Possible under 18's in my image

Harlequin565 said:
You probably need to separate the two actions. Taking the picture and usage of the picture.

If you're on public land you can take pictures of whatever or whoever you want with whatever they're wearing (or not!) as long as no one is breaking the law (indecent exposure etc etc)

But when it comes to usage - especially commercial usage - you need to be more careful. Some buildings have copyright for example, never mind people!
Recognisable people absolutely need to give their permission for you to use their likeness in (for example) advertising. That's why model releases were invented. If the model is under 18, I would imagine parental consent is also required (though NOT a lawyer!)

Commercial usage could be anything that promotes your business, or your product(s). It's not always about payment. Get A Lawyer or legal advice if it's not clear. "What about a club competition?" - If the images are prints, reviewed on one night, then everyone takes them home, I would guess that's ok. What about [random example] a national competition where the images are posted online and it's to promote a gay male organisation? That could probably be construed as advertising even though it's a comp

As for "thinking it's fine", that's a moral question that is likely to have as many opinions as there are folks on this forum. Personally, I think it's a bit weird wanting to persuade strange children to be models for your camera club and a little careless to not think to ask their ages before you started, but that's me. That's a whole different scenario to the OPs question which was about something happening in front of him in a public place, where most people wouldn't have a reasonable expectation of privacy. If the guy (for example) took all his clothes off (breaking the decency laws) I would definitely have put the camera away - whether he was 16, 18 or 88!
Click to expand...

This is sound advice as for example taking a picture of the Eifel Tower in Paris and posting online is fine, unless it is illuminated then copy right applies. Of course using a picture of a person for commercial gain you need a model release form signed. Animals do not count and you can use zoo animals and pets for instance. Taking photos of crowds in public venue who do not need permission or a models release form as there is no way to get release forms for the mass of people in shot.

Many years ago I was going to a organised photo shoot and one of the model was 15 y.o and the organiser want us all to complete and pay for the Gov back ground check ( I can not remember what it is called ) before we could attend. I decline as the process does take time and was not necessary for the shoot. It was IMO completely OTT !
However that was the condition of the shoot, so if you wanted to go that is what you needed to do.

IMO it seems common sense and innocence has been lost when it comes to children and taking of media in any format as everyone now has a concern of what it is going to be used for ! !
 
Dave Canon said:
and one of the ladies spoke to this parent and they were OK about. During the following few days our female photographer contacted all of the parents and obtained permission by email.

Dave
Click to expand...
I'm curious as to the reason why the club got their female members to do this? I suspect I know the answer but I'm curious all the same, thanks for resurrecting the thread Mark, I missed it first time around, and I'm glad to see that you are still defending your position :giggle:
 
Tysonator said:
IMO it seems common sense and innocence has been lost when it comes to children and taking of media in any format as everyone now has a concern of what it is going to be used for ! !
Click to expand...
Things change.

I still have a copy of Louis Peek's "Cash from Your Camera", published in 1970 by Fountain Press. Peek was a freelance photographer and writer who enjoyed some success in the middle of the last century. The interesting thing, in this context, is that his book contains several pictures of naked children,

To my eyes, they seem quite innocent and I very much doubt they'd have raised an eyebrow at the time but I'm also sure they'd be unpublishable in these days of Mrs Grundy's supremacy.
 
TVRTim said:
I'm curious as to the reason why the club got their female members to do this? I suspect I know the answer but I'm curious all the same, thanks for resurrecting the thread Mark, I missed it first time around, and I'm glad to see that you are still defending your position :giggle:
Click to expand...
You are trying to read things in which are not there though I see you have a smiley. Just to clear up a few more issues, Firstly the female member was one of the photographers and one of those who recruited the teenagers (2 female and one male). She was also Club Secretary and lead administrator of our annual Schools competition. She was not asked to gain the parental approval but did so because she chose to do so and regularly deals with schools and parents.

As some others have said, the taking of the images is not that critical but what you do with them is. For camera club members we like to enter competitions and many international Salons will no longer accept entries of people unless you have written permission. It is not that they demand this when you enter but presumably reserve the right to request this later which they might do for a well publicised winner. Of course this is all a pain and when I started photography you could go into the local park and photograph children playing which few of us would consider doing now even though it may be legal. We still see pictures of children in our international competitions but almost all appear to be taken in SE Asia, N Africa or Georgia.

Incidentally, one of the images I took earned me two international awards so it was worth gaining parental approval in my view.

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