Mirror With A Memory wrote:
I don't know why guys are so fixated on these  underage girls.

And there you go - a perfect example.

The thread is about "I don't know why guys are SHOOTING underage girls" and someone changes is to "I don't know why guys are SO FIXATED on underage girls" and no one bats and eyelash at the manipulation.


We react to this thread with "there's no reason underage is an issue, so the only reason to be worried is if you're doing something wrong."

That's in correct. The reason to be worried is that right in the middle of this someone can stir the pot with an intentional manipulation and not get called out on it. When it comes to the underage thing, people can't see when and how they get manipulated by a third party.

This is not an underage girl making the statement "Why are you so fixated on me?" This is a third party who has no idea what's in anyone else's head and can have no way of knowing if anyone is "fixated" - other than themselves of course.

Google 180 degree lying/lies or 180 degree rule.

It sounds paranoid until you witness it first hand and you know the facts and can watch people react to a 180 degree lie.

Kevin Alex Photography wrote:
I was always taught to get a model release signed. This includes parental signature or legal guardian if under the legal age to legally self represent. If the question is, should I do this, you have the answer. Not 100% sure on the possible legal ramifications teetering towards the worst but, why take the chance? Plenty of legal aged models out there.

The worse case scenario: you do a shoot with an under aged model, she (or he) decides to use the photographer as a cash cow and shouts RAPE! Who do you think the courts will believe given the scenario? Your word against an under age model with no witnesses. Four words, SOAP ON A ROPE.

SOOOOOOOOOO, people of age NEVER do this????   I find it amusing that people seem to think that actions of someone under 18 never happen over the age of 18.. 

Not to mention, can anyone cite a link as to how many school photography companies photographers have been sued because they acted inappropriately with a minor? Given the number of minors photographed by these type of companies, I'm thinking it's pretty low..

Digitoxin wrote:

Irrelevant.

ANYONE of ANY AGE can make ANY allegation.

I am not a teen.

If I wanted to allege that my dentist fondled me, I could.

Age is irrelevant.  As is the link to that story in this thread.

But the reaction is different depending on how close the story fits a stereo type.

You want to get away with shooting your wife in a racist city like Boston? Have your brother do it, wing you, and tell the police it was a black guy like Charles Stuart did it. Racisim was so strong at the time that there were no objections, even from black males, when the police stopped nearly 100% wihtout probable cause in a 3-4 day period. That's when it became clear and Stuart eventually confessed.

People are easily manipulated by stereo typical stories, especially with a 180 lie.

Digitoxin wrote:

Why is your analysis limited to underage models?  Why not 22 year old female models or 19 year old male models?  Both of them can assert the same allegations, right?  And, before you head down the path that "underage girls are more prone to make allegations......" ..... Please be sure to back that assertion up with actual compiled statistics......

It's not that they are more prone to make them it's that everyone else is more prone to believing them - especially when a camera and older, male photographer is involved.

Art of the nude wrote:

Why?  If it MIGHT be an issue, why not just protect yourself, there is no downside.

That's not what it's for.  It DOES show, in the case of a minor, that the parent was aware of the shoot and consented to it, which can't be a bad thing.  NOTHING can prevent "false allegations or inaccurate perceptions" 100%.  Being, and appearing to be, totally professional can help.

If it MIGHT be an issue you should protect yourself.

The thing is using a photo in a portfolio without a release is NOT an issue.


There's no relevance to the parent being aware of the shoot. There are either allegations or no allegations, which are either real or not. Documentation that a parent was aware of the shoot would only weaken a defense against false allegations.

If there were false allegations a parents awareness of the shoot is not going to change what they say.

patrick otoole wrote:
Hi All.
So the age old topic....

So I'm setting up a shoot...and I contact a newby model on MM
who is currently 17.
I tell her...that of course if she is 17 day of shooting...a parent (or guardian) needs to sign a release AND attend the shoot.

I got this interesting reply....

"Okay well my dad is the one that takes care of me and he's in a wheelchair because he doesn't have legs. He usually talks on the phone to the photographers or writes them a note. "

I can only image what the 'note from her dad' must be.

I'm NOT planning to work with her now...but...
it sounds like many other photographers have.

Thoughts anyone??

I'd be afraid for the photographers...
and if a minor IS shooting with photographers (alone)..I'd be afraid for the model too!!

Why????   Do you have bad thoughts or intentions?  My dad was a school teacher and a coach.  He worked with kids 17 and younger a lot while working for a high school.  Then he got a job teaching inside a State prison.  One thing he did say was that at least in the prison, you didn't have to worry about students cutting class or bringing weapons like some kids do now in high school.   

I have photographed so many minors over the years that I honestly don't know how many, but out of my last and most recent photo shoots, 2 out of the 3 were minor aged (16-17) ... so I don't know where you get the idea that shooting a 17 year old (with a camera) is going to get you prison time??!!?


Also, why do you doubt her dad is in a wheelchair?

Charger Photography wrote:
I worked with lots of underage models.... the youngest one 15... all of them in my port... I just shoot age appropiate stuff... no problems.. sometimes without a parent... Don't understand the paranoia.

I don't either!  When I worked for retail portrait studios, teens with money came in all the time without parents.  I also have shot minor aged "models" many times with or without a parent present as a mutual choice between the parent and myself.

Garry k wrote:
what is wrong with say going to meet the father ?

This being the most obvious solution to me.  There is no reason to be afraid of minors ... unless they give you some.  I don't think I'm the greatest at photography, as I know there are many here better than me, but one thing I am good at is communication.  Sometimes being good at communication give an edge over other more skilled photographers.

Presley ONeil wrote:
This shit again?
If you don't trust a minor, don't shoot her. I don't care what she looks like. Why is it that important? She'll be 18 in under a year yes? And there are plenty of people over 18 you can bear to shoot until then yes? Problem solved-.-

I have female friends on my facebook that I started photographing them when they were ages 16, 14 and even one woman who was a 9 year old singer when I first photographed her promo and modeling shots.  All these women were photographed by me at various stages of their lives with or without parents present while under age ... and all of them are adults as old as in their 30's now!  We've known each other that long, and it is a wonderful feeling knowing we've got that strong of friendship and trust.  These are priceless long standing friendships! 

But I know something about how important communication is.  I also know that no matter what age anyone is, that it takes WORK to build a trusting relationship with people you work with.   I was kidnapped by two adult women right after photographing one of them, but then I met them at a nightclub.  It only happened once, so I learned my lesson!  Don't go looking for models at clubs or bars!  Maybe the playgrounds are safer?  Just joking! 

Capitol City Boudoir wrote:
I shoot underage, particularily 17 year old females all the time in the studio.  Most of the time without a parent.

They're called SENIOR PORTRAITS.  Just keep the concepts age appropriate and have your assistant stick close by.

Yeah, senior portraits, I've done hundreds of those! 

Sometimes I get paid.  Sometimes I pay the models.  Then many times I've shot TFP.  When it comes to modeling releases, I often get those signed, but not always ... because not every shoot calls for a model release.

SweetGirlyGirl wrote:
My advice would be just to tell you'd like to shoot with her once she's 18. Then she can sign her own model release.

tell that to this girl



not my shot, but I've shot her walking for several collections, including one at Fashoin Week last weekend.  yup. I'm gonna delete all my pics and tell ELLE and VOGUE ITALIA they are all going to jail!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Patrick Walberg wrote:

I have female friends on my facebook that I started photographing them when they were ages 16, 14 and even one woman who was a 9 year old singer when I first photographed her promo and modeling shots.  All these women were photographed by me at various stages of their lives with or without parents present while under age ... and all of them are adults as old as in their 30's now!  We've known each other that long, and it is a wonderful feeling knowing we've got that strong of friendship and trust.  These are priceless long standing friendships! 

But I know something about how important communication is.  I also know that no matter what age anyone is, that it takes WORK to build a trusting relationship with people you work with.   I was kidnapped by two adult women right after photographing one of them, but then I met them at a nightclub.  It only happened once, so I learned my lesson!  Don't go looking for models at clubs or bars!  Maybe the playgrounds are safer?  Just joking! 

I know, I get that YOU can responsibly shoot minors Patrick, I was just saying for these people who consistently have trouble figuring it out why do it at all? Just don't bother and wait until she's a certain age.

faltered wrote:
I shoot minors all the time in fashion. If you're not shooting minors you're not shooting high end fashion.

Mirror With A Memory wrote:
I don't know why guys are so fixated on these  underage girls.

He's right. Why are you so fixated on underage girls? That's probably why you shoot in the first place - just to be around underage girls.

A photo doesn't have to be sexually explicit to be child pornography, it just has to sexualize them and what fashion isn't about sexualizing the subject, so you're admitting to shooting child porn in public.

Is that really your thing shooting child pornography? Are you a child pornographer?



Do you see how easy it is to create an association between someone who shoots a minor in a professional manner and someone doing it in a pervy manner?

And this post will be searchable on google with your MM name and someone asking you if your real motivation is to shoot child pornography. Google "faltered child pornographer" and you come up now.

All it takes is for someone to say that "questions have been raised publically about faltered being a child pornographer" and people think it's probably not true, but why take the chance? And then a week later a model flakes and makes up a story about you and now it's back to back stories and people wonder what is this guy doing that stories keep coming up?

Most people don't have the time, energy, motivation, skill or intelligence to sort fact from fiction and now you're getting less enthusiastic recommendations or people think "I know someone, but I don't want to take the chance of being the one to accidentally recommend the perv." and they don't mention you to someone who would have hired you if your name came up.

Or someone asks one of your clients why the hire a photographer who's known to shoot underage girls and they don't want their brand associated with what that question implies. They may know for certain that nothing is wrong, but decide to look out for themselves first.


When people say "false accusations" they're not worried about the accusation, they're worried about the effect. The police will see right through a false accusation, so nothing will happen legally. It's the spreading of the story that's the problem. And, false accusations can be made by a third party who doesn't have to prove anything, just create doubt.

Charger Photography wrote:
I worked with lots of underage models.... the youngest one 15... all of them in my port... I just shoot age appropiate stuff... no problems.. sometimes without a parent... Don't understand the paranoia.

Uhhh...just took a peek at your port. Saw only a few images that would be considered age appropriate for the "lots of" underage girls.

I would be very paranoid if I were you.

Kevin Alex Photography wrote:

WHAT! Clearly you aren't getting the point of the conversation here. Or perhaps you're running a fantasy in your mind.

My reasoning for bringing up model releases was what appears to be my mistaken in giving people credit in thinking that the idea of such a scenario is mute in this particular topic.

Man I forgot how people just love to comment for the sake of commenting.

I understand the point, the conversation, and the thread quite clearly. There are two things that some people don't seem to understand in these types of threads.

1. A signed release does not provide ANY LEGAL PROTECTION against criminal accusations.

2. The age of an accuser is only relevant if the accused is claiming the "act" was consensual.  Outside of that, anyone of any age can claim someone molested, raped, robbed, abused, etc.

patrick otoole wrote:
Hi All.
So the age old topic....

So I'm setting up a shoot...and I contact a newby model on MM
who is currently 17.
I tell her...that of course if she is 17 day of shooting...a parent (or guardian) needs to sign a release AND attend the shoot.

I got this interesting reply....

"Okay well my dad is the one that takes care of me and he's in a wheelchair because he doesn't have legs. He usually talks on the phone to the photographers or writes them a note. "

I can only image what the 'note from her dad' must be.

I'm NOT planning to work with her now...but...
it sounds like many other photographers have.

Thoughts anyone??

I'd be afraid for the photographers...
and if a minor IS shooting with photographers (alone)..I'd be afraid for the model too!!

Big Red Flag!

Little Queenie wrote:
Uhhh...just took a peek at your port. Saw only a few images that would be considered age appropriate for the "lots of" underage girls.

I would be very paranoid if I were you.

What he shows here vs his entire body of work can be two completely different things.  You should be embarrased for making such a suggestion against him.

see below

Christopher Hartman wrote:
What he shows here vs his entire body of work can be two completely different things.  You should be embarrased for making such a suggestion against him.

Hey, he said all of them were in his port. Maybe a stupid assumption but he should clarify.

Little Queenie wrote:
Hey, he said all of them were in his port. Maybe a stupid assumption but he should clarify.

Nevermind...I can see how his post can make one go

Kneejerk reaction on my part...

Little Queenie wrote:
Hey, he said all of them were in his port. Maybe a stupid assumption but he should clarify.

I don't see the confusion.  Having all of the underage llamas he has worked with represented in his portfolio here is not the same as all of his portfolio being underage llamas.

Christopher Hartman wrote:
Nevermind...I can see how his post can make one go

Kneejerk reaction on my part...

It's cool. I checked out the profiles of some of the llamas. The younger ones say they are "19."


It shocks me how little caution some people use. I've had photographers and artists not even ask me for ID, ask me for ID and not document it by scanning, photographing or copying it. One can get themselves in a bunch of hot water if they don't use some precaution.

Little Queenie wrote:
It's cool. I checked out the profiles of some of the llamas. The younger ones say they are "19."


It shocks me how little caution some people use. I've had photographers and artists not even ask me for ID, ask me for ID and not document it by scanning, photographing or copying it. One can get themselves in a bunch of hot water if they don't use some precaution.

If they are doing 18  work, I think they have some legal requirements to get that identification.

Robert Lynch wrote:

I don't see the confusion.  Having all of the underage models h e has worked with represented in his portfolio here is not the same as all of his portfolio being underage models.

That was not what I was saying. I said the few photos that would be age appropriate (as in they actually have clothes on) would be questionable. Again, he should clarify. I'm not trying to attack the guy, he just needs to be careful of what he says.

Christopher Hartman wrote:

If they are doing 18+ work, I think they have some legal requirements to get that identification.

Exactly. Better safe than sorry in this industry. Especially when it involves provocative and hardly clothed barely 18ers.

Charger Photography wrote:
I worked with lots of underage models.... the youngest one 15... all of them in my port... I just shoot age appropiate stuff... no problems.. sometimes without a parent... Don't understand the paranoia.

Exactly. Don't have them naked and what's the problem?

MC Photo wrote:
He's right. Why are you so fixated on underage girls? That's probably why you shoot in the first place - just to be around underage girls.

A photo doesn't have to be sexually explicit to be child pornography, it just has to sexualize them and what fashion isn't about sexualizing the subject, so you're admitting to shooting child porn in public.

Is that really your thing shooting child pornography? Are you a child pornographer?

Do you see how easy it is to create an association between someone who shoots a minor in a professional manner and someone doing it in a pervy manner?

And this post will be searchable on google with your MM name and someone asking you if your real motivation is to shoot child pornography. Google "faltered child pornographer" and you come up now.

All it takes is for someone to say that "questions have been raised publically about faltered being a child pornographer" and people think it's probably not true, but why take the chance? And then a week later a model flakes and makes up a story about you and now it's back to back stories and people wonder what is this guy doing that stories keep coming up?

Most people don't have the time, energy, motivation, skill or intelligence to sort fact from fiction and now you're getting less enthusiastic recommendations or people think "I know someone, but I don't want to take the chance of being the one to accidentally recommend the perv." and they don't mention you to someone who would have hired you if your name came up.

Or someone asks one of your clients why the hire a photographer who's known to shoot underage girls and they don't want their brand associated with what that question implies. They may know for certain that nothing is wrong, but decide to look out for themselves first.


When people say "false accusations" they're not worried about the accusation, they're worried about the effect. The police will see right through a false accusation, so nothing will happen legally. It's the spreading of the story that's the problem. And, false accusations can be made by a third party who doesn't have to prove anything, just create doubt.

I've read your post several times and can't make sense of it. Are you really implying that my type of shooting is "child pornography"? Are you really asking me if I'm a "child pornographer"?  Have you read my single post in this thread? I think you're making the assumption that you and I are equal photographers, but I'm being paid by designers to shoot minors for campaigns or occasionally by a agency for someone on the new faces board, I'm not paying the model like yourself.

MC Photo wrote:

A photo doesn't have to be sexually explicit to be child pornography, it just has to sexualize them and what fashion isn't about sexualizing the subject, so you're admitting to shooting child porn in public.

FALTERED WROTE:
so you believe all fashion photography is sexualization and therefore any fashion photography with a minor is child porn? So whenever I shoot for Target, Gap, Gap Kids, Pac Sun, or a editorial assignment for Teen Vogue with minors I'm shooting child porn?

Seriously dude, sober up.

MC Photo wrote:

So with threads like this I've stopped wondering why.

faltered wrote:

I've read your post several times and can't make sense of it. Are you really implying that my type of shooting is "child pornography"? Are you really asking me if I'm a "child pornographer"?  Have you read my single post in this thread? I think you're making the assumption that you and I are equal photographers, but I'm being paid by designers to shoot minors for campaigns or occasionally by a agency for someone on the new faces board, I'm not paying the model like yourself.

No I'm not seriously asking you that, but do you see how people can ask that question based on nothing at all?

If you believed it was a serious question, while there's an explanation in the post that it's an example, then you should be able to see how other people could believe it's a serious question.

You're career could be trashed by suggestion of wrong doing by someone who wasn't even present.

If you're getting calls from agencies it's probably because of what someone said after shooting with you more than the quality of your work. Finding people who can do the work is easy. Finding people who can do it and are professional is much harder.

But just as easy as someone could help you they can say something that will stop the calls from coming and it's very easy to manipulate people with the word "underage". That's what people are paranoid about.

twoharts wrote:
we've done shoots with minors no problem. sometimes the parents just drop them off and don't stick around for the shoot. sometimes the minors just come by themselves. as long as it's age-appropriate and you keep your language age-appropriate it doesn't have to be a big deal. lots of senior picture shoots happen without the parents tagging along.

if a 17 year old (or their parent) wants anything racy then they have to wait.

This exactly.  Just keep it age appropriate.

Art of the nude wrote:
As far as your situation, if I REALLY liked her look, I'd offer to bring the lights to her place, and shoot her with dad there.

+1