Kinetic Photography wrote:
WHY AND WHEN DID PHOTOGRAPHERS GET THE DANGEROUS LABEL ?

Probably Hollywood. Or those dead tree things.

George ephrem wrote:
Always, always, if the model is under age(18 here in fla), the mom MUST be with her. I don't deviate from this , ever!!!!!!

Damn... guess I must be posting from jail with all the people telling me I broke some sort of "don't deviate from this ever" rule.

Kinetic Photography wrote:
Wow, I didnt think my post would get some many replies.  However, no one has yet answered my question....Why do photographers have the reputation they have ?  When the mother questioned the "appropriateness" of her daughter being alone with a "photographer" it made me wonder what is it about photographers that is so dangerous ?  Her mother knew that photography isnt my profession.  In all of my years teaching tennis lessons to people under 18 I was never once questioned by a parent as to my intentions or the safety of being alone with me.   My nieghboor teaches music lessons to people, many of them children, and they are alone with him.  This is the crux of my post.....WHY AND WHEN DID PHOTOGRAPHERS GET THE DANGEROUS LABEL ?

Again, and only for you Kinetic, I leave my lurking to answer your question.

I think it's the combination of young, sexually desirable girls who are most likely not wearing very much, posing and playing in a very "flirty, grown up" way in front of older, not generally polished looking men.  Our society only likes that combination when the man is filthy rich and he found the chick in a strip club.
If you don't like it, choose another profession/hobby.  I used to hate the annoying stereotypes about cheerleaders, but I didn't bitch and moan about it for the 11 years that I did it. 

Ok, bye again. 

Zoe Daugherty wrote:
Wow, my daughter is new her to MM, neither of us have ever posted anywhere on here and I'm about to jump into a frying pan. No worries, I'm not here to say whether anyone is right or wrong, but rather to give my 2 cents for what it is worth. Take what you can and toss the rest.

There isn't anyone in the world that can honestly say that they have never said something inappropriate, unprofessional or just plain wrong. It happens. Sometimes even those that are usually well in control of themselves and their actions, lose control. It doesn't matter if you feel that you/they were right or wrong, it happens. In my opinion, what matters most is how a delicate situation is handled once it has proven to be out of control.

Whether the mother's literal words were to the effect that he might make (warranted or unwarranted) advances toward her daughter really isn't the point. If that is in fact what she said, I would agree that it was likely a bit out of line given that such blanket generalizations are quite skewed most often and rarely close to the truth....and typically pretty unfairly proclaimed. Just as I feel that his response to the perceived attack was out of line as well. What's done is done and can't be undone though.

As for your original statements:
"Okay so we all know that all photographers are pedophiles, rapists and murderers.  Society and the media has taught everyone to be EXRETEMLY cautious and apprehensive around photographers and to do everything possible to ensure that you dont end up a victim of a known photographer.  The golden rule is that a female can NEVER be left alone with a photographer because at any given moment they might STRIKE.....sexually."

This is again a very blanket generalization and what I believe to be a bit exaggerated. Of course there are rumors of the bad seed photographers out there. Some have been proven to truly be bad seeds. Of course, people are going to discuss it and remind people to be careful, take caution and use a little common sense when possibly working with someone brand new. That actually happens in every walk of life though....it certainly isn't limited to this industry or even more  precisely to photographers moreso than others. The fact of the matter is that there  really are bad people out there that only wish to bring harm. They are everywhere and in every industry. I would venture to guess that the "chitter chatter" about photographers in particular seems more out there to you because you are actually a part of this industry and thus it hits a lot closer to home. Take a gander around though and you will find that this exact same concern is definitely out there in every venue whether it be priests, coaches, den mothers/fathers, girl scout leaders, CEO's and any other field that you could possibly imagine. Rightly so as well. The numbers are staggering for the number of children that are assaulted physically, sexually and emotionally. We as a society have a right (even responsibility) to be concerned, aware and to take any and all measures available to us in order to reduce the risk as much as possible.

Let's set aside the part in which you said the mother inferred that you would make advances toward her daughter and just for the sake of ridding ourselves of perceived threats and ask whether the mother had a right to expect that her wishes of her daughter not being at a photoshoot without a guardian present was appropriate. Indeed it was. Setting all personal beliefs and opinions aside, that is by and far any parents right and responsibility. Quite frankly, it doesn't matter what the general public feels is standard or should be considered the norm. It doesn't even matter what this industry typically portrays as appropriate. In being a parent, a responsibility is accepted and hopefully taken to heart, to care for, nurture and protect the child with hopes of gearing them into a productive, healthy and well balanced adult hood. No parent is perfect. Some go overboard. Some don't seem to take it seriously enough, but we have to give them the benefit of the doubt that they are truly doing what they feel is in the best interest of the child. Unless you see that there is definite harm being done, who are you to interfere or say that they are wrong? Plain and simple, for whatever reasons (and they honestly never matter, nor will) she had every right to not feel comfortable (or allow) her daughter doing a photoshoot with you or any other photographer without parent present.

You had every right to take offense to her statements and your understanding of what was said. You have every right to say that you aren't willing or don't wish to work with people where the foundation of your working relationship isn't built on the trust and respect that you believed it to be.  You even have a right to forcefully defend yourself as you feel necessary when you feel attacked (granted that given certain more extreme circumstances, there might actually be serious consequences for doing this) and doing so proudly.

Now, onto what most disturbs me about this thread. You stated that your "I am a little upset though that this thread drifted so far away from what I wanted it to be.  My whole point was....why do photographers, to the exclusion of so many other professions, warrant so much fear and aprehension in the publics mind ?  What did photographer do throughout history to deserve it ?"

If this was what you were really looking to explore, why the indepth description of the events that you encountered? There really was no need for a background story explaining why you were seeking out other people's thoughts on why photographers have such a bad rep. First, let me give you props because unless I missed it somewhere, you didn't actually disclose real names of those involved. However, I do disagree with bringing forth issues that occur in the workplace or anywhere else that truly are of no concern of anyone else on this site. It's just poor form in my opinion. Being so new to this site, I don't know if it is as intricately woven as some of the  others and easy to link things back to people even without their names, but I certainly hope that isn't the case for the sake of this young girl. She didn't ask to brought into this. And regardless of a woman's age, but especially a minor, her sexual proclivities whether true, false, posted on a site of hers somewhere or written on the bedroom wall is completely inappropriate discussion. For me to use the terms inappropriate, bad form, tastless, etc...just doesn't do it justice. Can someone please tell me how this thread has gone on as long as it has when it is clearly trashing a young girl?

I don't care what  is on her MySpace page. I don't care if she really has been highly promiscous....even with older men. I hope that it isn't as the original poster described, but quite frankly it isn't any of my business and it sure isn't the business of any Tom, Dick, Jane or Betty that may come bepopping along to a public forum. Sure as anything else in this world, a bunch of complete strangers that don't know this young lady from Eve, don't need to be discussing a minor childs sexual explorations or using terms such as "slut" and "whore" even in the same discussion....let alone in the same sentence.

Myself as a mother of a minor young lady trying to break into this industry, I absolutely will not allow her to attend a photoshoot without an adult of my approval....either myself, my mother or her father usually....under any circumstances. Part of this does stem from eliminating as many of those risks as I can for her. In fact, the mere fact that I am allowing her to shoot with someone at all says that I at least got an initial good viber from them. If I hadn't, I wouldn't let them near my baby. Another part comes from protecting everyone involved in case of any miscommunications or misconstrued signals (we are working in a fast paced environment and dealing with children here). And yet another part comes from feeling as if I should be there. The photographer is not a babysitter, nor are  they responsible for the child in any way. What if something should go wrong and someone was injured? Long shot probably but I'm certain it has happened somewhere. Let me note very clearly though, that this does not just apply to photographers. This also applies to her personal gymnastics trainer who she has worked one on one with for almost 2 years. This applies to her being left unattended with anyone for that matter that I do not trust with every fiber in me actually. Zoe has a few photographers that she has shot with several times. She and I both adore them and I actually consider them a friend and someone that I can run to for advice and questions and I am still present at every shoot even with them. It isn't personal...trust me, if it was you wouldn't be in the picture to be offended in the first place.

Again, everyone has their right to choose that with which they find acceptable work conditions and terms. I would hope that should you not agree in part or whole with what someone else feels or believes that you wouldn't find it necessary to shun them or bash them publicly. We have come across several photographers in the short time that we have been doing this that wanted or expected things that just didn't jive with us. I don't think any less of them. Nor would I run amock spreading negativity about them. I simply don't work with them. Should someone ask why we won't/haven't or don't work with someone in particular, I will gladly tell them that we didn't have the same concepts in mind and would likely give them a vague description of how we conflicted. Other than that, it truly is no one elses business. I can't say that I am shocked and horrified to see such public disgrace of other people, although I wish I could but this really hit home with me. Again, take it for what it's worth...just another person's opinions and we all know about those. Use what you can and toss the rest. I am just hoping that this really isn't typical behaviour on this site.

Shelly

How did I miss this most awesome post from an active parent..

You go girl..this sums it up nicley...
damn fine post..

Rock on

Best wishes!

Melissa Lynnette wrote:
Again, and only for you Kinetic, I leave my lurking to answer your question.

I think it's the combination of young, sexually desirable girls who are most likely not wearing very much, posing and playing in a very "flirty, grown up" way in front of older, not generally polished looking men.  Our society only likes that combination when the man is filthy rich and he found the chick in a strip club.
If you don't like it, choose another profession/hobby.  I used to hate the annoying stereotypes about cheerleaders, but I didn't bitch and moan about it for the 11 years that I did it. 

Ok, bye again. 

What do Polish looking men have to do with this? First, someone brings in the race card and now ethnic background? Hey, that reminds me...have you heard the one about the Polish Cheerleader Photographer? sarcasm, yes

Kinetic Photography wrote:
Wow, I didnt think my post would get some many replies.  However, no one has yet answered my question....Why do photographers have the reputation they have ?  When the mother questioned the "appropriateness" of her daughter being alone with a "photographer" it made me wonder what is it about photographers that is so dangerous ?  Her mother knew that photography isnt my profession.  In all of my years teaching tennis lessons to people under 18 I was never once questioned by a parent as to my intentions or the safety of being alone with me.   My nieghboor teaches music lessons to people, many of them children, and they are alone with him.  This is the crux of my post.....WHY AND WHEN DID PHOTOGRAPHERS GET THE DANGEROUS LABEL ?

You negated your question with your response.

If anything, you reinforced her worries when you brought up her sexuality at all.  I think you handled it in a way that you can't ask " why " the mother felt the way she did.  You made it sound like you want to be ONE of those " Others."

Farenell Photography wrote:
Ok, let me get this straight...

- You want to work w/ someone w/ whom you have already worked w/ & who also happens to be underage.

- Mother isn't buying into it &/or your reasons. "well because you are a photographer and it wouldnt be appropiate"

- You reply back, "Of course, I should have known.  Its a good thing all of those other guys she is having sex with arent photographers"

- Mother gets angry.

- & on here, you have the audacity to blame this on the mother?!?!

Way to blow it, man.

Not only I see nothing wrong w/ the mother's requests &/or her reasonings (from what little you gave). You never made the attempt to compromise.

I have to agree with this comment.  As the parent of underage daughters, neither of my children are legally capable of entering into any contractual agreement with out my or my wife's written consent.  That's what a release is for.  I don't buy into the awnser that it's for portfolio work so I don't need one.  I have been on the loosing end of that battle.  Better to play CYO.

That being said, I am in the business of photographing high school seniors.  These "children" sometimes show up to the session with a parent, most do not.  But, I would never have the balls to say to a parent of an underage child that they could not be present during any part of the process, from initial interview through the photography and sales process.

Further, if you told me as a parent that I could not be present at a session that my child was participating in, you would probably come very close to testing the limits on your major medical insurance.

David Linke wrote:
Further, if you told me as a parent that I could not be present at a session that my child was participating in, you would probably come very close to testing the limits on your major medical insurance.

Not only could you not be present...but when you said it was inappropriate the photographer went off on a rant to insult your child by questioning their sexual behavior? That's a rhetorical question...I'm pretty sure we're on the same page with your response lol. Higher premiums anyone?

Michael Pandolfo wrote:

What do Polish looking men have to do with this? First, someone brings in the race card and now ethnic background? Hey, that reminds me...have you heard the one about the Polish Cheerleader Photographer? sarcasm, yes

My story was to show how people deal with anger.  Its what happened but if
it makes everyone feel better pretend he called my wife a b* the point was
that my wife felt bad because she allowed this person to control her.  She
lost her temper.  So for the last time I wasn't trying to play the race card.
Ok?

Vance wrote:

Did you bother reading the OP?..and please...hung around teens latley.
I havent seen so many threesomes and anal sex my entire life...WOWZERS!

You watched them huh?

Kinetic Photography wrote:
Wow, I didnt think my post would get some many replies.  However, no one has yet answered my question....Why do photographers have the reputation they have ?  When the mother questioned the "appropriateness" of her daughter being alone with a "photographer" it made me wonder what is it about photographers that is so dangerous ?  Her mother knew that photography isnt my profession.  In all of my years teaching tennis lessons to people under 18 I was never once questioned by a parent as to my intentions or the safety of being alone with me.   My nieghboor teaches music lessons to people, many of them children, and they are alone with him.  This is the crux of my post.....WHY AND WHEN DID PHOTOGRAPHERS GET THE DANGEROUS LABEL ?

Ok, I'll answer it.

Child Porn.  Ever hear of it?  Those photos need to be taken with a camera.  A person with a camera is a photographer.  Sure, they may not and probably are NOT professional photographers.  But neither am I.  Neither are you.  We're hobbiests for the most part.  Are those people that take child porn photographs not hobbiests?

That, I believe, is why we have a bad rap.

Professional photographers may have a Casting Couch type of bad rap and that comes from rumors and truth which probably mostly came out of Hollywood.

Hobbiests get the bad rap of perverts because if we're not doing it professionally, why ARE we doing it?  Must be because we're perverts.

George ephrem wrote:
Always, always, if the model is under age(18 here in fla), the mom MUST be with her. I don't deviate from this , ever!!!!!!

James Jackson wrote:
Damn... guess I must be posting from jail with all the people telling me I broke some sort of "don't deviate from this ever" rule.

Come James, read his quote.

Tony Lawrence wrote:

My story was to show how people deal with anger.  Its what happened but if
it makes everyone feel better pretend he called my wife a b* the point was
that my wife felt bad because she allowed this person to control her.  She
lost her temper.  So for the last time I wasn't trying to play the race card.
Ok?

You may have missed the part of the comment that said "sarcasm, yes." Ya see...sarcasm is a sharply ironical taunt (there it was again). I didn't think you actually (nor did I remember who first brought up the topic) were playing the race card any more than I thought Melissa was talking about Polish men lol.

Vance wrote:
As far as my question to you..If yu read what Tony wrote you wouldnt have to ask. as my comment was in the context of the thread.

Well, maybe it was, but it was off topic.  I didn't see the OP say anything about that.  Why were you even posting it?  What are you?  Some kind of thread hijacker? 

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.  So I don't want you complaining to me anymore when I respond to people who say things like "Go ahead and try to prove something I didnt do..I dare ya....." or when someone posts NY or congressional act codes about kidnapping, custodial interference and so on as "proof" that it's against the law to even be alone with a minor. 

Otherwise, I might just start to ignore you for making inconsistent and unprincipled posts.   

Peace, Van.

-- rick

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I've re-read some of the posts from this thread and frankly I'm amazed at some.
Several people have taken the OP to task for calling the model a whore or a
slut yet I can't find he said that.  Perhaps hinted but never said.  At least one
person has quoted a law and given wrong information about it.  Saying that in
some states its illegal for adults to be around children if the parent isn't there. 
Some have suggested the OP wanted to have sex with her and I was accused of
playing the race card.  As always MM lives up to its name.

I said "of course, I should have known.  Its a good thing all of those other guys she is having sex with arent photographers"

What is the implication of that quote?

If I say you hate people that don't look like you, would it be okay to assume I'm calling you a racist even though I didn't say you were?

Though he didn't call her a whore or a slut...you know, if the shoe fits.

Tony Lawrence wrote:

My story was to show how people deal with anger.  Its what happened but if
it makes everyone feel better pretend he called my wife a b* the point was
that my wife felt bad because she allowed this person to control her.  She
lost her temper.  So for the last time I wasn't trying to play the race card.
Ok?

I think he was making a joke. 

-- rick

Vance wrote:
glurg!

Vance...it could be worse. You could have my name and instead of Michael or Mike, people could call you Mikey or Mickey or, worse, Michelle...ugh.

DigitalCMH wrote:

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I've re-read some of the posts from this thread and frankly I'm amazed at some.
Several people have taken the OP to task for calling the model a whore or a
slut yet I can't find he said that.  Perhaps hinted but never said.  At least one
person has quoted a law and given wrong information about it.  Saying that in
some states its illegal for adults to be around children if the parent isn't there. 
Some have suggested the OP wanted to have sex with her and I was accused of
playing the race card.  As always MM lives up to its name.

What is the implication of that quote?

If I say you hate people that don't look like you, would it be okay to assume I'm calling you a racist even though I didn't say you were?

Though he didn't call her a whore or a slut...you know, if the shoe fits.

I know, Chris but he didn't out right call her a whore or a slut he just hinted at
it.  Someone on my profile called my work very clean.  Hinting I imagine it
was boring.  Well I guess it is.  Anyway I'm still trying to get my lens off of
ebay and trying not to get banned from MM.  By the way I agree with you in
principal but he didn't actually call her anything.

DigitalCMH wrote:

George ephrem wrote:
Always, always, if the model is under age(18 here in fla), the mom MUST be with her. I don't deviate from this , ever!!!!!!

Come James, read his quote.

You're right... George *did* specify himself... my apologies.... I think I was thrown off by the "the mom MUST be with her."

Michael Pandolfo wrote:

You may have missed the part of the comment that said "sarcasm, yes." Ya see...sarcasm is a sharply ironical taunt (there it was again). I didn't think you actually (nor did I remember who first brought up the topic) were playing the race card any more than I thought Melissa was talking about Polish men lol.

Mike as you can see I'm not all that bright.  Sarcasm sometimes escapes me
like my hair did several years ago.  Sorry.  Next time SPEAK SLOWLY.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Someone on my profile called my work very clean.  Hinting I imagine it
was boring.  Well I guess it is.  Anyway I'm still trying to get my lens off of
ebay and trying not to get banned from MM.

Oh man I'm in trouble. I thought "clean" was a compliment.

Michael Pandolfo wrote:

Vance...it could be worse. You could have my name and instead of Michael or Mike, people could call you Mikey or Mickey or, worse, Michelle...ugh.

Yeah, but after you state you dont like your name being misused..most people back off...No worries.....its all good..

James Jackson wrote:
Still looking for evidence of a professional photographer being convicted of raping or murdering a woman.

This was an amateur photographer who had an OMP account and also he is as far as I can tell (since the news articles are no longer up) only *accused* of doing bad things.  Ever heard of innocent until proven guilty?

Vito wrote:
Here ya go:
http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/xp-67980

and while Bob Shell may have had an OMP account, if I recall, he was a professional photographer and an editor of SHUTTERBUG Magazine. While he didn't actually shoot her or knife her, he contributed heavily to her death and then tried to cover it up. This was the first article (and one going rather easier on Shell than others I read) that I found online.

The Bob Shell case is still being tried.  He is innocent until proven guilty.  He is only *accused* of contributing to the girl's death.

Kinetic Photography wrote:

Hmm, interesting.....a minor is having sexual relations with adults and a 3rd person who knows about it is NOT required or even allowed to notify anyone about it.  I guess Foley would love you guys as friends

Unless you're a State Mandated Reporter (such as a Police, School Teacher, Guidence Counselor et al) no, you're not required. In this case, you are also assuming that what she posts on MySpace is true and not embellishments or bragging to look cool. What if it was?

Vance wrote:

What does that have to do with this thread?

And for the sake of your post.. I dont see criminal charges..Or the place being closed down..

And it looks retouched to me as well...Look at the hair line..
OK..so?

This is not what we are talking about..

Please...it is the shadow (elogated) of the photographers' head (I'll bet he was bald (or shaved).

RohanB wrote:
I SOOO AGREE!

Maybe I watch too much Lifetime movies with the wife, but working for EMS in NYC in the past for over like 10 years you see alot! a minor can say anything about "that photog guy i shot with 3-4 weeks ago"

Great Advice RohanB...!

I hope her mom doesn't confront her with your accusation and the daughter makes up something about you for revenge.  This could get even more out of hand.

The mother is probably thinking:  What was he doing on her myspace account?

All the minor has so say is, "He or she did" and your done. 

Quote: An escort is like a condom, better to be caught with one then without. 

:-)~

Kinetic Photography wrote:
She is now 17 yrs old. I said sure, however, I asked if I could do the shoot just one on one with the model because I felt she wasnt opening up enough due to her mom being there.  The mom was understanding but accused me of trying to be alone with her daughter so I could make "advances" toward her.  I told her I took offense to that and asked why I would be any different then any other guy she was alone with.  The mother stammered and then said "well because you are a photographer and it wouldnt be appropiate" .  I said "of course, I should have known.  Its a good thing all of those other guys she is having sex with arent photographers"  Well, suffice it to say the mother started yelling and blah blah blah.

I am tired of automatically being put on the same level as convicted molesters and rapists merely because I am a photographer.  Photographers did ABSOLUTELY nothing to deserve their reputation.  My father told me when he was in college studying photo-journalism that people actually liked and respected photographers.

Well...technically she's still underage. If a parent wants to be there they have every right to be.

Vito wrote:

Please...it is the shadow (elogated) of the photographers' head (I'll bet he was bald (or shaved).

Are you serious? Damn good eye...I would never have guessed   yousholuld call em..LOL..gety the paret off prozac before she burst a bubble..

MoJo40 wrote:

Great Advice RohanB...!

I hope her mom doesn't confront her with your accusation and the daughter makes up something about you for revenge.  This could get even more out of hand.

The mother is probably thinking:  What was he doing on her myspace account?

All the minor has so say is, "He or she did" and your done. 

Quote: An escort is like a condom, better to be caught with one then without. 

:-)~

What is every one so afraid of?

I say, all you of you that are so fearful of the industry should find other work.

well, you hobbust dont really coount..

I keep forgetting, It's mostly internet people in an uproar about having an escort.

Escorts are rarely allowed in on pro shoots, and HARDLY every ona commercial shoot..

I often kicj the make up artist out after she is done.. they return later perhaps..but I like to work alone..unless a big staff is needed, which does happe..I like to keep it minimal.

The models in my port are my best references. ONE had her husband there..Graeat guy, no problems....But, it did hurt my vibe....As to this thread...we have squeezed all the blood out...let it dry up...

Vance wrote:
What is every one so afraid of?

I say, all you of you that are so fearful of the industry should find other work.

well, you hobbust dont really coount..

I keep forgetting, It's mostly internet people in an uproar about having an escort.

Escorts are rarely allowed in on pro shoots, and HARDLY every ona commercial shoot..

I often kicj the make up artist out after she is done.. they return later perhaps..but I like to work alone..unless a big staff is needed, which does happe..I like to keep it minimal.

The models in my port are my best references. ONE had her husband there..Graeat guy, no problems....But, it did hurt my vibe....As to this thread...we have squeezed all the blood out...let it dry up...

Vance ... I got one thing to say to you...

Great Port....!

Kinetic Photography wrote:
Look at the stripper in the Duke lacross case.  Just making an allegation can turn around on you pretty quickly.  Science is pretty good these days.  Only an idiot would make a false accusation of rape.  I for one dont worry about it

Just be careful about using a vial of your own blood and semen as a prop. Boy was that ever a problem last week.

Kinetic Photography wrote:
Look at the stripper in the Duke lacross case.  Just making an allegation can turn around on you pretty quickly.  Science is pretty good these days.  Only an idiot would make a false accusation of rape.  I for one dont worry about it

Maybe true, but it's one of the stupidest things I've ever seen posted on a website.

Vito wrote:

Maybe true, but it's one of the stupidest things I've ever seen posted on a website.

Which part is stupid Don Vito ?

Kinetic Photography wrote:

Which part is stupid Don Vito ?

That you believe only a stupid person was claim she was raped. You obviously are young so you don't know any better. There are a lot of crazy, demented, paranoid, vicious, spiteful, hateful people out there. Claiming a photographer (or anyone, really) raped them is just another day for them. They crave attention, the like to be at the center of the action, they believe the world revolves around them (hmmm...sounds like some peoples definition of a m***l). People have been arrested, tried and convicted by less evidence than you can know.