Young person morals?

[Michael_Lambert]

Hey guys,

Kind of ran into a issue had to vent about it.

On sunday i got a call from a family member asking if would do a bathing suit shoot for a teenager, she said that she was looking to enter a contest and was looking to have a few shots done.

I said that would be fine that i would need her mother to complete a release form and that i would require her mother to be on site while i did the shoot. These where not and issue and we booked her in for lastnight.

So..

The yonge lady shows up we went over what they wanted and she made it clear a couple of head shots and then a couple of full lenght shots of her in her bathing suit.

Did the head shots no issues, so now it was time to do the bathing suit shots. I asked the younge lady to change into her suit and mentioned i would turn up the heat alittle to ensure she was comfrortable.. Her mother replied that no the temp was good too warm and it would lose the effect they where after this kind of caught me off guard.

Well her daughter came out of the change room ( spare bedroom ) wearing this string tong thing... People i **** you not she could not have worn less, i mean this thing was soo tight and so thin up front i considered her naked... on on top of that she was wearing this string top where the fabric was only small enough to litterly cover her nipples and even then i swear she must have fondled them in order for them to get the apearence she wanted.

I was honestly shocked when i seen this and turned away.. she walked over to me and was adjusting her self and doing so she was complelelty revealing herself to me i reach over and grabbed the blanket off my couch and wrapped it around her.

I turned to her mother and said i was sorry i could not shoot this minor in the outfit she was wearing, I gave her her cheque back ( which i could have really used ) and told her that i was sorry but i just could not take part in shooting any young child in an outfit like that and if she honesty had to wear an out fit like that in order to enter some contest she would be best not being apart of it.

Well...

The mother got pissy... my wife who was down stairs watching TV heard the yelling and came up. She was freaking out cause these photos had to be sumitted today and where was she going to find a photographer on such short notice. She also stated several times that she would sue me for her losses from not being able to enter this contest. At this point the mother told her daughter to get changed they where leaving and to my wifes surprise the daugher dropped cloths right there nad changed in the middle of my halway.

I later explained to my wife what had happened and she seen the outfit this girl was wearing and she made the comment she has seen adult entertainers wear more while preforming on stage! She said she would have been really disapointed if i had shot her the way she was.... She said she does not like the stuff i do with adults and often its wearing more clothing than that.. but she accepts it.. but there would be no way she could see a child in the same sort of sene.

Anyways.. Being Canadian... What are the laws.... I feel i have the right to refuse service exspecially for the reason here i returned her payment and i have formatted the card infront of the mother so there is no way i am benifiting from this experience.

thoughts are welcome.

[René Damkot]

If you find you cannot shoot it for personal reasons, IMO you are right not to shoot it. There are some things I won't shoot as well.

I wouldn't judge any client on my moral standards or principles however.

As for the "legal" part: What age was the model?

[Michael_Lambert]

The young lady was 15.

not judging there morals, judging my own... I mean i guess it could have a ripple effect with the word of mouth and cause more harm to my bussiness than good but moraly in my own mind/heart i could not stand seeing her like that let alone shooting it..

one thing i have noticed and it might just be me.. in the last couple weeks my mind set has shifted alittle. we had a baby girl a month ago and she kind of seems to be messing with my head :D

[gjl711]

Age will make all the difference in the world. If as you say she was a minor, that is less than the age of consent, then you’re treading into some sticky territory and I too would have avoided it. Technically she was not naked but getting very close and in this day and age any male photographer just can’t take that chance. So, I don’t see this as a moral issue but clearly a legal one.

[Kristic]

I think you did the right thing. If you cant feel comfortable shooting your subject, you can expect to produce your best possible work.

[gjl711]

The young lady was 15. ...
Ok, 15… no way in he!! would I have done this shoot, not even if I had several policemen, the local judge, and all the potential jurors in the room with me while I took the pictures. That has trouble written all over it.

BTW… what contest could possible require a 15 year old to prance about nekid?

[pennypue]

Seriously? How on earth could you be responsible for their "losses"?

Did they pick the day of the shoot?
Procrastination on their part does not constitute and emergency on your part. :)

[Michael_Lambert]

well thats the thing..

I konw there are a couple of things going on and bathing suits are fine.. and honestly i was expecting a two peice suit which woudl have been fine with me... But there was no way i could have felt right having my name on a shot with her wearing soo little. She could have come out in her underwear and i am sure would have been more covered!

I did a search on google, and this was pretty much the same bathing suit she was wearing.. only the one she had on was silver!


Edited NWS embedded image to link - moderator. (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v725/Michael_Lambert/beachmodel.jpg)

Crap, Was not even thinking about that... Sorry about that.

[bishop13]

Good lord. What kind of parent would let their 15 year old wear that, much less get pictures of them get taken!?!?

[Robert16]

You did the right thing IMO. Let her try to sue you.

[Michael_Lambert]

Seriously? How on earth could you be responsible for their "losses"?

Did they pick the day of the shoot?
Procrastination on their part does not constitute and emergency on your part. :)


They did pick the day, i spoke with them on Sunday and told them i was only availible in the evenings... Photography is not my profession.. i do work else where for a living.

How i could be accountable for there losses is beyond me, but hey people have been sued for less in our wonderful world.

What gets me, is even if i did shoot her.. this shoot took place at almost 11pm.. as thats when they where free there was no way i would have had the images processed by the following day regardless. I was not told a deadline only asked to shoot what they required.

I have this afternoon heard from the family member who asked me originally and they are kind of dumbfounded why i turned the work away. I just made it clear to them that there are some things i refuse to shoot with the camera and what she was wearing was one of those things. I also sent her the link to the image i posted here and she could not belieave that she was wearing that... then kind of remarked how her father would have kicked my a$$ if he seen i took shots like that.

[Andrushka]

dang... good call on steering clear of that... the possibility is just to great that crap would come back at you one way or another! dang... and if you werent going to be pleased with the outcome anyway... why shoot at all?

[SKnight]

The only lesson I see you need to take from this is to actually ask to see what they'll be wearing before agreeing to the shoot. Sad that it's come to that.

Is the contact going to get Dad involved? That may put a cold stop to this.

People are nuts today.

[Michael_Lambert]

dang... good call on steering clear of that... the possibility is just to great that crap would come back at you one way or another! dang... and if you werent going to be pleased with the outcome anyway... why shoot at all?

I had no issues with the shoot.. When the mother and daughter had shown up very nice people. Very beautiful daughter. I noticed on my release that the age was 15 and i had no issues with it. I don't have an issue shooting a minor in swim wear, it gets done every day.

However everything was going great untill she came out wearing the outfit that was discriped and displayed on a mature model. That is where i decided to call it quits.. And actually i only covered her up and said i could not shoot her in that outfit.. i did not say i would not shoot her in a bathing suit... Just not that one.

Guys you gotta understand... take a look at that outfit on the model listed here.. not picture a 15 year old girl who is well developed.. and think of the suit being about 3 sizes tooo small on her i mean seriously.. You would have really had to look close to make out she even had a suit on!

I can honestly say that as a father if someone took pictures of my daughter looking the way this girl did. You would need the intire police force to restrain me from perminatly implanting his lens where the sun don't shine.

[Michael_Lambert]

The only lesson I see you need to take from this is to actually ask to see what they'll be wearing before agreeing to the shoot. Sad that it's come to that.

Is the contact going to get Dad involved? That may put a cold stop to this.

People are nuts today.


Honestly,

From what i have gathered, This is my own thoughts.. it seems they picked this day and time as the father works overnights at a local factory. I have not been able to find any sort of information on any local fashion contest.

I honesty am starting to think that this girl has a very open minded mother and most likly was looking for the pictures for her personal use. I mean they did not even question my rate for the job.

I don't think they will be getting the father involved. But i could be wrong.

[andrew748]

you did the right thing imo.

that's just all kinds of wrong

[BlackJagger]

You definitely did the right thing. Especially in Canada and with the high publicity of some child pornography issues lately, it’s just not worth it. It is sad though that her mother would allow that, there is a reason for laws concerning minors, they just don’t have the judgment to make the best decisions some of the time and need adults to help. On a side note I wouldn’t worry about legal issues stemming from this, Just seems like a generic threat.

Cheers,
Josh

[gjl711]

Ya know, a just thought popped into my head. I’m wondering if it was not some type of sting trying to catch possible pedo-photographers. It’s a technique being used on the internet and I’m wondering if it’s not being extended to photographers as well. Think about it. A contest where a 15 year old has to submit pictures practically nekid. That just does not compute, not in this day and age.

So they find a young looking cop trainee, couple them with the mom cop and head on out to catch some bad guys. They target photographers because clearly someone is taking the pictures. I’m guessing that as soon as you would have pressed that shutter button, the Mounties would have broken down the door to your house, rushed into your studio, thrown you to the ground and branded your forehead on the spot before dragging you outside to parade you in front of the press claiming that they have made the world a safer place. Dang.. we could have been reading about you in the papers and there would have been a flood of posts lamenting on how you give all photographers a bad name.

[Michael_Lambert]

while i am sure this goes on, I really don't think it was the case here. I mean it was my wifes aunt who called looking to see if i would photograph a friend of hers.

I honesty think that it was just poor judgment on the mothers part.

I hate to say it but i live in a big city and spend alot of time in traffic ( Drive 1.5 hours to work ) and pass alot of schools and the way some of these young kids dress its insane!

[Kristic]

If it was a police sting situation, I dont think it would have even come to the 15 yr old getting in a next to nothing bikini, they would have set the hook before that

[CheetaPita]

i definitely think you did the right thing by not shooting her in that state of undress. its appalling that the mother would not only allow but take part in this type of behavior....ill never understand people like that.

[Michael_Lambert]

So,

Apparently I jumped ship before it started to sink!

I just finished sifting through a Facebook message I got from the young lady. While I found it very hard to follow as she had a lot to say, I am sure she was not sure how to say it and with it coming from a 15 year old child I am sure it does not help. I am older and just don’t get there lingo.

So the general consensus I get from the message is as follows.

- The photo shoot was for two purposes.
- 1) She loves the shots I have taken of her friends ( My wife’s cousins and she has always wanted some of her for her facebook)
- 2) Her mother is starting out in fashion design and the modeling shots where for her to submit to a magazine. They used the contest as a reason for her to be dressed the way she was however due to her “Over Maturity” they where going to cut off the legs and head of the shot as they only needed a body shot showing the suit.

I got the impression from the message that the mother was only using the daughter as she has spent all she has on the materials and design stuff to make the outfit and whatever else she has paid to be put into this magazine. She could not afford to hire a model and a photographer at the same time and did not see a reason using the daughter’s body as no one would ever know she was a minor… Looking at the body you would never know it.

I sat and looked at the message for a while and spoke with my wife before replying to her and I did reply to her. I did outline that while they had the best intentions what her mother was asking was very close to breaking the law if it does not already, a minor is a minor with our with out a head in the shot.

I think asked that she have her mother call me when she is able to if she wants to discuss this any further.

I got a call from the mother about 20 minutes later. Basically she threatened to sue as she was afraid I was going to call the police, she understands that while what she did was wrong she figured that by only using the torso she would be okay. I explained to her my position on the issue and explained how I felt about where she put me.

We spoke for a little while and I kind of felt bad for her, I told her that I would be more than happy to work with her. I told her that I would gladly shoot some shots of her daughter with her permission and the release resigned for that purpose she could use them freely on her facebook and showing her friends ect.. I also told her that I would be more than happy to provide a couple of mature models who I have worked with and would be more than happy to model her outfits for her as a favor for me. They are starting out models and are more than happy to work for free for me in exchange for the experience and prints.

All in all, I don’t think I jumped ship too soon. I also do not think I over reacted. My wife thinks I am nuts for helping out after what happened but again I don’t see anything wrong with it. I can see how she could be a person who is honesty in need and I have the means I think to help her out.

Anyways.. I guess I should have just waited it out a little longer before posting my thread I could have had the whole incident all in one post instead of spread out like this.. But what can I say..

It was truly interesting.

[FlyingPhotog]

So,

Apparently I jumped ship before it started to sink!

Absolutely nothing wrong with moving to the life boats as a precaution...

;)

[andrew748]

glad you got it worked out, maybe the break your cutting the mom will make her realise that no matter how desperate the mom is she was wrong to use her daughter in this way.

w00t for the happy ending
:D

[Michael_Lambert]

Well i tell you i am only doing the break... cause honesty... i would love to see that outfit on one of the girls i have been shooting :D But yes it gives me alittle more exposure as well which should work out nice and saves face with the family.

[andrew748]

Well i tell you i am only doing the break... cause honesty... i would love to see that outfit on one of the girls i have been shooting :D But yes it gives me alittle more exposure as well which should work out nice and saves face with the family.

lol nothing wrong with the outfit on an appropriate model

[thrash_273]

i say you are the man, you made the right call.

[zelseman]

I am extremely proud to know that this degree of moral fiber is evident amongst this many POTN members. Great call man, glad it is working out for you.

[Moppie]

Michael sounds like you were put in a difficult situation, and have handled very, very well.

To now be helping them by supplying models etc, is an even great thing, shows you have really been the better person through out it all.

[Michael_Lambert]

To now be helping them by supplying models etc, is an even great thing, shows you have really been the better person through out it all.

Honesty, if i have to pull some strings to keep that little girl from losing her innocents i am all for it. I only know the information second and third hand but apparently they are good people and i took things the wrong way. Not admitting i did, however i am all about second chances.

[Andrushka]

interesting... i guess its not always a zero-sum game, huh? smooth maneuvering on your part! And +1 on the props for not shooting a 15 year old in nearly-nothing, even if the mother/daughters' reasoning wasnt the worst case scenarion. Thats great to see from the guys here on POTN.

[elader]

You did the right thing. No accounting for insanity. You could be held liable regardless of what her mom said or signed.

[charlesu]

You did the right thing. No question. Especially in a world where innocence seems so fragile and fleeting. And also where the consequences can be so severe if you do cross a line.

Interestingly, I posted a picture here years ago (on the glamour and nude forum) of two models, nude, lying on some rocks in a river. One of the first responses I got was that the girls were far too young to photographed like that. She went on to rant a little bit about this.

I responded to the post by asking which model they meant. The 24 year old pharmacy school grad school student or the 27 year old professional actress?

In any case, it's better to turn down the work whenever there is ANY question.

[locky]

I think you did the right thing. Now for instance if this was a European country then it probably would have been more acceptable. My wife and I do visit nude beaches on occasion and do believe you can have nudity without sexuality. Unfortunetly in this situation it was more for sexuality and the Mother herself was more quilty than the Daughter. You could have ruined your reputation for good if you would have carried on with the shoot.

[andrew748]

I think you did the right thing. Now for instance if this was a European country then it probably would have been more acceptable. My wife and I do visit nude beaches on occasion and do believe you can have nudity without sexuality. Unfortunetly in this situation it was more for sexuality and the Mother herself was more quilty than the Daughter. You could have ruined your reputation for good if you would have carried on with the shoot.

LMAO WTF yes we all encourage paedophilia here in europe :rolleyes:

[charlesu]

well thats the thing..

I konw there are a couple of things going on and bathing suits are fine.. and honestly i was expecting a two peice suit which woudl have been fine with me... But there was no way i could have felt right having my name on a shot with her wearing soo little. She could have come out in her underwear and i am sure would have been more covered!

I did a search on google, and this was pretty much the same bathing suit she was wearing.. only the one she had on was silver!


Edited NWS embedded image to link - moderator. (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v725/Michael_Lambert/beachmodel.jpg)

Crap, Was not even thinking about that... Sorry about that.

Notice that her top is inside out and her tag is showing on the bottom.

[coffeeguy415]

Mike,

You made a right decision for yourself. Many can also argue that you didn't do your job. In my opinion, the consequences of you may have many outcomes with,
1) awesome shots with your name on top and credit to you,
2) the teenage model becomes the next pop star,
3) shame-on-your pointing fingers from your neighbors,
4) dirty look from townsmen while you shop for groceries, or
5) an extremely black angry father who will you find out that he holds an occupation as Canadian lumber jack.

I hope you have a crack of smile after reading the 5th one.

You did the right thing!

-coffeeguy

[x2x3x4x5x]

You did the right thing. My only suggestion is to add a clause in your contract that states if you turn over no images (due to loss/broken gear/moral values/etc) the client will get a full monetary refund and you won't be held responsible in the court of law. A big stretch, but worth it.

[milorad]

I would have shot her TBH...

It's not her changing in front of you that's illegal, its shooting her naked that's illegal, and you weren't doing that, nor were you asked to do that, nor would that have been the point of doing that.

I've seen similar garments on 6 year olds at the beach... and 20 year olds who fill them out a lot more. You being uncomfortable that a 15 year old girl was filling it out, isn't really the issue.

Professional detachment is key... aint nothing there that isn't also at the beach.

but hey, I just like to be the odd one out :)

(also, there's nothing you can do with a 15 year old that qualifies as pedophilia... pedophilia is a very specific thing, involing pre-pubescent children... it gets thrown around a HELL of a lot though, especially in America, but I'm not sure why -- that doesn't make shooting a naked 15 year old legal, but it sure has nothing to do with pedophilia or child porn (underage sure, but while potentially just as bad, that isn't the same as child))

[sl3966]

I would have shot her TBH...

It's not her changing in front of you that's illegal, its shooting her naked that's illegal, and you weren't doing that, nor were you asked to do that, nor would that have been the point of doing that.

I've seen similar garments on 6 year olds at the beach... and 20 year olds who fill them out a lot more. You being uncomfortable that a 15 year old girl was filling it out, isn't really the issue.

Professional detachment is key... aint nothing there that isn't also at the beach.

but hey, I just like to be the odd one out :)

(also, there's nothing you can do with a 15 year old that qualifies as pedophilia... pedophilia is a very specific thing, involing pre-pubescent children... it gets thrown around a HELL of a lot though, especially in America, but I'm not sure why -- that doesn't make shooting a naked 15 year old legal, but it sure has nothing to do with pedophilia or child porn (underage sure, but while potentially just as bad, that isn't the same as child))
Agreed on all points. People love to throw about terms like Pedophile and child porn. However, a swimsuit is not nudity or porn.

[Michael_Lambert]

Agreed on all points. People love to throw about terms like Pedophile and child porn. However, a swimsuit is not nudity or porn.

I agree and if she was wearing the bathing suit to fit her it might have ended differently.

As i said in my first post

Well her daughter came out of the change room ( spare bedroom ) wearing this string tong thing... People i **** you not she could not have worn less, i mean this thing was soo tight and so thin up front i considered her naked...

This thing was soo tight and small that it rode up on her, Yes i was not too graphic in my first post but her vagina was in clean and clear view.. think of a frontal weggie!

[milorad]

All I've got to say is, if you ever come down to Oz for a holiday, don't plan on spending much time at the beach.

Having said that, if you're genuinely uncomfortable, there's nothing to be done but end the shoot. Even IS won't help the shaky hands if you're really concerned about public perception, or legal issues.

[gjl711]

I don't think that the issue is shooting nudes, but underage nudes. Public perception is nomething I could deal with. A couple years in Joliet I could not. :(

[sl3966]

I agree and if she was wearing the bathing suit to fit her it might have ended differently.

As i said in my first post



This thing was soo tight and small that it rode up on her, Yes i was not too graphic in my first post but her vagina was in clean and clear view.. think of a frontal weggie!
In that case I would have told her to pull the suit out of her crotch or get one that fits. In any case if you weren't comfortabe shooting then you were right to stop it. I, on the other hand will shoot pretty much anything as long as the check clears and it's legal (or I have plausible deniability) :).

[Roy Mathers]

LMAO WTF yes we all encourage paedophilia here in europe :rolleyes:

Taking pictures of minors - even wearing skimpy outfits - isn't paedophilia;)

[rhommel]

technically, that's considered a breach of contract. she can technically sue you for it. You knew that you were going to be shooting her in a swimsuit. Doesn't matter how skimpy it is, it still a swimsuit.

morally, u did the right thing. but you are in the modelling industry... honestly, swimsuit modelling and morals? i didn't even knwo you can put those words in the same sentence :D

[locky]

LMAO WTF yes we all encourage paedophilia here in europe :rolleyes:

That is not what I was saying. I have been to Tahiti Beach in Saint Tropez France and you see teenage girls topless or wearing very skimpy Bikini's. In Europe the naked body is more acceptable and usually not a big deal. My Wife and I have been to completely nude beaches with people of all ages nude. Being in North America If Michael would have photographed this young lady then most people would have looked at him as some pervert even though he was just doing a job he was hired to do. North America is prudish when it comes to the human body. I am a Christian and I believe if God wanted us to be naked then we would have been born that way. :lol:

[gjl711]

... most people would have looked at him as some pervert even though he was just doing a job he was hired to do. ... It's not the "most people" part you have to worry about. Most people could care less. It's the one crusading person who is willing to apply the label of pedophile you have to worry about. Once that label is applied, guilt or innocent lo longer matters, your screwed especially if your male.

[Michael_Lambert]

In our society today exspecially north american where everything is over censored and our goverments are cracking down so tightly on illiegal porn and kiddie porn, it would not take much for a over zelus rookie looking to make a name for himself to paint the wrong conclusion on any simple inoccent shot.

Not worth the risk in my books.

[Roy Mathers]

That is not what I was saying. I have been to Tahiti Beach in Saint Tropez France and you see teenage girls topless or wearing very skimpy Bikini's. In Europe the naked body is more acceptable and usually not a big deal. My Wife and I have been to completely nude beaches with people of all ages nude. Being in North America If Michael would have photographed this young lady then most people would have looked at him as some pervert even though he was just doing a job he was hired to do. North America is prudish when it comes to the human body. I am a Christian and I believe if God wanted us to be naked then we would have been born that way. :lol:


I agree totally locky.

[pennypue]

The ethnocentric evaluation of what's acceptable in Europe, Australia or even some of the primitive tribes in Africa has nothing to do with whether or not he should have shot the photographs. And it's not at all fair to compare what would be acceptable for you in your country, your culture and under your laws.

The mother put him in a compromising position that she shouldn't have. Period.

Being SEEN on a beach is much different than being PHOTOGRAPHED. If she's running about naked on a beach that's a legal issue for her parents, if he's photographing her then that's a legal issue for HIM.

That said, I like nude beaches. :D

[Roy Mathers]

I don't think anyone was being 'ethnocentric'. People from both sides of the Atlantic were merely pointing out that things are different in different countries. There is nothing wrong with that, and no-one was suggesting that it had any bearing on the case under discussion.

[pennypue]

Then what would be the point in comparing the two sets of cultural standards?

Why even point it out?

[Roy Mathers]

I don't know - you'd have to ask the person who first did so. (As a matter of interest, he was American.)

[locky]

Then what would be the point in comparing the two sets of cultural standards?

Why even point it out?

The reason I mentioned the differences in cultures is because some other members here from different cultures might be wondering why Michael didnt take the pics. I'm sorry if my post offended anybody. It was not my intention.

[Roy Mathers]

I think that's a good reason, locky, and I don't see how it could offend anybody.

[pennypue]

The reason I mentioned the differences in cultures is because some other members here from different cultures might be wondering why Michael didnt take the pics. I'm sorry if my post offended anybody. It was not my intention.
I was never offended. I was pointing out the differences in perceptions.

I'm sorry, you're sorry you might have thought I could have thought I was offended. :lol:

[cdifoto]

I would have shot her TBH...

It's not her changing in front of you that's illegal, its shooting her naked that's illegal, and you weren't doing that, nor were you asked to do that, nor would that have been the point of doing that.

I've seen similar garments on 6 year olds at the beach... and 20 year olds who fill them out a lot more. You being uncomfortable that a 15 year old girl was filling it out, isn't really the issue.

Professional detachment is key... aint nothing there that isn't also at the beach.

but hey, I just like to be the odd one out :)

(also, there's nothing you can do with a 15 year old that qualifies as pedophilia... pedophilia is a very specific thing, involing pre-pubescent children... it gets thrown around a HELL of a lot though, especially in America, but I'm not sure why -- that doesn't make shooting a naked 15 year old legal, but it sure has nothing to do with pedophilia or child porn (underage sure, but while potentially just as bad, that isn't the same as child))

In that case I would have told her to pull the suit out of her crotch or get one that fits. In any case if you weren't comfortabe shooting then you were right to stop it. I, on the other hand will shoot pretty much anything as long as the check clears and it's legal (or I have plausible deniability) :).
Same here.

I would have shot it. She's got the important bits covered so it's legal. Morals? I don't care what people think of me. I can't control that. Heck they could think I'm a disgusting guy just for not shaving for once.

[Shuttergal]

I applaud you. Good for you!

[cdifoto]

I applaud you. Good for you!
Thanks! :lol:

[rovers_Andy]

I for one want to applaud you for standing by your morals, If one pushy parent abandons morals in an attept to allow their daughter to be photographed in this situation must surely be seen as a window on some areas of society. I think beauty pagents have become a very dangerouse thing as it seems to contribute to the culture that only certain "looks" are correct and from what i have seen children are becoming increasingly sexualised at a younger and younger age and this surely signifys a greater problem in society, i know this was only for a "beauty pagent" but it sounds like the first step. I dont think 20 or 30 years ago (although i can't speak from experience as im only in my early 20's) children were being sexualized in situations like this. I just feel for parents to be comfortable with their children dressing like this is a very worrying trend.

Once again i applaud you for not proceeding with the shoot.

[neil_g]

i think you did the right thing, especially in todays paranoid society.

at the end of the day you did what a lot of people would do from a moral point of view and its all turned out for the best and youve probably got more work out of it. alround sucess!

[LBaldwin]

technically, that's considered a breach of contract. she can technically sue you for it. You knew that you were going to be shooting her in a swimsuit. Doesn't matter how skimpy it is, it still a swimsuit.

morally, u did the right thing. but you are in the modelling industry... honestly, swimsuit modelling and morals? i didn't even knwo you can put those words in the same sentence :D

I don't think she can sue for breach of contract for several reasons;

1. The contract has to be enforeceable, in this case she is a minor and even if her parents sign the contract the act itself may be considered illegal - criminally.
2. Unless the contract stipulates (in wriitng) that the wardrobe will consist of such and such it is not enforeceable. Anything other than a "standard" bikini
3. The Mom is in potential seriously deep yogurt for sexual expolitation of a minor which in this country is a class A or B felony with serious jail time and you will lose your parental rights and have to register as a sex offender. Every community has it's different set of values.

The OP did the right thing and really needs to consult a criminal attorney and may even need to go and see the DA. We do not know what other mischief the Mom is up too. CYA!!

Never Never agree to shoot a minor under 16 without a rock solid contract and a phalanx of lay dogs at your disposal. Look at all the trouble around Miley Cyrus got into and she was covered!!

[milorad]

Miley Cyrus got in trouble? I thought all that happened were a few parents-by-disney got their noses out of joint. Was there some legal action there I didn't hear about, or was this just more wowserism and whining?

You know, that picture with her dad was actually quite nice. Nothing sexual about it. It's only the idiot mothers juicing their panties over billy ray cyrus, who look at that and imagine themselves in miley's position. They're projecting their sexual desires on a 'rockstar' photo of dad and daughter.

Now who's the inappropriate one?

[LBaldwin]

Not sure exactly what you mean, but any way if you read my post it was regarding the trouble surrounding Miley Cyrus. Many thought that the images that were published in vanityfair were a little too racey for a young teenager. There was quite a flap here in the states re: the topless/cape shot that Annie Leibovitz did after her Billy Ray left the shoot. He has said that he really does not see anything wrong with the shots per se but probably would not have wanted his daughter portrayed that way. But he decided not to make a big stink over and make it even bigger.

But it did start a pretty large discussion over what is published about teens. Not sure your source of intel on the other images didn;t hear much about those father/daughter shots.

But anyway, the OP still did the right thing by not shooting that young lady. Who knows what would have happened next. Evern if you shoot nudes or swimsuit we as professional photographer should strive to keep ourselves above moral or ethical reproach if possible. You can get the shot and do so in a reasonably dignified and professional manner.

[shannyD]

that is crazy.. i have been learning studio work, and i have been around a few minor models ( they really are no fun to work with) but i wouldnt have been comfortable shooting a minor dressed like that either. im actually shocked that the mother was ok with it.

and can she really sue you?

[Glenn NK]

technically, that's considered a breach of contract. she can technically sue you for it. You knew that you were going to be shooting her in a swimsuit. Doesn't matter how skimpy it is, it still a swimsuit

We must be very careful about assuming what is a breach of contract what and isn't as it can vary from one jurisdiction to another. In Canada, there can be no breach of contract if the performance of the contract involves an illegal act. If photographing this minor in this situation is illegal, there would be no contract to sue under.

Not worth the risk in my books.

I think you did the right thing.

[luvtotakepics]

I do not blame you one bit for not wanting to take the girls picture. SHame on her mother for her behavior.

[Michael_Lambert]

*** UPDATE***

Alright,

Well as everyone knows i did make arrangments with the mother to shoot using a correct model. She has stated that the lawsuit was a empty threat that she was never going to act on it.

Regarding the law, some who have followed other threads of mine would know i have a couple of moral issues going on. So my wifes cousin is taking his 3rd year at UofT here in Ontario for Law. I had spoken with him and asked if he could bring up my situation in general with his professor to get an idea of where i do stand as i called a couple of places and they want a fair peice of change to discuss this.. go figure.. more people wanting more money :D

Well he took in my release form , details on the minor issue and the pictures and details on the photo use and this is the short form of what he said.

- My release is very general and very simple. It clearly states that any and all images taken by me or anyone repersenting me has the right to do with them as the please, sell them to anyone to do as they please ect.

- Regarding the minor he said i had her sign a release not a contact so there would be no breach of contract. He said it would be if anything a verbal contract which would be only between myself and her as her daughter was a minor present and not legally able to enter into a contract or agreement. So she would have to prove that there was contract and prove that broke it.

- After the same explaination i posted here of how she was dressed a copy of the image of what she was wearing and a clear explaintaion of how she was wearing it he made the comment that i could have been charged with "Sexual Exploitation of a Minor" based on this.

"Lewd exhibition of the unclothed genitals, anus or pubic area of a person. An
exhibition is considered lewd if the depiction is designed for the purpose of eliciting or attempting to elicit a sexual response in the intended viewer; "

Now of course this was all done in general conversation, however i think if i had photographed her the way she was and the way they intended for me to do even if they where not going to show the head of the minor.. i think i stood to be put in a situation that could have been alot more than just a moral issue if someone with morals and an understanding of the law found out.

[Jeff]

If any "parts" were showing due to the "frontal wedgie" then it's child pornography which equals jailtime. No parental permission in the world is valid.

Kudos - I think you did the right thing.

[LBaldwin]

Michael,

I think you just taught a whole boat load of photographers a very valuable lesson!! Sometimes it is not easy doing the right thing. IF it were me, I would NOTHING further to do with that client. She has shown a serious lack of common sense.

Again, THANK YOU.

[anonyymi]

Taking pictures of minors - even wearing skimpy outfits - isn't paedophilia;)

That may be the case but I'm sure if you sent them for printing you'd be receiving a knock on the door from the police. If it got to the courts in the UK you would likely end up on the Sex Offenders register. Similar cases have been posted here before with photogs working with parents permission, no excuse when it comes before a judge.

[stephen_g]

I agree with you, I think it's terrible that such young girls are revealing so much of their bodies.
Oh yer, I might add that I'm still 'a young one' at 16.

[milorad]

If any "parts" were showing due to the "frontal wedgie" then it's child pornography which equals jailtime. No parental permission in the world is valid.

Kudos - I think you did the right thing.

If you're really a photographer, then you should learn the difference between underage nude photos, and child porn. Not just you, but a whole bunch of you in this thread.

Mind you, just because she had a frontal wedgie when she got changed, doesn't mean she'd need to be photographed that way.

In addition, a certain amount (not a huge amount) of frontal wedgieness is permissable, simply because that's the way lady bits are shaped.

Whether a photo is considered pornographic or not also depends on the salacious nature of it. It is entirely possible to have a nude photograph, without it being porn at all. Photography is an art, some of you should consider that the WAY you shoot has a large impact on the end product.

The way some folks shoot, you'd swear a fully-clothed shot of a chick in an overcoat was porn... nudity and porn aren't inextricably linked.

I think some of you guys don't take your art as seriously as you should. If you did, you'd familiarise yourself with what the law actually says, and how greatly that differs to american public perception.

I'm not saying that you should all go out and shoot naked underage girls -- far from it, because a lot of you would indeed turn out some horribly salacious pictures, which *SHOULD* get you canned, but I am saying that sometimes art can be controversial, and that doesn't make it illegal, or even that bad an idea.

2c.

[Robert16]

Yeah but it isn't you he would have to convince - it would be a jury. I can just imagine the scream from cell block B as the inmates cut your b*ll*cks off and flush them down the toilet " IT WAS AAAAART"

[S-S]

i definitely think you did the right thing by not shooting her in that state of undress. its appalling that the mother would not only allow but take part in this type of behavior....ill never understand people like that.

totally agree 100% - good for you to the OP!

[LBaldwin]

If you're really a photographer, then you should learn the difference between underage nude photos, and child porn. Not just you, but a whole bunch of you in this thread.

Mind you, just because she had a frontal wedgie when she got changed, doesn't mean she'd need to be photographed that way.

In addition, a certain amount (not a huge amount) of frontal wedgieness is permissable, simply because that's the way lady bits are shaped.

Whether a photo is considered pornographic or not also depends on the salacious nature of it. It is entirely possible to have a nude photograph, without it being porn at all. Photography is an art, some of you should consider that the WAY you shoot has a large impact on the end product.

The way some folks shoot, you'd swear a fully-clothed shot of a chick in an overcoat was porn... nudity and porn aren't inextricably linked.

I think some of you guys don't take your art as seriously as you should. If you did, you'd familiarise yourself with what the law actually says, and how greatly that differs to american public perception.

I'm not saying that you should all go out and shoot naked underage girls -- far from it, because a lot of you would indeed turn out some horribly salacious pictures, which *SHOULD* get you canned, but I am saying that sometimes art can be controversial, and that doesn't make it illegal, or even that bad an idea.

2c.

Hey milorad,

I don't know about downunder, but here in the US and probably all of NA, you cannot under ANY circumstances shoot nudes of an underage person, with the exception of babies on fuzzy white rugs. They will through you UNDER the jail for a very long time. Artistic needs aside it is against the law to photograph that girl in that outfit, period end of sentence. It is way too close to nude.

And really I cannot think of ANY artistic need to shoot someone under 18 when waiting a few months will allow it to be done legally. So your argument holds no water on this side of the pond. :rolleyes:

[anonyymi]

I take my freedom more seriously than my art. As far as I'm concerned I don't take pictures of anyone else's children, clothed or not without permission and I wouldn't consider taking anything but fully clothed even with permission. It's a sad reflection of our paranoid society. The truth is that the vast majority of adults mean no harm to children, but the media has a lot to answer for in increasing the fear factor beyond common sense.

[milorad]

Hey milorad,

hey there.

I think you'll find that's actually not the case, but I'm sure its widely understood to be the case. The USA has nudist colonies too, and some with photos on their website too. Those are indeed protected under current US law. The purpose of your photo is as important as the subject, under the law.

Conveniently though, you've managed to ignore most of my point, which is that she wasn't actually nude.

But hey, thanks for the eye-rolling smiley anyway.... oh and by the way, just because you can't think of a reason, doesn't mean there isn't one.

[Glenn NK]

hey there.

I think you'll find that's actually not the case, but I'm sure its widely understood to be the case. The USA has nudist colonies too, and some with photos on their website too. Those are indeed protected under current US law. The purpose of your photo is as important as the subject, under the law.

Conveniently though, you've managed to ignore most of my point, which is that she wasn't actually nude.

But hey, thanks for the eye-rolling smiley anyway.... oh and by the way, just because you can't think of a reason, doesn't mean there isn't one.

The OP is governed by Canadian law only (the Criminal Code of Canada would apply not provincial law). The decision would be in the hands of a single judge (no jury), and as such, any decision would be subject to interpretation of the law by the judge.

Whether or not the OP would be judged to be innocent is a moot point, as the legal fight he could have faced would simply not be worth it.

The laws of other countries don't have much bearing on this particular case.

On the very particular subject of Canadian law and photographer's rights, I refer Canadian photograperhs to an article in the January 2007 edition of PhotoLife which illustrates more than anything that photographers' rights vary considerably from province to province, state to state, and country to country.

[Andrushka]

the court of public opinion varies from country to country too, apparently! Even if the OP or someone in his position was accused, or scandalized in some way without even being charged for any crime, the damage to his cred, personally and as a photog would be enough to warrant avoiding the whole situation, don't you think?

This sounds like a case of "though it may not be illegal, its still not a good idea!"

[gjl711]

the court of public opinion varies from country to country too, apparently! Even if the OP or someone in his position was accused, or scandalized in some way without even being charged for any crime, the damage to his cred, personally and as a photog would be enough to warrant avoiding the whole situation, don't you think?

This sounds like a case of "though it may not be illegal, its still not a good idea!" That is very true in the states where even the accusation of a impropriety with a minor can ruin your life.

[Andrushka]

That is very true in the states where even the accusation of a impropriety with a minor can ruin your life.

exactly!

[sl3966]

That is very true in the states where even the accusation of a impropriety with a minor can ruin your life.
I have found that in the states even having a camera that is not a P&S is grounds for people suspecting you of something. I can't count the number of times I have had the cops or security guards called when shooting a (fully clothed) model.

[Killjoy]

I approve you standing by your morals.

Just out of curiosity, did you do the shoot with an adult model?
Was the mother happy with the results?
Did one of your models get more work, and prints to show for her portfolio?

Just wondering if this all turned out as happy as possible.

[Michael_Lambert]

Killjoy,

I have a adult model lined up, and aparently they had images that they where able to submit that i had nothing to do with so they have.

I have provided her with the mesurements of the model we are going to use and she is going to have a couple of outfits done up for her when i return from Vegas at the end of the month.

This model is working for the exposure, she will be doing a full day with me so she will have lot of shots done of her own expectations on top of the couple of outfits for the mother.

[stathunter]

Killjoy,


This model is working for the exposure, ..........

With those outfits she will have a lot exposed. :)


Michael - good job for standing up for what you believe in.

[Killjoy]

Killjoy,

I have a adult model lined up, and aparently they had images that they where able to submit that i had nothing to do with so they have.

I have provided her with the mesurements of the model we are going to use and she is going to have a couple of outfits done up for her when i return from Vegas at the end of the month.

This model is working for the exposure, she will be doing a full day with me so she will have lot of shots done of her own expectations on top of the couple of outfits for the mother.

It certainly sounds like you have turned this into a win/win/win scenario for everyone involved. ;)

[weka2000]

I read 2 things .... 1# mother 2# daughter + contest. Sounds like mum was wanting to win.

If we as photographers do not have any morals then its going to be very sad at what gets displayed.
"To thy own self be true"

You made a tough call but sounds like the right call.

[SlowBlink]

I think twice about including a fully clothed kid (15 qualifies) in a street shot. Art shooting IMO could have been done fully nude with the proper lighting and angles but this wasn't an art session. I thought the Miley photo was pretty good work on Annie's part. It was the Disney dynamic that caused the trouble more than anything else.

Hard to say if the mother was being exploitive or just made a really bad call. I prefer to leave some room before I make a call as serious as that. I think you handled it as well as you could have. Follow up gave you both some more understanding of the situation.

On the plus side, most prison cells are a neutral grey and perfect for metering. :)

[BlackJagger]

On the plus side, most prison cells are a neutral grey and perfect for metering. :)

Way to see the glass half full...lol

Cheers
Josh

[DocFrankenstein]

The canadian laws are scary in regards to little girls, you never know which way they'll come out... everybody is scared - you... her mom... lol it's ridiculous.

[jmcder53]

very interesting post. i'd say the OP did the right thing. all it takes is one person's opinion of the situation in a negative light and you'd be branded a pedophile or something. what if something happened to the images before the mother cropped the head out. it could have ended up on some pedophile website. it was out of your control but you'd still end up in jail. and i think most convicts don't think too highly of pedophiles. there's probably no Gray area to explain the mistake.
i know sometimes people are protective of their ideas. maybe the mother didn't want to give away info about her new business ideas. but in dealing with a minor i think the mother should have given a more thorough explanation.
i think to avoid this situation, we should all put Chris Hansen on our speed dials, facebook and myspace friend lists. (he's the host on that show to catch a predator)

[mwdakota]

"Lewd exhibition of the unclothed genitals, anus or pubic area of a person. An
exhibition is considered lewd if the depiction is designed for the purpose of eliciting or attempting to elicit a sexual response in the intended viewer
Was it centered on the genitals? That is the law, was the photo centered on the genitals, (aka genitals the the first thing "photographicly" that you looked at?
God bless the USA for making naked agenst the law!!!

[mwdakota]

An exhibition is considered lewd if the depiction is designed for the purpose of eliciting or attempting to elicit a sexual response in the intended viewer.
1)who is the intended viewer?
2)what "sexual" response was intended
3) was there a sexual response?
The number one reason I hate living in the us is (and BTW) I am not a pedo, is the US is afraid and un-willing to except anyone who feels nudity is OK and natural...
?

[BlackJagger]

Mwdakota as per the OP's situation it has more to do with a minor then just simply N.A.
s feelings on nudity. The laws are in place to make sure that minors are not exploited, and I would rather error on the side on conservatism and over protection to ensure that end.

Cheers,
Josh

[Chris450D]

reading this post a tad late i applaud you for your strong conscience and good will. its about time some moral grounds are enforced. it is because of people like you that youngsters may learn to respect their bodies and further more their dignity as human beings. shame on her mother too for allowing such obscenities!

it should have been much clearer what the model was going to wear since 'swimsuit' seems to have so much vast a meaning than we can imagine...

[Mark_Cohran]

Hey milorad,

I don't know about downunder, but here in the US and probably all of NA, you cannot under ANY circumstances shoot nudes of an underage person, with the exception of babies on fuzzy white rugs. They will through you UNDER the jail for a very long time. Artistic needs aside it is against the law to photograph that girl in that outfit, period end of sentence. It is way too close to nude.

And really I cannot think of ANY artistic need to shoot someone under 18 when waiting a few months will allow it to be done legally. So your argument holds no water on this side of the pond. :rolleyes:


Actually, that's not true at all. As others have stated here, nudity does not constitute pornography and photography of underage nudity isn't necessarily illegal in all jurisdictions.

[ThomGascoigne]

Dont worry about legal action. Theres nothing they can do unless you had a email agreement or a contract in writing.

It's in your house and you have the full right to refuse "service" and ask them to leave no question about it.

I do have some concerns with your speeling though.

[Pete]

I do have some concerns with your speeling though.

Not everyone here has strong English skills or runs over their posts with a spell/grammar checker. Look to the meaning, not to the actual words/spelling.

[LBaldwin]

Actually, that's not true at all. As others have stated here, nudity does not constitute pornography and photography of underage nudity isn't necessarily illegal in all jurisdictions.

Hi Mark, I've been thinking about your post, on the surface it is correct. But in reality I don't think it is advisable. First there are no real reasons to use an underage model. Second and most importantly the acid test for these is usually what the local standards are for objectionable material.

The probable legal and financial issues could be staggering, plus the potential for damage to what is otherwise a good reputation.

The costs are way too high for the potential gain.

[Mark_Cohran]

Hi Mark, I've been thinking about your post, on the surface it is correct. But in reality I don't think it is advisable. First there are no real reasons to use an underage model. Second and most importantly the acid test for these is usually what the local standards are for objectionable material.

The probable legal and financial issues could be staggering, plus the potential for damage to what is otherwise a good reputation.

The costs are way too high for the potential gain.

For the normal hobbiest, you could be right, but there are occasions when such photography is perfectly legitimate. For example, families that are nudist and want to record the family vacation and use a resort photogapher or a friend of the family. There are other situations as well, and I can think of at least two situations where I have taken such images with the parent's consent and blessing. They were completely non-sexual in nature and were part of the family's normal lifestyle.

If it's a situation that would make you uncomfortable, certainly don't do it. On the other hand, to simply dismiss it complete out of hand without considering the circumstances isn't the best answer either.

[timescapes.org]

Hahaha. Is this OP for real?? I haven't been here long enough to know if this guy is pulling our leg or what.

A couple of points:

1) You need to post a couple of samples from the shoot so we can judge the situation. ;)
2) It is not illegal to photograph teenagers or kids or anyone else in thongs, or even buck naked. Look at Jock Sturges' photos, which are sold in every Barnes & Noble in America. It's nothing but naked 13 year old girls.

[ThomGascoigne]

Not everyone here has strong English skills or runs over their posts with a spell/grammar checker. Look to the meaning, not to the actual words/spelling.

Thanks Pete. I still am concerned though as it makes me suspicious as it reads like it was written by a 14 year old.

[bluefox9er]

i really admire the way you handled this situation. let her try sue you, she has no leg to stand on. a plus for decency and good values..you have my respect,sir :)

[Killjoy]

Michael,
It's been a little over a month since your first experience with this woman.
You were going to have an adult model her swimwear, and you were going to shoot it.

Just to satisfy everyone's curiosity, if you have done this already, can you post some of the images of what you thought were improper attire for a minor?
I realize this is the "Talk about photography" section, but perhaps you can add a link to a thread where these photos might not raise an eyebrow.

Thanks.