I was not aware that the image was going to bring up some moral discussion. Again, she's 16, her mother was present, she's the one who came up with the idea. I did no PS on the eyes what so ever. I liked the picture for a reason, now I know the reason ! Francois brought it up here, as a Belgian , I am aware of the work of Louis Malle. It must have been buried deep inside my head.
Anyway, it is and stays interesting to me to read all the remarks.
With your suggestions in mind, and thanks to the help of cgardner, I post a new version of the image.
I definetly find this creepy. kids shouldnt have all the makeup on to look like adults.
On a technical note, I dont see anything all that fantastic about the photo. The white is borderline being blown out, and the light seems like its too low and pointing at the underside of her face.
As a comment on thebmrust's post with the link to the modelmayhem page of the underage model. I think there is a difference because when I look at her photos she looks like shes much older. I would have never guessed she was 17. I was thinking more like 25 at first glance. The girl in this thread looks like she is 12 and done up to look older which comes off as creepy to a lot of people.
Jess Edward wrote:
I definetly find this creepy. kids shouldnt have all the makeup on to look like adults.
> I have for kids, and as far as I remember, my daughters liked nothing more than trying to look like their mother, make-up and all. Does that makes them creepy as well?
On a technical note, I dont see anything all that fantastic about the photo. The white is borderline being blown out,
> Check your monitor !!
and the light seems like its too low and pointing at the underside of her face.
The light was at least 2 meters up !!
As a comment on thebmrust's post with the link to the modelmayhem page of the underage model. I think there is a difference because when I look at her photos she looks like shes much older. I would have never guessed she was 17. I was thinking more like 25 at first glance. The girl in this thread looks like she is 12 and done up to look older which comes off as creepy to a lot of people.
So Valerie is 16 and looks much younger ! That seems to be forbidden here ??
What if she becomes 30 and then will look like a 21 year old. I bet you would like that !
Many models start out underage - much of this is due to the requirements of the fit of the clothing (not many fully matured women can fit into a garment at the sizes required - yes, there are a few exceptions, but not many). That's why most high fashion model careers are over by the time they are 21.
Personally, I've always found this somewhat disturbing, but such is life. I just don't think most people realize when they are leering at a half-naked fashion model that she might not be of age.
Edited by Shari Umpstead on Dec 30, 2007 at 11:23 AM GMT
I think part of the 'flack' you are getting is because of the ambiguous nature of the image composition (the bed, feather boa) and because of the ambiguous nature of the subject (person/girl) and her 'unknown' age. Also, your title for the original post (thread) was "Child fashion model."
Given that you live in Belgium and many of your post's respondents live in the USA, it is perhaps a little 'communication' error here. Perhaps it is something as simple as a little choice of words and language.
IF your title had said: "Sixteen Year old fashion model" then perhaps some of the people would not object to her portrait as you have posted. It is pretty clear that some will see this girl as a 'child' and others will see her as a 'teen model.'
To my eyes this girl looks like a pretty teenage girl dressing up and wearing makeup. I do not see a sexual intent or anything sexual about it. She is wearing makeup as most teen age girls do. Yet most people assumed she is much younger.
Yet, there is another thread on this forum now where a girl of about 4 years old (at least she looks that young to me) appears to be wearing lipstick and mascara (makeup) and I don't see people blasting that photographer. So what gives? What is the difference?
She is sitting on a bed. I think this is something that more people would find 'creepy' yet I have seen pictures of girls (of various ages in the teen years) posted on forums such as this that are 'prone' on the floor or on a bed or even looking back at the camera while draped over a bed and on their backs. Few photographers on forums like this call those 'creepy.' Perhaps it is because they expect to see photos like those of teenage girls (and younger) and they did not expect to see one like yours.
Why am I writing this to you and the forum?
Perhaps because I think it is a matter of perspective, a matter of personal tastes, and a matter of 'miscommunication.' And, as I hope this forum allows people to post their work and discuss it openly with good will and no malice, I hope to get someone (anyone?) to see they may be a little 'overreacting' to this image.
Johny, you wrote "Child" and that is 100% correct. She is a child. She is also a model. She is also a teenager (according to what I read in the later posting in the thread). Giving you and the other forum members the 'benefit of the doubt' I would say it is merely a matter of how one (the photographer) has described the image/subject and how others (the forum viewers) 'perceive' that subject.
I can assume your English is good. My Flemish is non-existant and my French is rusty. I hope you understand what I am writing with no problems and I hope that I am being clear.
So, if I had posted a similar image in a Belgian forum, and wrote in French, I would no doubt make some statements that might be misinterpreted.
I hope this helps 'calm' the thread some. I have no wish to inflame anyone and I will not debate this either. It is pretty clear that some will see this girl as a 'child' and others will see her as a 'teen model.' Some see a model sitting on a bed. Others see something else.
My specialty is fine art nude and a bit of glamour, so I inter-act with naked women all the time...I am frightened to death that one day I'll get fooled by a young'n and ...well you know the rest. I am very uncomfortable even with 19 and 20 year olds..If you can't prove you are 21 I won't do the shoot.
And, I require photo ID and a relative/chaperone if I get ANY kind of hinky vibe.
I think kids should be allowed to be kids...
Further, I sense no intention or evidence that the young lady in the photograph is in any way being exploited..that IS NOT my point at all....
I think many of us got sensitized by that awful case where the little girl got killed in Colorado....She'd been in multiple beauty contests etc and was not even close to puberty...That has a lasting creep factor on me...On many of us I guess. I hasten to add that has absolutely nothing to do with this photograph or photographer who posted it.
With all that said....It is a very fine photograph in every respect and the girl is
a lovely and charming model. I'd like to meet her in 7 or 8 years..
@ Steady : you are right in every aspect !
@ Eddy: there is clearly a difference between Europe and the USA. I respect that, but sometimes it is hard for me, European, to "feel" the sensitive points.
Again, her mother was present. I can assure you that if mamma wasn't there, it would be a nono from the very beginning. In my studio, if not eighteen, there has to be at least one parent our a legal .... ( don't now the word) present. Everybody over here knows that.
And I have that other principle of mine: " if one can not hang the picture in the living room, then I wont make it"
Its a photo of a pretty girl wearing a boa aroudn her neck
HOW you percieve and relate to that is up to your own imagination.
If however, you associate a girl sitting on the end of a barely visible bed as to being creepy or overtly sexual, then maybe you should rethink where your imagination is leading you. Rethink how you percieve what you see and how you associate what you see with the real world
Not everything is about sex. Not everything has to be about sex.
Get over it.
Im sorry, but im sick and tired of this so called politically correct and moralistic world where things arent seen for what they are.
Implication and inuendo carry more weight than facts.
Its a joke,
Hell in some places of teh world, Dads cant even bond with their daughters anymore for this particular reason... the fear of being judged and persecuted simply because hes bonding with his kid.
No wonder our society is going downhill when fathers are even too afraid to touch their daughters in case if inuendo...
Its a sad fact that our society has gone downhill simply because we thrive on needing something to be intrigued about.... to need to have something to complain about... or the need to feel a part of a group so this whole group mentality happens... and this is a perfect example..
What we have here is a picture of a girl. BIG DEAL
Firstly, I think we are far more alike than different. I took a minute and looked around for the case I mentioned. When I popped open an old page from a Denver newspaper I realized that the reason I found things so creepy is that your model bears a very striking resemblance to the young victim...Jon Benet Ramsey...my reaction was visceral...I'd wager that resemblance is what triggered some of the other reactions...This case was huge for years in the USA, with pictures of the victim in all the media all the time.
If you search on some of the old photos of Jon Benet, I believe you'll see what I mean...Anyway it's a tempest in a teapot imho.
I do not and did not mean to find fault in your methods or practices...I was just sharing some of my approaches and worries. This is not a difference between Europe and the USA...God knows there's too many of those already...Just a quirky coincidence imho. Keep on keepin' on.
jwstudios wrote:
@ Steady : you are right in every aspect !
@ Eddy: there is clearly a difference between Europe and the USA. I respect that, but sometimes it is hard for me, European, to "feel" the sensitive points.
Again, her mother was present. I can assure you that if mamma wasn't there, it would be a nono from the very beginning. In my studio, if not eighteen, there has to be at least one parent our a legal .... ( don't now the word) present. Everybody over here knows that.
And I have that other principle of mine: " if one can not hang the picture in the living room, then I wont make it"
I think you have good points, but may be going way over the top in the other direction. To ignore the fact that children are exploited is just as sad a commentary on today's society as seeing sexuality in every made-up girl or teenager.
Again, once I knew this girl's age my reaction became "meh, a teenager tarted up, what's new?" although I DO think the photo is well done. Let's face it, many teenage girls go out in public tarted up on a regular basis and we don't run around clutching our pearls like this at them. I personally just have an issue with little girls being tarted up to look like adults like Jon Benet Ramsey was (which is not the case in this photo, since the girl is a teenager and probably makes herself up on a regular basis to try to look older).
jwstudios - You have to admit that there is a difference between little girls dressing up like their moms (and the haphazard way they apply makeup, which makes them look even more like a child) and a young girl being made up professionally to look like an adult.
Regardless, it IS a matter of perception and just because people are perceiving it a certain way or not does not make them perverts, or uptight, or whatever (I am hardly uptight or overly moralistic about anything, and I can see why people reacted this way - however, once it was stated that she is 16 and her mother was there to consent? I can no longer see why everyone is in a huff).
Some people must really relax a bit. It’s in your mind if you feel uncomfortable.
Love the portrait and PP. Love the make-up and the glamour is has. For this age (16), nothing wrong with it. Girls at that age love to pose and are not immune to glamour. I would say the same if she was 8 years old.
I really get the creeps of the witch-hunt (generally speaking) going on for the last couple of years and it’s getting stronger every year. I know, this is a modular phenomenon, after 10 or 20 years we will relax a bit. I really hope not too much photographers or parents are the victim of this declining moral and are falsely accused of producing horrific pictures.
Last week I was at an art gallery and saw some nude pictures of children. I spoke with the owner about ethics etc. She told me she got a few complaints, something she never had when she showed the same pictures 5 years earlier. She refused to remove them. I noticed she was very disappointed by the current moral.
Unfortunately, in the USA it goes far beyond hypocrisy and/or moral correctness...The legal system (notice I don't call it the justice system) here has perverted the laws intended (justifiably) to protect kids from exploitation and harm into a blank check for prosecutors to turn any published nude photo of a child into a crime no matter how tasteful or artful or innocent the motives of the creator of the art.
The above mentioned gallery owner as well as the creator of the art could easily find themselves in handcuffs in the US.
I subscribe to the notion that if we make a mistake we make it in favor of protection of the kids, but there are grandmothers here being criminally prosecuted for taking innocent pictures of their naked grandchildren...even babies. One celebrated case where a photo finisher called the cops on granny who now finds herself on the sex offenders lists. Nothing whatsoever sexual or suggestive or prurient...just a few visible body parts.
The world has gone crazy in the US and I fear we are a long ways from the pendulum swinging back to rationality. I fear SEX=DIRTY is going to be the hypocritical norm for the rest of my lifetime
Edited by eddyboy on Dec 31, 2007 at 12:25 PM GMT (Reason: spell)
Evexphile's comments refer to a NBC show hosted by Chris Hanson. It is an undercover sting operation to expose and catch adult men who have been trapped into thinking that they have been having an online conversation with underage teenage girls (who are actually adults) interested in sexual favors. Eventually, they are caught coming to what they think is the girls house to have sex, only to be met with those words..."High my name is Chris Hanson and I'm with Dateline NBC". The men get arrested. It's quite sick to see these men, but given the number of comments your picture has stirred, I have to admit that I found Evexphile's comments quite funny. Perhaps trying to lighten a situation.
As for my opinions of your photo, I do not particularly like this one and it's simply because I do not like seeing young girls is this type of fashion. I'm a fan of your adult work (e.g. Gwenny and Valerie) but the image with the boa (and it appears that she is not wearing anything else on top) cross the culturally acceptable for many, at least here in the USA. Her mom being present is good to know but I still do not think it is acceptable here. The European culture is much more open (less conservative) than ours. Not that one is better than another, just those differences may be why this photo stirred up so many moral remarks and why they may have caught you offguard.
Yet most people assumed she is much younger. 