Ken Long wrote:
Not sure about this one, so please don't take it as Gospel-- but what about a notarized letter from your mother, granting an individual of age, limited "gaurdian rights" ?  Something simple that states that the escort is legally allowed to act on her behalf for the purposes of signing modeling contracts.  I'm not talking just a letter, but it would have to be notarized.  That's about the only way I know to make it legal.  Just an idea... maybe it's a bad one, I don't know.

Try not to take advice from people who don't know the law.  I could have a paper that indicates that I'm the King of England, and have it notarized.  Does that make me the King of England?

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlo/76R/ … 01794I.HTM - here is  a site with some language related to Texas law and what is considered "nudity" (less than fully opaque, etc.).


James

ImagesByJames wrote:

Try not to take advice from people who don't know the law.  I could have a paper that indicates that I'm the King of England, and have it notarized.  Does that make me the King of England?

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlo/76R/ … 01794I.HTM - here is  a site with some language related to Texas law and what is considered "nudity" (less than fully opaque, etc.).


James

Well, I did start it off by saying that I wasn't sure about that idea your majesty, but I do know that the notary would lose his license for your little stunt.

Ken Long wrote:
I do know that the notary would lose his license for your little stunt.

I haven't looked up the laws in Texas, but in Minnesota, the primary role of the Notary is to serve as a "witness" that the person who signed a document was authentic (that the person signing produced an ID to show that the name on the document that they are signing matches their name).  It is not the role of a notary to assess the legitimacy or legal stature of a document (after all, high-school secretaries at elementary schools are sometimes notaries to handle documents related to student affairs and registrations). 

More info for Minnesota at:
https://notary.sos.state.mn.us/

James

James Christian wrote:
And has anyone bothered to see where this girl is from?????  Not in the US people.

i guess us law would not much matter unless she crossed the border my advice is to go to a liberty and look up the law or what till you become of legal age where you are

Legend Images wrote:
I lean to the safe side with minors.  A photographer accused of inappropriate behavior would be guilty until proven innocent... and not much chance of that.  I would never risk my career for a shoot with a minor, no matter how bad she needed a break.  If I did consent to a shoot with you without your parents and you walked out of my dressing room looking like your avi I would have a heart attack.  You are probably going to have to work around Mom's schedule or wait till you are 18.  If you find a photographer that really doesn't care and is eager to book, BE VERY CAREFUL!



Having said that, you are beautiful.  Come to Phoenix when you are 18 and lets shoot!

i NEVER have any one under 18 dress in that either i too young to have a hart attack lol i think i would run AS FAST AS I COULD and as FAR AS I COULD and pray that no one know about it lol i get charged with Kidd porn in a hart beat where i live and i would like to say that i fell  it would be against my morals to dress little girls as such ie any one under 18

ImagesByJames wrote:
Except for your actual parents (or court appointed guardian) -- your escort cannot make any legal decisions for you.  As a minor, you cannot make any "legal" decisions or be forced to comply to any agreement/decision you make.

The parent or guardian is more a protection for the photographer - in case the model turns "psycho." (grin)

A minor female accusing a photographer of doing something unsavory is major "he-said/she-said" in which his word will count for very little.  Especially for lingerie, sheer, implied - which essentially means that in some of the United States - could mean the electric chair for the photographers (just kidding).

A model release co-signed by a parent is not truly enforcable unless the parent is APPROVING the work that the model is doing.  After all, without a parent there - the parent could later claim "I was never informed the photographer was going to photograph my innocent little girl in a BIKINI!  I would have NEVER allowed that if I were PERMITTED to stay."  (See how it can get bad for a photographer in a hurry?)

Wait 3 months - and focus on your school studies.  Long after you are too old to model - your education will keep you earning.

James

I'm homeschooled. I start university in the fall, I'm on a break. haha. Thanks for the advice though, every little bit helps

nathan combs wrote:

i NEVER have any one under 18 dress in that either i too young to have a hart attack lol i think i would run AS FAST AS I COULD and as FAR AS I COULD and pray that no one know about it lol i get charged with Kidd porn in a hart beat where i live and i would like to say that i fell  it would be against my morals to dress little girls as such ie any one under 18

My mother met the photographer before the shoot and saw the outfits. If Victoria Secret models under 18 can do it, so can I. Secondly, I'm Canadian, our laws aren't as strict around here about these sort of things. I can do nude if I'm so inclined, as long as my mother signs off on the release. Granted, I choose to not.

Suzan Aktug wrote:
As a model who is a minor (only for three more months thank God), I have a problem that I run into rather frequently, which I'm hoping to get some light shed on.

My father left when I was young, and my mother works two jobs fulltime to keep our family afloat. Due to this she isn't able to accompany me on shoots. She signs release forms and will drop me off if she has the time, sometimes she will come to the meet and greet before hand to talk to the photographer, but is more or less unavailable to be there. I will usually bring along a friend who is at least 19, or my boyfriend, who is 20.

I understand that some photographers do not want to shoot a minor without a parent present, but in my situation, it's more or less impossible, and if the release is signed, is it really so bad that my 'escort' is not related to me?

Suzan Aktug wrote:
My mother met the photographer before the shoot and saw the outfits. If Victoria Secret models under 18 can do it, so can I. Secondly, I'm Canadian, our laws aren't as strict around here about these sort of things. I can do nude if I'm so inclined, as long as my mother signs off on the release. Granted, I choose to not.

that is the thing your out of the US different laws i not criticising you i just trying to say there are a lot of things that could happen hear in the US that could put a lot of people out of bigness guilty or not there have been stings on tv (dateline) that netted a lot of sleaz bags but on the other hand if a local sheriff decided to do the same thing and reads the law a bit different boom your life is over Victoria secret is MEGA rich and can get away with more and it depends where you are also if your in a more liberal city or Regen you get buy with more the laws are VERY veg and it is up to the prosecutor you also have to remember if it an election year for him or her and they need to make an example of some one

ps they could Evin go after your mom if the right sucstasis are right but like i sed before follow the law where you are at

Carlos Arturo Velarde wrote:
It's for the photographer's legal protection. If I was to work with you without your mom present I would meet with her beforehand and write up a special release stating exactly every outfit we would be using as wardrobe down to the size, fabric and color. It would then specify very clearly the types of poses to be enacted during the shoot, and also what poses/angles are to be avoided, and finally stating that the person signing this is your legal guardian.
I would the require that it be notarized in front of me, and I would receive the original and your mom keep a copy.
I would also have another contract to be signed after she reviews *every shot* stating she has done so and feels that the shoot complied fully with the agreed-on rules and limitations. I would also video the whole shoot from your arrival to your departure.

...or I would just wait 3 months and then work with you

To me that seems a little over done, and I'm not refferring to lingerie specifically, I'm reffering to any kind of shoot. I don't know any models my age who have had to go through all of that just so that their parent wasn't at the shoot. I think that the USA is much more strict about these sort of things. Probably not the best area for me to be asking this question since all the responses are from Americans.

Granted, still thankyou for the advice.

Abdiel Urcullu Photo wrote:
who is signing model releases? i hope it's not ur friend and boyfriend cause someone (the photographers) can get screwed if they let that happen

Did you happen to actually read her post?  The part where she said her mother was signing the releases?  Or did you just read "minor" and "photo shoot" and immediately find your knee jerking in response?

ImagesByJames wrote:
Try not to take advice from people who don't know the law.  . . . .

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlo/76R/ … 01794I.HTM - here is  a site with some language related to Texas law and what is considered "nudity" (less than fully opaque, etc.).

Why would you post that?  What possible relevance does it have to her?

1.  The law you post is a Texas law. It has no relevance to anyone outside Texas, and in fact the definition used is not the same as used in some other states.

2.  The OP is in another country, not Texas.  US law in general, and Texas law in particular, does not apply to her.

3.  Even if she were in Texas, the law would not apply to her.  She is 17; the Texas law applies only to people under 17.

4.  "Nudity" is not at issue in what she is doing.  She explictly stated that she does not do nudes.  So it really doesn't matter what the law relating to nudes is.

5.  In her country, which is much more civilized than the United States, nudity at age 17 isn't illegal.  She said that (and is correct).  So how could posting a law in Texas concievably answer any question she has?

6.  It's not at all clear that the Texas law is constitutional, even though it is on the books.

7.  In most of the United States shooting simple, non-sexual nudes of 17 year old people is not illegal.  (Yeah, I know, now there will be a hue and cry about how it really is illegal - which isn't true - or about how if it isn't, it should be, or about how we know it's really legal but nobody should do it because they will be arrested anyway.  Spare us.  We have already had that conversation over and over again.)

For seven different reasons, citing that law does nothing but raise the emotional stakes among those who want to condemn a model who is doing nothing wrong, and provides no useful information that actually can help her in answering her question.

TXPhotog wrote:
Susan, your post has done what such posts usually do:  attracted the paranoid segment of our community.  Things are not nearly as stark and forbidding as they are made out to be on the Internet.  Please disregard nearly everything you have heard in this thread so far - it bears little relationship to the real world.

It sounds like you have a good head on your shoulders, and a responsible, caring mother.  Those two things will go a long way.  Nothing you are doing is illegal, immoral or fattening.  Carry on.

YEP i am paranoid and i see no reason to photo little girls in there undies.

now i am going to put up a little snareo (i am applying this as if it where in the US)

Bob the photographer has a profile on all the modeling sites

Bob is contacted by Jane who is under 18 to shoot some undie photos

Jane seas that her mom can not be there but if Bob meets her and her mom her mom will sine what ever Bob has

ok now Bob shows up where he is going to photo Jane but instead of meeting Jane he is met with Bubba the county sharf that just so happens to be in an election year and just recently got slammed in the locale news paper for being soft on sexafnders

now Bob is in had coffes and is red his miranda rights and put in to a police car

Bob is telling Bubba the Sheff i did nothing illegal

Bubba seas shut up yes you did

now Bob's mug shot is on the front of the news paper with the other "perverts" that the sting rounded up and Bubba is there too with a big smile on his face because he looks VERY good now and is going to get reelected

now Bob is in jail and he meats Freddy.....................................

now Bob gos to Cort gets a attorney that costs LOTS and LOTS of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

ok now 3 things can happen to Bob
1. he can be found not guilty
a. but Bob rep is allured heart he may get a small paragraph in the paper saying he was found not guilty but it will be in the back some where next to the story about the cat that rides a skate Bord and no one will read it but WILL remember Bob's mug shot on the cover a while back and remember Bob has already made "friends" with Freddy
2.Bob can be found guilty the laws are so brouard that it leaves a LOT of room for INTERPTAION
a. Bob is put in jail and has to now rester as a sex offender and has now become Freddys girl friend
3.Bob can spend LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS of $$$$$$$$ and appeal the decision her could win and might not
a. Bob now becomes Freddys wife


now Bob could have avoided all this by just simply saying to Jane no thank you i do not photo any one under the age of 18 unless it is for a portrait and your mother has to be present at all times and i would NEVER photo any one under 18 in there undies.

just remember it is HOW some one interprets the law that makes some thing illegal or not.

john knight wrote:
I have to disagree , a police sting is not an overnight thing and most officers spend weeks to months sorting through the lists of contacts to find the one who will and do offer to have sexual contact with the female in question.....they do not care about some photographer offering to take photos and then ushering the girl home......the only way that you can be arrested is to have contact of some sort or arrange to have contact of some sort with the model.....and then they have to have proof , which is normally the emails or phone calls that were recorded....taking photographs is not illegal.....if that were true, most agencies would not exist.....mainstream models are a lot younger than they appear.....

the difference come in to as where you live and how much $$$$ you have in say LA, CA you can get a way with a LOT more than in Waynesboro VA like i sed it is interpretation of the law and people at say a big copney like Victoria secret or some thing can got a way with more because the can afford the attorneys and such hear if i photoed the girl that started the thread in what she is wearing i WOULD get arrested for child porn no qustens asked i could yell all i wonted that it is legal but i am a frad it would fall on deaf ears

nathan combs wrote:

the difference come in to as where you live and how much $$$$ you have in say LA, CA you can get a way with a LOT more than in Waynesboro VA like i sed it is interpretation of the law and people at say a big copney like Victoria secret or some thing can got a way with more because the can afford the attorneys and such hear if i photoed the girl that started the thread in what she is wearing i WOULD get arrested for child porn no qustens asked i could yell all i wonted that it is legal but i am a frad it would fall on deaf ears

Well you have answered the question yourself, if you feel that shooting a minor in lingerie could lead to arrest, then shoot the minor but not in lingerie.....If you and a minor model choose to work together then reach an agreement before hand about the types of photographs that you,the photographer,are comfortable doing with a minor, and keep a firm hold on those standards during the shoot....then any photographer should have no worries.

nathan combs wrote:
YEP i am paranoid

Well, we agree on that, at least.

nathan combs wrote:
and i see no reason to photo little girls in there undies.

Then don't do it!

But the fact that you see "no reason" has nothing whatever to do with other people with other reasons in other places.  Your paranoia is just that - YOURS.

nathan combs wrote:
now i am going to put up a little snareo (i am applying this as if it where in the US)

Why?  The OP is NOT in the US!  Why do you insist that she live by your perverted description of rules that do not apply to her?

nathan combs wrote:
Bob the photographer has a profile on all the modeling sites

Bob is contacted by Jane who is under 18 to shoot some undie photos

Jane seas that her mom can not be there but if Bob meets her and her mom her mom will sine what ever Bob has

Now let's add a little bit to the conversation, shall we?  Bob knows, and approves, that Jane will be bringing a legal-age escort to ensure that nothing illegal or imoral happens.  That approval is known to Sheriff Bubba.  At this point it is VERY hard to make a prima facie case that anything illegal is intended by Bob - and Bubba knows it.

nathan combs wrote:
ok now Bob shows up where he is going to photo Jane but instead of meeting Jane he is met with Bubba the county sharf that just so happens to be in an election year and just recently got slammed in the locale news paper for being soft on sexafnders

1.  Can you find me any place in the country where the local sheriff has "recently got slammed in the locale news paper for being soft on sexafnders" (sic)?  I didn't think so.  Now can you find me such a place in the OP's country?  No.  Your make-believe scenario just got more make-believe.

2.  Can you find me a sheriff anywhere in the country who will put on a sting operation to find photographers shooting legal pictures of people, with a legal-age escort along to assure legality?  No?  Now, can you find me a single case of such a thing ever happening?  No?  How about in her country?  No again?  Gee, what a surprise.

Your paranoid little make-believe fantasy is just that.  It is exactly the kind of hyper-inflated nonsense that whips people into this paranoid fear of photographers and models, that makes people see perverts behind every camera, and that contributes to the unreasoning fear that so many people allow to take over their lives.

ERNIE CHAN wrote:
I do not shoot with underage models-I would not with this model especially with the type of poses on her site-such as the one of her on the avatar-photographers please avoid legal trouble.

What "legal trouble" would that be, Ernie?  She is in Canada.  What she is doing is legal.  Completely, absolutely legal.  There isn't even a hint of anything illegal about it.  You are not doing anyone a service with that kind of advice.

If you don't want to shoot minors, that's fine.  Everyone makes their own choices.  But to give this kind of advice is just wrong, and is insulting to the OP, who has done nothing wrong.

Ken Long wrote:
Not sure about this one, so please don't take it as Gospel-- but what about a notarized letter from your mother, granting an individual of age, limited "gaurdian rights" ?  Something simple that states that the escort is legally allowed to act on her behalf for the purposes of signing modeling contracts.  I'm not talking just a letter, but it would have to be notarized.  That's about the only way I know to make it legal.  Just an idea... maybe it's a bad one, I don't know.

Good idea , but I do have a question that maybe Txphotog can answer, he is by all means pretty good with the laws that constitute photography.

Could mom or dad, who does not have time to attend the daughters sessions appoint power of attorney( as far as modeling goes) to a legal age person to oversee and attend the sessions with the daughter, such an agreement would ease the minds of many photographers.

Suzan Aktug wrote:

I'm homeschooled. I start university in the fall, I'm on a break. haha. Thanks for the advice though, every little bit helps

I am confused, I thought your mom worked two jobs to keep the family afloat?  Who does the home schooling?  Just curious because in FL and MA, even if there several parents involved in the overall curriculum, one of each ot the children's parent must teach as well.  Maybe it is different in Canada.

john knight wrote:
Could mom or dad, who does not have time to attend the daughters sessions appoint power of attorney( as far as modeling goes) to a legal age person to oversee and attend the sessions with the daughter, such an agreement would ease the minds of many photographers.

There are two "legal issues" here.  One is simple and already being dealt with:  the release.  The mother signed the release, so it is legal, and no "power of attorney" is required.

The other "legal issue" is not related to entering into a contract (which is what a power of attorney would enable) but rather the exercise of adult supervision over a situation including a minor to make sure that nothing "illegal" or "untoward" took place.  No power of attorney is needed for that - just a responsible adult acting under the guidance of the parent.  It sounds like that is exactly what is happening here.  Nothing else is needed.

(I would take it further - that this is more than what is needed - but we already have so many people in this thread with visions of Bubba in their heads that going down that path seems counter-productive.)

Apfel Photography wrote:
here is the simple truth. 

If the legal gaurdian is not present, don't even think about it!!!! PERIOD.

The court will side with a minor and their family 100% of the time unless there is documented legal proof that the child and family are "wolf cry'ers".

As for the author of this thread....just take a three month vacation and then start again once you are legal.  Simple enough.

1.  Has it occurred to you that the OP is the model, and the minor?  Even if what you were saying were true, it acts to protect her, not make her situation worse. 

She is asking, from her perspective, if what she is doing is a problem FOR HER.  Your answer, beside continuing the unreasoning paranoia of this thread, is not responsive to her question or her situation.

2.  You live in a city in which every day (during season) fashion models under 18 are shot by photographers, often in skimpy outfits, with no legal guardian present.  Are you even slightly influenced by that fact?

No, I thought not. 

The truth is that such shoots take place routinely and without problems in your own city - but you would rather condemn everyone involved in the industry anyway.

Not helpful.

Darren Green wrote:
TX - You got to stop hitting that brick wall with your head,

The discouraging thing is that the brick wall doesn't seem to notice.

TXPhotog wrote:

There are two "legal issues" here.  One is simple and already being dealt with:  the release.  The mother signed the release, so it is legal, and no "power of attorney" is required.

The other "legal issue" is not related to entering into a contract (which is what a power of attorney would enable) but rather the exercise of adult supervision over a situation including a minor to make sure that nothing "illegal" or "untoward" took place.  No power of attorney is needed for that - just a responsible adult acting under the guidance of the parent.  It sounds like that is exactly what is happening here.  Nothing else is needed.

(I would take it further - that this is more than what is needed - but we already have so many people in this thread with visions of Bubba in their heads that going down that path seems counter-productive.)

You are discussing situations of "driving with a legal guardian" or a minor going to Disney with and aunt and uncle.

However, this does not always spread to the world of acting or modeling.  A manager for a client who is a minor actually has a legal document stating they can represent the minor inthe parents absence because there are unplanned situations that are not pre-discussed and cleared with the parents (i.e. a article of clothing that the parent might find too sheer...etc).

The fact of the matter is that you have to look at the photographer.....there are so many "legal" models that I question why a photographer would choose a minor to do a lingerie or risque shoot with?

Ken Long wrote:
Not sure about this one, so please don't take it as Gospel-- but what about a notarized letter from your mother, granting an individual of age, limited "gaurdian rights" ?  Something simple that states that the escort is legally allowed to act on her behalf for the purposes of signing modeling contracts.  I'm not talking just a letter, but it would have to be notarized.  That's about the only way I know to make it legal.  Just an idea... maybe it's a bad one, I don't know.

=====
I think this is a possible good idea!  Not related to photography, but I have had parents designate me as guardian of their 15/16 your old daughters during on-site overnight work at the california renaissance faire. the idea was that the Faire owners demanded a guardian for -any- underage faire-worker who wanted to stay overnight on the faire grounds.
their parents signed a document provided by the Faire staff which stated that I was designated with gaurdian rights for that weekend (in case of accidents/illness/etc).

... why could the same NOT work for photography? if the document -was- notarized, then that -should- make it a legal document to "cover the photogs **s" ...yes???

Apfel Photography wrote:
You are discussing situations of "driving with a legal guardian" or a minor going to Disney with and aunt and uncle.

However, this does not always spread to the world of acting or modeling.

I am absolutely stunned!  Silly me!  What could I possibly have been thinking?  All this time I thought that this thread was about a Canadian girl who wanted to take a trip to Disney World without her parents.  Thank you for setting me straight.

(It's hard to type that while laughing)

Apfel Photography wrote:
A manager for a client who is a minor actually has a legal document stating they can represent the minor inthe parents absence because there are unplanned situations that are not pre-discussed and cleared with the parents (i.e. a article of clothing that the parent might find too sheer...etc).

And you know this how?  Because you have read such documents and found such a paragraph?

Bull. 

An agent or manager usually will have a limited power of attorney which allows them to act in the parent's stead in certain cases:  signing releases, signing contracts, collecting money owed to the minor and such.  There is nothing in such clauses allowing the kind of intervention for the parent that you are suggesting.  You just made that up.

Apfel Photography wrote:
The fact of the matter is that you have to look at the photographer.....there are so many "legal" models that I question why a photographer would choose a minor to do a lingerie or risque shoot with?

Because that's who the client chose.  Clients get to make those choices.  They are entirely legal choices.  As I said above, such shoots happen daily in your own city.

Time to wake up.  It's not the 16th Century anymore.