amanda Irish wrote:
well she cant from my heart.  but she is gonna do what she wanna do.  this is my say so, and society looks at it that way so that means no.  she is not legal.. so there is no i think and my opinion.  its what its is.  so my thought and opinions is my feeling for this young lady is my business.  she should not do it yet.

Look amanda, you're new here and so I'll let the "pervert" comment slide.  What I will not accept as someone who has both more experience in this industry than you, and as a person who has more experience with life than you, is this concept that your opinion is fact.  I also am well known around here for not allowing blatantly incorrect statements made as statements of fact to stand without rebuttal.

She *can* model lingerie.

You may think it is a bad idea, and you may express that opinion, but don't try to express it as a statement of fact.

She is legally allowed to model in any state of dress or undress that she is comfortable with, all the way from Ball gown to Birthday suit.

Your opinion is your business, but once you start voicing your opinion in a "matter of fact" tone, it becomes anybody's business that has facts to repute it.

DeBoer Photography wrote:

Who said anything about the advice having to do with "moral" issues?  It would seem that the "moral" dilema was something the people wanting a young girl to pose nude or nearly nude threw into the mix.

Re-read again and you will see that those who suggest that she wait are not suggesting for "moral" reasons but for reasons that will help her avoid potentially "sleazy" photographers and possibly closing some doors for her in the field of modeling.

Regards,

Denoy

P.S.

And no, just because a photographer photographs nude images, lingerie, fine arts, or even erotic (or even graphic nudity), that does not make them a "sleazy" photographer.

I am sure Tawny is smart enough to figure out whom to work with and whom to avoid.  Her portfolio and responses on here are indicative of that.

I have read, and re-read and actually, I've read a few posts that are stating that 17 is just to young, with phrases like "toooooo young" "standards people standards" "You shouldn't even own lingerie at 17" and "sexualizing a CHILD" in them. This screams a morals issue and that is why I stated my post as such. This isn't to knock them or what they believe in, but instead, I'm curious as to whether these folks with their so called morals would reject an offer for V.S. or F.O.H. if they knew the model/s were under 18.

I understand the reasoning behind trying to avoid the "sleazy" photographers. I wish we could all help the girls that get hooked up with the not so good crowd. I've watched one of these shoots at a workshop and I'll never forget the look in her eyes as it looked like she just gave away her soul. Yeah, she was over 18, and even stated she didn't shoot nudes. Well, by the end of the day, there she was naked and lost. All for a handful of dollars.

I don't want to see that look again.

amanda Irish wrote:
but im not knew to the game at all.

To the modeling game? Obviously you are...just by your other thread...

amanda Irish wrote:
i look on victoria secrets and royal lingerie and checked out the ages.

18+

SHE IS A KID.

She has adults making decisions for her...the question asked was is she too young...legally no...in the industry no...the only objections that have been brought up are moral...morality has no part in answering this question...neither does anyone's personal opinion...the only personal opinion that counts are those of the original poster and her parents.

http://www.jurgita.com/models-id10368.html

"In 1999, when she was 16, Isabeli appeared in the Victoria's Secret catalog."

Tawny Heath wrote:
Thank you! I am getting my zeds and portfolio together now and will be looking for a very reputable agent soon.

you realize that for most of the legit mainstream agencies, you don't need zeds to be considered as a new face; more than likely, if the agency signs you, you'll be provided a few names of photographers that particular agency uses & asked to get new photos anyway, all in line with the way [they] market their particular talent ...

fml_photog

amanda Irish wrote:
2 young 2 young that all im gonna say and good night with this situation.  others totally agree and like i said the girl is gonna do what she wants, but we all say. 2 young 2 young

moron...

what are you five years old?

I can just see you now dancing around with your fingers in your ears

"La la...Too Young...La La...Can't hear you...Too Young Too Young"

Alan from Aavian Prod wrote:
This thread is getting too emotional.  Can we stick to the OP's question about whether she should have lingerie pictures in her portfolio at age 17.

Unfortunately no one can seem to seperate the practical/business aspects she was asking for from the immediate knee-jerk response that lingerie which covers more than her bikinis is "dirrrrrty" because it "sexualizes a child."
I get mental trying to debate rational points with people because they don't stay rational, they jump right to emotional points or (in the case especially of political or religious arguments) ingrained personal beliefs that have no rational basis.  *Shrug*  Sounds like Tawny & her mom are both bright enough to have worked out the better advice here & make the right decision for rational reasons tho.
Sad that a 17 yr old is more level-headed than some of the adults here!

James Jackson wrote:

Look amanda, you're new here and so I'll let the "pervert" comment slide.  What I will not accept as someone who has both more experience in this industry than you, and as a person who has more experience with life than you, is this concept that your opinion is fact.  I also am well known around here for not allowing blatantly incorrect statements made as statements of fact to stand without rebuttal.

She *can* model lingerie.

You may think it is a bad idea, and you may express that opinion, but don't try to express it as a statement of fact.

She is legally allowed to model in any state of dress or undress that she is comfortable with, all the way from Ball gown to Birthday suit.

Your opinion is your business, but once you start voicing your opinion in a "matter of fact" tone, it becomes anybody's business that has facts to repute it.

Seems to me that your doing the same thing that she is doing. Making your statements as fact as opposed to opinion. While the model may have a choices
every state has different laws regarding legal age of consent. And just because you are more Brash and Blatent with your opinion, does not make it fact. The models original question was not about morality or if the law permits.

All she asked if she should put the image on her z-card.

Alan from Aavian Prod wrote:
Can we stick to the OP's question about whether she should have lingerie pictures in her portfolio at age 17.

This is an issue that goes to sensibility in presentation.  Lingerie for someone this age should be in tear-sheet form and not just a standard portfolio shot. 

The difference becomes this; very few clients will hire a 17 year old for lingerie but upon doing that a tear-sheet will give the image some credibility.  A standard portfolio shot showcasing lingerie falls out of what is perceived as imaging practice for one under 18 at the commercial level, thus lack of credibility toward sensible presentation.  It becomes pushing an envelope with no compelling reason to do so.

The fallacy is the thinking that if "I don't show this type of work" it will be a detriment to gaining this type of work.  Forcing the issue without having client based imaging credibility can actually work against the model.

It's not really an issue of what is right or wrong, it is more about how others view the imaging as being sensible and in line with viable presentation for someone that age.  Without client backed credibility, the perception will more often show a lack of understanding toward how best for one to present themself for client based work.

The difference also goes to the type of client one seeks to attract.  If the goal is to work with 'net level shooters and not entirely focused on commercial level work, then grab the teddy and click away.

area291 wrote:
This is an issue that goes to sensibility in presentation.  Lingerie for someone this age should be in tear-sheet form and not just a standard portfolio shot. 

The difference becomes this; very few clients will hire a 17 year old for lingerie but upon doing that a tear-sheet will give the image some credibility.  A standard portfolio shot showcasing lingerie falls out of what is perceived as imaging practice for one under 18 at the commercial level, thus lack of credibility toward sensible presentation.  It becomes pushing an envelope with no compelling reason to do so.

The fallacy is the thinking that if "I don't show this type of work" it will be a detriment to gaining this type of work.  Forcing the issue without having client based imaging credibility can actually work against the model.

It's not really an issue of what is right or wrong, it is more about how others view the imaging as being sensible and in line with viable presentation for someone that age.  Without client backed credibility, the perception will more often show a lack of understanding toward how best for one to present themself for client based work.

The difference also goes to the type of client one seeks to attract.  If the goal is to work with 'net level shooters and not entirely focused on commercial level work, then grab the teddy and click away.

What you said isn't so different from what a number of people said.  What Alan & some of the rest of us were talking about were the people saying she shouldn't do it because it was bad & wrong & immoral, not because functionally it might not be the best thing for her career.

Moda Photographic wrote:
Seems to me that your doing the same thing that she is doing. Making your statements as fact as opposed to opinion. While the model may have a choices
every state has different laws regarding legal age of consent. And just because you are more Brash and Blatent with your opinion, does not make it fact. The models original question was not about morality or if the law permits.

All she asked if she should put the image on her z-card.

My statements are not that of opinion.  They are simple fact.  There is no legal age of consent issue with this question. 

The original question of whether she should put it on her zed card has been asked and answered and followed up with by the original poster and closed...the only issue that remains is the discussion we're all having as to the moral/ethical/legal implications of a 17 year old posing in lingerie.

The poster I was responding to said that she should not even pose in lingerie...which is quite a different matter from putting a lingerie shot on her Zed.

Putting a lingerie shot on her Zed leads to the implications which Area291 has quite properly explained, and he is quite correct when he says:

area291 wrote:
This is an issue that goes to sensibility in presentation.  Lingerie for someone this age should be in tear-sheet form and not just a standard portfolio shot.

The issue of putting a lingerie shot on her Zed is separate from posing for lingerie shots.  There are many reasons she may consider at 17 to pose for a lingerie shot, and there is nothing barring her from doing so.  Many of those responding with the opinion "she's too young" are stating it as a fact and implying there is some legal reason or factual reason for her not to do so, when there is not.

So as has been said before:

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should do something.
Just because you think someone else should not do something doesn't mean they can not do it.

Completely separating fact from opinion is difficult, but when giving advice on issues like this you should do so, and state both the facts and the opinions if you feel your opinion changes what the fact would lead you to do.

DeBoer Photography wrote:

Playing Devil's Advocate...

Why were you with that group of "sleazy" photographers....and why, when you could see that "look" did you not step in and stop the shoot?

Also, did you photograph this model as she expressed the look...and did you keep shooting?

Does the model in question stlll model?  Does she now do nude work?  Does she display those types of images in her portfolio?

I'd like to find out if she really felt like she "gave away her soul" or if you are reading your own "guilt" into this situation.

- Denoy

P.S.

Do you still attend those photo shoots by that "group?"  Have you let others know what happens at the shoots sponsored by that group?  You stated that you do not wish to see that happen again...but have you done anything to discourage "unwitting" models from posing for them?

Have you tried to advocate that "young" models not pose in lingerie as it might attact the "wrong" crowd... or are you questioning those people who express their "morals" in an attempt to "protect" the model from attracting the wrong kind of attention from the wrong kind of people?

Or did you, instead, throw in a "shoot for $$$" for a well-known commercial ad for VS or FOH....to see if such people would think it was okay for her to shoot for COMMERCIAL purposes in a (hopefully) protected environment...only to try to knock them for expressing their "morals" in trying to "protect" a young model?

I ask, because you played Devil's Advocate and threw in the "shoot for $$$" for a VS or FOH ad bit...

Which would seem to me like you are one of the people who feel it is "okay" for her to post lingerie pics in her online portfolio...even without the advice of a reputable agent/agency.

If this seems like an "attack" it isn't.  I am simply asking because you mentioned you do not want to see "that look" and yet contrary to that, your posting and tactics seem to be those that try to pursuade "young new" models to do things that may not be in their best interest.

And what is in their best interest?  Only the model herself would know that...as well as her family...and yes...a reputable agent.

Just food for thought...

Cool, food for thought...I just wish I had a cup of coffe to help the thinking process!

I realize this isn't an attack Denoy, and I'm more than happy to explain.

I was at the group shoot as a supplier of lighting equipment and to shoot a specific(different) model. It was near the beginning of my so called career and was rather naive to the workings of these things. Do I feel guilty about not saying anything? Sure, a bit. However, legally I had no right to do anything. She was an adult and had every right to do what she was doing. However, if she was refusing and or if she was being physically abused, it would have been a different story.

Did I photograph the model?
Yes, but earlier in the day with her clothes on. That is how I knew that she wasn't shooting nudes. (I've always asked models what their comfort levels are prior to shooting since day 1)

Does she still model?
I don't know. I never saw the girl again (in person or online)

Do I still attend these shoots?
No. Have I been asked to attend again yes. Will I? No. I took myself out of the circle on that day. If I decide that I want to shoot porn, I'll hire a porn star. Not an innocent victim.

Have you tried to advocate that "young" models not pose in lingerie as it might attract the "wrong" crowd?
If having a lingerie shot in her online portfolio is what stands between getting "Pro" photographers and "sleazy" ones, then yes, I would say not to have lingerie shots in a models online portfolio. That however is not the case. This so called "sleazy" photographer is gonna prey on the girls regardless. In fact, it's the web cam girls who I feel that are at most risk. Not the model with High quality professional pictures. (lingerie , swimsuit or whatever)

I threw in the big $$$ shoot to see what kind of reaction I would get. And it worked...Not one person (model or photographer) responded saying they wouldn't do it even though it's a high paying gig with a bit of prestige. Oh, people still said 17 is to young, but I didn't see anyone turn down the offer to shoot the ad.

I fully understand people wanting to express their morals. But you have to stick by them otherwise, why bother? It's very similar to some of our lovely laws...(based on strong moral beliefs) For instance...It's considered indecent exposure for a girl to take off her top in public, unless she's a stripper. Then it's alright for her to get as naked as she wants, as long as she's getting paid for it. Or, how about it's illegal to have sex for money, unless it's for a film/ adult movie. then it's OK. Go figure? It seems once a dollar sign shows up, the moral issue takes a back seat.

As for whether I'm OK with an "under age" model having lingerie shots in her portfolio?
Yes, I don't see an issue with it when done correctly. If a models parents and agency say no, then NO, there should be no form of lingerie pics in the portfolio. But let me ask...What about her swimsuit pics?  I've seen swimsuits cover far less and the girls are allowed to run around in public all day in them. Yet nobody says a word. A closer look at some swimwear, and it's built off the same design...Tops that look and are built exactly the same all the way from the clasps in the back to the under-wires and padding for extra cleavage. Lets not forget the thongs and brazilian backs and boy cuts that have half a cheek showing on the bottoms. Yet a swimsuit picture is considered a must for both a models portfolio and zed card.

As for my postings and tactics, just playing Devils Advocate again. My postings in this thread were based solely on the OP's original question and by the statements in her post. Nothing more. If this thread was started by some 15yr old wanting pics of herself in a see thru teddy and a pair of fishnet panties because it would be fun... Then my response would be far different.

I hope this clears things up a bit.

Let me just add....Since most of the girls I work with are agency girls, I shoot pics based on what they (model and agent) need. Would I shoot a minor in lingerie, yes, and to this date, I've only done it once. (Sort of) It was requested by the model and parents and styled by the agent for her comp card. The model is wearing pants and a jacket which is open to her navel to reveal the bra underneath. Was it a reputable agent? Yes, one of, if not the biggest in Las Vegas.

Was it wrong to do? No, I don't think so.

Tawny Heath wrote:
So, I just turned 17 about 3 weeks ago and I wanted to know if it was appropriate to have tasteful lingerie on my zed card and my portfolio or am I to young? I have one Lingerie picture of me on my picture gallery, and I think it looks tasteful and appropriate for my age...What do you think?

Unless the lingerie is conservative and shot in a commerical style, then I would probably avoid it at the age 17.  If the lingerie is too sexy in style (or too revealing) and the poses are too sexy ( ie. back shots, you on all fours, you with your legs spread, etc) or shot in a glamour or centerfold....then it's innappropiate at your age.  But it's always nice to add various different shots to your portfolio.