Photographing Minors

<p>So since I have been in the (small) photography business, I have only had shoots through people who were some how connected to me, through friends, family, etc. Well, I knew the day would come where I would get a client not connected to me.<br>

I have a 17 year old, female who is wanting to do a photoshoot with me. Do I create a Parent/Guardin consent form, contract, etc? Can I get a little insight on this?<br>

 </p>

<p>Faith - </p>

<p>Never shoot a minor unless the parent or a guardian is there with you. Signatures are too easily forged - so I would not advise accepting a signed consent form. </p>

<p>I do Senior photos - and every potential client - gets the same speech - if you can't be with your son or daughter - no photos. Unless they have a guardian (over 18) or they are over 18. And yes - I do check ID's. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

<p>What David said +1.</p>

<p>In addition you do need a contract for the parents to sign clearly stating what will be produced and how much it will cost. It also needs to make clear that you own the copyright and it should act as an acceptable use license (listing what they can/can't do with the images - EG "no commercial use"). Obviously what is/isn't acceptable is totally open to negotiation.</p>

<p>In the USA it is far less worry to photograph miners rather than minors.<br>

If you do decide to photograph minors - definitely follow David's and Dan's advice. If the photographs requested are in anyway to be "suggestive" - don't walk away - RUN AWAY without signing the contract.<br>

Remember too that what is acceptable to one parent may be totally unacceptable to the other. </p>

<p>With all due respect, there is no reason to "RUN AWAY" or even "walk away" if the photographs are merely "suggestive". Many great advertising campaigns are "suggestive" and are shot with minors. I do agree that that having a parent present, not just their signature, is mandatory to avoid any "misunderstandings" although for the typical senior portrait that seems a bit extreme and unnecessary. </p>

<p>There is more than one issue here. </p>

<p>The first issue--the one all the previous posters appear to be addressing--is your personal liability in being alone with a minor. In a private situation, that's a definite issue. In a public situation, not so much. I always have a parent or guardian present shooting any minor in the studio. But I often meet teen agers for a session that takes place totally in a populated public location without parents.</p>

<p>The model release issue is purely a matter of the license to use the images to promote my photography business. If you don't intend to use the images commercially, you don't need a release at all. But if you do intend to use the image, you need a model release signed by the legal guardian.</p>

<p>I would be interested in seeing a case where a photographer was taken to court for "suggestive" photographs--that did not otherwise break state or federal law--by one parent after they had been properly released by the other parent. I don't know that it would have mattered in <em>Shields v Gross</em> if Brooke Shields' father would have objected after the fact...considering that it didn't even matter that Shields herself objected after the fact.</p>

 

<p>Hi am also interested in the legal aspects of photographing minors. For instance I saw in the news that a yearbook having a photograph of Madonna (the singer) at the age of 14 is being auctioned. It also contains photos of lots of other 14 year old classmates. Just wondering what the legalities are.</p>

<p>cheers,<br>

Matthew</p>