Now, If the people at Smugmug can't even locate these violations, then Smugmug has alot more to worry about than me.
I'm not going to do your job for you guys, this is your company, you all need to fix these issues yourself. Get tracking scripts for your server or something!
All I did to find these photo's was do a keyword search on the words 'sex', 'nude' 'naked'
YouthTalent,
You're making us look thru entire websites to find the photos. Gallery and photo links that we can actually do something about look like this:
Still, I picked up your note, and we are using alternate means to find these photos - which takes ALOT OF TIME.
Your slamming our employees doesn't help your cause. We bend over backwards to fight inappropriate material and ALWAYS REMOVE IT when we can see it and find it.
Still, I picked up your note, and we are using alternate means to find these photos - which takes ALOT OF TIME.
Your slamming our employees doesn't help your cause. We bend over backwards to fight inappropriate material and ALWAYS REMOVE IT when we can see it and find it.
YEs, and if you'd have clicked the link "see photo in gallery" we'd have an easier time of identifying the websites involved.
Im not slamming your employees, but I'm not here to do their work for them. This is a support forum, I'm just pointing out the issues that I see, since its so easy for others to point things out that DON'T violate the TOS.:):
YouthTalent, do you feel no responsibility were the photo's on your website to be viewed in a (far) less then buisness oriented manor?
I would.
"There is a place for me somewhere, where I can write and speak much as I think, and make it pay for my living and some besides. Just where this place is I have small idea now, but I am going to find it" Carl Sandburg
Now, If the people at Smugmug can't even locate these violations, then Smugmug has alot more to worry about than me.
I'm not going to do your job for you guys, this is your company, you all need to fix these issues yourself. Get tracking scripts for your server or something!
All I did to find these photo's was do a keyword search on the words 'sex', 'nude' 'naked'
By the way, the two of them that were in direct violation of the ToS were taken off soon after the post, but may still be in your cache. We can indeed locate the galleries quickly from a photo number. Dustin and Andy just were not aware of it themselves since it is a rarely used feature.
Regardless, posting links to questionable photos on Smugmug is not a good way to try and prove a point. Pornographic photos do occasionally sneak through to the site, though we do our very best to stamp them out. One of the advantages to having a service that is almost entirely made up of paying subscribers is we have more leverage in fighting the battle to make sure the site is family-safe.
Youthtalent, I respect your right to go about your business in a legal manner. I can also understand how you would be frustrated when people try to attack your business and your character. I do not, however, respect your methods of linking to questionable photographs to argue your point.
Let's keep this discussion civil, please.
SmugMug Product Manager
0
Options
BaldyRegistered Users, Super ModeratorsPosts: 2,853moderator
edited May 15, 2006
YouthTalent, have you considered making your galleries private? What I'm reading here is that while they don't seem to violate the letter of a nudity law, clearly some of our members find them offensive.
If they were private, the youth can still direct legitimate people to the site without having them show up in the popular photos page or having random Internet surfers discover them and either get the wrong idea or use them in questionable ways.
DavidTO has a point about the homoerotic DVD that you link to from your site. For everyone else that link is http://www.mouseboysmovies.com/youarenotalone.htm. Here are a few exerpts from that site:
Mouseboys Movies
Rare and the Best in Boy DVD/CD Sales
This realistic look at life in a boys' boarding school centers around the headmaster's puberty stricken son, Kim (Peter Bjerg), and his homoerotic relationship with a teen who is about two years his senior (Anders Agenso). Subplots include problems with the locals and a strike that was caused by a boy's expulsion. Great 70ish nostalgia, long hair and bell-bottoms abound. Extremely well done and highly recommended. Released in: 1980. Length: 92 minutes. The 2 disc DVD-R set is packed with extras including a photo gallery and interview with the actors. Language: Danish (with English subtitles). Condition: NEW, Factory Sealed.
I guess I'm just not seeing the future model thing applying to this. This is basically billed as a collector's item. Would those same collectors also be interested in the pics and DVDs on your site?
EDIT: Also I found the following on the Welcome page of that site:
We offer Simply The BEST, commercially released, NEW, factory sealed Boy: Film DVDs and Music CDs that are rare and sought after by serious collectors. We also have a nice variety of USED, commercially released DVDs and CDs at great prices. No membership required. We ship world wide, discretely and accept Visa and MasterCard credit cards, money orders or cash.
Why would it be necessary to discretely accept payment?
Y'all don't want to hear me, you just want to dance.
If you are legit, like you keep saying, I can't understand why you would have all the external banners and links that contain content of a questionable nature.
YouthTalent, have you considered making your galleries private? What I'm reading here is that while they don't seem to violate the letter of a nudity law, clearly some of our members find them offensive.
If they were private, the youth can still direct legitimate people to the site without having them show up in the popular photos page or having random Internet surfers discover them and either get the wrong idea or use them in questionable ways.
This is a wonderful idea and should be implemented by YouthTalent.
I've been reading this thread and trying to not draw any conclusions as to who really buys those CD's and what purpose they are used for. But I'm afraid that since anyone can purchase those CD's, some of them are most certainly ending up in the "wrong hands" and for the "wrong reasons." This sickens me.
I visited the site and was really taken aback by what I saw. I realize there are legitimate young models out there, and if their pictures were in private or protected galleries, and legitimate people were able to purchase CD's via a password or direct link from the young boys, that would be one thing. But the open sale of CD's of these boys really leaves a bad taste in my mouth. There is no way to guarantee they won't end up in the wrong hands. And that's a bad thing, IMO.
You like what you like, other people like what they like.
What about the creepy comment that was pointed out earlier in this thread that was attached to one of your photos? Are you ok with that sort of thing being left on your gallery?
This thread started out very well, in others defending the line of business that someone does.
As Andy said:
The purpose of that site is for that photographer to earn a living. We appreciate that you may not like the fact that there are child models out there, modeling for clothing companies, all sorts of companies, actually - but as far as I can tell, the site owner has the right to photograph those models, and promote his work.
Where would it stop? Should we cancel accounts for people who show photos of people wearing fur? Eating Tuna? Driving SUVs?
The photographer is not doing anything illegal as far as I can tell, nor is he violating our Terms of Service. If you can show us otherwise, we'll certainly look into it and do something about it.
We don't "let" photos get popular, you and the millions of visitors each day to SmugMug do that.
DavidTO said:
I don't get it. These kids are trying to get work as models, and this photographer is helping them build their portfolio. I mean, do you boycott Target because they use child models?
Khaos said:
I think the issue that someone thinks something bad is going on lends more to what's going on in the someone's head rather than anything actually bad going on.
These are excellent posts.:):
Then in post #10 pmaland started a mean cussing out of control post without even knowing about the business of photography as it relates to modeling.
All of the Parents of the models have signed contracts to allow their sons to have the Photo Cd's to be sold to help pay for their future modeling/acting careers.:):
I don't see whats wrong with that.:):
I did remove the DVD movies, since that seemed to be causing an issue in itself with conflicting with the Model Cd's.
Sheaf said:
Youthtalent, I respect your right to go about your business in a legal manner. I can also understand how you would be frustrated when people try to attack your business and your character. I do not, however, respect your methods of linking to questionable photographs to argue your point.
Let's keep this discussion civil, please.
Sorry about that Sheaf, It won't happen again.:):
Baldy said:
YouthTalent, have you considered making your galleries private? What I'm reading here is that while they don't seem to violate the letter of a nudity law, clearly some of our members find them offensive.
If they were private, the youth can still direct legitimate people to the site without having them show up in the popular photos page or having random Internet surfers discover them and either get the wrong idea or use them in questionable ways.
Yes, I have already tried that about a year ago, it didn't work well.
But I'm willing to work with you and others as far turning off the popular photo settings, so they won't show up in the popular photo pages.
You also have to remember that something that offends some people, does not offend all. There are many photos that offend me and others, but I just don't click on them.:):
Yes, I have already tried that about a year ago, it didn't work well.
But I'm willing to work with you and others as far turning off the popular photo settings, so they won't show up in the popular photo pages.
you know theres a setting in the galleries that says PhotoRank and you can turn it off right?
I did remove the DVD movies, since that seemed to be causing an issue in itself with conflicting with the Model Cd's.
I'm not trying to harp, but that still doesn't answer the question (for me at least) of why those particular movies should have been associated with the pictures that you've got on your site. It's not the movies themselves that are at issue it is the fact that it is obvious - perhaps even more so by your removal of the link to those movies - that the audience for the movies is someone a bit more creepy than a modelling agency talent scout. The fact that you linked those movies, in fact those particular movies, gives me the perception that your site is about more than boy models.
But maybe I'm simply not educated enough on the subject to know that there is a group of people that like those movies not for some sick sexual gratification but for some other completely innocent reason unbeknownst to me. Perhaps the target audience for those movies also happens to enjoy for completely asexual resons suggestive pictures of young boys.
So perhaps you could fill us in? Just to satisfy my own curiosity, who is the target audience for the DVDs you had linked on your site? Are those DVDs just something to collect like stamps (or canon lenses if you're Andy) or is the audience significantly more disturbing? If the latter, why would that disturbing audience be targeted on your modelling site if not to cater in a way to the more disturbing audience?
Y'all don't want to hear me, you just want to dance.
This is a real interesting thread. I've looked through the site and I can't see anything that would be illegal. I don't think that Youth Talent should be prevented from displaying his wares. The question for me is if Smugmug is the approprate place for this display.
I looked at the shots and was turned off by what I saw. Now I'm known for my lousy taste so I asked my wife to have a gander. Her response was "that's almost child pornongraphy".
The site with its "discreet delivery" seems to be aimed towards a target audience which I feel can best be described as perverts in training. I love some of the descriptions of the CDs such as:
"Rose of Youth - Is a spectacular documentary style film featuring a blonde that should be model of the year!!! Pojkart once again brings our buddies from Barefooted and Holiday Fun 3 to enjoy themselves with friends in an amusement park. Following a trip home for a snack and wrestling match the boys go off the the local banya for some awesome swimming footage - naturist style! DVD-R Disc will play world-wide, Region 0, Free. Condition: NEW, Factory Sealed."
Pray tell what is the "naturist stlye" of these awsome swimming shots.
Then we have this classic "Spoofing the Chippendales, this group of 9 preteen British boys is bound to entertain you as they gyrate like wild on your television screen and discuss the pros and cons of their "profession": e.g., dancing is harder than football, but gets you lots of girlfriends. The only documentary of its kind; cute, wholesome..., and dang can these kids move! Released in: 1995. Length: 45 minutes. Warning: Rated F...for Fun! No questionable content; Shirtless. DVD-R Disc will play world-wide, Region 0, Free. Condition: NEW, Factory Sealed."
Beneath this blurb for this "F' rated fun video is the flashing word "HOT".
A lot of the photos are OK then there are also plenty of shots of young boys in skimpy underwear and shots of barechested boys reclining with a spouting water fountain conveniently located right behind their crotch. I'm also curious why there is no female talent breaking down your door. I guess your target audience just ain't interested.
I'm delighted that their parents have consented to their darlings' careers. Then again I have known parents who have given their consent to their kids turning tricks and selling drugs too. All too often "parental consent" is nothing more an than an indication of dubious decisions made by parents.
I think you do have a right to display your goods, I just don't think Smugmug is the place.
Harry http://behret.smugmug.com/NANPA member How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
I'm not trying to harp, but that still doesn't answer the question (for me at least) of why those particular movies should have been associated with the pictures that you've got on your site. It's not the movies themselves that are at issue it is the fact that it is obvious - perhaps even more so by your removal of the link to those movies - that the audience for the movies is someone a bit more creepy than a modelling agency talent scout. The fact that you linked those movies, in fact those particular movies, gives me the perception that your site is about more than boy models.
Yep, for me, it was definitely the linking to those movies that looked very suspicious. Like you said, the movies alone wouldnt have been that big a deal. The photos alone wouldnt have been that big a deal either. But, together, they do raise an eyebrow for concern.
I'm not trying to harp, but that still doesn't answer the question (for me at least) of why those particular movies should have been associated with the pictures that you've got on your site. It's not the movies themselves that are at issue it is the fact that it is obvious - perhaps even more so by your removal of the link to those movies - that the audience for the movies is someone a bit more creepy than a modelling agency talent scout. The fact that you linked those movies, in fact those particular movies, gives me the perception that your site is about more than boy models.
But maybe I'm simply not educated enough on the subject to know that there is a group of people that like those movies not for some sick sexual gratification but for some other completely innocent reason unbeknownst to me. Perhaps the target audience for those movies also happens to enjoy for completely asexual resons suggestive pictures of young boys.
So perhaps you could fill us in? Just to satisfy my own curiosity, who is the target audience for the DVDs you had linked on your site? Are those DVDs just something to collect like stamps (or canon lenses if you're Andy) or is the audience significantly more disturbing? If the latter, why would that disturbing audience be targeted on your modelling site if not to cater in a way to the more disturbing audience?
Good questions.
Lots are confused by youth models/actors. Its a business like anything else, the boys are interested in either acting or modeling, and want to at least try it out, possibly pursue it for a career if they like it. The money raised goes to them and their families to pursue a career for the future, even if they stop modeling/acting, the money from the CD's and DVD's still is theirs whenever someone purchases their products. Its like a royalty in when a Radio Station plays an artists song, that artist is paid for the airplay, and for every CD and DVD sold.
That's why even though some of the DVD's I had listed on my site are made from back in the 1980's till now, these youth actors will still get paid for every DVD sold, even when they are adults, the money is still theirs because of the Royalty rights, so they can possibly pass that money down to their sons or daughters for their careers.
Lots of people think, since they are young and they have to pose, that it attracts the wrong element to this industry. The Youth are very well protected and often use different names in their Photo Shots.
Sure there are sick perverts in anything that involves children, teens, etc. But like I said, they are very well protected from predators by the studios, local law enforcement, and their own families.
Lots are confused by youth models/actors. Its a business like anything else, the boys are interested in either acting or modeling, and want to at least try it out, possibly pursue it for a career if they like it. The money raised goes to them and their families to pursue a career for the future, even if they stop modeling/acting, the money from the CD's and DVD's still is theirs whenever someone purchases their products. Its like a royalty in when a Radio Station plays an artists song, that artist is paid for the airplay, and for every CD and DVD sold.
That's why even though some of the DVD's I had listed on my site are made from back in the 1980's till now, these youth actors will still get paid for every DVD sold, even when they are adults, the money is still theirs because of the Royalty rights, so they can possibly pass that money down to their sons or daughters for their careers.
Lots of people think, since they are young and they have to pose, that it attracts the wrong element to this industry. The Youth are very well protected and often use different names in their Photo Shots.
Sure there are sick perverts in anything that involves children, teens, etc. But like I said, they are very well protected from predators by the studios, local law enforcement, and their own families.
So a pervert cannot find the boys on the DVDs and they are paid so it's all good?
What if they can find my kid. Or someone elses kid that looks like some kid from 1980?
I think it's promoting softcore homoerotic child porn, but thats just me.
Firstly, the instant I opened your site and saw the thumbnails it made my stomach turn.
I modeled as a child, never did I have photos like that taken of me. Are there no girls in your area that want to be models and actors as well? Is this only a market for young boys? Are the models chosen as direct targets for these "collectors"?
I didn't really notice the links to specific DVDs I did see the CD's for sale which also raised a red flag in my mind.
You are trying to defend this with your model releases, however, we all know how easily parents can have the wool pulled over their eyes thinking their child is going to be famous. We all love to believe our child is the most beautiful and talented etc... some people tend to get caught up in that and ignore warning signs, the warning signs I see flashing all over this whole thing.
So, no, I'd rather work 5 jobs to pay for my child's future than ever think for a moment I whore'd out their innocence.
The fact your wife approves means nothing to me either. I don't know what kind of person you are, and I don't know what kind of person she is. I take it the one little boy must be yours or a close relative since he's displayed on there repeatedly. Seeing this site really freaked me out I have to say.
I do senior sessions all the time and most of them are 18 and I still don't have photos that are nearly as suggestive as yours are - there is no need. The kids I take photos of and the likes of many other photographers here could get those kids work w/ the natural and non-suggestive photos they take. I worry about what kind of jobs these kids are getting anyway as most companies (Target, Gap, Old Navy etc...) do NOT portray the children in their clothes in suggestive manners. I don't think I've seen a 9 year old boy sitting in a tree w/ his legs spread trying to sell me a pair of bermuda shorts.
I understand your right to your photographic style, and your right to share them and your hundred other rights, I also understand the rights of parents and children and that perhaps this whole operation beyond yourself should be investigated by authorities other than the management here at smugmug. Just to be certain it is all on the up and up. I hate to be so pointed, but if you have been doing this for years, then I can't see you innocently shooting these photographs and selling DVD's w/ no knowledge of what is OBVIOUSLY going on here.
Collectors....hope that makes all the sick people feel better about themselves, now perverts even have a politically correct term for themselves.
Just because a parent signs a release doesn't make things okay. There are many kids in this world that are exploited by their parents, or other family members, not to mention other people they are supposed to be able to trust. There are way too many shots of boys with their crotches pointed directly at the camera, and to me this serves one purpose. I wouldn't be surpised if these pictures had been booted off of another site, thus the heated battle to keep them here. I remember the infamous "pecker" thread being changed, and it was only about woodpeckers, and offended like one person. These photo's obviously offend way more paying customers than that thread did. Some pedifile's crave young boys, and since it is highly illegal to possess photo's of nude boys, which most pedifiles would prefer over girls anyway, they take what they can get. In my opinion those pic's are in bad taste, and are probably ordered by people I'd rather not know. As far as being for future model / acting gigs...whatever. Some of those shots are taken in someones hallway, absolutely no professionalism in that. Here's my two cents....let him go elsewhere...if he can.
I want to say thanks to the supporters I had at the beginning, your the only ones who understands about people making a living. You were very kind!:):
For the people who were condemning it, I sure hope that if one day you are ever in a place where something is not questioned for over year, then one day 1 person complains, and tries to tear down your business for something they have no clue about, I pray to God that people don't get this mean and ugly towards you as they been towards me.
The photos actually on smugmug don't really creep me out. Little boys with no shirts? What's the big deal? Models are usually used to sell stuff, and the content on this site isn't really much wierder than your average sears catalog. My first thought was that pmaland was out of his mind- some folks would (after all) be so oversensitive as to find his gallery freaky as well.
However, following this "youth photo" guy's links its obvious that this is guy is into some stuff that is beyond questionable: check this out
THE CHIPPENDIDDYS
Spoofing the Chippendales, this group of 9 preteen British boys is bound to entertain you as they gyrate like wild on your television screen and discuss the pros and cons of their "profession".
OK....
I was with you until I found that stuff. Does this violate the law as far as child porn goes? Maye not the letter, but certainly the spirit. the other site this guy has is full of such exploitation videos that are clearly designed for sexual gratification.
It's like a vivid video catalog, except everybody is under 9.
Give the guy his money back, and get him the hell out of here.
I want to say thanks to the supporters I had at the beginning, your the only ones who understands about people making a living. You were very kind!:):
For the people who were condemning it, I sure hope that if one day you are ever in a place where something is not questioned for over year, then one day 1 person complains, and tries to tear down your business for something they have no clue about, I pray to God that people don't get this mean and ugly towards you as they been towards me.
Your supporters and opponents just gave you a big ol' shot o' publicity. Search engines love this kind of thread (lots of posts and lots of links to your site). It's rare, however, that people get a chance to converse with someone posting objectionable content on the internet, so I can see why so many people (including me now) jumped on to this thread. And... sounds like you drove a lot of traffic to your site too. Your taste in DVD's may be questionable, but your marketing skills sure are good.
I think that some things have been removed already. It wasn't the photos of boys w/out shirts, it was the other stuff that grossed me out. I never even saw the links to DVD's to be honest. The photos were enough for me.
no justification
Before I posted this comment I had a brief look at this site - it was brief because I didn't like what I saw and didn't want to see any more.
As the mother of two sons I can see absolutely no justification for either parents allowing this or anyone taking such photographs/DVD's - if anyone tried to exploit my boys in this way I would rip them to shreds.
Why can't people just let children have some innocence and be children?
I think that some things have been removed already. It wasn't the photos of boys w/out shirts, it was the other stuff that grossed me out. I never even saw the links to DVD's to be honest. The photos were enough for me.
Lots of his stuff is gone. Only a fraction of the galleries are still up. And the dvd's are gone. Or the junk is marked private anyway.
I knew, of course, that trees and plants had roots, stems, bark, branches and foliage that reached up toward the light. But I was coming to realize that the real magician was light itself.
Edward Steichen
0
Options
BaldyRegistered Users, Super ModeratorsPosts: 2,853moderator
edited May 16, 2006
Hmmm... We just received an email from someone who works in law enforcement and who had stumbled upon this thread.
It was a personal, not official, plea for us to shut the site down based on the logic that convicted sex offenders are sometimes not allowed around parks, schools, and other places intended for people under the age of 18 because they don't need nudity for physical attraction.
I don't like the idea of making judgement calls like this but the reaction by our customers is pretty telling...
Hmmm... We just received an email from someone who works in law enforcement and who had stumbled upon this thread.
It was a personal, not official, plea for us to shut the site down based on the logic that convicted sex offenders are sometimes not allowed around parks, schools, and other places intended for people under the age of 18 because they don't need nudity for physical attraction.
I don't like the idea of making judgement calls like this but the reaction by our customers is pretty telling...
Well, from the looks of his site, you may not have to. Looks as if he's closing up shop on his own & probably moving somewhere else. But, maybe not.
I think the issue that someone thinks something bad is going on lends more to what's going on in the someone's head rather than anything actually bad going on.
Looks like lots of people must have this going on in their head, huh? Any chance of a retraction? Or do you just like to drop your clever insults and disappear?
Comments
YouthTalent,
You're making us look thru entire websites to find the photos. Gallery and photo links that we can actually do something about look like this:
http://nickname.smugmug.com/gallery/XXXXXXX-L.jpg for example.
Still, I picked up your note, and we are using alternate means to find these photos - which takes ALOT OF TIME.
Your slamming our employees doesn't help your cause. We bend over backwards to fight inappropriate material and ALWAYS REMOVE IT when we can see it and find it.
YEs, and if you'd have clicked the link "see photo in gallery" we'd have an easier time of identifying the websites involved.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Youth.Smugmug.com
By the way, the two of them that were in direct violation of the ToS were taken off soon after the post, but may still be in your cache. We can indeed locate the galleries quickly from a photo number. Dustin and Andy just were not aware of it themselves since it is a rarely used feature.
Regardless, posting links to questionable photos on Smugmug is not a good way to try and prove a point. Pornographic photos do occasionally sneak through to the site, though we do our very best to stamp them out. One of the advantages to having a service that is almost entirely made up of paying subscribers is we have more leverage in fighting the battle to make sure the site is family-safe.
Youthtalent, I respect your right to go about your business in a legal manner. I can also understand how you would be frustrated when people try to attack your business and your character. I do not, however, respect your methods of linking to questionable photographs to argue your point.
Let's keep this discussion civil, please.
If they were private, the youth can still direct legitimate people to the site without having them show up in the popular photos page or having random Internet surfers discover them and either get the wrong idea or use them in questionable ways.
http://www.mouseboysmovies.com/youarenotalone.htm. Here are a few exerpts from that site:
I guess I'm just not seeing the future model thing applying to this. This is basically billed as a collector's item. Would those same collectors also be interested in the pics and DVDs on your site?
EDIT: Also I found the following on the Welcome page of that site:
Why would it be necessary to discretely accept payment?
http://photos.mikelanestudios.com/
IMO, you're making a rod for your own back.
SmugMug API Developer
My Photos
This is a wonderful idea and should be implemented by YouthTalent.
I've been reading this thread and trying to not draw any conclusions as to who really buys those CD's and what purpose they are used for. But I'm afraid that since anyone can purchase those CD's, some of them are most certainly ending up in the "wrong hands" and for the "wrong reasons." This sickens me.
I visited the site and was really taken aback by what I saw. I realize there are legitimate young models out there, and if their pictures were in private or protected galleries, and legitimate people were able to purchase CD's via a password or direct link from the young boys, that would be one thing. But the open sale of CD's of these boys really leaves a bad taste in my mouth. There is no way to guarantee they won't end up in the wrong hands. And that's a bad thing, IMO.
Smug since 2006
SmugMug Help
PhotoscapeDesign
What about the creepy comment that was pointed out earlier in this thread that was attached to one of your photos? Are you ok with that sort of thing being left on your gallery?
I'm stumped also on the "collector" aspect. Who would collect these? I don't even want to think about that.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
As Andy said: DavidTO said: Khaos said: These are excellent posts.:):
Then in post #10 pmaland started a mean cussing out of control post without even knowing about the business of photography as it relates to modeling.
All of the Parents of the models have signed contracts to allow their sons to have the Photo Cd's to be sold to help pay for their future modeling/acting careers.:):
I don't see whats wrong with that.:):
I did remove the DVD movies, since that seemed to be causing an issue in itself with conflicting with the Model Cd's.
Sheaf said:
Sorry about that Sheaf, It won't happen again.:):
Baldy said:
Yes, I have already tried that about a year ago, it didn't work well.
But I'm willing to work with you and others as far turning off the popular photo settings, so they won't show up in the popular photo pages.
You also have to remember that something that offends some people, does not offend all. There are many photos that offend me and others, but I just don't click on them.:):
Youth.Smugmug.com
you know theres a setting in the galleries that says PhotoRank and you can turn it off right?
smugmug: www.StandOutphoto.smugmug.com
I'm not trying to harp, but that still doesn't answer the question (for me at least) of why those particular movies should have been associated with the pictures that you've got on your site. It's not the movies themselves that are at issue it is the fact that it is obvious - perhaps even more so by your removal of the link to those movies - that the audience for the movies is someone a bit more creepy than a modelling agency talent scout. The fact that you linked those movies, in fact those particular movies, gives me the perception that your site is about more than boy models.
But maybe I'm simply not educated enough on the subject to know that there is a group of people that like those movies not for some sick sexual gratification but for some other completely innocent reason unbeknownst to me. Perhaps the target audience for those movies also happens to enjoy for completely asexual resons suggestive pictures of young boys.
So perhaps you could fill us in?
http://photos.mikelanestudios.com/
Yes, Thanks Daniel.:):
Youth.Smugmug.com
I looked at the shots and was turned off by what I saw. Now I'm known for my lousy taste so I asked my wife to have a gander. Her response was "that's almost child pornongraphy".
The site with its "discreet delivery" seems to be aimed towards a target audience which I feel can best be described as perverts in training. I love some of the descriptions of the CDs such as:
"Rose of Youth - Is a spectacular documentary style film featuring a blonde that should be model of the year!!! Pojkart once again brings our buddies from Barefooted and Holiday Fun 3 to enjoy themselves with friends in an amusement park. Following a trip home for a snack and wrestling match the boys go off the the local banya for some awesome swimming footage - naturist style! DVD-R Disc will play world-wide, Region 0, Free. Condition: NEW, Factory Sealed."
Pray tell what is the "naturist stlye" of these awsome swimming shots.
Then we have this classic
"Spoofing the Chippendales, this group of 9 preteen British boys is bound to entertain you as they gyrate like wild on your television screen and discuss the pros and cons of their "profession": e.g., dancing is harder than football, but gets you lots of girlfriends. The only documentary of its kind; cute, wholesome..., and dang can these kids move! Released in: 1995. Length: 45 minutes. Warning: Rated F...for Fun! No questionable content; Shirtless. DVD-R Disc will play world-wide, Region 0, Free. Condition: NEW, Factory Sealed."
Beneath this blurb for this "F' rated fun video is the flashing word "HOT".
A lot of the photos are OK then there are also plenty of shots of young boys in skimpy underwear and shots of barechested boys reclining with a spouting water fountain conveniently located right behind their crotch. I'm also curious why there is no female talent breaking down your door. I guess your target audience just ain't interested.
I'm delighted that their parents have consented to their darlings' careers. Then again I have known parents who have given their consent to their kids turning tricks and selling drugs too. All too often "parental consent" is nothing more an than an indication of dubious decisions made by parents.
I think you do have a right to display your goods, I just don't think Smugmug is the place.
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
Lots are confused by youth models/actors. Its a business like anything else, the boys are interested in either acting or modeling, and want to at least try it out, possibly pursue it for a career if they like it. The money raised goes to them and their families to pursue a career for the future, even if they stop modeling/acting, the money from the CD's and DVD's still is theirs whenever someone purchases their products. Its like a royalty in when a Radio Station plays an artists song, that artist is paid for the airplay, and for every CD and DVD sold.
That's why even though some of the DVD's I had listed on my site are made from back in the 1980's till now, these youth actors will still get paid for every DVD sold, even when they are adults, the money is still theirs because of the Royalty rights, so they can possibly pass that money down to their sons or daughters for their careers.
Lots of people think, since they are young and they have to pose, that it attracts the wrong element to this industry. The Youth are very well protected and often use different names in their Photo Shots.
Sure there are sick perverts in anything that involves children, teens, etc. But like I said, they are very well protected from predators by the studios, local law enforcement, and their own families.
Youth.Smugmug.com
[severe edit, conjecture and accusations removed]
Now Smugmug isn't my business, but as a paying customer, I would feel better if you found another photo hosting service.
So a pervert cannot find the boys on the DVDs and they are paid so it's all good?
What if they can find my kid. Or someone elses kid that looks like some kid from 1980?
I think it's promoting softcore homoerotic child porn, but thats just me.
I modeled as a child, never did I have photos like that taken of me. Are there no girls in your area that want to be models and actors as well? Is this only a market for young boys? Are the models chosen as direct targets for these "collectors"?
I didn't really notice the links to specific DVDs I did see the CD's for sale which also raised a red flag in my mind.
You are trying to defend this with your model releases, however, we all know how easily parents can have the wool pulled over their eyes thinking their child is going to be famous. We all love to believe our child is the most beautiful and talented etc... some people tend to get caught up in that and ignore warning signs, the warning signs I see flashing all over this whole thing.
So, no, I'd rather work 5 jobs to pay for my child's future than ever think for a moment I whore'd out their innocence.
The fact your wife approves means nothing to me either. I don't know what kind of person you are, and I don't know what kind of person she is. I take it the one little boy must be yours or a close relative since he's displayed on there repeatedly. Seeing this site really freaked me out I have to say.
I do senior sessions all the time and most of them are 18 and I still don't have photos that are nearly as suggestive as yours are - there is no need. The kids I take photos of and the likes of many other photographers here could get those kids work w/ the natural and non-suggestive photos they take. I worry about what kind of jobs these kids are getting anyway as most companies (Target, Gap, Old Navy etc...) do NOT portray the children in their clothes in suggestive manners. I don't think I've seen a 9 year old boy sitting in a tree w/ his legs spread trying to sell me a pair of bermuda shorts.
I understand your right to your photographic style, and your right to share them and your hundred other rights, I also understand the rights of parents and children and that perhaps this whole operation beyond yourself should be investigated by authorities other than the management here at smugmug. Just to be certain it is all on the up and up. I hate to be so pointed, but if you have been doing this for years, then I can't see you innocently shooting these photographs and selling DVD's w/ no knowledge of what is OBVIOUSLY going on here.
Collectors....hope that makes all the sick people feel better about themselves, now perverts even have a politically correct term for themselves.
There are way too many shots of boys with their crotches pointed directly at the camera, and to me this serves one purpose.
I wouldn't be surpised if these pictures had been booted off of another site, thus the heated battle to keep them here.
I remember the infamous "pecker" thread being changed, and it was only about woodpeckers, and offended like one person.
These photo's obviously offend way more paying customers than that thread did.
Some pedifile's crave young boys, and since it is highly illegal to possess photo's of nude boys, which most pedifiles would prefer over girls anyway, they take what they can get.
In my opinion those pic's are in bad taste, and are probably ordered by people I'd rather not know.
As far as being for future model / acting gigs...whatever. Some of those shots are taken in someones hallway, absolutely no professionalism in that.
Here's my two cents....let him go elsewhere...if he can.
I want to say thanks to the supporters I had at the beginning, your the only ones who understands about people making a living. You were very kind!:):
For the people who were condemning it, I sure hope that if one day you are ever in a place where something is not questioned for over year, then one day 1 person complains, and tries to tear down your business for something they have no clue about, I pray to God that people don't get this mean and ugly towards you as they been towards me.
Youth.Smugmug.com
However, following this "youth photo" guy's links its obvious that this is guy is into some stuff that is beyond questionable: check this out
http://www.youthtalentgalleries.com/showgallery.php/cat/594
the main gallery describes this DVD thusly:
THE CHIPPENDIDDYS
Spoofing the Chippendales, this group of 9 preteen British boys is bound to entertain you as they gyrate like wild on your television screen and discuss the pros and cons of their "profession".
OK....
I was with you until I found that stuff. Does this violate the law as far as child porn goes? Maye not the letter, but certainly the spirit. the other site this guy has is full of such exploitation videos that are clearly designed for sexual gratification.
It's like a vivid video catalog, except everybody is under 9.
Give the guy his money back, and get him the hell out of here.
Your supporters and opponents just gave you a big ol' shot o' publicity. Search engines love this kind of thread (lots of posts and lots of links to your site). It's rare, however, that people get a chance to converse with someone posting objectionable content on the internet, so I can see why so many people (including me now) jumped on to this thread. And... sounds like you drove a lot of traffic to your site too. Your taste in DVD's may be questionable, but your marketing skills sure are good.
Portland, Oregon Photographer Pete Springer
website blog instagram facebook g+
Before I posted this comment I had a brief look at this site - it was brief because I didn't like what I saw and didn't want to see any more.
As the mother of two sons I can see absolutely no justification for either parents allowing this or anyone taking such photographs/DVD's - if anyone tried to exploit my boys in this way I would rip them to shreds.
Why can't people just let children have some innocence and be children?
Exploitation - at best.
Lots of his stuff is gone. Only a fraction of the galleries are still up. And the dvd's are gone. Or the junk is marked private anyway.
I knew, of course, that trees and plants had roots, stems, bark, branches and foliage that reached up toward the light. But I was coming to realize that the real magician was light itself.
Edward Steichen
It was a personal, not official, plea for us to shut the site down based on the logic that convicted sex offenders are sometimes not allowed around parks, schools, and other places intended for people under the age of 18 because they don't need nudity for physical attraction.
I don't like the idea of making judgement calls like this but the reaction by our customers is pretty telling...
Looks like lots of people must have this going on in their head, huh? Any chance of a retraction? Or do you just like to drop your clever insults and disappear?
http://www.philmaland.com/