Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 81 to 97 of 97

Thread: Underage is still Underage

  1. #81

    Default Re: Underage is still Underage

    [quote=waileong;4550248]How sad that one has not seized the moment to be gracious here.

    WTF. Why do I need to be gracious? Vince and I disagree on some points, he made himself clear and I clarified myself in relation to his post.

    Where does graciousness come into it?
    Canon 400D + BG-E3 . EF-S 17-85mm 4-5.6 IS . EF 75-300mm 4-5.6 IS
    http://aselley.zenfolio.com/

  2. #82
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Underage is still Underage

    Actually, I don't think that we are remotely close to being on the same page. I draw you back to the disagreement on whether age makes a difference, and not the definition of obscene.

    The second set of questions you asked on #68 have nothing to do with age, but I have simply obliged you by providing my view. This should not be confused with the main topic of age.

    Even within the assessment of what is an obscene photograph, I definitely disagree with you that the age of the model makes a difference in assessing whether the photograph is obscene. I really don't know how you can come to that reasoning at all.

    There is no issue in disagreement - you can have your view.

    Posting a non-obscene photograph of any person does not attract legal liabilities as far as I'm aware, save for the usual causes of action of outrage of modesty, defamation or copyright infringement.

    As for posting a nude photo - we will then revisit the whole idea of obscene etc etc.

    Profit does not come into the picture in any of these cases, unlike in the United States.

    In response to my comment:

    4. Bikini photography, whether in my objective or subjective view, will not be considered as obscene, regardless of the age, setting, location of the shoot itself. I'm very surprised someone actually takes the view that bikini photographs are obscene.

    You said:

    I actually don't. Personally I love attractive women in Bikini's, so another side question, is a thong-bikini or those often called "Brazilian" legal attire on Singapore beaches? As for the age of the Model I guess on this matter I think it depends on the nature of the posing being done as to my feelings...but this I admit is a moral and therefore subjective judgment.

    I only need to draw your attention to your comment at #67 where you said:

    The act of being on the beach at Sentosa is not obscene or indecent the act of photographing them may be, and the further act of publishing those photos online would almost definitely be.

    So I'm not sure what your position now is.

    On the final part about the thong - your guess is as good as mine. However, in my subjective view, I doubt it will be considered as obscene. So many people have done it without prosecution already.

    Quote Originally Posted by aselley View Post
    Actually Vince given the points below except where I have noted you and I are very close to being on the same page.

    Totally agree, the trouble is Art is so subjective, some people relate to it and see merit, some see smut...so I think Artistic is always going to be a grey area.

    This is one point we may have to agree to disagree, take this recent post: http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=440674, for me personally I like the message the photo is trying to convey, the idea of sexual forbidden fruit for me sends one message if the Model is 22 than if she is 12. One I can appreciate the other I can't...or ratehr objectively I can, yet I can't remove the subjective with Models I consider underage.

    So I hope we can just agree to have differing viewpoints on this.



    I agree with this, but as an almost unrelated question: If you posted a nude photo of a Model or even a clothed one of her online without her explicit permission is this allowed in Singapore? What about profiting from the photo?



    I actually don't. Personally I love attractive women in Bikini's, so another side question, is a thong-bikini or those often called "Brazilian" legal attire on Singapore beaches? As for the age of the Model I guess on this matter I think it depends on the nature of the posing being done as to my feelings...but this I admit is a moral and therefore subjective judgment.

  3. #83
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Underage is still Underage

    Hehe, actually times have changed. In my last poll, a first year legal associate charges out at around S$275 per hour, and that increases all the way until S$1,000+ for a senior partner. I could be wrong though, but I think S$200/hr is quite low.

    Quote Originally Posted by waileong View Post
    I hope you realise you've been given free legal advice and opinion which would ordinarily cost you over $200 an hour. And while no lawyer can guarantee his legal opinion until it is tested in Court, I believe vince's opinion is sound and you shoul strive to understand it, regardless of what you personally feel is right or wrong.

  4. #84

    Default Re: Underage is still Underage

    Quote Originally Posted by TheQuestion View Post
    exactly and its that point that he doesn't seem to be getting...all he's coming off as now is a demagogue trying to make people afraid of their shadows.
    For someone who has "Question Authority" as your signature I find this comment of tremendous contribution to the thread.

    Also as for my POV, I am not trying to bring people over to my thoughts or thinking at all, for I am very much able to accept that my thinking may be in error and my points may need to be re-thought. What I was hoping for was maybe some intelligent discourse, where even disagreement is accepted and understanding shared and valued.

    I can read your points and chose to not agree with them fully, regardless of the source, in fact doing so is how we all come to greater understanding and maybe, even hopefully ensure that as photographers our actions enhance our image and not detract from it.
    Canon 400D + BG-E3 . EF-S 17-85mm 4-5.6 IS . EF 75-300mm 4-5.6 IS
    http://aselley.zenfolio.com/

  5. #85

    Default Re: Underage is still Underage

    Vince,

    Thank you for both your personal and perhaps more importantly your professional understanding of the legal stance of nude, semi-nude and bikini photographic shoots.

    I do appreciate it, even if others feel my answers show that I do not.

    So once again thank you for obviously repeating something you have said oft times before and in numerous older threads
    Canon 400D + BG-E3 . EF-S 17-85mm 4-5.6 IS . EF 75-300mm 4-5.6 IS
    http://aselley.zenfolio.com/

  6. #86

    Default Re: Underage is still Underage

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123 View Post
    Hehe, actually times have changed. In my last poll, a first year legal associate charges out at around S$275 per hour, and that increases all the way until S$1,000+ for a senior partner. I could be wrong though, but I think S$200/hr is quite low.
    Actually you could give him advice worth $5000 an hour and it wouldn't make a difference. Waste of money and time in my view.

  7. #87
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Underage is still Underage

    You're welcome - all views expressed here are personal views and qualified accordingly. There is no "professional understanding" or professional views here because each of us here are expressing their own personal views on the Internet.

    Hope this clarifies.

    Quote Originally Posted by aselley View Post
    Vince,

    Thank you for both your personal and perhaps more importantly your professional understanding of the legal stance of nude, semi-nude and bikini photographic shoots.

    I do appreciate it, even if others feel my answers show that I do not.

    So once again thank you for obviously repeating something you have said oft times before and in numerous older threads

  8. #88
    Member TheQuestion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    PenguinVille.
    Posts
    1,089

    Default Re: Underage is still Underage

    Quote Originally Posted by aselley View Post
    For someone who has "Question Authority" as your signature I find this comment of tremendous contribution to the thread.

    Also as for my POV, I am not trying to bring people over to my thoughts or thinking at all, for I am very much able to accept that my thinking may be in error and my points may need to be re-thought. What I was hoping for was maybe some intelligent discourse, where even disagreement is accepted and understanding shared and valued.

    I can read your points and chose to not agree with them fully, regardless of the source, in fact doing so is how we all come to greater understanding and maybe, even hopefully ensure that as photographers our actions enhance our image and not detract from it.
    I'm questioning u since u set yourself up as the authority to judge what is child porn and scare people here. face it you've lost your point and no one is gonna listen to u because as waileong pointed out earlier u didn't stick to your guns and stick with one arguement; that being the moral one. not you're just coming off as a demagogue trying to scare people.
    Opinions are like A-holes. Everyone's got one.

  9. #89

    Default Re: Underage is still Underage

    Quote Originally Posted by TheQuestion View Post
    I'm questioning u since u set yourself up as the authority to judge what is child porn and scare people here. face it you've lost your point and no one is gonna listen to u because as waileong pointed out earlier u didn't stick to your guns and stick with one arguement; that being the moral one. not you're just coming off as a demagogue trying to scare people.
    I never realised I set myself up as anything save someone who was asking some questions and seeking some clarification. If i did not "stick to my guns" as you suggest it might be because the issue is one where it is difficult to be totally objective (ie: legal) and not allow subjective (ie moral) feelings to enter the discourse.

    If I have scared people, which was not my intent, then maybe that is in part because they see what is happening in large parts of the world in regards to photography and the treatment of photographers. You should feel lucky that the same is not also happening here.

    And maybe as a group work to ensure that it never does?
    Canon 400D + BG-E3 . EF-S 17-85mm 4-5.6 IS . EF 75-300mm 4-5.6 IS
    http://aselley.zenfolio.com/

  10. #90

    Default Re: Underage is still Underage

    One who grasps the dynamics of the situation and the inadequacy of one's words and actions will understand when one should be gracious.

    One who understands when to be gracious will get respect, while one who persists doggedly loses respect.

    Quote Originally Posted by aselley View Post
    WTF. Why do I need to be gracious? Vince and I disagree on some points, he made himself clear and I clarified myself in relation to his post.

    Where does graciousness come into it?
    Last edited by waileong; 25th November 2008 at 09:16 PM.

  11. #91
    Deregistered scandal599's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Escaped from Gotham Asylum
    Posts
    563

    Default Re: Underage is still Underage

    A very interesting topic to begin with.

    Read with great interest on both the TS and what the rest have posted and I think that, if you all do not mind, a noob here will like to give his two cents worth.

    Singapore , like any jurisdiction, has a set of laws that are effectively open to interpretation. As such, layman like us are very much befuddled as to why some laws can apply in one case but the same set of laws cannot be applied to another similar case. Even if you ask for lawyer's opinion, you will never get a straight answer, not because they are charging you by the hour, but because as it is the law is very much open to interpretations tat is best left to the judge to decide what is the best verdict. Which is the beauty of not having a jury, as emotions can and will run high. A case of jurisprudence in question? Perhaps.

    While I can understand to a certain degree of where the TS is coming from, let me try to simplify his argument here. So correct me if I am wrong. His contention here is the idea that some models here are or under the possibility that they might be underage when posing for shoots. To which degree he is afraid that in light of the negativity of the news surrounding the photoshoot in question, amateurs like us will be put in a position where we will be viewed in a negative light. I will not bring up nude or not because I think the broader question here is in itself underage.

    TS has also brought up a few points here which, are very much conflicting in nature:"As for the age of the Model I guess on this matter I think it depends on the nature of the posing being done as to my feelings...but this I admit is a moral and therefore subjective judgment." and "The act of being on the beach at Sentosa is not obscene or indecent the act of photographing them may be, and the further act of publishing those photos online would almost definitely be". To the above two points, allow me to say this:yes, on the first point it is a moral call. The fact is it does not matter what age the model is, she can be in her 30s or even 70s, and if you get her to pose suggestively, people might find it offensive. As for the second point, I do not get it. A person in a swimsuit on a beach is not offensive which in this case will encompass obscene and indecent, the act of photographing them may well be possible, and to put them online is offensive??? In that case, going by the context of Sing law, Maxim, FHM, Cleo, 8 Days might just jolly well be banned because they are not only online, they in print!!

    What I was taken aback however, was his use of the word exploitation here, which I will take it up later. TS has also talked about morals and legality here, which in itself are strange bedfellows. As far as legal and moral issues are concerned, one should be separate from each other. If I were to ask you for example, "What is the job of a doctor?" If you answer me, his job is to save lives. That is a moral call. But what happens if the doctor chooses to allow a person to end his life early due to some terminal illness that he or she may be suffering, that is a legal call and ethical call (which I will go into in a bit). The word exploitation here is too strong a word to use. As for the TS case, let us take into consideration here two separate issues. Many kids, age 14 and below, are child models. They have modeled in swimsuits before. In one-piece like a jumpsuit for both boys and girls and for girls in bikinis as well. These have been reported in news, magazines, fashion spreads etc. If going strictly by what TS stated, this IS exploitation. Case 2, during festivals, like the 7th month, go to any roadshow, girls sometimes 14 and above, sometime 14 and below. Skimpy costumes, prancing on stage. Pictures in the paper, tabloids. Obscene? Indecent? Offensive? Your call. If that is case, the I guess, SPH should just close shop. So I guess a TIME photographer going to a war torn place to shoot a photo of a conflict driven place just to win a prize will be considered an act of discretion? Your call

    I for one am against any form of child porn and the issue of acts being used as a guise for this. But as in the case of Bill Henson as TS has mentioned in his post, the fact here is that much of the argument actually surrounds what was in the picture and not what was the picture about. Jurisdictions around the world here are doing their best to protect kids from coming to any harm, especially in the West and here in Singapore, but to serve as an example. What I have said above, if going by what TS has stated, is indeed an act of exploitation, then I think all parents of child models should be punished as they are exploiting their kid.

    In my opinion, the issue of morals and law here does not gel. In fact as many have rightly stated, morals have different standards so the issue of morals have indeed opened a Pandora's box here. What I want to question here is the ethics of any photographer. I do not care whether the shoot is a nude shot or otherwise. I do nor ask about morals. I ask ethics. I work in the bloody finance industry, so I do not know what morals are. But I know what are my ethics. Some may say that ethics and morals go together. Bull. A person can have a high moral standing, but if he does not have a the ethics to uphold, he is nothing. A person can have no morals, but if his actions do not contravene his ethics or the ethics of his profession, I will hold him in high regard.

    So my questions to the TS is this: I give you a nude model. Will photograph the model? And how will you do it? And secondly, I give you a youth swimmer to shoot her in a swimsuit. One-piece for a fashion spread. Will you do it?

  12. #92
    Member TheQuestion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    PenguinVille.
    Posts
    1,089

    Default Re: Underage is still Underage

    Quote Originally Posted by scandal599 View Post
    A very interesting topic to begin with.

    Read with great interest on both the TS and what the rest have posted and I think that, if you all do not mind, a noob here will like to give his two cents worth.

    Singapore , like any jurisdiction, has a set of laws that are effectively open to interpretation. As such, layman like us are very much befuddled as to why some laws can apply in one case but the same set of laws cannot be applied to another similar case. Even if you ask for lawyer's opinion, you will never get a straight answer, not because they are charging you by the hour, but because as it is the law is very much open to interpretations tat is best left to the judge to decide what is the best verdict. Which is the beauty of not having a jury, as emotions can and will run high. A case of jurisprudence in question? Perhaps.

    While I can understand to a certain degree of where the TS is coming from, let me try to simplify his argument here. So correct me if I am wrong. His contention here is the idea that some models here are or under the possibility that they might be underage when posing for shoots. To which degree he is afraid that in light of the negativity of the news surrounding the photoshoot in question, amateurs like us will be put in a position where we will be viewed in a negative light. I will not bring up nude or not because I think the broader question here is in itself underage.

    TS has also brought up a few points here which, are very much conflicting in nature:"As for the age of the Model I guess on this matter I think it depends on the nature of the posing being done as to my feelings...but this I admit is a moral and therefore subjective judgment." and "The act of being on the beach at Sentosa is not obscene or indecent the act of photographing them may be, and the further act of publishing those photos online would almost definitely be". To the above two points, allow me to say this:yes, on the first point it is a moral call. The fact is it does not matter what age the model is, she can be in her 30s or even 70s, and if you get her to pose suggestively, people might find it offensive. As for the second point, I do not get it. A person in a swimsuit on a beach is not offensive which in this case will encompass obscene and indecent, the act of photographing them may well be possible, and to put them online is offensive??? In that case, going by the context of Sing law, Maxim, FHM, Cleo, 8 Days might just jolly well be banned because they are not only online, they in print!!

    What I was taken aback however, was his use of the word exploitation here, which I will take it up later. TS has also talked about morals and legality here, which in itself are strange bedfellows. As far as legal and moral issues are concerned, one should be separate from each other. If I were to ask you for example, "What is the job of a doctor?" If you answer me, his job is to save lives. That is a moral call. But what happens if the doctor chooses to allow a person to end his life early due to some terminal illness that he or she may be suffering, that is a legal call and ethical call (which I will go into in a bit). The word exploitation here is too strong a word to use. As for the TS case, let us take into consideration here two separate issues. Many kids, age 14 and below, are child models. They have modeled in swimsuits before. In one-piece like a jumpsuit for both boys and girls and for girls in bikinis as well. These have been reported in news, magazines, fashion spreads etc. If going strictly by what TS stated, this IS exploitation. Case 2, during festivals, like the 7th month, go to any roadshow, girls sometimes 14 and above, sometime 14 and below. Skimpy costumes, prancing on stage. Pictures in the paper, tabloids. Obscene? Indecent? Offensive? Your call. If that is case, the I guess, SPH should just close shop. So I guess a TIME photographer going to a war torn place to shoot a photo of a conflict driven place just to win a prize will be considered an act of discretion? Your call

    I for one am against any form of child porn and the issue of acts being used as a guise for this. But as in the case of Bill Henson as TS has mentioned in his post, the fact here is that much of the argument actually surrounds what was in the picture and not what was the picture about. Jurisdictions around the world here are doing their best to protect kids from coming to any harm, especially in the West and here in Singapore, but to serve as an example. What I have said above, if going by what TS has stated, is indeed an act of exploitation, then I think all parents of child models should be punished as they are exploiting their kid.

    In my opinion, the issue of morals and law here does not gel. In fact as many have rightly stated, morals have different standards so the issue of morals have indeed opened a Pandora's box here. What I want to question here is the ethics of any photographer. I do not care whether the shoot is a nude shot or otherwise. I do nor ask about morals. I ask ethics. I work in the bloody finance industry, so I do not know what morals are. But I know what are my ethics. Some may say that ethics and morals go together. Bull. A person can have a high moral standing, but if he does not have a the ethics to uphold, he is nothing. A person can have no morals, but if his actions do not contravene his ethics or the ethics of his profession, I will hold him in high regard.

    So my questions to the TS is this: I give you a nude model. Will photograph the model? And how will you do it? And secondly, I give you a youth swimmer to shoot her in a swimsuit. One-piece for a fashion spread. Will you do it?
    wall of txt plz summarize.
    Opinions are like A-holes. Everyone's got one.

  13. #93
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Underage is still Underage

    Its an essay, I summarise for you: Basically:

    "TS you are wrong in your moral stand! Morals and Legals dont' gel!
    WRONG WRONG WRONG!"

    That's more or less what I take away from it hehee :P

    Quote Originally Posted by TheQuestion View Post
    wall of txt plz summarize.

  14. #94
    Deregistered scandal599's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Escaped from Gotham Asylum
    Posts
    563

    Default Re: Underage is still Underage

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123 View Post
    Its an essay, I summarise for you: Basically:

    "TS you are wrong in your moral stand! Morals and Legals dont' gel!
    WRONG WRONG WRONG!"

    That's more or less what I take away from it hehee :P
    HaHaHa

    My bad for the berlin wall. For the record, I infact applaud the TS for bringing this up. But it is the arguments he used to bring his point across which I not only do not get, but am quite amused. So basically now throwin the ball into the TS court, without malice, if he can clarify his view in these three:

    1) :"As for the age of the Model I guess on this matter I think it depends on the nature of the posing being done as to my feelings...but this I admit is a moral and therefore subjective judgment." and "The act of being on the beach at Sentosa is not obscene or indecent the act of photographing them may be, and the further act of publishing those photos online would almost definitely be". To the above two points, allow me to say this:yes, on the first point it is a moral call. The fact is it does not matter what age the model is, she can be in her 30s or even 70s, and if you get her to pose suggestively, people might find it offensive. As for the second point, I do not get it. A person in a swimsuit on a beach is not offensive which in this case will encompass obscene and indecent, the act of photographing them may well be possible, and to put them online is offensive??? In that case, going by the context of Sing law, Maxim, FHM, Cleo, 8 Days might just jolly well be banned because they are not only online, they in print!!

    2)Many kids, age 14 and below, are child models. They have modeled in swimsuits before. In one-piece like a jumpsuit for both boys and girls and for girls in bikinis as well. These have been reported in news, magazines, fashion spreads etc. If going strictly by what TS stated, this IS exploitation. Case 2, during festivals, like the 7th month, go to any roadshow, girls sometimes 14 and above, sometime 14 and below. Skimpy costumes, prancing on stage. Pictures in the paper, tabloids. Obscene? Indecent? Offensive? Your call. If that is case, the I guess, SPH should just close shop. So I guess a TIME photographer going to a war torn place to shoot a photo of a conflict driven place just to win a prize will be considered an act of discretion? Your call

    3)So my questions to the TS is this: I give you a nude model. Will photograph the model? And how will you do it? And secondly, I give you a youth swimmer to shoot her in a swimsuit. One-piece for a fashion spread. Will you do it?

    As long as he clarifies this, we will know his view, in spite of what he has said thus far.

  15. #95

    Default Re: Underage is still Underage

    Quote Originally Posted by scandal599 View Post
    HaHaHa

    My bad for the berlin wall. For the record, I infact applaud the TS for bringing this up. But it is the arguments he used to bring his point across which I not only do not get, but am quite amused. So basically now throwin the ball into the TS court, without malice, if he can clarify his view in these three:

    1) :"As for the age of the Model I guess on this matter I think it depends on the nature of the posing being done as to my feelings...but this I admit is a moral and therefore subjective judgment." and "The act of being on the beach at Sentosa is not obscene or indecent the act of photographing them may be, and the further act of publishing those photos online would almost definitely be". To the above two points, allow me to say this:yes, on the first point it is a moral call. The fact is it does not matter what age the model is, she can be in her 30s or even 70s, and if you get her to pose suggestively, people might find it offensive. As for the second point, I do not get it. A person in a swimsuit on a beach is not offensive which in this case will encompass obscene and indecent, the act of photographing them may well be possible, and to put them online is offensive??? In that case, going by the context of Sing law, Maxim, FHM, Cleo, 8 Days might just jolly well be banned because they are not only online, they in print!!

    2)Many kids, age 14 and below, are child models. They have modeled in swimsuits before. In one-piece like a jumpsuit for both boys and girls and for girls in bikinis as well. These have been reported in news, magazines, fashion spreads etc. If going strictly by what TS stated, this IS exploitation. Case 2, during festivals, like the 7th month, go to any roadshow, girls sometimes 14 and above, sometime 14 and below. Skimpy costumes, prancing on stage. Pictures in the paper, tabloids. Obscene? Indecent? Offensive? Your call. If that is case, the I guess, SPH should just close shop. So I guess a TIME photographer going to a war torn place to shoot a photo of a conflict driven place just to win a prize will be considered an act of discretion? Your call

    3)So my questions to the TS is this: I give you a nude model. Will photograph the model? And how will you do it? And secondly, I give you a youth swimmer to shoot her in a swimsuit. One-piece for a fashion spread. Will you do it?

    As long as he clarifies this, we will know his view, in spite of what he has said thus far.
    Clarification can only come after graciousness is manifested.

  16. #96

    Default Re: Underage is still Underage

    Quote Originally Posted by waileong View Post
    Clarification can only come after graciousness is manifested.
    Thought about about replying in a gracious manner but I am not sure how to since you have been labeled deregistered and as someone who chooses to only reply with negative help to the forum I am not sure that clarification from you is worth he effort to read.

    So basically, your example of graciousness is one I will aspire to, and hope I fail to achieve. I know it will take effort, but I pray that I am able, and that I am granted the strength.

    So thank you for all the negative contributions you have made. I hope you are are more positive to both other photographers and others who love this art in the next life, and if not I only hope that karma visits you with what you deserve
    Canon 400D + BG-E3 . EF-S 17-85mm 4-5.6 IS . EF 75-300mm 4-5.6 IS
    http://aselley.zenfolio.com/

  17. #97
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Underage is still Underage

    I disagree that waileong only gives negative help - I think he has contributed in ways that many people won't dare to speak of - and I'm not referring to his challenges against the admin, but his other views.

    Anyway I think that even if you disagree with him, you shouldn't be mocking at his deregistration....at least that's my view.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •