# Young Models



## jlykins

We had a couple of girls down at the studio on Saturday to take some stuff to update their portfolio. The mothers of these two were friends so they came together and we cut them a small break on the price. Anyway, believe it or not, the one is 7 and the other is 12... 

1






2





3





4





5





6





7 This one wasn't for the portfolio, but it was just fun..


----------



## boogschd

the last ones shadow looks unreal ... cool 


7 & 12? ??? O.O

looks more like 12 & 16 lolz


----------



## jlykins

Yeah I thought it was pretty neat too!


----------



## Jaszek

if the one in the first picture is 12 then I'm 20 lol


----------



## Jaszek

btw, great shots


----------



## jlykins

Thank you


----------



## LuckySo-n-So

7-year-olds should look like 7-year-olds. Ditto for 12-year-olds.

That being said, I like #'s 1 and 7.

Not a fan of #'s 4 and 5 because of the age of the girl and the poses she's in.  Just kind of creepy to me.

JMO. Very good photographs, though.


----------



## cammiej

I agree with the pp.  The pictures are good but they make me cringe.. esp. the one's of the 7 yr. old.. kinda creepy.

But I agree.. the photographs are well done


----------



## jlykins

You know I agree... I wouldn't have placed them in those particular poses. As a matter of fact I did very little posing throughout the entire session. The "models" did most of the posing themselfs. I did some minor tweeks here and there of arms, foot placement, etc. But the two photos in question were the models all on their own... The wierd thing is that the mothers were standing there and didn't think that these were innapropriate at all... I have a 3 year old daughter and there's no way that I'll be dressing them like that, or doing pictures like that. I want her to stay young as long as possible, as well as her twin brother.


----------



## jlykins

Let me show you another one that I thought was a little sketchy. As a matter of fact I asked the mother before I took the shot, "do you really want her in that pose" and she told me it was fine...


----------



## LuckySo-n-So

> As a matter of fact I asked the mother before I took the shot, "do you really want her in that pose" and she told me it was fine...


 
These pics of the 7-year-old have a creepiness factor, but they are not "sick."   What's a poor innocent photographer to do with mom on the sidelines encouraging such poses?  Lose a client?  Not over those photos.  

I'm sure it's tough to be put in that situation as a photographer.


----------



## jlykins

Short of illegal I don't really care what I shoot. It didn't seem too creepy at the time. Looking back on the photos now, yeah they seem a little age inappropriate but really all it boils down to is a parent letting their kid grow up too fast. I mean I would venture to say that a lot of the young girls that are in these pagents and into modeling do poses that are a little ahead of their age. If you were a young model, looking up to these adult models doing shots like this, you would probably want to try to be as much like them as you could too. Either way, Lucky is right, I'm not turning away a customer...


----------



## adamwilliamking

Cool but agree with creepiness of a few


----------



## bwlergh

Pictures 4 & 5: Totally inappropriate poses for a child that age.


----------



## timethief

> Pictures 4 & 5: Totally inappropriate poses for a child that age.



+1


----------



## jlykins

bwlergh said:


> Pictures 4 & 5: Totally inappropriate poses for a child that age.


 

Guess it's a good thing that I didn't do the posing then...


----------



## manaheim

I concur with the creepy, but 2 and 3 are very nice.


----------



## photographyfanatic

4 and 5 are disturbing to me! The shots of the 12 year old are fine, but the ones of the 7 year old give me the creeps. They are so wrong! You are so wrong for shooting thoses poses. Even though you say you did not suggest those poses, you are responsible for what you shoot and how it portrays the MINORS in your photos.  I  am a mother myself and I am outraged that any mother would stand by and watch her 7 year old daughter pose like that and just do nothing! If the mother didn't care then you as a father yourself should and KNOW BETTER!  I don't care what they were paying you should REFUSE to shoot such small kids in a way that sexulaizes them!!!!!! SHAME on you for allowing that! What if someone did that to your child - exploited them for money! The fact that after you shot them, knowing it was creepy and wrong, you still posted them on the internet where any old pervert can see them and take them and post them anywhere. Seriously why would you post those shots of the 7 year old? How could you be proud that you allowed that and shot that!!! Parents should be warned about photographers like you! Sickening!


----------



## manaheim

photographyfanatic said:


> 4 and 5 are disturbing to me! The shots of the 12 year old are fine, but the ones of the 7 year old give me the creeps. They are so wrong! You are so wrong for shooting thoses poses. Even though you say you did not suggest those poses, you are responsible for what you shoot and how it portrays the MINORS in your photos. I am a mother myself and I am outraged that any mother would stand by and watch her 7 year old daughter pose like that and just do nothing! If the mother didn't care then you as a father yourself should and KNOW BETTER! I don't care what they were paying you should REFUSE to shoot such small kids in a way that sexulaizes them!!!!!! SHAME on you for allowing that! What if someone did that to your child - exploited them for money! The fact that after you shot them, knowing it was creepy and wrong, you still posted them on the internet where any old pervert can see them and take them and post them anywhere. Seriously why would you post those shots of the 7 year old? How could you be proud that you allowed that and shot that!!! Parents should be warned about photographers like you! Sickening!


 
Wow... judge much?

Calm down.


----------



## photographyfanatic

Judge much? Well yes since he put them here for judgement!!!!So yes I will judge these as they are. As I said sickening! Anyone who looks at number 5 will see that. There are many others here who have agreed that they are wrong. As a photographer you need to be liable for what you put out there. Is that the kind of reputation he wants to build? To be known as the photographer who looks the other way and shoots and posts such photos of kids? So when it comes to the sexualization of kids - no I will not calm down. The problem is that you are not outraged yourself. Children need to be protected. Not exploited and that is what is going on here. From the mother, photographer,and anyone else who doesn't get why those are wrong, and would post them. I am sure photo forum would agree. The photos of the 12 year old are very nice, but no one will remember this photographer for those. Instead he will be remembered as the guy who took and posted the creepy pictures of a little girl.


----------



## photographyfanatic

jlykins said:


> Short of illegal I don't really care what I shoot. It didn't seem too creepy at the time. Looking back on the photos now, yeah they seem a little age inappropriate but really all it boils down to is a parent letting their kid grow up too fast. I mean I would venture to say that a lot of the young girls that are in these pagents and into modeling do poses that are a little ahead of their age. If you were a young model, looking up to these adult models doing shots like this, you would probably want to try to be as much like them as you could too. Either way, Lucky is right, I'm not turning away a customer...


 
With an attitude like this, you should not be allowed to shoot kids. Anything for a dollar? Gross!


----------



## manaheim

photographyfanatic said:


> Judge much? Well yes since he put them here for judgement!!!!So yes I will judge these as they are. As I said sickening! Anyone who looks at number 5 will see that. There are many others here who have agreed that they are wrong. As a photographer you need to be liable for what you put out there. Is that the kind of reputation he wants to build? To be known as the photographer who looks the other way and shoots and posts such photos of kids? So when it comes to the sexualization of kids - no I will not calm down. The problem is that you are not outraged yourself. Children need to be protected. Not exploited and that is what is going on here. From the mother, photographer,and anyone else who doesn't get why those are wrong, and would post them. I am sure photo forum would agree. The photos of the 12 year old are very nice, but no one will remember this photographer for those. Instead he will be remembered as the guy who took and posted the creepy pictures of a little girl.


 
I think we all understand your general point of concern.  Pretty much everyone who posted expressed the concern.  I, myself, turned to a coworker and said "Good lord, I hope my daughters don't look like that when they are 12!"

From what I've heard, I think the photographer handled the situation as they should have.  Whether or not they walked off the scene or refused to take the pictures is a matter of business sense, principles, and art.  All three of those are pretty subjective, and it is absolutely not for you to personally judge if the OPs choices were right or wrong.

No laws were broken... no laws were even gently nudged... and the parents were present and approved of the pictures being taken, even when the photographer expressed some concern.

The problem here is that you are being unconstructive and reactionary, and all that will accomplish is to actually make _you_ look foolish.  

If anything, it is the parents who should be questioned and not the photographer... and even then... really not your place.


----------



## Arch

Please lets stop this OTT reaction.
If you do not like the photos, state why and then leave this thread, please do not attack the image poster.

We can all have our opinions like 'i would never let my daughter do that'... but other than that, no one is sick or 'wrong'. If it is not illegal, or 'porn' then there is nothing to argue about.

Now back to normal c&c:

To be honest there is only one image i dislike out of the set and that is #5 for the reason that the position the girl is in is meant to accentuate curves, which i don't think is appropriate for such a young girl. But this is not porn, its just a pose that doesn't work. I don't find any of the others distasteful.


----------



## photographyfanatic

manaheim said:


> I think we all understand your general point of concern. Pretty much everyone who posted expressed the concern. I, myself, turned to a coworker and said "Good lord, I hope my daughters don't look like that when they are 12!"
> 
> From what I've heard, I think the photographer handled the situation as they should have. Whether or not they walked off the scene or refused to take the pictures is a matter of business sense, principles, and art. All three of those are pretty subjective, and it is absolutely not for you to personally judge if the OPs choices were right or wrong.
> 
> No laws were broken... no laws were even gently nudged... and the parents were present and approved of the pictures being taken, even when the photographer expressed some concern.
> 
> The problem here is that you are being unconstructive and reactionary, and all that will accomplish is to actually make _you_ look foolish.
> 
> If anything, it is the parents who should be questioned and not the photographer... and even then... really not your place.


 
It absolutley is for me to judge when the pictures are posted in this forum for review!!!  Do you really think that number 4 and 5 don't cross the line? As a professional I don't think he should of walked off the shoot, but I do feel it is his resposiblity to sway the parents in a different direction with photos like 4 and 5. After all it is HIS reputation that is on the line. No parent or photographer I know would ever want to be associated with a photographer that walks such a fine line with no discretion at all. It's a 7 year old! Would you?To me it's abusive of any parent to allow their child to be photographed in such a way. Remember we are talking about a SEVEN year old! It's shows poor morals, poor judgement, poor buisness sense, and a poor world view of that photographer to shoot and post number 4 and 5. How could anyone assist an ignorant parent exploit their kid? To me no dollar amount would ever be worth the damage to my professional, artistic, and personal reputation taking and posting such photos would bring.


----------



## Big Mike

I think the point has been made.


----------



## photographyfanatic

Arch said:


> Please lets stop this OTT reaction.
> If you do not like the photos, state why and then leave this thread, please do not attack the image poster.
> 
> We can all have our opinions like 'i would never let my daughter do that'... but other than that, no one is sick or 'wrong'. If it is not illegal, or 'porn' then there is nothing to argue about.
> 
> Now back to normal c&c:
> 
> To be honest there is only one image i dislike out of the set and that is #5 for the reason that the position the girl is in is meant to accentuate curves, which i don't think is appropriate for such a young girl. But this is not porn, its just a pose that doesn't work. I don't find any of the others distasteful.


 
So I can only have an opinion that you like? It is my opinion that those 2 photos are out of line. I did not attack the poster. I stated my opinion. It is ridiculous that you state that it must be illegal or porn to be debated. Thats insane! What's wrong with a heate debate? Where's the harm in a good discussion/debate wheather it's heated or not?


----------



## manaheim

*rolls eyes*

Aaaaaaaaanyway...

To OP: I want to say again how much I really like 3.  2 is kinda cute, but I think there's just too much wall in it.  There are a couple cases where I think these shots would be really dressed up by a different crop... notice, for example, in 2... you're tighter in on the subject and the line of her body starts in the bottom left and never really quite brings her into the center of the shot... that's really nice.

btw, a friend pointed out that in 4... if she was smiling, it might have eliminated the "curse" of it... brought innocence back into the shot a bit.

In 6, it strikes me as the girl just looks off-balance and uncomfortable... like the shot you intended occurred just before or after this one, and this was her getting into position or something.

Anyway, still some good stuff and I think with a bit of tweaking some really appealing shots.  Nice work and good eye.

Don't let the crazies get you down.


----------



## Big Mike

photographyfanatic said:


> I did not attack the poster.


Sounds a bit like an attack to me...


> SHAME on you for allowing that!





> Parents should be warned about photographers like you!



While we are on the topic...keep in mind that how someone interprets an image, has a lot to do with their own values.  
Does the position of arms and legs make an image sexual to you?  It is possible that you are interjecting a sexual overtone to images where it's non-existent?  And who's to say if it's non-existent or not?  Hard to say because everyone interprets it differently.

Of course, there are societal differences to be considered.  In Europe, you may find an magazine ad for a sauna showing a naked family of four.  In America, many would call that porn and be outraged.


----------



## Arch

photographyfanatic said:


> It is ridiculous that you state that it must be illegal or porn to be debated.



I said no such thing... if its illegal or porn it will be *deleted* not debated.

As Mike has already pointed out, you are being aggressive.. makes no difference to me what the subject is, calm down and leave this thread i have said already. There's no need for this to go further if you just leave it alone now, thanks.


----------



## jlykins

First of all, I had consent before I posted them up. I won't turn down a job, unless it's illegal. You don't stay in business turning away jobs. The mother in this situation thought her daughter posing was just fine. She's not naked, she's not even partially naked. You could see more going to a local pool in the summer. Yes she has that "sexy" look, but in no way did I or her or her mother for that matter do anything wrong. Yes I did post them up for people on here to see, and for Judgement. Not judgement on if you think it's right or wrong to pose in that manner, but judgement in color, exposure, contrast... I welcome your opinions about the photos, but if you can't refrain from verbally attacking me, you should probably not say anything at all. The moderators don't put up with that kind of stuff long. Thanks for your opinion about the images though.


----------



## jlykins

I would like to say sorry if I have offended anyone. I had the best of intentions when I took the images, and when I posted them up here. I wouldn't ever purposely post anything that I felt would offend people. I understand the concerns, but if I had it to do all over again, I would. Between these two girls we have made almost $1000 already, and they have refered us numerous other models and dancers that they know and work with. I really do appreciate everyones comments. That is how I learn and grow as a photographer. I value every opinion.


----------



## bdavison

Well Im not offended. You got hired to take perfectly legal photos and did so. No problem with that. 

Unfortunatly in the process you dragged out some self-righteous overprotective mom that decided you should be strung up and dragged behind her car because shes paranoid that everyone is a pedophile or something.

She should go check her kids myspace acct, her kid probably posted pics from her cellphone that would make a hooker blush.

Ive seen worse poses come out of disney.


----------



## bigtwinky

No offense here either.

I actually think you did the right thing in telling the mom "are you sure you want her to pose like this?".  I think that shows that your head is in the right place and had the pose been worse/illegal, you would of refused to snap the picture.

I was thrown off a bit when I scrolled through the pictures and saw those poses.  I personally think they are not right for a child of that age and don't really see the point of taking something like that.  A casting director will not be looking for a 7 year old who can do that, they want kids to be kids and look like kids.

In terms of business, the mom made the wrong call in asking you to shoot the pose anyway.   But hey, you are offering a service.   You don't always have creative control over everything that is shot.  If I put in my 2 cents and refused to shoot things unless they were the way I wanted, I wouldn't be paid.

Wait... I don't get paid for any of this, I'm just doing this for fun.


----------



## epp_b

Well, I didn't want to be the one to bring it up, but since someone already has, I'll come out say it: numbers 4, 5 and 6 give off a really bad vibe.  You need to show them doing "kid" stuff, not doing "grown-up" stuff.   It's creepy.  Almost pedobear approved.

I would have simply told her mom that I won't photograph these poses.

1, 2, 3 and 7 are fine.  #7 It's fun, it's expressive, it shows her being a kid.


----------



## GeneralBenson

I'm gonna have to agree that these are pretty sick.  I'll also go a little further and say that the 12 year old ones are over the line as well, to me.  The only reason they don't look appalling is because of the 7 yr old ones.  But if I forget those for a moment, and just think about the fact that there is a 12 yr old try to look sexy, that is also creepy to me.  But since that's not why you posted them, I'll go another step further and say that regardless of creepiness, I don't find them to be anything special.  They all have elements that could be improved.  They all pretty much look like direct sunlight pictures, and the light isn't very soft or flattering, and the shadows are mostly hard and distracting.  The bricks look fake for some reason.  I hd to stare at a few pictures to decide if they were real or not.  

#1 - her head is perfectly level and her smile is flat and looks forced.  Her head should be tilted.  and there is a black thing sticking in the left side of the frame.  

#2 - seems kind of overexposed.  the ground is pretty dirty.  her hair is too much in her eyes.

#3 - hair in eyes.  otherwise pretty good.  Really good expression.

#4 - Despite the fact that the girl seem to think this is a good model pose, it's not really.  Backs of hands are generally a no no and are pretty unattractive in this and most cases.  the white shirt and black vest are both clipped.  the up the skirt pose is just revolting, sorry.

#5 - The pose is realy stiff, her legs are locked out, and her butt is sticking out in a way that makes it look big.  her hair is all over the place.  the background is a disaster.  

#6 - same thing here, what's up with the background?  half a bucket on the right edge, a trash can behing her head.  It looks like you both forgot she was wearing a scarf and it just kind of ended up in the picture on accident.  do they not own shoes or something?  

#7 - This would be the best shot of the group is her hand wasn't cut off by that door.  The plywood and the edge of the wall running out on the left are distracting.  Should have backed up and cropped tighter with a longer focal length.  

#8 - the one you posted up later is really crowded and busy in the background, and it looks like you keylighted her with on camera flash.   The light is really harsh.

Seems like the whole shoot could have been improved by shooting at a later time.


----------



## wagaboo

#5 is just wrong and imo and should have been shot more like in the jump shot and more age appropriate at all even though the photos are well done , the parents imo are not too bright in allowing that sort of shoot...on just a couple of the shots though
My 2 Cents !!!


----------



## KmH

Interesting thread.


----------



## jlykins

I'm done defending myself, and the poses. If you don't like them fine, if you think I'm a creep, fine. I'm doing shoots that the customers ask for, that's how you stay in business.


----------



## Phranquey

jlykins said:


> I'm done defending myself, and the poses. If you don't like them fine, if you think I'm a creep, fine. I'm doing shoots that the customers ask for, that's how you stay in business.


 

Dude, blow it off.  They may be a bit age inappropriate, but as Arch said, they are definitey no where near illegal.  It was a paid gig, directed by the mother.  As was stated earlier, I have seen parents let girls of this age wear outfits at the pool that probably would make Hugh Hefner blush.


----------



## Jon0807

Big Mike said:


> Sounds a bit like an attack to me...
> 
> 
> 
> While we are on the topic...keep in mind that how someone interprets an image, has a lot to do with their own values.
> Does the position of arms and legs make an image sexual to you?  It is possible that you are interjecting a sexual overtone to images where it's non-existent?  And who's to say if it's non-existent or not?  Hard to say because everyone interprets it differently.
> 
> Of course, there are societal differences to be considered.  In Europe, you may find an magazine ad for a sauna showing a naked family of four.  In America, many would call that porn and be outraged.




I agree with Mike on this one.  When I first looked at the pictures I saw some well done photos.  Then I started to read others' comments and it just blew my mind at how people like to blow the "creepy underage pervert whistle" at the slightest hint of anything they don't agree with.  I'm quite disappointed at how society as come to a point when a mother or father can't take a picture of their baby crawling on the floor for the first time without someone calling CPS because the baby was naked.  Maybe these whistleblowers should read up on some Freud.

As for the photos themselves, the only ones I don't really care for are #5 and 6 because of the poses.  They just seem awkward and unnatural when that doesn't seem to be the intent of the photos.  I did not see a single thread of sexual innuendo at all.  Just didn't care for the poses in those particular photos


----------



## epp_b

> I'm quite disappointed at how society as come to a point when a mother or father can't take a picture of their baby crawling on the floor for the first time without someone calling CPS because the baby was naked.


It's one thing to take pictures of your own children for keepsake purposes.  It's quite another for a photographer to pose children suggestively.


----------



## jlykins

But what if you are trying to get your kid into modeling, or into acting. What if you want to show every side that your kid can do. Then is it ok to pose them like this? Because that's what happened. The younger one spends an hour a night in front of the mirror posing... At least that's what her mother said. These mothers weren't white trash either. One of them is VP of a very large division of a vary large company(fortune 500 large), and the other's mom is in Some sort of goverment position here in town. They have refered us a ton of business since this shoot, which means that they're happy, which means I'm happy. That's all I'm ever out to do at a photo shoot, make the customer happy.


----------



## manaheim

jlynkins... the people on here who would rail at you for what you did will never be convinced.  If you think you did the right thing and you can sleep at night with your decision, then I think you've done all you can expect to do.

Plenty of folks on here, including some of the mods, think you've done right by your craft and your profession.


----------



## jlykins

manaheim said:


> jlynkins... the people on here who would rail at you for what you did will never be convinced. If you think you did the right thing and you can sleep at night with your decision, then I think you've done all you can expect to do.
> 
> Plenty of folks on here, including some of the mods, think you've done right by your craft and your profession.


 

Well put. Thanks.


----------



## Flash Harry

I rate myself as a normal heterosexual married father of three with a decent sexual appetite, to me the pictures/kids are just that, pictures of kids, the poses are not provocative and I don't find myself "turned on" by them, most male adults are not perverts and look at kids as just kids. 

Those who have been offended by these shots I reckon should question whether they are looking at them from an adult point of view and whether to seek help sorting out their own issues, as, obviously, they see something sexually provocative in these children. H


----------

