Unique Imaging wrote:
It's comical to me that some people...........

Sorry dude, but you when say something as ridiculous as this.......

Unique Imaging wrote:
Your opinion is that I have judged him. t's already been proven that he did. Read the article.

Now its just onto finding out how many others he did this too hence the reason for this post

you lose any credibility with me, & it is what caught my attention enough to look closer at things. Between your three other locked threads, your profile, & your geographical proximity to Mr. Faulkner it got my eyes rolling about.

You take a piece of FINE newspaper reporting, which IMHO reeks of BS to high heavens....and purport that to be truth & proof....throw everything else into the pot mentioned........yeah, I sell bridges. Would you like to buy one?

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I for one call bullshi%.   You posted three threads about this.   That's not
about informing that smells like a agenda.  If this man is guilty let
the police and courts do their jobs.   I don't think they need your help.
One thread was all that was needed.   If it was locked or removed petition
the Mods to reopen it.   

None of us knows for sure if he's guilty or innocent.   If found guilty he
may go to jail although, I suspect he may not but in any case innocent or
guilty his life will be ruined for years to come.   Lets say the police
are wrong.   What if the other models were wiling participants in all this?
Would you be as vigilant  in letting everyone know about his innocence.

Women who worked with the accused and lets be clear that's all he is.
Are concerned as they should be.   This is a big mess but its not your mess
to clean nor race around to tell everybody.  However you do win the
Fear Monger award of the month.

Tony, I wish that the OP ... aka "Unique Imaging" would post his own name on his profile.  I know your name, and I can call you on the phone.  Like wise, you've got my name and phone number. 

I've already posted a public apology to the OP if I am indeed mistaken about his motive. However it bothers me that the OP has not participated a whole lot on the forums until now ... and that his first (and multiple) posts are over warning models about another photographer.  How would I not consider that there could be some ulterior motives?  It's completely understandable that you and I would consider that he is "white knighting" the situation. 

It's nice to want to warn folks about a situation where other models may come forward and so on ... but this is limited to a small area geographically.  We are posting on a World Wide Web forum that gets read by other folks all over the place.  It magnifies the situation even more because of the access to information.  But why make this a bigger story than it is? 

The photographer has been arrested for allegedly committing class one misdemeanors. The article doesn't even say anything about bail, so on such charges, I would guess he either bailed or might not even have had bail since the suspect was cooperating with the police. It's really not much of a story compared to the model and boyfriend allegedly killing a tattoo shop owner!   Let's not be passing judgement on these people unless we get picked for jury duty! 

As for the OP, he has not posted his own name on his profile and remains anonymous.  I have more respect for those who put their own name out there when they are making accusations against others.  That's all.

JoShyra wrote:
Wow, when I hear stories like this, I try to think of it as an isolated incident but many times when reading the forums, it seems like so many other photographers go out of their way to defend these types of individuals. That is what really makes it seem like the incident isn't so "isolated"

I understand "guilty until proven innocent" but I think many don't know the difference between guilty and found guilty by a court of law.

If I shoot someone because I want their parking spot, I am guilty of the crime. Period. Whether a court finds me guilty is a different story.

Whether this person is guilty is one thing but the issue is that we models have come across this type of action plenty of times and try to think of each creep as an individual, but seeing so many photographers continue to defend these actions really enforces the stereotypes in my mind. I would have rather nothing be said, after all the original post was a fact finding mission and a warning, but I know this type of post always gets such a reaction.

I really have to question if you're the type of person who will look out for my best interest, I try to separate the "creepy, touch feely, lurching" photographers from the good ones but more and more I see good photographers defending anything a photographer does, no matter how bad it is.

I'm just being honest, I'm not sure how many other models feel the same way.

Actually, I haven't seen ANYONE "defend the actions."  Some are more or less convinced of the guilt of the accused, and some have questions about others' motives.  No on endorses the activity that is alleged.

Cherrystone wrote:

Unique Imaging wrote:
It's comical to me that some people...........

Sorry dude, but you when say something as ridiculous as this.......


you lose any credibility with me, & it is what caught my attention enough to look closer at things. Between your three other locked threads, your profile, & your geographical proximity to Mr. Faulkner it got my eyes rolling about.

You take a piece of FINE newspaper reporting, which IMHO reeks of BS to high heavens....and purport that to be truth & proof....throw everything else into the pot mentioned........yeah, I sell bridges. Would you like to buy one?

He must really want that Hooters gig bad

Greg Kolack wrote:
Interesting thread of a related nature:

https://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=672987

I think we all agree, some will be convicted and some will not.   Of course, we need to wait for a verdict here until we know the outcome.

We already know that some other photographers have been convicted in the past.

ei Total Productions wrote:

I think we all agree, some will be convicted and some will not.   Of course, we need to wait for a verdict here until we know the outcome.

We already know that some other photographers have been convicted in the past.

I agree 100%.

Patrick Walberg wrote:

Tony, I wish that the OP ... aka "Unique Imaging" would post his own name on his profile.  I know your name, and I can call you on the phone.  Like wise, you've got my name and phone number. 

I've already posted a public apology to the OP if I am indeed mistaken about his motive. However it bothers me that the OP has not participated a whole lot on the forums until now ... and that his first (and multiple) posts are over warning models about another photographer.  How would I not consider that there could be some ulterior motives?  It's completely understandable that you and I would consider that he is "white knighting" the situation. 

It's nice to want to warn folks about a situation where other models may come forward and so on ... but this is limited to a small area geographically.  We are posting on a World Wide Web forum that gets read by other folks all over the place.  It magnifies the situation even more because of the access to information.  But why make this a bigger story than it is? 

The photographer has been arrested for allegedly committing class one misdemeanors. The article doesn't even say anything about bail, so on such charges, I would guess he either bailed or might not even have had bail since the suspect was cooperating with the police. It's really not much of a story compared to the model and boyfriend allegedly killing a tattoo shop owner!   Let's not be passing judgement on these people unless we get picked for jury duty! 

As for the OP, he has not posted his own name on his profile and remains anonymous.  I have more respect for those who put their own name out there when they are making accusations against others.  That's all.

Pat,  I don't know if, I said this but you are a real asset to MM.   You
are a classy and thoughtful person.   I don't know the OP at all from
forum posts but I am troubled with his almost glee at the downfall of
a brother photographer.   His in my mind pretense about his motives and
his need to post the same thread several times.   Hey models did you
know so and so might have taken some secret videos of you.   Get the
word out, lets get 'em.

First it hurts us all and strengths the case for escorts and concerns
about all of us in general.   Second it says you have a certain contempt
for other photographers.   I wouldn't have felt this way if the OP had simply
said:   A area photographer has been arrested for secretly recording videos
of a model while she changed.   Models who have worked with this
man are encouraged to call the police and review tapes found.

No judgements about his guilt or innocence.   No multiple postings
of duplicate threads.   This man wasn't arrested for rape or sex abuse.
Whatever the outcome.   This is really between the models he worked
with and him.   If he's dirty, I guess he'll get punished.   I won't be one
of those laughing or throwing dirt on him. 
What was it the prophet said?   He among us without sin cast the first
stone.   Shoot, I'd be throwing rocks at my reflection for years.

JoShyra wrote:
Wow, when I hear stories like this, I try to think of it as an isolated incident but many times when reading the forums, it seems like so many other photographers go out of their way to defend these types of individuals. That is what really makes it seem like the incident isn't so "isolated"

I understand "guilty until proven innocent" but I think many don't know the difference between guilty and found guilty by a court of law.

If I shoot someone because I want their parking spot, I am guilty of the crime. Period. Whether a court finds me guilty is a different story.

Whether this person is guilty is one thing but the issue is that we models have come across this type of action plenty of times and try to think of each creep as an individual, but seeing so many photographers continue to defend these actions really enforces the stereotypes in my mind. I would have rather nothing be said, after all the original post was a fact finding mission and a warning, but I know this type of post always gets such a reaction.

I really have to question if you're the type of person who will look out for my best interest, I try to separate the "creepy, touch feely, lurching" photographers from the good ones but more and more I see good photographers defending anything a photographer does, no matter how bad it is.

I'm just being honest, I'm not sure how many other models feel the same way.

This is EXACTLY my reaction when reading this.... I look at who is defending  or minimizing the  alleged creeps actions and wonder...hmmmmm....why?

Mary wrote:
This is EXACTLY my reaction when reading this.... I look at who is defending  or minimizing the  alleged creeps actions and wonder...hmmmmm....why?

I really don't see anyone defending actions like this. What I do see is people saying he is definitely guilty, and others suggesting a rush to judgment is not a good course of action.

A few years ago a model and I were arrested for trespassing on an abandoned theme park. We were doing nude art shots. In the course of talking to the police, the model mentioned she had done adult modeling. The story in the papers grew from nude modeling, to porn modeling, to shooting a porn film, and some rumors that a snuff film was being shot there. There were even rumors of a satanic cult. The incident grew to such proportions that it was headlines in all the local papers and became fodder for many blogs. It even became such a controversy that the local government who had been trying to get the owner to level the remaining buildings, finally used this supposed porn film as a basis to finally get the owner to tear down the buildings on the site.

All we were charged with was trespassing and nothing more (not even indecency), and once the deputies who arrested us talked with us and found out we were only shooting art nudes, they actually tried to talk the owner out of pressing charges, but he wouldn't do it. He never showed up in court, so the charges were dropped. But the results from the rumors and the false newspaper stories had grown to such proportions that the owner was forced to tear down the buildings.

There is a photo of this supposed "porn" shoot in my port, and the story about it, which includes an interview with me, is here:

http://shireland.tripod.com/lingercontroversey.htm

This is a great example of how some small incident can be blown to mythical proportions by the media and how one needs to be careful to assume what you read in the papers is the truth.

Greg Kolack wrote:

I really don't see anyone defending actions like this. What I do see is people saying he is definitely guilty, and others suggesting a rush to judgment is not a good course of action.

A few years ago a model and I were arrested for trespassing on an abandoned theme park. We were doing nude art shots. In the course of talking to the police, the model mentioned she had done adult modeling. The story in the papers grew from nude modeling, to porn modeling, to shooting a porn film, and some rumors that a snuff film was being shot there. There were even rumors of a satanic cult. The incident grew to such proportions that it was headlines in all the local papers and became fodder for many blogs. It even became such a controversy that the local government who had been trying to get the owner to level the remaining buildings, finally used this supposed porn film as a basis to finally get the owner to tear down the buildings on the site.

All we were charged with was trespassing and nothing more (not even indecency), and once the deputies who arrested us talked with us and found out we were only shooting art nudes, they actually tried to talk the owner out of pressing charges, but he wouldn't do it. He never showed up in court, so the charges were dropped. But the results from the rumors and the false newspaper stories had grown to such proportions that the owner was forced to tear down the buildings.

There is a photo of this supposed "porn" shoot in my port, and the story about it, which includes an interview with me, is here:

http://shireland.tripod.com/lingercontroversey.htm

This is a great example of how some small incident can be blown to mythical proportions by the media and how one needs to be careful to assume what you read in the papers is the truth.

well, I assume he was arrested because I see his mug shot...I assume they found tapes or something because they had enough evidence to make an arrest. I am not assuming he is guilty for now but I do know that the appeal to the public to come forward with info is important because the people in these tapes are "jane doe" until the police have a name...while they are "jane doe" you can't interview them and get the stories... so putting this guys name all over the media is what you have to do in order to have an honest trial with all the people that may be involved (and at this point many women do not even know they are involved)

If he is innocent, he needs these women to come forward and  testify that they were a willing part of the taping and not victims....as soon as this is made clear by all the women, he will be out of jail and hold his prominent station among his fellow MM members.... if he is guilty, he'll go to jail, get out a few months later and  probably work the overnight shift a mall security (I assume giving up photography would be a part of any probation deal) 

and this has nothing to do with "outing" this is all over the news media, the outing has been done....it's all pretty much out there and can't be quieted now
there is an innocent person in this story, either the photographer or the women and the innocent party needs to be vindicated and you can only do that with the truth, so bring on the women. Get the story out there and bring as many people into this as is possible...that will result in the fair trial this man needs and deserves to have.

Greg Kolack wrote:
I really don't see anyone defending actions like this. What I do see is people saying he is definitely guilty, and others suggesting a rush to judgment is not a good course of action.

A few years ago a model and I were arrested for trespassing on an abandoned theme park. We were doing nude art shots. In the course of talking to the police, the model mentioned she had done adult modeling. The story in the papers grew from nude modeling, to porn modeling, to shooting a porn film, and some rumors that a snuff film was being shot there. There were even rumors of a satanic cult. The incident grew to such proportions that it was headlines in all the local papers and became fodder for many blogs. It even became such a controversy that the local government who had been trying to get the owner to level the remaining buildings, finally used this supposed porn film as a basis to finally get the owner to tear down the buildings on the site.

All we were charged with was trespassing and nothing more (not even indecency), and once the deputies who arrested us talked with us and found out we were only shooting art nudes, they actually tried to talk the owner out of pressing charges, but he wouldn't do it. He never showed up in court, so the charges were dropped. But the results from the rumors and the false newspaper stories had grown to such proportions that the owner was forced to tear down the buildings.

There is a photo of this supposed "porn" shoot in my port, and the story about it, which includes an interview with me, is here:

http://shireland.tripod.com/lingercontroversey.htm

This is a great example of how some small incident can be blown to mythical proportions by the media and how one needs to be careful to assume what you read in the papers is the truth.

Mary wrote:
well, I assume he was arrested because I see his mug shot...I assume they found tapes or something because they had enough evidence to make an arrest. I am not assuming he is guilty for now but I do know that the appeal to the public to come forward with info is important because the people in these tapes are "jane doe" until the police have a name...while they are "jane doe" you can't interview them and get the stories... so putting this guys name all over the media is what you have to do in order to have an honest trial with all the people that may be involved (and at this point many women do not even know they are involved)

If he is innocent, he needs these women to come forward and  testify that they were a willing part of the taping and not victims....as soon as this is made clear by all the women, he will be out of jail and hold his prominent station among his fellow MM members.... if he is guilty, he'll go to jail, get out a few months later and  probably work the overnight shift a mall security (I assume giving up photography would be a part of any probation deal) 

and this has nothing to do with "outing" this is all over the news media, the outing has been done....it's all pretty much out there and can't be quieted now
there is an innocent person in this story, either the photographer or the women and the innocent party needs to be vindicated and you can only do that with the truth, so bring on the women. Get the story out there and bring as many people into this as is possible...that will result in the fair trial this man needs and deserves to have.

It is interesting, this is a fair analysis.   I happen to agree with you ... they found tapes, at least they say, so now they need to get to the bottom of it.

When I read the news account, something did strike me.  The news article suggests that original complainer saw the camera, changed anyhow, finished the shoot and then went to the police.  I am sure this guy's lawyer will argue that she knew about it and consented.  If you get a situation where some of the 17 women also knew the camera was there, it becomes a little bit strange.  Proving that there was a hidden camera becomes more complex.

Then you start getting into things like, was she mad at him for something, which is why she went to the police, etc, etc, etc. 

On the other hand, the newspaper could have gotten the story completely wrong.  She may not have noticed the camera until the shoot was over.  She could have stormed out and went immediately to the police.   There could be absolutely nothing suspicious in this story at all.  He may well be a total creep with a hidden camera.  That is the problem with news articles.  it is hearsay and it is often not right.

I am neither defending him nor accusing him.  I really have no idea, for sure, what happened.  I wasn't there.

What makes me a little suspicious is that, according to the article, the police came to his home and asked if he had videotaped and he said "no."  They then came back with a warrant and found the seventeen tapes.   If he lied to the police, it could suggest that he was covering it up.  Of course, we weren't there.  We really don't know if he said "no" or just declined to cooperate.  That is different than saying "no."   

My guess is that this will all shake out in the courts and we will never know the outcome.  He wiull have a lawyer who will sping the whole thing as well.   That is his job.  What I do know is that the stories, themself, are bad for our industry.  It adds fodder to the suggestion that what we all do is seedy.  The truth is that what some on the net do is seedy.  What many, or most do, is to pursue a career, an avocation or a legitimate hobby.  The public doesn't see it that way.

I often shoot photos in the dressing room at my Glamour events.  These are the situations where models are posing nude and nobody cares.  I am standing there out in the open with a camera and it is never an issue.  If we are doing fashion events or other non-nude events, I never take a camera into the dressing room.

If this guy was doing a bikini shoot and was, in fact, using a hidden camera, he deserves whatefver they throw at him.  You are right, now that this has started, they have to investigate it. 

No matter what ultimately happens, it is not a good thing.

AshleyCT wrote:
Not trying to come off wrong but if you deliver quality pics and have a good rep idiots like this dont hurt you. They only create more business for a well know established photographer because no matter what models need shots. If you are suffering because of something like this then your need to look at your own work. Not some pervert with a dressing room fettish:)

I'm sorry but I think your wrong.  When something like this happens it casts a shadow of doubt over all photographers.  Anyone working in the area where all the negative press is will have to prove they are not a perv like the a** h*** in the news story.  Do you have any idea how impossible it is to prove a negative?  Just try to prove you didn't do something.  The more you deny it, the guiltier you appear.

Unique Imaging wrote:

It has something to do with all of us as working photographers. This is all over our local news so every girl who wants to model, mother or family or friends of that girl will tell the horror story of this moron who ruined his career just to tape girls naked for his own enjoyment. It gives us a bad stereotype.

Yea, no kidding.  Everytime there is some incident involving a photographer the media jumps right on it and so many people jump to a poor knee jerk conclusion that the reported incident is an example describing all photographers everywhere.       
     The un-professional photographers could care less but the damage does affect the really professional photographers that do care about how the public see's our industry and us.

5778 Kelvin wrote:
I'm sorry but I think your wrong.  When something like this happens it casts a shadow of doubt over all photographers.  Anyone working in the area where all the negative press is will have to prove they are not a perv like the a** h*** in the news story.  Do you have any idea how impossible it is to prove a negative?  Just try to prove you didn't do something.  The more you deny it, the guiltier you appear.

Gulf Coast Glamour wrote:
Yea, no kidding.  Everytime there is some incident involving a photographer the media jumps right on it and so many people jump to a poor knee jerk conclusion that the reported incident is an example describing all photographers everywhere.       
     The un-professional photographers could care less but the damage does affect the really professional photographers that do care about how the public see's our industry and us.

Of course you can prove that this incident and others like it have impacted your business directly. And, when I say directly, I mean that models have refused to work with you and have specifically cited actual cases such as this one as their reason why.

Who would want to work with someone like that anyway?

Photography will survive. Just keep your side of the street clean.

Z.

When I read the news account, something did strike me.  The news article suggests that original complainer saw the camera, changed anyhow, finished the shoot and then went to the police.  I am sure this guy's lawyer will argue that she knew about it and consented.  If you get a situation where some of the 17 women also knew the camera was there, it becomes a little bit strange.  Proving that there was a hidden camera becomes more complex.

If this happened to me I would cover the camera, continue the shoot but try to make it quick and get out, call the police from my car.... the reason is that when you catch someone doing something that could send them to jail it would be dangerous to confront them...it's best to pretend you don't see it and let the police take him by surprise.... if you tell him when you see it you risk his destroying the images, getting rid of all evidence and maybe even silencing you if he's scared enough.  You never know what people will do when they're scared.  After he has destroyed evidence its just a he said, she said situation and she would probably lose.

It is odd that he would secretly tape from a tripod in plain sight, maybe it was behind a clothing rack and not sitting in the open... the details of these stories do get pretty convoluted when they're reported.... someone said the facts are often wrong and that is so true.... reporters in a rush to get the story out get a lot of facts wrong.   

It is odd that a guy that does nude shoots would feel the need to shoot nudes in a dressing room  but there are voyers that get a thrill out of doing this while someone is unaware...like a peeping tom...a peeping tom could just rent a porn movie or magazine or whatever...the thrill is in the victim not knowing.

Mary wrote:

well, I assume he was arrested because I see his mug shot...I assume they found tapes or something because they had enough evidence to make an arrest. I am not assuming he is guilty for now but I do know that the appeal to the public to come forward with info is important because the people in these tapes are "jane doe" until the police have a name...while they are "jane doe" you can't interview them and get the stories... so putting this guys name all over the media is what you have to do in order to have an honest trial with all the people that may be involved (and at this point many women do not even know they are involved)

If he is innocent, he needs these women to come forward and  testify that they were a willing part of the taping and not victims....as soon as this is made clear by all the women, he will be out of jail and hold his prominent station among his fellow MM members.... if he is guilty, he'll go to jail, get out a few months later and  probably work the overnight shift a mall security (I assume giving up photography would be a part of any probation deal) 

and this has nothing to do with "outing" this is all over the news media, the outing has been done....it's all pretty much out there and can't be quieted now
there is an innocent person in this story, either the photographer or the women and the innocent party needs to be vindicated and you can only do that with the truth, so bring on the women. Get the story out there and bring as many people into this as is possible...that will result in the fair trial this man needs and deserves to have.

Mary, Greg's story is just one example of how a story can become
overblown and incorrect.   Do you remember the Duke University
story?  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_lacrosse_case
The media had these young men all but convicted and jailed.   I was here
in a thread saying, something doesn't seem quite right.   Later after months
they were vindicated.   Something that cost the parents thousands.

We don't know what's on the tapes.   We don't really know much at
all.   As you noted in a later comment it seems odd he would have to
secretly record women changing when so many were shooting nudes.
Part of why, I suggested the tapes might be faked like some of the
upskirt web sites do or the infamous Bang Brothers videos of normal
women walking around yet agree to sex in a van with strangers.

Chances are that the charges may be correct in part or full.   We
just don't know.  Back to the Duke case.   There was evidence there as
well.  A 'victim' a friend who backed her story at first.   It wasn't till
later we discovered she was untruthful.

zaxpix wrote:

Unless you're hiding cameras in your dressing rooms, this ain't got nothin' to do with you.

Z.

It most certainly does!  Ever wonder why we have to endure all that nonsense about escorts and all?  Small wonder models don't automatically trust.  One idiot like this that hits the press is all it takes for trust and integrity the rest of us work constantly to protect to get blown away in seconds.

Skip

FStopFitzgerald wrote:

It most certainly does!  Ever wonder why we have to endure all that nonsense about escorts and all?  Small wonder models don't automatically trust.  One idiot like this that hits the press is all it takes for trust and integrity the rest of us work constantly to protect to get blown away in seconds.

Skip

Show me charts, graphs, studies, give me a personal experience related to a similar case.

Don't just sing the chorus.

The harmonics are off.

Sounds interesting, but prove how similar events have impacted you directly.

I don't allow escorts and shot over 100 MM models last year. I've shot 15 so far this year and not one has ever mentioned a case or incident similar to this. 

Know why? Because everyone does not buy into that bullshit that, "what one photographer does, affects all of us."

Speak for yourself.

People, on the whole, are not stupid.

Funny, while posting in this thread, I scheduled four shoots. No mention of Fredricksburg.

Z.

Erlinda wrote:
How is this thread still going? It's been hijacked by a new topic "what are the OP's real motives for posting this thread"

Why isn't this thread blocked and dead already

No surprise to me anymore.

There is a link somewhere above about a thread where a photographer was found innocent of sexual misconduct, and I thought it was a good thing to know about; however, to my surprise some people are yelling that has nothing to do with photography.

I suppose only the bad things  that happen to photographers should be discussed, and dissected, but any good news should be kept under wraps.

zaxpix wrote:

Show me charts, graphs, studies, give me a personal experience related to a similar case.

Don't just sing the chorus.

The harmonics are off.

Sounds interesting, but prove how similar events have impacted you directly.

I don't allow escorts and shot over 100 MM models last year. I've shot 15 so far this year and not one has ever mentioned a case or incident similar to this. 

Know why? Because everyone does not buy into that bullshit that, "what one photographer does, affects all of us."

Speak for yourself.

People, on the whole, are not stupid.

Funny, while posting in this thread, I scheduled four shoots. No mention of Fredricksburg.

Z.

Personally???   Several models from MM have told me they
have read stories about problems when escorts aren't allowed and
they don't shoot without them.   You like, I don't allow escorts so
many of those models may not contact us and we won't know.   Based on
that it may be difficult to qualify if these stories have a negative effect.

Are people stupid.   On the whole, no but life doesn't exist in a vacum.
What we do does make a difference.   Model comes in for a shoot.
She sees a odd light and recalls this story.   Off she goes to report it.
The police arrive at your home.   You allow them to look through your
things and while they don't find any cameras ask can they remove
your equipment for inspection.   You say, no and they get a search
warrant.


Tyra Banks had a women on her show who caught a guy doing a
peak shot up her dress.   She confronted him about it.   Even dousing
him with her soda.   The police arrested him and he did in fact have
the images on the cameras card.   Yet what if she had been wrong?
These stories affect us all.   Many shoot in their homes and apartments.
This and how many of us meet our models via the web is cause for
suspicion in many peoples minds. 

Other shooters, I know have had models also relate various stories
recounted from web sites and the news.   Just because you don't
think a thing affects you means it actually doesn't.

Tony Lawrence wrote:

Personally???   Several models from MM have told me they
have read stories about problems when escorts aren't allowed and
they don't shoot without them.   You like, I don't allow escorts so
many of those models may not contact us and we won't know.   Based on
that it may be difficult to qualify if these stories have a negative effect.

Are people stupid.   On the whole, no but life doesn't exist in a vacum.
What we do does make a difference.   Model comes in for a shoot.
She sees a odd light and recalls this story.   Off she goes to report it.
The police arrive at your home.   You allow them to look through your
things and while they don't find any cameras ask can they remove
your equipment for inspection.   You say, no and they get a search
warrant.


Tyra Banks had a women on her show who caught a guy doing a
peak shot up her dress.   She confronted him about it.   Even dousing
him with her soda.   The police arrested him and he did in fact have
the images on the cameras card.   Yet what if she had been wrong?
These stories affect us all.   Many shoot in their homes and apartments.
This and how many of us meet our models via the web is cause for
suspicion in many peoples minds. 

Other shooters, I know have had models also relate various stories
recounted from web sites and the news.   Just because you don't
think a thing affects you means it actually doesn't.

Tony, unless you can prove that your business as a whole has been affected, a few random stories are just that.

If you want to see people complain, Google any major corporation's name followed by the word, "complaints" and watch what happens. It will make the few stories found here seem trivial by comparison. Those corporations are still in business. Likewise photography.

There is nothing that can be done about the assholes that do what they do, otherwise that magic wand would have been waved a long time ago.

Psychopaths walk amongst us every day. That's just the way it is. Photography has no lock on bad people.

If I sat and worried about another photographer's fuck-up 300 miles away, I'd be foolish.

When you pick up a camera and declare yourself a photographer you pick up the baggage and stereotypes that come with the title, just like lawyers and car salesmen.

Like I said, keep your side of the street clean, and you'll be fine.

Z.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Chances are that the charges may be correct in part or full.   We
just don't know.

Which is why I am neither accusing nor defending him.  We just don't know all the facts.

InCain Photography wrote:
I live across the street from a driving school and every day the instructors practice parrell parking on my street in front of my house.   There is always an adult male instructor with a 15/16 yr old girl.  Do parents DEMAND an escort for that ?  Nope.  They let a 45 yr old male drive around alone with their teenage daughter for 3 hours.

Ah yes, but neither Walmart nor Driving instructiors routinely ask their teenage daughters to take their clothes off.

InCain Photography wrote:
I live across the street from a driving school and every day the instructors practice parrell parking on my street in front of my house.   There is always an adult male instructor with a 15/16 yr old girl.  Do parents DEMAND an escort for that ?  Nope.  They let a 45 yr old male drive around alone with their teenage daughter for 3 hours.

ei Total Productions wrote:
Ah yes, but neither Walmart nor Driving instructiors routinely ask their teenage daughters to take their clothes off.

I, at least, would never ask a 15/16 year old to take her clothes off for a photo shoot either.

But, that aside, I spent 15 years working in a place not that different from WalMart (it did pay better in those days).  Believe me, there will be plenty of coworkers asking any girl who looks decent to take her clothes off, and a lot more.

ei Total Productions wrote:
Ah yes, but neither Walmart nor Driving instructiors routinely ask their teenage daughters to take their clothes off.

Yeah.. wait... they don't? Dammit, I KNEW that wasn't part of the driving test! Damn dude told me it was standard!

MikeRobisonPhotos wrote:

I, at least, would never ask a 15/16 year old to take her clothes off for a photo shoot either.

But, that aside, I spent 15 years working in a place not that different from WalMart (it did pay better in those days).  Believe me, there will be plenty of coworkers asking any girl who looks decent to take her clothes off, and a lot more.

there's a photographer in my area, sitting in jail now for asking under age girls to take their clothes off (partially at least) the other person present at the time also sat in jail for a while.  I don't care if the model says shes 18, you better have ID on everyone taking anything off....and the "escort" over 18 is also in trouble if this ever happens.

I can not imagine anyone being stupid enough to put themselves in a situation where they are alone with a female under 18 unless they are teachers, doctors, or professionals that have to be.... but this thread is about adult women so it's going off track I suppose

Unique Imaging wrote:
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/02/ … f-clients/  For all of those who were skeptical on his guilt or innocence. I was curious whatever happened with this case. I had many friends who shot with him who were traumatized by the whole process of wondering if they had been taped by him.. if they videos were sold or on some porn site so, when originally posting this yes I did want to get the word out so that any other girls who shot with him could get in contact to find out if they were on the tapes as well. With that being said he was convicted and one of the girls was only 16 so now along with his jail term he is a registered sex offender. When I googled to find an outcome this thread came up as well.. In reading allllll of the replies long after I had stopped paying attention, I'd like to say thank you to those who understood I was trying to be helpful and could care less about "the hooters gig" haha

Now that' one heck of a bump, from the OP no less
Glad people like this get caught eventually, thanks.

Photography by BE wrote:
quote=Carlton Primm I feel bad for all the models involved in this.  It seems if I noticed a cam in the dressing room with a light on, at the very least, I would cover the lens or turn it in another direction (just in case) /quote

Nawww...    I have seen tripods turn over when they have clothes piled on them.  The camera makes a strange sound when it hits the floor.

Or else at least picked it up and brought it out of the dressing room, pointed to it while looking the photographer in the eye and saying, "What is going on here?!"

And then leaving...
Jen

M Day Photo and Retouch wrote:
I always try to videotape a shoot. Its a liability issue however the law states (at least in FL) there must be no expectation of privacy. If there is a expectation of privacy you must tell or at least have it posted that they are being video tapped. A shoot inside a studio or home, I would say there is a expectation of privacy. Personally it is written in my release. If the model doesn't read the release then that's their problem.

Actually no, it's not. As the person doing said videotaping, it's YOUR responsibility to make it clear and readily apparent that video taping is going on. Burying it in your release is not apparent. And not everyone who may come to a shoot is required to sign a release, therefor they may not even read it.

You even mentioned this before you even brought up your release. And shrugging it off that if they don't read it's not your fault is not a defense.

Unless you have signs, or actually tell them (which I assume you don't because of your claim about your release), then you aren't actually informing them.

This is why businesses have signs about videos, or they have a recording mentioning that a phone call may be recorded. It's not buried somewhere where people could miss it.

Unique Imaging wrote:
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/02/ … f-clients/  For all of those who were skeptical on his guilt or innocence. I was curious whatever happened with this case. I had many friends who shot with him who were traumatized by the whole process of wondering if they had been taped by him.. if they videos were sold or on some porn site so, when originally posting this yes I did want to get the word out so that any other girls who shot with him could get in contact to find out if they were on the tapes as well. With that being said he was convicted and one of the girls was only 16 so now along with his jail term he is a registered sex offender. When I googled to find an outcome this thread came up as well.. In reading allllll of the replies long after I had stopped paying attention, I'd like to say thank you to those who understood I was trying to be helpful and could care less about "the hooters gig" haha

It is good to know the final outcome.  Thank you for posting.

M Day Photo and Retouch wrote:
I always try to videotape a shoot. Its a liability issue however the law states (at least in FL) there must be no expectation of privacy. If there is a expectation of privacy you must tell or at least have it posted that they are being video tapped. A shoot inside a studio or home, I would say there is a expectation of privacy. Personally it is written in my release. If the model doesn't read the release then that's their problem.

Do you have models sign their release before the shoot, or after? If they don't read the release, it may actually become your problem as well. I would add this to your entry door. (I'm not an attorney).

Even so, there isn't a need to have a camera pointed towards a shooting area, imo.