Some issues to clarify & maybe CS can do something for the kids?

[Xiao_shin]

Scandal and Deadpoet, I am not saying that photographers has no duty to protect the model but rather the organiser has the duty to do so.

He or she has to be the 1st to stand up for the model in situation like this.

 

[two200]

I concur with DP. At the end of it all, while as photogs we may be able to help the model to a certain degree and extent, our hands are bound in respect to the fact that the model makes the choice.

We will do what we can do to protect the model. But otherwise, we are stuck and will be stuck with the decision the model chooses.

If the 'victim' does not want action taken, then nobody else can stand up for her cos the wolf will say there is no 'victim' and he is right. And unfortunately this is evident from what nineeleven has mentioned as he had taken issue and given the model a chance to make a choice but unfortunately she chose an 'unwise' decision and therefore had to endure the consequences. If she chose to endure the humiliation, then the organisers and the photographers hands will be tied.

In any case, model should take issue first, then organiser will act as arbiter, and finally the photographers should support the decision of the model. This is probably the only way to expel the perpetrator.

 

[JayKay]

Scandal and Deadpoet, I am not saying that photographers has no duty to protect the model but rather the organiser has the duty to do so.

He or she has to be the 1st to stand up for the model in situation like this.

If I recall correctly when nude shoots were allowed, there was an organiser who stated in the opening of the thread that participants may pose or bring props but the model has the right to refuse if she is not comfortable with it. Perhaps organisers should include a clause that states that photographers may pose the model with due regard to decency and the model may refuse to do any that comprises her modesty.
Also, organisers should be ensure that they still able to pay for the hotel room or studio or have arrangements to offset/postpone use should anything derail the shoot so that they will not be held ransom by withdrawal or dispelling of any participant.
Of course, I do agree that in the end it all depends on the photographers who support the model and organisers. They should not remain silent as that would practically be condoning the actions of the offender. They can and should speak up when things are not going right.

 

[JayKay]

If the 'victim' does not want action taken, then nobody else can stand up for her cos the wolf will say there is no 'victim' and he is right. And unfortunately this is evident from what nineeleven has mentioned as he had taken issue and given the model a chance to make a choice but unfortunately she chose an 'unwise' decision and therefore had to endure the consequences. If she chose to endure the humiliation, then the organisers and the photographers hands will be tied.

In any case, model should take issue first, then organiser will act as arbiter, and finally the photographers should support the decision of the model. This is probably the only way to expel the perpetrator.

Actually, in his/her capacity the organiser has the right to intervene.

 

[scandal599]

Scandal and Deadpoet, I am not saying that photographers has no duty to protect the model but rather the organiser has the duty to do so.

He or she has to be the 1st to stand up for the model in situation like this.

okay...let me try to put it this way.

Organiser has a duty and responsibility to the model before, during and after the shoot. In under any given circumstance, the model is and must be the organiser's top, first and foremost priority. No two ways about that. Her safety, her well being and a lot of other factors come into play. This much, you know and I know that it cannot and will not change.

But the flip side is this. Given under any circumstances, as a photographer, we have to be mindful of the models interest as well. That is why I mentioned specifically in the thread that even in a group shoot, it does not absolve us as photographers the responsibility for the welfare and well being of the model to ensure that she does not get compromised as such.

I am not exactly in total agreeement that the organiser should be the first one to stand up for the model as mentioned in the various replies above. In this case, the organiser being female is in a position that could be considered weaker than had it been a male orgainser. So this begs the question, why then given the situaion as presented by 9-11, did only he and he alone stand up for the model? What about the rest?

I am not faulting the organiser per se nor any photographer for that matter. What I am saying in reference to this matter as well as encompassing all other matters in group shoots or not, is that besides the organiser, the responsibility has to be a shared one. I personally do not think that the organiser has to be the first one to stand up. As long as the situation calls for it for the shoot to be stopped due to circumstances or as long as the situation gets out of hand, I believe anyone, can and will have the right to halt the shoot when the situation calls for it lest things turn ugly.

 

[vince123123]

Actually, I think in a group shoot that the photographers should be the ones responsible for confronting any perp. The organiser remains primarily responsible, which is why and how an organiser earns his keep. If photographers have a complaint, they bring it up to the orgniaser, who must then assess and see if it becomes necessary to take further action. Why should paying customers have to stick their neck out for anyone?

Hence, sorry to say, my view is that the organiser must be the first one to take action, not the photographers or customers.

 

[Xiao_shin]

Agreed with your point. Whatever this guy is doing is morally wrong. It is up to those that witness it to standup and challenge the offender.

The sex of the organiser shouldn't affect his or her ability to do the job of protecting the model.

okay...let me try to put it this way.

Organiser has a duty and responsibility to the model before, during and after the shoot. In under any given circumstance, the model is and must be the organiser's top, first and foremost priority. No two ways about that. Her safety, her well being and a lot of other factors come into play. This much, you know and I know that it cannot and will not change.

But the flip side is this. Given under any circumstances, as a photographer, we have to be mindful of the models interest as well. That is why I mentioned specifically in the thread that even in a group shoot, it does not absolve us as photographers the responsibility for the welfare and well being of the model to ensure that she does not get compromised as such.

I am not exactly in total agreeement that the organiser should be the first one to stand up for the model as mentioned in the various replies above. In this case, the organiser being female is in a position that could be considered weaker than had it been a male orgainser. So this begs the question, why then given the situaion as presented by 9-11, did only he and he alone stand up for the model? What about the rest?

I am not faulting the organiser per se nor any photographer for that matter. What I am saying in reference to this matter as well as encompassing all other matters in group shoots or not, is that besides the organiser, the responsibility has to be a shared one. I personally do not think that the organiser has to be the first one to stand up. As long as the situation calls for it for the shoot to be stopped due to circumstances or as long as the situation gets out of hand, I believe anyone, can and will have the right to halt the shoot when the situation calls for it lest things turn ugly.

 

[NineEleven]

Many excellent points & I'm glad that we can have a proper discussion here.

The situation was, the organiser is a young lady & her assistants are all sub-20 poly students? They probably felt intimidated & she did mention her fear. The models are also young & not full-time. One felt that she would jeopardize her job should she stop as we paid & embarrass her boss. So, everyone chose to suffer in silence. I felt that in this case, it's up to us photographers & adults to make a decision or at least offer advice.

The thing is, yes, while you may be right that the organiser has a duty to the model and the photographer in the shoot, the thing is as photographers, we have an even greater responsibility towards the model under any given circumstance.

here is why:

1) as photogs we hold the pictures in our hands. as such we have the control on how we use their pictures. we have the ability to make or break the model, be it male or female. if anyone remembers the adeline teo case, it is a classic reminder and example. how as a photog you use the photo or how as a photog you DI the photo, can make an impact on the model to an extent and degree that can be unimaginable. at all times we need to take into consideration the models interest first before our own.

How each photogs code of ethics are is different, so there is no one code to rule all. BUT, as photogs, we must have the basic decency to help the models and the organiser should soomething go down bad.

I don't know about the Adeline case but can guess as much. In this case, the guy can post his work anywhere, anytime & I can imagine the damage that would cause to the model. Imagine showing the face then the close-ups.... :angry:

We all have the responsiblity to protect the model and everyone else in the shoot. That is our duty as human being.

However, at the end of the day, willing seller willing buyer.

It is really up to the model on the scene to stand up for her own rights. The photographers really cannot raise much credible noise except against the perpetrator for blocking/getting into shots. The organizer could have stepped in, oh behalf of the model or simply to enforce shooting rules.

However, once the model or the organizer objected, if the perpetrator continues the unacceptable actions, the photographers should step in and help the model/organizer. We do not want an uncomfortable model, don't we, to say the least.

At the end, it's the model that must raise the objections.

There is really nothing CS can do.

For argument sake, even if the perpetrator is aiming squarely at the model's crotch, asking the model to spread her legs, it will be difficult to argue harassment in the court. Getting the police involve is not an answer. Getting the police involve will only further push the other at the shoot to shy away from "problems".

Likewise, what can CS do? The most it can, is to pass the nick and name, if CS knows who the perpetrator is, to the organizers and/or models. That is about all it can legally do.

It all boils down to, the model must take care of herself.

Models, you need to help us to help you, you need to help yourself.

First and foremost, get out if you can. Second, you must be forthcoming with the person's identity. If not, the perpetrator will always get away free and clear.

:thumbsup:

Yes, CS can't do much about it. It's a free platform for us to discuss & exchange. It's a blessing that we have it.

As for the models, if you prefer to suffer in silence. We can't help & imagine if we were to stand in for you & you don't do anything, we will get into trouble with the other party!

This reminded me few years ago when my ex-galfriend went to sell advertising to a client in his warehouse @ Jurong after 9pm. The client was drunk & became touchy. She was lucky to escape & when I sent her to the police station, she was so traumatised that she refused to file a statement. The police officers, me & her company were helpless. You guess what? The wife of that idiot defended him, filed a compliant that she seduced him & demanded an apology.....

Other than getting away free and clear, will continue again and again That said, I find very little grounds for any sexual harrassment case in the present situation.

Refer to above.

If the 'victim' does not want action taken, then nobody else can stand up for her cos the wolf will say there is no 'victim' and he is right. And unfortunately this is evident from what nineeleven has mentioned as he had taken issue and given the model a chance to make a choice but unfortunately she chose an 'unwise' decision and therefore had to endure the consequences. If she chose to endure the humiliation, then the organisers and the photographers hands will be tied.

In any case, model should take issue first, then organiser will act as arbiter, and finally the photographers should support the decision of the model. This is probably the only way to expel the perpetrator.

The 1st model stopped shooting immediately when I asked her if she was uncomfortable. The 2nd one came in but suffered a worse fate, like a caged animal being paraded. By then, all of us are unhappy with that guy & stopped for a while then protested with the organiser. Some watched over him while he continued. One other senior then helped the 2nd model to get into proper poses & kept some dignity for her. He sacrificed & stopped shooting.

Actually, I think in a group shoot that the photographers should be the ones responsible for confronting any perp. The organiser remains primarily responsible, which is why and how an organiser earns his keep. If photographers have a complaint, they bring it up to the orgniaser, who must then assess and see if it becomes necessary to take further action. Why should paying customers have to stick their neck out for anyone?

Hence, sorry to say, my view is that the organiser must be the first one to take action, not the photographers or customers.

You have valid points but if nobody else are still going to doing anything about it. Not sticking their heads out? That is a thin line. I personally would raise the red flag but if model is fine, what can I do? Maybe I leave then.

Anyway, at least the organiser stopped the shoot earlier & gave us extra time after that but that bugger refused to leave & two of us had to act by packing up then leave by pulling him along.

Anyway, this is a rare case. I hope the models & organisers will remember to exercise their rights when the situation calls for it.

Thank you for everyone's comments, I have learned something from you all today.

 

[Xiao_shin]

I know this sound a bit dated. But if you are uncomfortable, it is best to voice out.

This thread already served its purpose to remind models and organiser to voice out if they feel uncomfortable about a situation.

 

[ahbian]

I was one of those who felt that the person should be named; after taking a step back, here are my thoughts....

Besides behaving in a boorish and uncivilised manner, both as a person and as a photographer, the person have not broken any law (?). Correct me if I'm wrong.

As fellow photographers, we should raise the issue to the organisers on the spot, be it due to civic mindedness or simply due to one's own "right" to have proper photography session.

I feel the organisers can make a decision to
1) Allow it the carry on without intervention..
2) remove the photographer from the shoot
3) Stop the session altogether

There is nothing much CS can do, but if we can consistently stop boorish behaviour using the suggestion above, it is effectively implementing a ban on such people.

 

[vince123123]

ahbian: My view is that naming can be done, regardless of whether any law has been broken. In fact, I advocate that in situations where legal measures are not available, non-legal measures should be adopted, namely, naming and publication.

 

[ahbian]

Yup, I understand.

To me, the advantage I see in naming is that organisers/models can choose to blacklist the person before agreeing to the shoot, and it might serve as a deterrent to anyone who might try to be funny in future shoots.

My additional point is that when such undesirable behaviour does occur during photoshoots itself, other photographers should voice out to the organisers, for the benefit of all parties.

If done consistently as a standard, there should be less chance of such a problem subsequently.

 

[denniskee]

just imagine, should there be a reporter undercover, in searching for juicy story, or, a unknowing org, who feels a newspaper report will give him / her more publicity, not knowing such perp. in in the group since not body named him previously.

as it is, too many bias negative reports (to spice up the story for sellerbility) had been flashed on papers. this may or may bot the the result

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=505167

but if more twisted and bias reports comes out, and we the photographic hobbies community cant do anything about it, the above thread i linked here will soon be the case where ever we go shoot, more so if there are xmm around.

also, i see the org has concern about the mental state of that perp. shouldnt that person be named and id? the org, like dm wrote, should make a police report to safe guard herself. best is that since he has been id now, i have a question to the org.

"arent u afraid now? since u question his mental state. who is to say he will not be angry with u?"

 

[Deadpoet]

just imagine, should there be a reporter undercover, in searching for juicy story, or, a unknowing org, who feels a newspaper report will give him / her more publicity, not knowing such perp. in in the group since not body named him previously.

A slight OT.

In the future, how do we safeguard ourselves, retain our privacy (eventhough such things is a rarity here) during group photoshoot?

How can we be sure that there are no reporters, invited or uninvited, within our midst harboring intention that is not apparent to all.

I do not have an answer. All I know is, if I knew there is a reporter in our midst, with the intention of writing about the shoot, I will not shoot, and if I were the organizer, I will cancel the shoot. Any thoughts?

Why? This is an issue with privacy. The reporter of course has the rights to investigate and report, but I als have the right to protect my privacy. What and how I do things is none of your business, right?

 

[Pablo]

A slight OT.

In the future, how do we safeguard ourselves, retain our privacy (eventhough such things is a rarity here) during group photoshoot?

How can we be sure that there are no reporters, invited or uninvited, within our midst harboring intention that is not apparent to all.

I do not have an answer. All I know is, if I knew there is a reporter in our midst, with the intention of writing about the shoot, I will not shoot, and if I were the organizer, I will cancel the shoot. Any thoughts?

Why? This is an issue with privacy. The reporter of course has the rights to investigate and report, but I als have the right to protect my privacy. What and how I do things is none of your business, right?

Hi,

I have seen documents written here before by people tallented in the law.

They have had to do with photo release and other contracts that protect photog's and models .... etc ...etc ...

Is there a contract written that an organiser of a model shoot asks each attendant at the shoot (photographer or otherwise) to sign :dunno:

This might be short. Simply fill in their name, address, who they work for and then sign it.

Not much more than if you were to go into some of the clubs here like the RSL, Surf Club, Football Club ....etc.

Only at these clubs you don't have to put who wou work for.

But with what I have mentioned above, if someone signed and wrote that they worked for "Joes Pizza" and later was found to be working for a news paper etc; I think you can do something about it.

You also have a record of who was there.

Just a thought,

Cheers

 

[sORe-EyEz]

ahbian: My view is that naming can be done, regardless of whether any law has been broken. In fact, I advocate that in situations where legal measures are not available, non-legal measures should be adopted, namely, naming and publication.

this i agree, put it another way.

a novel problem not within the scope of the law indeed require a novel solution.

i'll go 1 step further to say in all fairness, the "accused" should be informed way beforehand & given a grace period to respond to clear the air. before a lynch mob is formed.

 

[sORe-EyEz]

Hi,

I have seen documents written here before by people tallented in the law.

They have had to do with photo release and other contracts that protect photog's and models .... etc ...etc ...

Is there a contract written that an organiser of a model shoot asks each attendant at the shoot (photographer or otherwise) to sign :dunno:

This might be short. Simply fill in their name, address, who they work for and then sign it.

Not much more than if you were to go into some of the clubs here like the RSL, Surf Club, Football Club ....etc.

Only at these clubs you don't have to put who wou work for.

But with what I have mentioned above, if someone signed and wrote that they worked for "Joes Pizza" and later was found to be working for a news paper etc; I think you can do something about it.

You also have a record of who was there.

Just a thought,

Cheers

there is a downside, that such personal info being abused...

another way of thinking is, participants of the shoot will also demand the Shoot organisers' address? how about the models' address?

in a shoot where there's the model, the organiser & participants. its a 3-way tag-a-war. giving out too much personal info can be a bad thing. making a shoot too complicated is 1.

 

[vince123123]

I would view this as a bar to participation - as a customer, I'll prefer to join a shoot by Organiser A where I don't have to sign anything, compared to one by Organiser B where I have to.

Also, how do you think you can go after someone who sign and say they work for Joes Pizza when that is untrue? Care to elaborate on this (because personally I find it fraught with difficulties, both legal and non-legal).

Hi,

I have seen documents written here before by people tallented in the law.

They have had to do with photo release and other contracts that protect photog's and models .... etc ...etc ...

Is there a contract written that an organiser of a model shoot asks each attendant at the shoot (photographer or otherwise) to sign :dunno:

This might be short. Simply fill in their name, address, who they work for and then sign it.

Not much more than if you were to go into some of the clubs here like the RSL, Surf Club, Football Club ....etc.

Only at these clubs you don't have to put who wou work for.

But with what I have mentioned above, if someone signed and wrote that they worked for "Joes Pizza" and later was found to be working for a news paper etc; I think you can do something about it.

You also have a record of who was there.

Just a thought,

Cheers

 

[headfonz]

i have been following this thread for a while. there is a possible legal recourse should the model feel that their modesty has been insulted by the actions of the said participant.

Section 509, Cap 224 (Penal Code) Word or gesture intended to insult the modesty of a woman
509. Whoever, intending to insult the modesty of any woman, utters any word, makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object, intending that such word or sound shall be heard, or that such gesture or object shall be seen by such woman, or intrudes upon the privacy of such woman, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.

this is not a common charge for offences against a women's modesty. most cases fall under sec 354, Outrage of Modesty (commonly known as molest) which has a criminal force requirement in its definition.

Section 509 is used to charge cases of offenders who take upskirt, down-blouse pictures of women in public without their consent. i believe that offenders charged with 509 in such cases may be charged for possession of obscene material as well. the key point is to establish that the offender has intruded into the privacy or modesty of a women.

in the case of lingerie models, the models are paid professionals to model the outfits or for commercial purposes. there is a case to be established since being a paid professional does not mean that the contract allows for the photographer to intrude into the models privacy or insult their modesty.

the models must decide whether to proceed with the case. other people including the organiser can choose to report the case to the police, but they can only proceed to investigate this charge if the models decide to proceed with it.

 

[eow]

My earlier link to the perpetrator was removed for some reason i believe for fear for legal retaliation by the mentioned subject.
The affected organiser already mentioned she can gave detail on the said culpirit.
what the organsiers can do is just adopt the neighbourhood watch style thingy and share the infor especially for those doing a lingerie shoot.
The best way is still prevention instead no action talk only(nato)