Shooting under 18s

ConfusedChicca

ConfusedChicca

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,053
Name
Laura
Edit My Images
Yes
I've been asked to do a glamour shoot of a girl that's 18 in December. By glamour she means mainly lingerie but with a few topless shots. I know I'll need parental permission and she'll need a chaperone on the day (that's over 18), but is there anything else I need to consider?
 
yes not to do it lol

she does not need a chaperon nor does she actually need parental permission to model under 18 (over 16).

taking topless shots of an under 18 is likely to get you a criminal record and be put on the sex offenders list too.
 
Not that I'm condoning under 18s getting their chebs out but it seems very peculiar that you can get married and have sex when you're 16 but not flash your tats. Why would that be? Everything is out of sync.
 
Its totally illegal to shoot a minor (under 18) in any sexually provocative poses and anything topless is totally gunna get you banged up.

Wait till December, after then, do it.

I Kinda agree with what Welly says, the world is a strange place. The other thing that would concern me is that if you turn away a girl like that, what if she then goes to a dodgy photographer who is willing to do it, you put her at risk of being with a dodgy guy.
 
She's already contacted some male photographers who are less than trustworthy, so she was referred to me as she's determined to get them done and if it's not me, it'll be someone extremely dodgy.
 
EdinburghGary said:
Walk away or wait until she is 18 for the topless shots. Or send her to Welly :D

Gary.
Click to expand...

Me? The 13th Duke of Wybourne? With an almost 18 year old? Topless?

13thduke2.jpg
 
ConfusedChicca said:
She's already contacted some male photographers who are less than trustworthy, so she was referred to me as she's determined to get them done and if it's not me, it'll be someone extremely dodgy.
Click to expand...

there does come a point when you need to think of yourself as well. Tell her what shes doing & the mistake she making, offer to do it the day after sher's 18, but at the end of the day she's responsible for her own actions and prtoecting her from dodgy photographers won't make what your doing any more legal.

Hugh
 
I have spoken to her about this, at length, but she won't listen. I was the same at 17, thought I knew everything and that nothing bad would happen to me. Her parents are fully supportive of her doing this, and it was them that approached me as I've worked with some people they know.
It's so frustrating, as has been said, it's legal to have sex at 16, and with the advent of video phones some of this sexual activity is filmed/photographed.. I think I need to speak to my police officer friend to clarify the law exactly, just thought someone on here might know exactly how it works.
 
The phrase you have to be careful off is...

"Sexualising a minor"

That means if you shoot a 16yr old and there's a bit of cleavage showing, just because you don't think it's sexy doesn't mean someone else won't - and if they happen to be their teacher who thinks it could be seen as sexy, the Rossers may well be knocking at your door !!!

DD
 
ConfusedChicca said:
I think I need to speak to my police officer friend to clarify the law exactly, just thought someone on here might know exactly how it works.
Click to expand...

Am I missing something? You've been told exactly how it works. It's illegal to shoot her topless until she is 18 and doing so, should you get caught out, will get you a criminal charge and added to the sex offenders register.
On top of that, parents who are so unscrupulous as to let their underage daughter flash her chest, will probably have no problem using the pics against you in future when they are short of a little cash.

My advice, don't be a fool... :cuckoo:
 
neo2810 said:
Am I missing something? You've been told exactly how it works. It's illegal to shoot her topless until she is 18 and doing so, should you get caught out, will get you a criminal charge and added to the sex offenders register.
On top of that, parents who are so unscrupulous as to let their underage daughter flash her chest, will probably have no problem using the pics against you in future when they are short of a little cash.

My advice, don't be a fool... :cuckoo:
Click to expand...

I was thinking that too - how many times/ways does NO need to be said :shrug:

DD
 
DiddyDave said:
The phrase you have to be careful off is...

"Sexualising a minor"

That means if you shoot a 16yr old and there's a bit of cleavage showing, just because you don't think it's sexy doesn't mean someone else won't - and if they happen to be their teacher who thinks it could be seen as sexy, the Rossers may well be knocking at your door !!!

DD
Click to expand...


Serious question but just out of curiosity more than anything.
We all know that girls look a lot older these days
So, someone books a "topless" studio shoot who may well look 18
Do yo take her word for it or do you ask for proof before
beginning the shoot?

Slightly OT sorry
 
Cobra said:
Serious question but just out of curiosity more than anything.
We all know that girls look a lot older these days
So, someone books a "topless" studio shoot who may well look 18
Do yo take her word for it or do you ask for proof before
beginning the shoot?

Slightly OT sorry
Click to expand...

Proof every single time. Ignorance is not an excuse in the eyes of the law.
 
Yip and also get her to understand the position she will be putting the 'Dodgy' male photographers in as lets face it, they might not realise that they are breaking the law...

Any photographer who is not just a random bloke with a camera is going to say no to this... it could ruin your career and also get you locked up...

I suppose on a side note if her parents are going to be there when it's done and let her get it done are they not likely to get prosecuted as well??
 
DiddyDave said:
I was thinking that too - how many times/ways does NO need to be said :shrug:

DD
Click to expand...

after all the advice she's had from Internet legal experts why could she possibly want advice from a 'real person' :thinking:
 
mrgubby said:
after all the advice she's had from Internet legal experts why could she possibly want advice from a 'real person' :thinking:
Click to expand...

strikes me as its pretty good advice - why ask for it if you don't want it??
 
mrgubby said:
after all the advice she's had from Internet legal experts why could she possibly want advice from a 'real person' :thinking:
Click to expand...

Ah - you've got me there - I'm just a pc generated 'person' passing on pretend info I've had from clients who are both teachers & Police - not a 'real person' at all

DD
 
I don't understand though.... it's not exactly a 'Grey' area in the eyes of the law... in fact it's pretty much the easiest law to understand... ok as has been mentioned sexually provocative images of an under 18 can be a tricky one, but topless is illegal end of.
 
Aye caramba this is bonkers. Being registered as a deviant to save a girl from herself and her parents? Not worth it IMO, if she is that daft she will pay for her ignorance in some way and to be frank it saves you paying for it.
 
Cobra said:
Serious question but just out of curiosity more than anything.
We all know that girls look a lot older these days
So, someone books a "topless" studio shoot who may well look 18
Do yo take her word for it or do you ask for proof before
beginning the shoot?

Slightly OT sorry
Click to expand...

I know of photographers that insist on at very least two forms of ID, one to be passport or driving license, and take photos of both sides / pages of passport, so that they have proof of doing so.

and as for the original post.... run like hell til december, and explain to her parents why you're doing so... hopefully they'll have a bit more sense...
 
DiddyDave said:
Ah - you've got me there - I'm just a pc generated 'person' passing on pretend info I've had from clients who are both teachers & Police - not a 'real person' at all

DD
Click to expand...

The point I was trying to get across is that there is no way of knowing the quality / reliability of the advice given across the forum is, after all how do I know you are really DiddyDave ??? :naughty:


Infact some days I'm not sure if I'm real or not :shrug:
 
mrgubby said:
The point I was trying to get across is that there is no way of knowing the quality / reliability of the advice given across the forum is, after all how do I know you are really DiddyDave ??? :naughty:


Infact some days I'm not sure if I'm real or not :shrug:
Click to expand...


Okies - understood (pinches self as a reality test, result = OUCH)

:)

DD
 
EdinburghGary said:
Proof every single time. Ignorance is not an excuse in the eyes of the law.
Click to expand...

itsdavedotnet said:
I know of photographers that insist on at very least two forms of ID, one to be passport or driving license, and take photos of both sides / pages of passport, so that they have proof of doing so.

and as for the original post.... run like hell til december, and explain to her parents why you're doing so... hopefully they'll have a bit more sense...
Click to expand...

Curiosity satisfied thanks guys :thumbs:
 
Creed said:
I don't understand though.... it's not exactly a 'Grey' area in the eyes of the law... in fact it's pretty much the easiest law to understand... ok as has been mentioned sexually provocative images of an under 18 can be a tricky one, but topless is illegal end of.
Click to expand...


actually its not the nakedness thats the point.

the law states that a person may not photography a minor underthe age of 18 (above 16) in an indecent way. indecent can be clothed.

The only way you could take those types of pictures is if they where for the model only and not published in any manor (includes internet).

The fact that the law says indecent is why most photographers stay away from anything remotely sexual in an under 18 photoshoot.

I've got no problem shooting a minor just not in anything other than fully clothed lol
 
The only obvious 'paps-out' I've had in our studio could have had their own 17 yr old kids - so I've not bothered with ID as yet

I reckon if they need to stretch upwards &/or use tape to get their paps above their knicker-line then they are old enough to not have legal worries! Worries over taste yes, but legal, no :lol:

DD
 
POAH said:
I've got no problem shooting a minor just not in anything other than fully clothed lol
Click to expand...

A pal of mine did a Prom night shoot a couple of years ago, and I swear some of the bra-less, back-less revealing dresses they were wearing could have been classed as indecent exposure in his pics :eek:

DD
 
DiddyDave said:
I reckon if they need to stretch upwards &/or use tape to get their paps above their knicker-line then they are old enough to not have legal worries! Worries over taste yes, but legal, no :lol:

DD
Click to expand...

Ah so you tend to go with "instinct" then :lol:
 
ConfusedChicca said:
I have spoken to her about this, at length, but she won't listen. I was the same at 17, thought I knew everything and that nothing bad would happen to me. Her parents are fully supportive of her doing this, and it was them that approached me as I've worked with some people they know.
It's so frustrating, as has been said, it's legal to have sex at 16, and with the advent of video phones some of this sexual activity is filmed/photographed.. I think I need to speak to my police officer friend to clarify the law exactly, just thought someone on here might know exactly how it works.
Click to expand...

I don't get it Chicca. You have been told by pro togs what the laws stance is on this. You don't like the help and advice given so choose to ask someone else. A Policeman/woman of all people. The Police actually know relatively little about the intricacies of the law, as is proved time and time again. I think a call to a Solicitor would be the best bet if you want someone else to tell you what has already been said.
 
Dave Stone said:
I don't get it Chicca. You have been told by pro togs what the laws stance is on this. You don't like the help and advice given so choose to ask someone else. A Policeman/woman of all people. The Police actually know relatively little about the intricacies of the law, as is proved time and time again. I think a call to a Solicitor would be the best bet if you want someone else to tell you what has already been said.
Click to expand...

I agree with what you are saying but can't blame her for wanting to be 100%, wouldn't risk it myself if there was even the smallest chance of getting into trouble, but if this police officer is a friend they can probably get the information she needs... a solicitor is likely to charge for even thinking about speaking to them.
 
To just jump to the defence of ConfusedChicca, she has hardly said she will be doing it. All she asked was for opinions, and then indicated she would ask a policeman for advice.

In my opinion, she is being extremely sensible. She has asked here, and will be asking a policeman, before making a decision. Something tells me the police will put her right.

I would not be so quick to jump down her throat as she really has not committed to this shoot at all.

Gary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top