In reguards to my last Post

[Buckster]

My question was legitimate - no troll here! I'm curious, if people have such an issue with an amateur model's photos being displayed in a photography forum, how do they feel about those that go on to national/international campaigns? Should it not be allowed?

I don't care about what the morals of others are, whether or not I'd consider it ridiculous for myself to feel that way. It's just interesting that, on an ART forum, people are so against something that has provided inspiration to artists for years: the human body. At birth, 10 years old, 20, 50 and even death - the human body is an amazing thing.

I am just going to shut my mouth before I really get kicked off the forum, but just curious are you volunteering your daughter to used for his next model exactly the way it was done in his original image?

For the sake of art?

I definitely would. He did an excellent job on the photos. Still can't see how it harms anyone either.

 

[cgipson1]

I want to see it.

It was removed from the original post... but the other shots are still there... http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/people-photography/332486-few-more-shots-recent.html#post2996384

It was not that big of a deal... really! But it is a very sensitive topic... with extremes on both sides.

 

[jowensphoto]

I want to see it.

Me too.

 

[jowensphoto]

If it stood up to those other photos, I don't see why not. A two year old in a swimsuit with some lights is hardly sexual. IMO, at least.

 

[e.rose]

I want to see it.

It was removed from the original post... but the other shots are still there... http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/people-photography/332486-few-more-shots-recent.html#post2996384

It was not that big of a deal... really! But it is a very sensitive topic... with extremes on both sides.

Yeah I saw the original thread... hence why I'm saying I want to see it... cause I still haven't seen it.

The photo that people got excited about was pretty bad.

That is subjective. Seeing as how your and my opinion tend to vary quite often, and based off the fact that I tend to like the OP's work from what I've seen, I'm gonna go ahead and say.............. I still want to see it.

 

[cgipson1]

If it stood up to those other photos, I don't see why not. A two year old in a swimsuit with some lights is hardly sexual. IMO, at least.

two year old? uh.. more like TWELVE year old...

And I agree.. not really sexual..

 

[Tailgunner]

Someone a'splain this to me, because clearly I'm not as bright as I thought I was. If the model in question had been a few years younger, the OP could have posted a shot of her with NO clothing on and people would have responded with, "Awww... isn't that cute". If she'd been a few years old people would have responded with, "WOW!". If she'd been on a beach, that would have been fine, but IN A STUDIO isn't????? What???? It's not like this was a creeper shot taken from inside an ice-cream van with a 400mm lens, it was well executed STUDIO SHOT!!! WHAT on earth is the problem?

We live in a time where people illegally exploit underage teenage children and looking is more than enough to incriminate a person. This isn't personal but I don't know the OP, I don't know the Child or her family. All I have is someone posting pictures of an underage child on the internet claiming to have legal parental consent to photograph said child. Does Thephotoforum.com do background checks to verify said information? How do you know what is being said is fact? If people will buy everything posted on the Internet as fact & true, I got some pristine Ocean Front Property in West Texas I'll sell you for cheap.

 

[yioties]

We live in a time that everything is exploited Tailgunner not just children! I still agree with Buckster and saw nothing wrong with the photo.

 

[tirediron]

Someone a'splain this to me, because clearly I'm not as bright as I thought I was. If the model in question had been a few years younger, the OP could have posted a shot of her with NO clothing on and people would have responded with, "Awww... isn't that cute". If she'd been a few years old people would have responded with, "WOW!". If she'd been on a beach, that would have been fine, but IN A STUDIO isn't????? What???? It's not like this was a creeper shot taken from inside an ice-cream van with a 400mm lens, it was well executed STUDIO SHOT!!! WHAT on earth is the problem?

We live in a time where people illegally exploit underage teenage children and looking is more than enough to incriminate a person. This isn't personal but I don't know the OP, I don't know the Child or her family. All I have is someone posting pictures of an underage child on the internet claiming to have legal parental consent to photograph said child. Does Thephotoforum.com do background checks to verify said information? How do you know what is being said is fact? If people will buy everything posted on the Internet as fact & true, I got some pristine Ocean Front Property in West Texas I'll sell you for cheap.

I don't mean to make light of your concern in the matter, but to rebutt: people have been exploiting other people of ALL age groups, genders and ethnicities for as long as their have been people; to liken the image in question to this sort exploitation with no supporting evidence is, IMO, grossly inappropriate. With the exception of the OP, I don't imagine any of us here know the OP, and while you are absolutely correct, we have only his assurance that permission has been obtained, I see no reason why that should not suffice. No, as I'm sure you're well aware, TPF doe not do any background checking on members, but rather trusts its membership (until given grounds to do otherwise). Completely aside from that, do you really think that any intelligent person would post something that wasn't appropriate in a public forum?

As has been mentioned, the child was wearing a bathing suit which in today's climate I would classify as conservative. I'm sure going to any local beach, lake-front, or public pool on a summer day would allow you to see many children of similar age in similar and/or less modest attire. Leave us not forget also that children of this age, and especially, IMO, females, like to play "grown up" and probably enjoyed the heck out of this.

 

[DanielLewis76]

Leave us not forget also that children of this age, and especially, IMO, females, like to play "grown up" and probably enjoyed the heck out of this.

Oh dear

I think maybe its just down to people own experiences on life and their thoughts that are based on them. My views are probably skewed some what by growing up with a family where most of the women has worked in child protection and rape centres dealing with the fall out of girls who are allowed to 'play grow up' only to be subjected to all manner of things because there are certain people out there who cannot recognise the difference between a child playing grown up and a child who wants to 'experience' being grown up. Along with a friend who works as a computer forensic scientist this all leads to my views being slightly on the side of caution when semi naked pics of underage girls are posted publicly on the internet.

I really do envy the people who cannot see any issues with it and akin it to seeing underage girls in bikini's on beaches as they must have a lovely life where everything is innocent but unfortunately not everyone sees it their way.

Again just my view based on my experiences.

 

[Buckster]

...this all leads to my views being slightly on the side of caution when semi naked pics of underage girls are posted publicly on the internet.

A girl in a bikini is now described as "semi-naked"??? And the talk now that she's being "exploited"???

Unbelievable... Simply, ridiculously unbelievable...

What next? Cover women with burkas? Bring back chastity belts?

 

[tirediron]

...Again just my view based on my experiences.

I think you will find that there is a significant amount of evidence to support the theory that clothing and attitude have virtually nothing to do with people (absolutely irrespective of age or gender) who are assaulted, exploited, etc.

 

[JacaRanda]

I don't think any of us "cannot see any issues with it". We simply don't see how those issues apply to this particular photo. Personally, if I did feel the way some others seem to feel; I would have reported it to the proper authorities and not given any indication to the OP.

 

[tirediron]

...this all leads to my views being slightly on the side of caution when semi naked pics of underage girls are posted publicly on the internet.

A girl in a bikini is now described as "semi-naked"??? And the talk now that she's being "exploited"??? Unbelievable... Simply, ridiculously unbelievable...

Well, strictly speaking, I suppose unless we're walking around fully dressed wearing gloves and bags on over heads, we're all at least semi-naked....

 

[kundalini]

......I really do envy the people who cannot see any issues with it and akin it to seeing underage girls in bikini's on beaches as they must have a lovely life where everything is innocent but unfortunately not everyone sees it their way........

That's a twisted way of telling someone their views are decidedly wrong. Your anecdotes do not draw a conclusion of reality. They meerly sustain antiquated outlooks. As been mentioned, clothing or not does not precipitate deviant behaviour. I absolutely abhor child predation and firmly believe the actual criminals will receive their just deserts, but perpetuating the fear mongering on such an innocent photo that was posted is akin to the witch hunts at Salem, or worse.