ward wrote:
I have shot minors...with and without a parent present, both agency repped and non-agency models. I'm not sure what the big issue is for people if you have a 'team' there with you for hair, makeup, styling etc, and if you are professional and reputable and trustworthy. This should be a non-issue.

Well I do run a fully staffed studio, so there is actually never a time when its only me and a model. But even so, down the line, if one were so unfortunate as to have to explain this to a judge, the letter of the law is such that I believe that I would be on the wrong side of the matter.

Alternate Endings Photo wrote:
I recently made arrangements with a model for a TFCD shoot. I approached her to shoot. After a few talks, we made arrangements to shoot. Everything was good. THEN she tells me shes only 17, and that her port, is inaccurate.
So I let her know that she cannot shoot unless her legal guardian is PRESENT at the shoot. Not stopping by, no permission slips, no phone call...HAS TO be present.
She bawks at this and says it won't work. I ask to speak to her mom on the phone. Her mom says she lets her shoot all the time, and the mom never goes. I say "sorry I cannot shoot".
Then the mom says "My daughter goes to Glamour Shots and I never go with her. She does casual and swim suit and even came home with pics in her underwear! How is this different?"
I told her I imagined that it was because she was a customer, not a working model, but really I have no idea.
So what i'm wondering is:
I understand that as a photog hiring a minor - it requires the guardian to be present, like along the lines of supervision and whatever else minors have to do to work (work permit?) I don't even know.
But when said minor is a customer, as in paying me to shoot them, what kind of situation is that? Now the mom wants to "pay" me a small small sum to shoot her daughter and call herself a customer of mine, as opposed to a contracted model (indicating pay or tfcd).
What the hell?
I'm guessing that since I need to ask, its probably not right. Though the mom makes a point, in some wierd way...

to me if you do the shoot you might be looking for trouble. and the fact the mom needs to sign the model release. I have shoot alot of minors and no parent, no shoot...... there is also times I will set up a video camera way in the back on a tripod for one just for a record kind of like cover your ass and two so that I can learn from my own shoot.and like my mom always said "if Glamour Shots jumps off a bridge would you" just because they do it does not make it ok. hope this helps.

Alternate Endings Photo wrote:
Still, legally, what is the answer? Always wrong to shoot a minor with no legal guardian?
Then how does (that mall photography studio) get away with it? It must be ok in some sense, I'm just curious as to the finer points of it, or exact wording of the law.
Is it because you don't need to be an adult to be a customer? And does paying me for a minor shoot, exempt the situation? Or is it always wrong?

No.. it's not illegal to shoot a minor without a legal guardian present (I questioned the agency and that was the response I got) The reason the guardian is present more times than not, is to protect the model as well as the photographer.

What can and often does happen when a minor is being photographed and no legal guardian is present that everyone is so afraid of? Inappropriate poses, clothing.. resulting in inappropriate shots. (which is the illegal part)  Also.. the "she said, he said" comes into play.

Just make sure you have a staff present at all shoots - (even those not involving minors) and don't do anything you would even question as appropriate - (this doesn't just apply to the photography.. this extends to language, actions, illegal substances etc.)

ward wrote:
I have shot minors...with and without a parent present, both agency repped and non-agency models. I'm not sure what the big issue is for people if you have a 'team' there with you for hair, makeup, styling etc, and if you are professional and reputable and trustworthy. This should be a non-issue.

Likewise...maybe its less of an issue since I am female, but I've picked girls up at grampas house (whom she lived with) with my stylist in tow (male) and drove off for a 10 hour day...returning them safe and sound at the end of the night. G'pa signed off on release without ever seeing photos. Granted I shoot fashion editorial mainly, and there was nothing to be concerned with...but I shoot without parents all the time.

The key? The parent/guardian has met me, or driven the model to the shoot, or the agency has dropped them off.

Bryanna Nicole wrote:
Being the mother of a minor - I go with her to every shoot - however, this latest endeavor of hers, the contest she was in.. they told us we weren't allowed to be there - I was a little uncomfortable with that.. but she was fine. Go figure.

Also - I have been doing wardrobe styling for a while now.. I can't tell you how many times a 15 yr old agency model shows up all by herself.. aaaaaaaaand.. we don't know her age until I ask (must be the mom in me)

I just can't believe these agencies don't tell the testing photogs their ages.. I mean, don't they worry about their models? What happens if something happens???

In truth - it has actually made me question the industry and it's practices in regards to my daughter, I know I can't always be there and be her protector, but I also feel as a minor and a "employee" of the agency, they should be taking responsibility.

I know I got a little off your topic.. but - I guess what it all boils down to is this - how you handle the situation and is the model worth having a full crew present to protect yourself? 

Yes - protect yourself, be certain to have others present at the shoot (MUA and/or hair, wardrobe.. a female assisitant is always wise too - asures you never have to physically touch the model to adjust clothing, hair..etc)
- be smart, don't shoot anything not age appropriate, even if the model asks you to.

Good luck ;o)

Tracy

If you are talking about agency testing, the agency probably feels comfortable with the photographer they are sending the models to. You don't get to test with agencies without meeting with them first and I doubt they send their minors to photographers whom they have had little experience with anyways.

Personally, I do request that I either meet the parents before hand or that they come to the shoot (internet TFP shoots). I have rarely had a shoot with a minor work out because of this requirement which leads me to believe that most of the underage internet models have parents that are likely unaware of their child's modeling. My reason is less to do with fear of legal issues than it is in knowing the parents are aware of their child's interests. Who wants to be the photographer that gets a phone call from a parent that is upset with their child's activities and needs someone to take it out on.

Bryanna Nicole wrote:
Being the mother of a minor - I go with her to every shoot - however, this latest endeavor of hers, the contest she was in.. they told us we weren't allowed to be there - I was a little uncomfortable with that.. but she was fine. Go figure.

Also - I have been doing wardrobe styling for a while now.. I can't tell you how many times a 15 yr old agency model shows up all by herself.. aaaaaaaaand.. we don't know her age until I ask (must be the mom in me)

I just can't believe these agencies don't tell the testing photogs their ages.. I mean, don't they worry about their models? What happens if something happens???

In truth - it has actually made me question the industry and it's practices in regards to my daughter, I know I can't always be there and be her protector, but I also feel as a minor and a "employee" of the agency, they should be taking responsibility.

I know I got a little off your topic.. but - I guess what it all boils down to is this - how you handle the situation and is the model worth having a full crew present to protect yourself? 

Yes - protect yourself, be certain to have others present at the shoot (MUA and/or hair, wardrobe.. a female assisitant is always wise too - asures you never have to physically touch the model to adjust clothing, hair..etc)
- be smart, don't shoot anything not age appropriate, even if the model asks you to.

Good luck ;o)

Tracy

It is because the agencies aren't the ones making the big deal out of it.  Others are.

Alternate Endings Photo wrote:
Well I do run a fully staffed studio, so there is actually never a time when its only me and a model. But even so, down the line, if one were so unfortunate as to have to explain this to a judge, the letter of the law is such that I believe that I would be on the wrong side of the matter.

What would you possibly have to explain to a judge?
I'm assuming you don't plan on having sex with her,
And I'm assuming you would not be shooting porn or other age Inappropriate material.
So how is it that you would wind up in front of a Judge?

Sure she could accuse you of touching her or tricking her into porn,
But she could just as easily do that even if you never shot together.

If you choose not to shoot with un-escorted minors that's fine,
But lets not ratchet up the hysteria with out cause.

Doug Jantz wrote:
It is because the agencies aren't the ones making the big deal out of it.  Others are.

Yes.. others are - like I said earlier, the kid has no problem with me leaving her alone at a shoot - but let me ask you this, would you let your 15 yr old daughter ride the subway in a strange city by herself and get herself to a shoot, leaving well after dark and again ride the subway in a strange city? I suppose in my case, I know there is much more to a guardian/escort responsibility than the actual shoot -
So what it all boils down to is this - is the photographer really all the concerned few are concerned about?

Actually.. now that I think about it, the photographer is the least of our worries..  okay, I hijacked your thread    time for me to goooooooooooo

I'll shut up now and go grill some Jersey sweet corn

Visual Eden Studios wrote:

Likewise...maybe its less of an issue since I am female, but I've picked girls up at grampas house (whom she lived with) with my stylist in tow (male) and drove off for a 10 hour day...returning them safe and sound at the end of the night. G'pa signed off on release without ever seeing photos. Granted I shoot fashion editorial mainly, and there was nothing to be concerned with...but I shoot without parents all the time.

The key? The parent/guardian has met me, or driven the model to the shoot, or the agency has dropped them off.

Likewise. Thx. Agency bookers know me and have had me pick up models for shoots at the subway or train station. So, it's all about credibility and trust at the end of the day.

Bryanna Nicole wrote:
but let me ask you this, would you let your 15 yr old daughter ride the subway in a strange city by herself and get herself to a shoot, leaving well after dark and again ride the subway in a strange city?

I used to ride the subway to work every day, at least until 9/11.  There were kids a lot younger than 15 going to school on it every day; teens can be found on the subway far past sundown.  All without any particular notice.  It's just routine.

How does going to the subway for a shoot become worse than going to the subway to school, or to a play on Broadway?

TXPhotog wrote:

I used to ride the subway to work every day, at least until 9/11.  There were kids a lot younger than 15 going to school on it every day; teens can be found on the subway far past sundown.  All without any particular notice.  It's just routine.

How does going to the subway for a shoot become worse than going to the subway to school, or to a play on Broadway?

As usual some quick common sense from Tx.  :-D

TXPhotog wrote:
This  has to be the 500th thread on this subject.  And it's just getting started.  Predictable things happen in each one of them:

1.  Someone will claim that it's illegal to shoot minors without a parent present, or without parental written permission.  When challenged to show us the law, they get aggressive about not needing no steekin' law, 'cause it's just obvious.

2.  Someone will opine that you should just wait until she is 18.

3.  Someone will claim that anyone who shoots minors for any reason is a perv.

4.  Someone will claim that if a parent signs a release, the shoot is legal, but it's not legal without a release.

5.  Someone will insist that the entire damned National Guard of their state has to be present to protect . . . uh . . . someone.

6.  Someone will invoke kiddie porn, even though the planned shoot is stated to be fully clothed and age-appropriate.

7.  Someone will simply say "Ewwwww!" as though that defined a law of nature.

And there will be much more.  All of the above are bullshit, all are passionately believed and brought forth as Obvious, Self-Evident Truth by the true believers, and the conversation will go to hell in a handbasket.

It simply is not possible to have a rational discussion of photography and minors on this forum.  There are too many strongly held views, too much paranoia, too much misinformation, and too many people determined to keep all of that in circulation.

To the OP:  your opening statement contained some false implications.  I would correct them for you, but the firestorm contained implied within this thread makes that kind of pointless.

that about wraps it up.
(maybe you should send the OP a PM to the last point)

Holopaw Pictures wrote:
Wait until she's 18, no model is worth going to jail over!

Congratulations, you are the first to lay claim to number two!

Quiet Light Photography wrote:
Would it be wrong of me to muddy the waters a little more and say "What about emancipated minors?"

Where do they fall into the issues?

Above you quoted a section of Florida law, which is similar to laws in many other states.  By being emancipated, a minor is legally permitted to enter into contracts, or to sign releases on their own.  That's about it.  There really isn't any other legal effect.  A shot of a minor which would be illegal if not emancipated, is still illegal if they are emancipated.

Alternate Endings Photo wrote:
Well I shoot minors quite a bit. I'm actually very proud of my presentation and the working relationships I have with the guardians of minors that I've worked for/with.
Its just that not having the parent around seems like an aweful idea. I don't have kids, but I imagine that any model I'm working with could be my sister, gf, etc, and I treat them with the respect that I would want given to someone that I care about.

I think my question got answered though, "If GS jumped off a cliff would I follow..." and the answer is no. They might be doing something wrong, or maybe its ok, but I don't think I have enough money to spare to hire a lawyer and fight about it. Better to err on the side of caution!
Thanks everyone!

Gosh, I thought I tied up this thread nicely here! Didn't mean to start another long and rehashed thread!
Cheers

Bryanna Nicole wrote:
Being the mother of a minor - I go with her to every shoot - however, this latest endeavor of hers, the contest she was in.. they told us we weren't allowed to be there - I was a little uncomfortable with that.. but she was fine. Go figure.

  why?  the world is full of more honest ppl than you think

Also - I have been doing wardrobe styling for a while now.. I can't tell you how many times a 15 yr old agency model shows up all by herself.. aaaaaaaaand.. we don't know her age until I ask (must be the mom in me)


very common

I just can't believe these agencies don't tell the testing photogs their ages.. I mean, don't they worry about their models? What happens if something happens???

like...........

In truth - it has actually made me question the industry and it's practices in regards to my daughter, I know I can't always be there and be her protector, but I also feel as a minor and a "employee" of the agency, they should be taking responsibility.

you should really separate mom from manager.

I know I got a little off your topic.. but - I guess what it all boils down to is this - how you handle the situation and is the model worth having a full crew present to protect yourself? 

Yes - protect yourself, be certain to have others present at the shoot (MUA and/or hair, wardrobe.. a female assisitant is always wise too - asures you never have to physically touch the model to adjust clothing, hair..etc)
- be smart, don't shoot anything not age appropriate, even if the model asks you to.

kinda, sorta agree but why does the assistant have to be female? Just asking.  You are right, safety is paramount, always, always always.

* my no escort rule still applys *

Good luck ;o)

Tracy

Alternate Endings Photo wrote:
So what i'm wondering is:
I understand that as a photog hiring a minor - it requires the guardian to be present, like along the lines of supervision and whatever else minors have to do to work (work permit?) I don't even know.
But when said minor is a customer, as in paying me to shoot them, what kind of situation is that? Now the mom wants to "pay" me a small small sum to shoot her daughter and call herself a customer of mine, as opposed to a contracted model (indicating pay or tfcd).
What the hell?
I'm guessing that since I need to ask, its probably not right. Though the mom makes a point, in some wierd way...

shoot the model and move on...............

KARLOS MATTHEWS wrote:

shoot the model and move on...............

werd.