# on ethics and law



## anthonyd (Apr 20, 2015)

I'd like to hear some opinions on the subjective matter of ethics and if possible some informed opinions on the objective matter of law.

The question concerns pictures of teenage girls, such as high school seniors and/or prom. Where do you draw the line before it's too creepy/sexy and where does the law draw the line, in the US.

I'll provide some examples (from 500px, not mine) to make the discussion more specific. Some are minors, some are not, but assume that they all were.

A) https://500px.com/photo/41835158/teen-model-by-josh-williams?from=user

B) https://500px.com/photo/73377341/s%C3%A1ra-by-david-%C5%98%C3%AD%C4%8Dan-photography?from=user_favorites&user_id=4349836

C) https://500px.com/photo/75375937/maria-by-sean-archer?from=user_favorites&user_id=4349836

D) The work of this guy: https://500px.com/The-Maksimov
who uses young (looking) models, but quite often crosses the line of what I consider safe for minors. Am I too conservative?


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Apr 20, 2015)

The law is different in each country, and even in different states of the same country, then recommend to inquire about the applicable law in your area.

Ethics also has different views, according to the local culture, but here's my personal opinion:

If a person has an adult woman's body (and does not look like girl), and sees herself as sexy, it does not hurt ethics shooting in sexy poses. Obviously, minors, need permission and monitoring of the parents or legal guardians.

On the other hand, pictures of women with girl's body may irritate some people, even if the "girl" is of legal age.
The same goes for boys doing poses adult man.

I do not mean the explicit nudity, but similar scenes to those that you used as an example.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Apr 20, 2015)

Usually this type of discussion involves the term obscenity. What is obscene? What is not obscene? Where is the dividing line between the two? Who gets to make the decision and how do they make it. 

The term obscenity is difficult to define. The Supreme Court has tried. 

It has ranged from "I know it when I see it", Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 184 (1964) to 

The Miller Criteria "(1) whether ‘the average person, applying contemporary community standards’ would find that the work, ‘taken as a whole,’ appeals to ‘prurient interest’ (2) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and (3) whether the work, ‘taken as a whole,’ lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. Miller v. California 413 U.S. 15 (1973).

As you can tell, neither of these definitions is really clear and testable. That's the problem with "drawing a line" concerning whether something is or is not considered obscene.

It is like beauty and art. Easier to identify in the extremes but most difficult and subjective when trying to draw a line between what is and is not beautiful/art.

Obscenity is in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## Marsu42 (Apr 20, 2015)

anthonyd said:


> Where do you draw the line before it's too creepy/sexy and where does the law draw the line, in the US.



I don't know if your "in the US" excludes non-US citizens from the discussions, and surely views on a lot of things are quite different on respective sides of the big lake, ethics- or law-wise.



anthonyd said:


> who uses young (looking) models, but quite often crosses the line of what I consider safe for minors. Am I too conservative?



.. but I'd like to mention that you're contradicting yourself with the above: Either you're concerned about child/teen psychology, or a self-set standard 'bout how things ought to be in the world out there.

The latter is entirely up to you, but as far as "safety" is concerned (of the models, that is) it probably entirely depends on factors you cannot see in the images - the studio setting, the relationship of the model to the photog and his/her team, the option to refuse poses w/o fear of being dumped as a model. If it wouldn't be possible to do shots like these and leave the models happy campers, all actors in horror movies should be raving psychotics for the rest of their lives, too.

Do note that I'm not trying to downplay problems in teen modeling, but a gloss picture on 500px isn't enough information to judge (ymmv).


----------



## awinphoto (Apr 20, 2015)

This is a very interesting topic, as we do shoot teenagers to older adults... Legal wise and the law, under 18, all models need to have the consent of a legal guardian or parent... We get releases from all parents and guardians, and if there's any questions or concerns, they address it right then and there. Legal wise, if they got the consent and releases from the parents and isn't nude, implied, or even lingerie, then it's fair game. Posing is what it is... Now whether it crosses the line into trashy is something all photographers have to be careful about and we have to worry about our reputations, but in the end of the day, legally and ethically, it is what it is. I have worked with a great young model, 16 years old... her parents were ok with everything, she's done many other modeling gig's and runway shows and she said with her shows that she models at, she can ironically wear bikinis and the like, but she cannot do lingerie shows (yet). I hope this helps... so ethically and legally, it's fine and really the examples you have shown are watered down a tad from what i've seen many of my competing photographers do... but everything does come at a cost as far as reputation and future business goes... There will be some that are turned off and will refuse to use them, and others that say dayum, i want to look that good.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 20, 2015)

Law is what you must do.
Ethics is what you should do.

They are not the same.

They vary depending on where you are.

There is no answer.


----------



## JumboShrimp (Apr 20, 2015)

Quote: "Where do you draw the line before it's too creepy/sexy...?"

Don't worry about that too much ... others will draw that line for you.


----------



## awinphoto (Apr 20, 2015)

JumboShrimp said:


> Quote: "Where do you draw the line before it's too creepy/sexy...?"
> 
> Don't worry about that too much ... others will draw that line for you.



in the end, the definition changes from generation to generation... teenagers in the 90's dressed and acted different than teens in the 60's-70's... and teens now are different than previous generations. At a recent expo we were at and had a booth, we had reactions varying from those gushing over our work, loved our lighting, composition and posing, to others scoffing and one calling me a "tool". The best you can do is do what's right by you and your client (and if needed their parents) and go from there.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Apr 20, 2015)

Don Haines said:


> Law is what you must do.
> Ethics is what you should do.
> 
> They are not the same.
> ...



An excellent point. To be a good citizen, we need to pay attention to both. Just because something is not illegal does not mean we should. Just like if something is moral to me, that does not give me liberty to violate the law with impunity.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Apr 20, 2015)

The perception of what is classified as inappropriate, also changes over time.

Research the photographer Irina Ionesco. Irina used his daughter Eva, as his favorite model for sexy photos of great artistic sensibildade. Irina Ionesco continued shooting with the same Nikon camera, black and white film and only lighting continuous light.

His daughter Eva grew, and with 40-year-old decided to sue his mother Irina, accusing her of having "stolen" childhood. Does the the daughter was affected by the "politically correct" almost 40 years years later?


----------

