Photographer
Garry k
Posts: 30131
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
She caught my eye waking the runway in a local Fashion Show
Tall . Lean and Lovely - but no idea how old she was
Did not have an opportunity to talk with her afterwards but found her on Social Media ..Asked her if She would like to do a Creative Shoot and She responded that she was interested - but I would need to clear it with her agent and if he agreed -then we could shoot after she returned from doing Paris and Milan Fashion Weeks
So I had a look at her on line Agency Portfolio
I seee a smattering of Runway shots . a Campaign or 2 and some Fashion Creatives - including a couple of implied topless
So I automatically assume she is over 18
I contact her agent and he requests a mood board
I send him some shots similar to what the Model aleady has in her portfolio - and he gives me the go ahead
Day of the Shoot comes and the Model and I meet for a preshoot coffee - She is very chatty and reveals that she is sitll in high school and is only 17 ( and she did the Paris and Milan gigs unaccompanied by parent )
I panic as I have never even shot with a 17 year old alone before( always have shot with others around ) - and almost pull the plug on the shoot
But I proceed - Mainly because She could be the Next Big Thing
We shoot - And I take a lot of headshots ...Everything fully clothed and nothing suggestive
The resulting Photos are probably at best catallogue worthy ....and the Model certainly is not blown away with the images ( edit ) She probably wont shoot with me again unless i can dazzle her by doing something like connecting with an amazing designer - but on the other hand I do have some Nice Beauty Shots of her that will look good in my portfolio whether she makes it big or not
I feel like asking her Agent why ( at 17 ) she has implied topless photos in her portfolio - but realize if i ask anything like that - I wont be working with any of his Models in the future
Hmmm
Artist/Painter
Hunter GWPB
Posts: 8226
King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, US
Please introduce yourself to a 10 foot pole and a 20 foot space. What is sexually suggestive? If she has a top on, but it is hidden by her hands and she gives a sultry look, is that sexually suggestive? I don't think I would have allowed her to do a bathing suit.
Her manager should not have left anything up to chance. He should have told you. If you want to work with any of his models in the future, then you know to ask. and stipulate what you require. Maybe it is no big deal in NYC or Paris and they have the lawyers who can guide them right to the edge of the legally permissible, but for most of us, even the hint of a child abuse photo would destroy us.
Photographer
Garry k
Posts: 30131
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Hunter GWPB wrote:
Please introduce yourself to a 10 foot pole and a 20 foot space. What is sexually suggestive? If she has a top on, but it is hidden by her hands and she gives a sultry look, is that sexually suggestive? I don't think I would have allowed her to do a bathing suit.
Her manager should not have left anything up to chance. He should have told you. If you want to work with any oaf his models in the future, then you know to ask. and stipulate what you require. Maybe it is no big deal in NYC or Paris and they have the lawyers who can guide them right to the edge of the legally permissible, but for most of us, even the hint of a child abuse photo would destroy us. I totally agree
I should have clarrified her age with him
I saw those implied topless / handbra photos and assumed the wrong thing
And I am very much against this double standard of The Fashion People feeling they can get away with this sort of thing - while it is not acceptable in General North American Society
And the bottem line for me ( wherever she lives ) is that the Model is 17 years old and is not mature enough to fully understand the implications of her actions
Photographer
JT Life Photography
Posts: 624
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Shooting in most of Europe, 17 is probably not too much of an issue. But in North America - run away (fast).
ID first, shoot second.
Best,
JT
Photographer
Nor-Cal Photography
Posts: 3721
Walnut Creek, California, US
Garry k wrote:
I should have clarrified her age I always tell each model to bring a "valid" photo ID showing that he or she is 18+. This approach weeds out all minors.
PS - I've done this with all models who stated age is 40+ and are obviously well past 18.
Photographer
Brooklyn Bridge Images
Posts: 13200
Brooklyn, New York, US
NewFlash they can get away with it
Look up Jason Wu /Tami Williams NYFW 15
(16 at the time I believe) in a completely see through dress
Photographer
Garry k
Posts: 30131
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Brooklyn Bridge Images wrote:
NewFlash they can get away with it
Look up Jason Wu /Tami Williams NYFW 15
(16 at the time I believe) in a completely see through dress Not really interested in looking for that sort of stuff
I tend to believe that Fashion Week Producers and Staff dont want to run afoul of decency laws
I will not speak for Fashion Designers ( as some of them are a bit strange in my opinion )
Model
Victoria Morrisa
Posts: 130
New York, New York, US
She most likely had parental consent for that shoot.
Photographer
Garry k
Posts: 30131
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Victoria Morrisa wrote:
She most likely had parental consent for that shoot. that doesnt make it right - or in her true best interests
Artist/Painter
Hunter GWPB
Posts: 8226
King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, US
Garry k wrote:
that doesnt make it right - or in her true best interests I don't think there is an exception in the law for parental consent. Otherwise, that would make it legal for parents to have porn of their own children.
Photographer
Garry k
Posts: 30131
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Hunter GWPB wrote:
I don't think there is an exception in the law for parental consent. Otherwise, that would make it legal for parents to have porn of their own children. exaclty - some parents will consent to anything
Photographer
Eric212Grapher
Posts: 3782
Saint Louis, Missouri, US
In the USA, a 17 year old cannot sign a model release without a pertain/legal guardian also signing. Not sure if her agent has that power of attorney, but not being present at the shoot, that would complicate the release anyhow.
Photographer
FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY
Posts: 6597
Uniontown, Pennsylvania, US
Teens scare Me to death, they're portraying a more mature look every day.
Photographer
Red Sky Photography
Posts: 3898
Germantown, Maryland, US
Eric212Grapher wrote:
In the USA, a 17 year old cannot sign a model release without a pertain/legal guardian also signing. Not sure if her agent has that power of attorney, but not being present at the shoot, that would complicate the release anyhow. I was under the impression that Agency models did not sign releases. Perhaps I am wrong ?
Photographer
Vector One Photography
Posts: 3722
Fort Lauderdale, Florida, US
Where do I start... ? Where ? In the states doing sexy implied work with a seventeen year old would lead me to exclaim, "What are you NUTS?" But then again Brooke Shields was topless at 10, but then again that was forty-four years ago. Just because someone else shot sexy implied and she includes it in her book does not mean it's a good idea for you to do it. But in the white woolly north things may be different as you guys may not be as uptight as we are down here. And does it matter ? You shot with her and you even admit the work was not impressive. She goes her way and you go yours P.S. I'm kind of confused as to the point of your posting. Is it about a Canadian 17 year old having sexy implied shots in her book ? Is it about your results in shooting with her ? Victoria Morrisa wrote:
She most likely had parental consent for that shoot. Even if she had parental consent it does not relieve liability for the photographer, they can't consent to a violation of law. Also, even if they consented to the shoot, in the U.S. the model release would still have to be signed by the parent or the legal guardian unless the juvenile has been emancipated.
Photographer
Garry k
Posts: 30131
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Vector One Photography wrote:
Where do I start... ? Where ? In the states doing sexy implied work with a seventeen year old would lead me to exclaim, "What are you NUTS?" But then again Brooke Shields was topless at 10, but then again that was forty-four years ago.
Just because someone else shot sexy implied and she includes it in her book does not mean it's a good idea for you to do it. But in the white woolly north things may be different as you guys may not be as uptight as we are down here.
And does it matter ? You shot with her and you even admit the work was not impressive. She goes her way and you go yours
P.S. I'm kind of confused as to the point of your posting. Is it about a Canadian 17 year old having sexy implied shots in her book ? Is it about your results in shooting with her ? Its simply about an Agency and their 17 yr old Model placing a Photographer ( me ) in a dilemma ( and that dilemma is do I shoot age appropriate shots with her without anyone else present ?)
and i am wondering how others would have handled it
Let Me just add one thing - Supermodels are often created at 17 and to shoot such a Model at that stage can really boost a photographers standing . I know this because I started my MM portfolio with pictures i took of a then unknown Coco Rocha ( but we had a full team present for the shoot ) and shooting with Coco gave me a huge boost as a photographer ( while i am not a commercial photographer by choice it did open the door for me to shoot creatives with Models from all levels of Modelling )
I believe this recent 17 year old Agency Model also has the potential to reach the highest levels of Fashion Modelling ( for similar and different reasons than Coco ) and it so I will get another boost as a photographer ( even though I only took mainly headshots of her )
That is why I took the risk
Would others do the same ?
Photographer
garybuntonfoto
Posts: 5
Sunnyvale, California, US
Out of the question don't do it period, even if she says she has consented. There are so many red flags, always ID first and have releases protecting yourself legally. Man the financial fallout could be catastrophic if it comes to an attorney and he said she said, particularly in today's climate.
Photographer
Red Sky Photography
Posts: 3898
Germantown, Maryland, US
Garry k wrote:
She caught my eye waking the runway in a local Fashion Show
Tall . Lean and Lovely - but no idea how old she was
Day of the Shoot comes and the Model and I meet for a preshoot coffee - She is very chatty and reveals that she is sitll in high school and is only 17 ( and she did the Paris and Milan gigs unaccompanied by parent )
I panic as I have never even shot with a 17 year old alone before( always have shot with others around ) - and almost pull the plug on the shoot
But I proceed - Mainly because She could be the Next Big Thing
We shoot - And I take a lot of headshots ...Everything fully clothed and nothing suggestive
The resulting Photos are probably at best catallogue worthy ....and the Model certainly is not blown away with the images ( edit ) She probably wont shoot with me again unless i can dazzle her by doing something like connecting with an amazing designer - but on the other hand I do have some Nice Beauty Shots of her that will look good in my portfolio whether she makes it big or not
Hmmm I am trying to understand why you wouldn't shoot some Fashion shots of this model. Your portfolio has some great fashion looks that don't include nudity or implied nudity.
I agree that shooting implied with a 17 year old is not a good idea, but everything else should be fine.
I shoot lots of high school seniors who are 17, some in groups and some alone. You just have to keep age appropriate looks in mind even when the girls want to push the envelope.
Photographer
Garry k
Posts: 30131
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Red Sky Photography wrote:
I am trying to understand why you wouldn't shoot some Fashion shots of this model. Your portfolio has some great fashion looks that don't include nudity or implied nudity.
I agree that shooting implied with a 17 year old is not a good idea, but everything else should be fine.
I shoot lots of high school seniors who are 17, some in groups and some alone. You just have to keep age appropriate looks in mind even when the girls want to push the envelope. Sorry i guess iwasnt too clear
Beauty Shots and some limited casual fashion - If I had understood before hand her actual age I would have made a greater effort to pull higher fashions into the mix - but I still wouold have faced the same dilemma regarding shooting alone wiht her after i realized her true age
Photographer
Eye of the World
Posts: 1396
Corvallis, Oregon, US
It is interesting that all but one responder is from the US, where the laws and attitudes are particularly prudish compared to Europe for example. I would think it important to find out specifically what kind of legal risk there is in Canada.
Photographer
shotbytim
Posts: 1040
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, US
Red Sky Photography wrote:
I was under the impression that Agency models did not sign releases. Perhaps I am wrong ? I could be that they have signed a release with the agency which will negotiate rights and usage with the "producers" of photo shoots, whether those will be the photographers themselves or art directors who will employ both the model and the photographer.
Photographer
shotbytim
Posts: 1040
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, US
Eye of the World wrote:
It is interesting that all but one responder is from the US, where the laws and attitudes are particularly prudish compared to Europe for example. I would think it important to find out specifically what kind of legal risk there is in Canada. In the U.S., If a model is 17 years, 11 months, 29 days, 23 hours and 59 minutes old when the photo is shot, a wayward nipple can get a photographer in hot water. One minute later, spread eagled, full nudity and real sex acts are perfectly fine. Just make things easy on yourself and only deal with actual adults. When I need a model for any degree of nudity, I look for models who have already posed even "nuder" than what I intend to shoot.
Photographer
Garry k
Posts: 30131
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
shotbytim wrote:
In the U.S., If a model is 17 years, 11 months, 29 days, 23 hours and 59 minutes old when the photo is shot, a wayward nipple can get a photographer in hot water. One minute later, spread eagled, full nudity and real sex acts are perfectly fine. Just make things easy on yourself and only deal with actual adults. When I need a model for any degree of nudity, I look for models who have already posed even "nuder" than what I intend to shoot. Well I am not a Nude Photographer and am much more interested in discoverinig the Next Big Thing in Fashion
Artist/Painter
Hunter GWPB
Posts: 8226
King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, US
Eye of the World wrote:
It is interesting that all but one responder is from the US, where the laws and attitudes are particularly prudish compared to Europe for example. I would think it important to find out specifically what kind of legal risk there is in Canada. A photographer anywhere in the world has to consider the impact of 2257 if their market includes the United States.
http://www.xxxlaw.com/articles/foreign2257.html
"The court rejected their argument about foreign producers and affirmed that Section 2257 would apply to material as it is received in the United States: Here is what the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia said in reversing the District Court:
Finally, we reject the district court's complaint that the Act "will effectively ban foreign produced images of sexually explicit conduct." ALA II,794 F.Supp. at 418. Foreign producers who wish to peddle their products in the United States should be expected to abide by our laws no less than domestic producers. Compare, e.g., 17 U.S.C. § 602 (1988) (prohibiting the importation of works that infringe on U.S. copyrights). Although the Government may not have other than a humane interest in protecting foreign children from exploitation, it has a most definite interest in plugging a loophole that would be created for domestic child pornographers if they were able to send their wares to secondary producers abroad for reexport to the United States."
Photographer
Camera Buff
Posts: 924
Maryborough, Queensland, Australia
The OP has clearly stated that this was a G-rated (not an implied, nude, or pornographic) photo session. No sexually explicit conduct, or exploitation occurred.
The OP also spoke about the 17 year old model already having implied topless photos in her portfolio.
So, is shooting G-rated images alone with a model under the age of 18 considered illegal in the US?
Also, is shooting artistic implied nude images of a model under the age of 18 considered illegal in the US?
I see no reason why the OP should be reluctant about respectfully asking the model's Agent what consent arrangements the Modelling Agency has in place for photographers who wish to work with their U/18 year old models.
Artist/Painter
Hunter GWPB
Posts: 8226
King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, US
Camera Buff: A nude of a minor in the US is not, per this law, a crime, but teens sexting pics to each other, especially of third parties, are sometimes prosecuted. Maybe, sometimes they should be, especially when forwarding an image that was sent to one person in confidence. But even then, it can be over the top and an injustice in itself. https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news … rchers-say Title 2256 defines the crime and 2257 is about record keeping and other related stuff. The law is probably unconstitutionally vague, but it serves its purpose because most people don't want to loose everything they have proving their innocence. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2256 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2257 https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/c … ornography " Notably, the legal definition of sexually explicit conduct does not require that an image depict a child engaging in sexual activity. A picture of a naked child may constitute illegal child pornography if it is sufficiently sexually suggestive. Additionally, the age of consent for sexual activity in a given state is irrelevant; any depiction of a minor under 18 years of age engaging in sexually explicit conduct is illegal"
Photographer
Red Sky Photography
Posts: 3898
Germantown, Maryland, US
Camera Buff wrote:
The OP has clearly stated that this was a G-rated (not an implied, nude, or pornographic) photo session. NO sexually explicit conduct, or exploitation occurred.
So, is shooting G-rated images alone with a model under the age of 18 considered illegal in the US?
. If it was, there would be no Senior pictures in School Yearbooks. I shoot plenty of 17 year olds, sometime alone, sometimes in groups and have never hesitated in doing so.
Photographer
Select Model Studios
Posts: 818
Tempe, Arizona, US
This is one of the things that really concern me. It's why I tend to stay away from working with any model who doesn't at least appear 23 or so. Especially if we are shooting something that can be considered sexy.You can check ID's all you want. But they can easily be faked.
Photographer
E Thompson Photography
Posts: 719
Hyattsville, Maryland, US
ShotbyRon wrote:
This is one of the things that really concern me. It's why I tend to stay away from working with any model who doesn't at least appear 23 or so. Especially if we are shooting something that can be considered sexy.You can check ID's all you want. But they can easily be faked. It may be easier now that all government issued IDs have to comply with The Real ID Act of 2005.
Photographer
Ken Marcus Studios
Posts: 9421
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
Why take a chance on something questionable, considering that if you are wrong there could be severe consequences ?
The laws in Canada are different than here in the States (Garry k is from BC).
Minors (under most circumstances) in the USA cannot sign a contract or release by themselves.
Garry . . . if you feel like contacting her agent to find out the details of her work elgilbility, by all means do so. You probably aren't the first one to ask them such a question. If anything, it shows that you are doing your due diligence by checking.
KM
Photographer
RTE Photography
Posts: 1511
NORTH HOLLYWOOD, California, US
Sounds like she has a agent who is just in it for the money and doesn't care what happens to the model. I personally would never shoot a under age model without a parent and/or legal guardian present. Also, a under age person cannot sign a contract/ model release.
I think that you should have expalined the problem to her and declined to shoot her at that time, but said that you would love to work with her either with a guardian present, or when she turns 18.
Photographer
Herman Surkis
Posts: 10856
Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
Signed models do not sign releases.
If you shoot trade, it is understood that it is to test equipment, lighting, ideas etc. or for portfolio use only.
And that is true for the model as well.
The agency acts as a surrogate parent when it comes to photography, so...
It is legal to shoot age appropriate images of underage models.
They do not have to be chaperoned. In fact most of the models prefer to not have mom around.
But there is always the he said/she said possibility if there is no one else around. But keep in mind that is a possibility with any age model if they are alone. If they are under age the courts may lean in their favour. What works in your favour is your rep in the field, and your rep with the agency.
However all that being said, I prefer a parent to be present. Added safety factor. I put the parent to work. Makeup, hair and stylist. Mom gets to do the touching I would not.
And worse, in more than one case, it is pictures of mom that have ended up in my portfolio (end up with a pissed off kid).
YMMV
Photographer
Garry k
Posts: 30131
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Herman Surkis wrote:
Signed models do not sign releases.
If you shoot trade, it is understood that it is to test equipment, lighting, ideas etc. or for portfolio use only.
And that is true for the model as well.
The agency acts as a surrogate parent when it comes to photography, so...
It is legal to shoot age appropriate images of underage models.
They do not have to be chaperoned. In fact most of the models prefer to not have mom around.
But there is always the he said/she said possibility if there is no one else around. But keep in mind that is a possibility with any age model if they are alone. If they are under age the courts may lean in their favour. What works in your favour is your rep in the field, and your rep with the agency.
However all that being said, I prefer a parent to be present. Added safety factor. I put the parent to work. Makeup, hair and stylist. Mom gets to do the touching I would not.
And worse, in more than one case, it is pictures of mom that have ended up in my portfolio (end up with a pissed off kid).
YMMV Yes -Trade and I prefer Parents be present as well
Shoot happened 5 months ago now and since then Miss Model has been travelling the world doing her thing
Hope to see her on the Cover of Vogue someday🙂
Photographer
Gold Rush Studio
Posts: 378
Sacramento, California, US
FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY wrote:
Teens scare Me to death, they're portraying a more mature look every day. The little girl in this ad from Disney is maybe 11 or 12 and she's tarted up like one of those little-girl glamour pageant victims. Like Jon-Benet Ramsey.
https://www.ispot.tv/ad/oezp/disney-res … be-with-us
No idea why parents or Disney for that matter thinks it's okay to abuse children like this.
My point is that you're right that the girls are being made more mature than in the past and you have to ask why it's so bad to let kids just be kids?
Oh, and NO it is not okay to do anything risque with underage. Ever.
Photographer
Phayes photography
Posts: 7
Farmington, New Mexico, US
Garry k wrote:
She caught my eye waking the runway in a local Fashion Show
Tall . Lean and Lovely - but no idea how old she was
Did not have an opportunity to talk with her afterwards but found her on Social Media ..Asked her if She would like to do a Creative Shoot and She responded that she was interested - but I would need to clear it with her agent and if he agreed -then we could shoot after she returned from doing Paris and Milan Fashion Weeks
So I had a look at her on line Agency Portfolio
I seee a smattering of Runway shots . a Campaign or 2 and some Fashion Creatives - including a couple of implied topless
So I automatically assume she is over 18
I contact her agent and he requests a mood board
I send him some shots similar to what the Model aleady has in her portfolio - and he gives me the go ahead
Day of the Shoot comes and the Model and I meet for a preshoot coffee - She is very chatty and reveals that she is sitll in high school and is only 17 ( and she did the Paris and Milan gigs unaccompanied by parent )
I panic as I have never even shot with a 17 year old alone before( always have shot with others around ) - and almost pull the plug on the shoot
But I proceed - Mainly because She could be the Next Big Thing
We shoot - And I take a lot of headshots ...Everything fully clothed and nothing suggestive
The resulting Photos are probably at best catallogue worthy ....and the Model certainly is not blown away with the images ( edit ) She probably wont shoot with me again unless i can dazzle her by doing something like connecting with an amazing designer - but on the other hand I do have some Nice Beauty Shots of her that will look good in my portfolio whether she makes it big or not
I feel like asking her Agent why ( at 17 ) she has implied topless photos in her portfolio - but realize if i ask anything like that - I wont be working with any of his Models in the future
Hmmm It makes me nervous just talking about it...for me they are 21 and over with proof of age.
Photographer
Orca Bay Images
Posts: 33877
Arcata, California, US
Gold Rush Studio wrote:
The little girl in this ad from Disney is maybe 11 or 12 and she's tarted up like one of those little-girl glamour pageant victims. Like Jon-Benet Ramsey. That kid in the ad is "tarted up?!?" "Glamour pageant like Jon-Benet?" You're joking, right?
|
