create images that you feel are completely innocuous and benign but you can still be judged in the court of public opinion. Would the negative attention build or bust your career?
Photographer
glamourglenn
Posts: 865
Lancaster, Pennsylvania, US
Post hidden on Jul 30, 2010 08:43 pm Reason: violates rules Comments: Please do not post deliberate misinformation in the forums.
Photographer
D K P
Posts: 43
Loughborough, England, United Kingdom
Light Writing Photo wrote:
This site is filled with a bunch of nervous nellies and amateur attorneys. Let's not give legal advice should we not have an expertise in the field. The best thing to do is solicit legal advice from an expert in your area (you're in NYC so that shouldn't be too difficult) and ignore the legal ramblings offered in this forum. None of the users of this forum are going to represent you in court so such advice is meaningless. Advice and Legal Counsel received for free is usually worth the price you paid to obtain it.
There are so many variables to consider and one has to choose his/her own path. The context of any such images would be paramount in my opinion. Are they boudoir/bedroom images or being shot in a very basic catalog style? How and where are these images going to be used? Are these images for the model's myspace, facebook account or has her agency directed her to create images for their site?
Is their a legal risk in creating these images; would the risk be worth the reward and what is the reward? I'm sure you can create images that you feel are completely innocuous and benign but you can still be judged in the court of public opinion. Would the negative attention build or bust your career? How very assertive of you to say but you're right, no one on here is trained in law to be honest and different countries project different laws. I have every right to be nervous. Photographers have to be careful, if they do the slightest thing wrong, they have a very expensive lawsuit on their hands.
|
