What Age Is Old Enough For Glamour Work? Total results: 26 Pages: 1 | 2 [ 2] |
|---|
| Date: 2007-09-09 07:53 I have seen many posts in here from younger members saying they are available
for nude, lingerie etc.
What age should girls do the following types of modelling
1/ Nude from front
2/ Topless from front
3/ Nude from rear
4/ Topless from rear
5/ See thru panties/bra
6/ G-strings/ thongs
Would luv to hear from the young models, and from others as well |
|---|
|
|---|
| Date: 2007-09-09 08:12 With regard to tasteful/not revealing Lingerie I would state 16 as a
definate minimum, but advise 18 more suitable!
Regarding the 6 examples you have quoted - Definately over18 for
all!
Please check out the current forum in 'Suggestions' forum the posting being
'Age'
There you can view others comments and problems that can occur!
Thank you
MIKE! |
|---|
|
|---|
 ID: 202838 Posts: 282 | Date: 2007-09-10 06:04 I agree with mike 18 is the standatd age for all the examples you have give.
Swimsuits on the other hand would be good from the ages of 14 and up.
Oluwaseungokesean |
|---|
|
|---|
 ID: 185214 Posts: 1299 | Date: 2007-09-10 06:28 Anything resembling nude here in Ireland the age is 18.
Lingerie can however be done from a young age. Such as them wearing a vest and
the underwear. This is the reality of advertising though. Although I am quite
sure that a good deal of care would o abouts these sort of shoots.
I however do not do nude. I am always covered in someway. You can do lingerie
and swimwear belongs you are covered for both private areas. So items of
clothing such as thongs and g-strings are normally allowed. Although you do have
to be quite careful when it comes down to it. Most photographers would stay away
from it until they are past the legal law age in their(the models) country to do
it.Howdy.I'm a 18 year old half asian from Ireland who really would love to get with an agency who can get her exposure or anything please look at my profile and get back to me  |
|---|
|
|---|
| Date: 2007-09-10 06:47 Hi Cindy,
Do you see any distinction between nude and topless, or whether the shots are
taken from the front or the back?
Just interested to hear your thoughts |
|---|
|
|---|
 ID: 196690 Posts: 58 | Date: 2007-09-10 06:49 nude = topless + bottomless, whereas topless is just topless?
just my thought though  |
|---|
|
|---|
ID: 185214 Posts: 1299 | Date: 2007-09-10 06:55 I don't know to be honest. You get 18+ ages who look quite young, and with
digital modification they can make anyone look younger. People will still look
at what they want to look, and it not being illegal seeing as they are the legal
age.
Topless is a form of nude, so there is no distinction really other then the
crotch area is normally covered which can make it a little better.
Behind nude is also the same, normally the private area can still be seen
normally especially with the right angle. So again no other 18 should do that.
At least wearing a thong or g-string covers those areas.Howdy.I'm a 18 year old half asian from Ireland who really would love to get with an agency who can get her exposure or anything please look at my profile and get back to me |
|---|
|
|---|
 ID: 185837 Posts: 336 | Date: 2007-09-10 07:30 For glamour as per the title, over 18... simple
Of course not all those types listed need to be glamour***** Spring approaches and soon the fairies will awaken ***** |
|---|
|
|---|
ID: 202838 Posts: 282 | Date: 2007-09-10 07:52 Roberts please i would like to ask you a question.
As a photographer would you rather take nude pictures of young girls or 18 and
above? because it seems like you are trying to find a line between taking under
aged nude pictures and breaking the law.
Just my thots
Oluwaseungokesean |
|---|
|
|---|
| Date: 2007-09-10 08:04 I would not take any nude pics of anyone under 18 under any circumstances. My
question was more aimed at the thoughts of the models themselves, not the
photographers |
|---|
|
|---|
 ID: 170792 Posts: 688 | Date: 2007-09-10 08:13 18 n above...no minor shld do such |
|---|
|
|---|
| Date: 2007-09-10 10:37 Roberts & Co:
I have seen many posts in
here from younger members saying they are available for nude, lingerie etc.
What age should girls do the following types of modelling
1/ Nude from front
2/ Topless from front
3/ Nude from rear
4/ Topless from rear
5/ See thru panties/bra
6/ G-strings/ thongs
Would luv to hear from the young models, and from others as well The
question as stated is wrong in so many ways:
- it is flawed in its attempt to define ages for showing particular parts of the
body as though they are somehow shameful in themselves without reference to
context
- it asks at what age should they do those
types of modelling
- it makes no reference to the fact that they should have the choice as to
whether to do it, but that responsibility for taking photographs rests with the
photographer
- it makes no allowance for the fact that Jurgita is inherently operating in an
international environment and that any answers given will be specific to one
cultural context but will be unlikely to take account of the fact that other
readers/contributors will be from other locations, quite possibly with very
different societal norms regarding such subjects.
fairydreams:For glamour as per the
title, over 18... simple I don't totally agree with this, as "glamour" (to my mind)
refers to the style of photograph where it concentrates on showing the model's
beauty rather than the clothing (which would be fashion) or some activity or
place (e.g. for commercial/editorial usage). There does not need to be any
sexual overtone in a glamour picture, in which case it is totally appropriate
for all ages.
If there is a sexual dimension, then I would say that the picture should
not be acceptable if the subject is clearly a child (and would thus appeal
to paedophiles), but should be acceptable from when the subject appears
to be sexually mature - e.g. with breasts and hips fully developed in a girl.
However, the law does not like to draw lines which are as vague as that,
prefering to state ages. Thus I would draw the line at 15 or 16, given that
almost all girls are pretty much fully developed at that age.
UK law used to draw the line here, but defences were being given that "I didn't
know how old she was but thought she looked old enough", hence the bar has been
raised to 18 to avoid that.
For pictures with explicit sexual motives (such as making genitals a clear
element within the overall picture rather than being incidental, for which see
my notes below) I would agree with 18 as being an appropriate place to draw the
line in the sand, artificial though it necessarily is, but I would personally be
comfortable seeing topless and even "implied nude" (e.g. nude from the rear) of
16 year olds.
fairydreams:
Of course not all those
types listed need to be glamour Very true!
I could quite easily imagine two specific types of photograph in which full
nudity would be acceptable for subjects of all ages:
- in a naturist (nudist) environment, where it is normal to be naked but where
there is no sexual dimension; a photograph of a family group in such a setting
should be (and is in the UK) acceptable;
- in an artistic picture such as classical works of art where, again, there is
no sexual dimension and where the nudity is very much secondary to the people,
their relationships, the setting, and so on.
Again, the law would have a problem implementing my views, but UK law does
reasonably well by using the phrase "indecent photograph" and defining that by
sexual activity or "erotic posing", and leaving the interpretation to courts on
a case by case basis. I understand that US law has similar "grey areas" with
phrases such as "explicit sexual activity", but I'd prefer to defer to someone
with local knowledge rather than attempt to go into it here.
Please note that the above is my opinion and represents where I would draw the
lines if asked, rather than relating to how I would interpret the laws that we
have, much less the rules which are imposed from outside, such as those who help
to pay for this site through advertising.
If the question relates to what we have, then we should stop allowing under 18s
to have profiles on here at all as the current levels of paranoia surrounding
any photographs of them seems to make it an offence even to acknowledge that
they are actually human. |
|---|
|
|---|
 ID: 203953 Posts: 22 | Date: 2007-09-11 05:14 I probably would not shoot anything provocative with anyone under 18. But that's
just me. |
|---|
|
|---|
ID: 202838 Posts: 282 | Date: 2007-09-11 10:11 David Otokpa Photography:
I probably would not shoot anything provocative with anyone under 18. But that's
just me.
Well to me thats a hoorable man never take advantage of the kids keep it up.
Oluwaseun
PS: Keep Representing For Naija gokesean |
|---|
|
|---|
 ID: 206377 Posts: 3 | Date: 2007-09-11 10:53 i thought it was law that you had to at least 18 to do this sort of
modelling.
 |
|---|
|
|---|
 ID: 207419 Posts: 95 | Date: 2007-09-11 15:02 well i think if shes comfortable with her self and of reasonable age and her
parents or guardians dont mind then aye about 16 ish. thats how old i am leaning
more to 17 but i have no problem doing tasteful shots of the ones you mentioned.
16 is fine for a tasteful nude...now justholding it open is a completely
different story Soon enough i'll be on your wall and you'll wanna be me |
|---|
|
|---|
| Date: 2007-09-11 21:36 Simone W.:
well i think if shes comfortable with her self and of reasonable age and her
parents or guardians dont mind then aye about 16 ish. thats how old i am leaning
more to 17 but i have no problem doing tasteful shots of the ones you mentioned.
16 is fine for a tasteful nude...now justholding it open is a completely
different story
I think we have proved here in various forums that there is a fine line between
what some call tasteful/artistic and what can be percieved as nude/provocative!
This is still a very grey area as different countries have different views and
laws regarding this and age!
This makes the question that much harder particularly regarding photos at an
international site such as Jurgita where people from differing Countries meet! |
|---|
Mystique Eyed Phoenix IonU |
|---|
 ID: 114505 Posts: 936 | Date: 2007-09-12 00:28 I should like to express the fact that while I agree with RICK upon the age of being
fully developed being approx. 15/16 yrs. : e.g. Breast & hip thing in full
'blossom'...
Don't get on my case for not including the rarer youngsters, who develop a bit
faster, OK!...We respect the possibilities of T/A coming on early.
Hold that z(O)(O)m Lens guys without shaking.
Try to RESERVE those "helpless" photographer tricks>
There is a certain thingy to consider via 'over exposure' of a model/person--
too soon increases obvious risks
for the endangerment of encouraging potential date rape for teens of this age
=13-16/borderline 17 yrs.
Why is it that USA has a statute placed in ordinance:
at 17 it's legal to watch rated R, but at 18 you can consent to being "naked" in
a sexually steamy relation...Is this Pre-Op 'training'?
--It isn't like the teen is educated by media alone, after all.
...At least let the teens be free of implications of possible failure of birth
control & unwanted child births, by delaying their body being advertised, 'til
18yrs. as an agreeable standard.
Allow basic Education to be completed, before encumbering results that occur
from
YOUTH SexXx...Then at least the parents do not PAY for the pursuit of lust/puppy
love/or in rare cases--TRUE LOVE.
Consider allowing, if it were your kid/teen to
be free to avoid such advertising to reduce the probable cause/effect of
depictions of nudity under the age of 18.
Sure there is no guaruntees of safety in anything, anywhere, & at anytime,
HOWEVER
...but I would want my daughter to make it through highschool, before thrusting
into deeper levels of magnetizing the wonderful male populous...Otherwise,
what's the point of showing up to school with clothes on?
...Why not Full tilt NUDE Attendance?
Talk about rioting role call--Worse than New Orleans Mardis Gras @ NITE
or Oregon State's Gay Parade Festival.
--That'd take the guess work out of everything, and most every1 other than
eunichs would want to become instant photographers!
I don't think any of us want HELL to $PAY$ for undecided guidelines.
Best WISHES to all for us to remain operating with each of our own unique
gifts.
HUGZzz to y'ALL,
PEACE/Salom
I'm migrating after this...>>>
But I'll still be online
Cancun? Or invest in beach property?
Then again, diamonds are a girl's best friend...MAYBE from Antwerp, Belgium!
looks better all the time...
Ay
Chihuahua
OR
bust the booked
Chuangtzu
 |
|---|
|
|---|
| Date: 2007-09-12 02:25 Stick to the Law... 18 I would say
also depends for what the shoot is for.
at the age of 18 the mind is very critical to develop new concepts. |
|---|
|
|---|
| Date: 2007-09-12 06:26 definatly 18, but agree that 16 yr olds can do swim wear etc as long as it is
tasteful and not pervy |
|---|
Announcement |
|---|
| From now on 50 activity points will turn into 1 credit, so you may earn credits as easy as never before !!!
All models and photographers are able to moderate photos! We will save a lot of time for moderators this way. Please read the short instruction on how to moderate and earn points very quickly.
Also, models and photographers can moderate part of the profiles as well! This is a fast way to earn some action points and credits! |
|---|
Total results: 26 Pages: 1 | 2 [ 2] |
Jurgita forum 
