MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: Shank_ali on July 03, 2011, 06:18
-
I wont do it...Children grow to be adults and may ask....."do you think you exploited me for money when i was a child..
Opinions please !
-
Chatty lately aren't we?
I'd say "I think you helped the family earn money for food, vacations, etc. and even helped to put away a chunk for your higher education". Pretty good for having a big smile and good attitude :)
-
Seriously^^
Throughout history kids have helped in their parents' family businesses. It teaches them responsibility and helps them appreciate the value of money. I seriously doubt any of us is running a modeling sweatshop! LOL!
My daughter enjoys the benefits of a great college education, currently a trip to Europe, a nice car, spending money, and pretty much anything she could need and most of what she wants, because of the extra income microstock has generated. I don't see a problem asking her to contribute to that with a little modeling.
FWIW, she is an adult now, and far from feeling exploited, she is grateful for having had a much better childhood than most of her friends.
-
Totaly agree with Lizafx.
+ Modeling is fun.
-
While I don't have any kids....that I know of anyway, ;) I agree with Sean and Lisa. Using your kids to help pad the monthly budget isn't exploitation.. Do you have your kids pull weeds, wash cars, trim your shrubs, do housework? Technically speaking you could hire a maid, a Gardner or take your car to the car wash but many don't. They save a few bucks by having their kids do it instead....in addition to learning that there are no free rides in life.
-
I don't have kids, but I'd never do it. I have a little sister and she's very photogenic and cute (and I am saying this as a photog not like all parents call their offspring cute even if they're far from it) and I'd never sell those photos on stock, even though I could make hundreds if not thousands of dollars with photos of her.
I think it's wrong to make decisions that could mark your child forever (it's a long shot with stock, but if she appears on hundreds of billboards for years, it sure will). It's almost like baptizing, circumcision etc. I think those decisions should be agreed on when they're old enough to decide about it, not forced on them when they're infants or just to young to decide. I for one am glad I wasn't forced in any of those things by my parents. Of course gardening etc is a totally different story, they should be taught about the value of money and to help with the work around home, they should be taught about responsibility.
-
(I don't have kids, so this is just theory...)
If the money goes to the kids benefit, I can't see how it would be exploitation.
I would perhaps sell my kids images as RM, just to stop them circulating over time.
-
I don't have kids, but I have nephews that I could have used as models, but I am very sensitive to possible misuse of the images.
Other than that, I see no problem using your own kids as models, as long as they enjoy it and are not forced into it when they really wanted to be playing with their friends.
-
...I think it's wrong to make decisions that could mark your child forever (it's a long shot with stock, but if she appears on hundreds of billboards for years, it sure will). It's almost like baptizing, circumcision etc. I think those decisions should be agreed on when they're old enough to decide about it, not forced on them when they're infants or just to young to decide...
It's a parent's job to make decisions for their children. Even most governments acknowledge the fact that parents need to make decisions that they feel are in the best interests of their kids up to a certain age (18 here in the U.S.) because below that age many kids don't have the ability to act in their own best interest.
I "forced" baptism and circumcision on my son and I'll gladly do it again with the next one. He's free to make decisions about his religion when he's old enough to form his own reasonable opinion on the subject. Until then it's my responsibility to do what I think is best for him.
The stock issue doesn't come into play for me since I'm not a photographer. But if I were, I wouldn't see any harm in having him be the subject of some stock images.
-
...I think it's wrong to make decisions that could mark your child forever (it's a long shot with stock, but if she appears on hundreds of billboards for years, it sure will). It's almost like baptizing, circumcision etc. I think those decisions should be agreed on when they're old enough to decide about it, not forced on them when they're infants or just to young to decide...
It's a parent's job to make decisions for their children. Even most governments acknowledge the fact that parents need to make decisions that they feel are in the best interests of their kids up to a certain age (18 here in the U.S.) because below that age many kids don't have the ability to act in their own best interest.
I "forced" baptism and circumcision on my son and I'll gladly do it again with the next one. He's free to make decisions about his religion when he's old enough to form his own reasonable opinion on the subject. Until then it's my responsibility to do what I think is best for him.
The stock issue doesn't come into play for me since I'm not a photographer. But if I were, I wouldn't see any harm in having him be the subject of some stock images.
Indeed, I just expressed my opinion, contrary to everyone before me, which was against it. I think this would be in the best interest of my children. But you don't want to much control, don't you? Like choosing which school they should attend, which profession is right or them and at the end have an arranged marriage in store for them ;)
He's not really free to make his/her own decision later, you're marked (as a catholic, muslim or whatever). I'm glad I wasn't baptised, because my father was smart and liberal enough to be against it. I could make the decision now to be baptised. I'm glad I'm an atheist, who was never "marked". That said, I respect all religions and people's choice to be religious, visit church/mosque etc for mass etc. I just think it should be a choice, not something you're pushed in. And religion is less and less "popular" every year, with all the technological development and education, we can find explanations for certain things we didn't understand elsewhere. Or not. But it should be a choice IMO. About circumcision, there's no turning back and you've already deprived him (to a certain degree) of sexual pleasure. So much for wanting the best for our children. I've also read percentage of little boys get circumsized is lowering every year in the US. People are opening their eyes in this regard as well.
-
{snip}
How did we get onto circumcision ;)
-
{snip}
How did we get onto circumcision ;)
Not only that, but we are also in the dangerous "is religion good or bad" path. I hope we re-route to the original subject!
-
{snip}
How did we get onto circumcision ;)
I thought this thread was getting a bit boring :P
-
I have a two year old daughter. Like every father, I think she is the cutest girl in the world ;D and she has been my favourite subject for photography these last two years. And - even without the biased viewpoint of a father - there are certainly a good number of shots of her sitting on my harddrive that would make some money in stock.
Still I don't upload them, simply because I don't want to see the face of my daughter anywhere where I can't control it. It's just a matter of personal choice. And it helps a lot if you don't do it (photography) for a living...
-
My daughter is now talking about getting her own agent and keeps negotiating me up in price. I have no idea where you'd get the idea that this is exploiting your kids. You'd be the first stock photographer in history not to do it.
-
I agree completely with Mike. As parents, it is our job to make decisions for our kids, and we do our best to make the right ones. Hopefully we succeed most of the time.
With trepidation, I will jump into the religion thing. I don't see how having your child baptized is marking them for life. The water dries ;)
In fact, I don't see how any self-described atheist could make the argument that baptism marks anyone for life. If you don't believe in God, then it's just some kid getting a spritz of water on their forehead... Only to Christians would it have any significance.
I was baptized Episcopalian, but I have never practiced that religion. In fact I was atheist for many years, and none of the other atheists made fun of me or called me names because I was baptized, LOL.
-
I have a two year old daughter. Like every father, I think she is the cutest girl in the world ;D and she has been my favourite subject for photography these last two years. And - even without the biased viewpoint of a father - there are certainly a good number of shots of her sitting on my harddrive that would make some money in stock.
Still I don't upload them, simply because I don't want to see the face of my daughter anywhere where I can't control it. It's just a matter of personal choice. And it helps a lot if you don't do it (photography) for a living...
Bravo.I share those sentiments.It's too easy for photographers who have children to use them as models and earn money.
The bottom line is that our off spring are subjects that designers want in a variety of shots.Education /playing/ ect ect.It's that demand that will continue to drive photographers to photograph there own children.
Sad but true !
-
Seriously^^
Throughout history kids have helped in their parents' family businesses. It teaches them responsibility and helps them appreciate the value of money. I seriously doubt any of us is running a modeling sweatshop! LOL!
My daughter enjoys the benefits of a great college education, currently a trip to Europe, a nice car, spending money, and pretty much anything she could need and most of what she wants, because of the extra income microstock has generated. I don't see a problem asking her to contribute to that with a little modeling.
FWIW, she is an adult now, and far from feeling exploited, she is grateful for having had a much better childhood than most of her friends.
Exellent posting!
Yes why not AND it teaches them responsibillity, the most important, especially in todays world.
-
I wont do it...Children grow to be adults and may ask....."do you think you exploited me for money when i was a child..
Opinions please !
Pay them - end of story.
I take it your kids won't be allowed to get a paper round ::)
-
With trepidation, I will jump into the religion thing. I don't see how having your child baptized is marking them for life. The water dries ;)
In fact, I don't see how any self-described atheist could make the argument that baptism marks anyone for life. If you don't believe in God, then it's just some kid getting a spritz of water on their forehead... Only to Christians would it have any significance.
I was baptized Episcopalian, but I have never practiced that religion. In fact I was atheist for many years, and none of the other atheists made fun of me or called me names because I was baptized, LOL.
Than why do it at all. The way you wrote it, you don't seem like a true believer. It's not just a spritz of water, it's a spritz of holy water, I don't think any true christian should make it sound as irrelevant by adding the words just. It's like saying eh why confess, he's just a priest, why go to church it's just a building or even why raise children in christian manner it's just 10 commandments. I could make some stronger statements, but I won't, I just wanted to say baptizing children if you're not really a believer makes even less sense. Unless someone lives in some backwards redneck town, where the family would get outcasted for not baptizing their children, but then again you could move. Americans do move around the country a lot, don't they (every time they get a new job).
I'm not only happy I wasn't marked as a Christian (catholic for that matter), I was happy I wasn't forced into it. Imagine my parents being Muslim or Jewish, I'd get circumsized :o . Now that is irreversible and something I wouldn't want for the reason I stated before.
As for atheists not making fun of you, we're way more tolerant and open minded, we don't go around people's homes and try to "sell them" religion. All anyone did was the campaign on the buses, that that gal in the photo started http://www.google.si/imgres?imgurl=http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/01/08/article-0-02F61967000005DC-412_468x330.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1126226/Atheist-theres-probably-God-campaign-did-NOT-breach-advertising-code-rules-watchdog.html&usg=__yRgsW4GQFAoAPCa2a4YIQLQKHuU=&h=330&w=468&sz=55&hl=sl&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=XBnrWH1Ckk5ZTM:&tbnh=136&tbnw=239&ei=N30RTt29C8_Mswbv8oWMDw&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dthere%2527s%2Bprobably%2Bno%2Bgod%2Bcampaign%26hl%3Dsl%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3DwL0%26sa%3DX%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26biw%3D1680%26bih%3D892%26tbm%3Disch%26prmd%3Divns&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=792&vpy=394&dur=1057&hovh=188&hovw=267&tx=170&ty=96&page=1&ndsp=36&ved=1t:429,r:17,s:0 (http://www.google.si/imgres?imgurl=http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/01/08/article-0-02F61967000005DC-412_468x330.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1126226/Atheist-theres-probably-God-campaign-did-NOT-breach-advertising-code-rules-watchdog.html&usg=__yRgsW4GQFAoAPCa2a4YIQLQKHuU=&h=330&w=468&sz=55&hl=sl&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=XBnrWH1Ckk5ZTM:&tbnh=136&tbnw=239&ei=N30RTt29C8_Mswbv8oWMDw&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dthere%2527s%2Bprobably%2Bno%2Bgod%2Bcampaign%26hl%3Dsl%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3DwL0%26sa%3DX%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26biw%3D1680%26bih%3D892%26tbm%3Disch%26prmd%3Divns&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=792&vpy=394&dur=1057&hovh=188&hovw=267&tx=170&ty=96&page=1&ndsp=36&ved=1t:429,r:17,s:0). Which is really not intrusive like the religious ppl (Jehovah's witnesses etc), just sends you a message not forcing you into anythink, perhaps it just makes you think a bit. I really answered this in the first paragraph, try this the other way around in a redneck town;)
-
With trepidation, I will jump into the religion thing. I don't see how having your child baptized is marking them for life. The water dries ;)
In fact, I don't see how any self-described atheist could make the argument that baptism marks anyone for life. If you don't believe in God, then it's just some kid getting a spritz of water on their forehead... Only to Christians would it have any significance.
I was baptized Episcopalian, but I have never practiced that religion. In fact I was atheist for many years, and none of the other atheists made fun of me or called me names because I was baptized, LOL.
Than why do it at all. The way you wrote it, you don't seem like a true believer. It's not just a spritz of water, it's a spritz of holy water, I don't think any true christian should make it sound as irrelevant by adding the words just. It's like saying eh why confess, he's just a priest, why go to church it's just a building or even why raise children in christian manner it's just 10 commandments. I could make some stronger statements, but I won't, I just wanted to say baptizing children if you're not really a believer makes even less sense. Unless someone lives in some backwards redneck town, where the family would get outcasted for not baptizing their children, but then again you could move. Americans do move around the country a lot, don't they (every time they get a new job).
I'm not only happy I wasn't marked as a Christian (catholic for that matter), I was happy I wasn't forced into it. Imagine my parents being Muslim or Jewish, I'd get circumsized :o . Now that is irreversible and something I wouldn't want for the reason I stated before.
As for atheists not making fun of you, we're way more tolerant and open minded, we don't go around people's homes and try to "sell them" religion. All anyone did was the campaign on the buses, that that gal in the photo started http://www.google.si/imgres?imgurl=http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/01/08/article-0-02F61967000005DC-412_468x330.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1126226/Atheist-theres-probably-God-campaign-did-NOT-breach-advertising-code-rules-watchdog.html&usg=__yRgsW4GQFAoAPCa2a4YIQLQKHuU=&h=330&w=468&sz=55&hl=sl&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=XBnrWH1Ckk5ZTM:&tbnh=136&tbnw=239&ei=N30RTt29C8_Mswbv8oWMDw&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dthere%2527s%2Bprobably%2Bno%2Bgod%2Bcampaign%26hl%3Dsl%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3DwL0%26sa%3DX%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26biw%3D1680%26bih%3D892%26tbm%3Disch%26prmd%3Divns&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=792&vpy=394&dur=1057&hovh=188&hovw=267&tx=170&ty=96&page=1&ndsp=36&ved=1t:429,r:17,s:0 (http://www.google.si/imgres?imgurl=http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/01/08/article-0-02F61967000005DC-412_468x330.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1126226/Atheist-theres-probably-God-campaign-did-NOT-breach-advertising-code-rules-watchdog.html&usg=__yRgsW4GQFAoAPCa2a4YIQLQKHuU=&h=330&w=468&sz=55&hl=sl&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=XBnrWH1Ckk5ZTM:&tbnh=136&tbnw=239&ei=N30RTt29C8_Mswbv8oWMDw&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dthere%2527s%2Bprobably%2Bno%2Bgod%2Bcampaign%26hl%3Dsl%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3DwL0%26sa%3DX%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26biw%3D1680%26bih%3D892%26tbm%3Disch%26prmd%3Divns&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=792&vpy=394&dur=1057&hovh=188&hovw=267&tx=170&ty=96&page=1&ndsp=36&ved=1t:429,r:17,s:0). Which is really not intrusive like the religious ppl (Jehovah's witnesses etc), just sends you a message not forcing you into anything, perhaps it just makes you think a bit. I really answered this in the first paragraph, try this the other way around in a redneck town;)
-
I would once again suggest keeping religion outside the discussion..
-
My daughter is now talking about getting her own agent and keeps negotiating me up in price. I have no idea where you'd get the idea that this is exploiting your kids. You'd be the first stock photographer in history not to do it.
Plenty of us don't sell child pictures. I'm not entirely comfortable with where they could end up or the reaction they might cause from the subject if they pop up 15 years later, and if I would worry about that for my kids I won't do it with other people's, either.
-
...He's not really free to make his/her own decision later, you're marked (as a catholic, muslim or whatever). I'm glad I wasn't baptised, because my father was smart and liberal enough to be against it. I could make the decision now to be baptised...
Sure he is. Baptism isn't a mandate that anyone practice any religion for life. When my son is old enough to make an informed decision about religion himself, he's free to do whatever he wants. Until then, it's my job to do what I think is best for him.
And let's not get into the "smart and liberal enough" debate. I wouldn't suggest that anyone is any more or less intelligent based on these decisions.
...About circumcision, there's no turning back and you've already deprived him (to a certain degree) of sexual pleasure. So much for wanting the best for our children. I've also read percentage of little boys get circumsized is lowering every year in the US. People are opening their eyes in this regard as well.
I'm deferring to the medical community on this one, where the benefits are believed to outweigh the risks. And frankly if it at all deprives anyone of sexual pleasure, I think that's a benefit as well. Like most guys, I'm not exactly of the mindset that I wish I got off faster in bed. And if circumcision has anything to do what that, then I'm happier my parents opted to have it done for me.
I am doing what is best for my kid. That's parenting. There's no playbook, no owners' manual. These are decisions that have to be made, and my wife and I are making them as we see fit, and in the interests of what we believe is best. I would never suggest that what your parents chose for you wasn't done with those same intentions. They had different opinions about these things than I do, and that's fine. I'd certainly never suggest that your parents were any less intelligent or didn't do what they believed to be best for you because of the decisions they came to.
-
...He's not really free to make his/her own decision later, you're marked (as a catholic, muslim or whatever). I'm glad I wasn't baptised, because my father was smart and liberal enough to be against it. I could make the decision now to be baptised...
Sure he is. Baptism isn't a mandate that anyone practice any religion for life. When my son is old enough to make an informed decision about religion himself, he's free to do whatever he wants. Until then, it's my job to do what I think is best for him.
And let's not get into the "smart and liberal enough" debate. I wouldn't suggest that anyone is any more or less intelligent based on these decisions.
OK, I'll give you that one. It is a logical explanation. I was coming from my own experience, saying I prefer I wasn't baptised. That's why I won't do it with my children and let them decide when they're old enough. Just the other way around. Fair?
...About circumcision, there's no turning back and you've already deprived him (to a certain degree) of sexual pleasure. So much for wanting the best for our children. I've also read percentage of little boys get circumsized is lowering every year in the US. People are opening their eyes in this regard as well.
I'm deferring to the medical community on this one, where the benefits are believed to outweigh the risks. And frankly if it at all deprives anyone of sexual pleasure, I think that's a benefit as well. Like most guys, I'm not exactly of the mindset that I wish I got off faster in bed. And if circumcision has anything to do what that, then I'm happier my parents opted to have it done for me.
I am doing what is best for my kid. That's parenting. There's no playbook, no owners' manual. These are decisions that have to be made, and my wife and I are making them as we see fit, and in the interests of what we believe is best. I would never suggest that what your parents chose for you wasn't done with those same intentions. They had different opinions about these things than I do, and that's fine. I'd certainly never suggest that your parents were any less intelligent or didn't do what they believed to be best for you because of the decisions they came to.
If you have a right mindset you don't have any problems getting off too fast. At least I was never amongst those who can't hold it for more than 5 min. If you are, you just put a condom on when you want to last longer or some kind of lube, but at least you don't have a "permanent condom" on. And for those who don't have that endurance problems it sure is a downside and your son could be just one of those marathoners, who could last forever and all circumsition is going to do for him is make him enjoy in sex less. So much for wanting the best for our children;). (yeah I know I'm exaggerating a bit, but ppl really don't think to much about the consequences, when such traditional stuff is in question).
OK more open minded, is that better? Or keeping my options open? I was just saying I think they made the correct decision in that case and I'm giving my father a big thumb up. You'd like to get as many from your kid won't you?;) (I'm not saying he won't give you one for those to decision of course).
-
Wow. Now this is *really* off topic. :D
TMI? I think so.
-
I'm happy that there are no images inserted in this thread to support your arguments. :o
-
Wow. Now this is *really* off topic. :D
TMI? I think so.
That's why I'm here, to make things interesting ;D . I mean, why not make a thread philosophical from time to time. Some threads just should be broadened. Some horizons as well :P.
TMI.
jm73, scared of water? :P
-
jm73, scared of water? :P
Yes, I'm non-swimmer. :)
-
Than why do it at all. The way you wrote it, you don't seem like a true believer. It's not just a spritz of water, it's a spritz of holy water, I don't think any true christian should make it sound as irrelevant by adding the words just. It's like saying eh why confess, he's just a priest, why go to church it's just a building or even why raise children in christian manner it's just 10 commandments. I could make some stronger statements, but I won't, I just wanted to say baptizing children if you're not really a believer makes even less sense. Unless someone lives in some backwards redneck town, where the family would get outcasted for not baptizing their children, but then again you could move. Americans do move around the country a lot, don't they (every time they get a new job).
LOL! So you, an atheist, are going to tell me whether or not I am a "true Christian"?!! First off, I don't believe I characterized my current religious beliefs in this conversation, other than to say I used to be an atheist (one who was certainly more consistent in my opinions than you seem to be). Nor did I claim to have had my daughter baptized. But here's the thing. We're not talking about me.
YOU were the one who claimed to be an atheist. So why would YOU get all worked up about someone spritzing a little water on a baby's head? Let me repeat this point because you seem to be having trouble grasping it - Baptism only has meaning if you are a Christian. If the kid grows up to be an atheist, it won't matter to them one way or the other. Which was my point.
For a supposed atheist, you seem to be awfully irrational on the topic of religion ::)
I'm deferring to the medical community on this one, where the benefits are believed to outweigh the risks. And frankly if it at all deprives anyone of sexual pleasure, I think that's a benefit as well. Like most guys, I'm not exactly of the mindset that I wish I got off faster in bed. And if circumcision has anything to do what that, then I'm happier my parents opted to have it done for me.
^^ Well said. This is almost word for word my husband's take on the subject when I discussed it with him :)
-
This thread is a case study in how conversational topics deviate.
-
This thread is a case study in how conversational topics deviate.
I'm just waiting for another twist in the discussion until it turns into a perfect example for Godwin's law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law).
-
This thread is a case study in how conversational topics deviate.
I'm just waiting for another twist in the discussion until it turns into a perfect example for Godwin's law ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law[/url]).
It's rapidly approaching 95%.
-
My daughter is now talking about getting her own agent and keeps negotiating me up in price. I have no idea where you'd get the idea that this is exploiting your kids. You'd be the first stock photographer in history not to do it.
Plenty of us don't sell child pictures. I'm not entirely comfortable with where they could end up or the reaction they might cause from the subject if they pop up 15 years later, and if I would worry about that for my kids I won't do it with other people's, either.
Plenty? What happens in 15 years time? The child is likely not recognizable in their current form and even they were would likely take pride in their involvement in your work. You're message to your kids may in fact have an opposite effect. Especially once they figure out other kids get to work with their parents. I'd worry about the worrying.
-
Than why do it at all. The way you wrote it, you don't seem like a true believer. It's not just a spritz of water, it's a spritz of holy water, I don't think any true christian should make it sound as irrelevant by adding the words just. It's like saying eh why confess, he's just a priest, why go to church it's just a building or even why raise children in christian manner it's just 10 commandments. I could make some stronger statements, but I won't, I just wanted to say baptizing children if you're not really a believer makes even less sense. Unless someone lives in some backwards redneck town, where the family would get outcasted for not baptizing their children, but then again you could move. Americans do move around the country a lot, don't they (every time they get a new job).
LOL! So you, an atheist, are going to tell me whether or not I am a "true Christian"?!! First off, I don't believe I characterized my current religious beliefs in this conversation, other than to say I used to be an atheist (one who was certainly more consistent in my opinions than you seem to be). Nor did I claim to have had my daughter baptized. But here's the thing. We're not talking about me.
YOU were the one who claimed to be an atheist. So why would YOU get all worked up about someone spritzing a little water on a baby's head? Let me repeat this point because you seem to be having trouble grasping it - Baptism only has meaning if you are a Christian. If the kid grows up to be an atheist, it won't matter to them one way or the other. Which was my point.
For a supposed atheist, you seem to be awfully irrational on the topic of religion ::)
I couldn't put it better than BaldricksTrousers if I wanted to, so there you go Lisa ;) :
There was a time when the catholic church kidnapped children of non-Christian families if a servant secretly baptised the child. At the moment of baptism the child "became Christian" and had to be protected from its non-Christian parents. So baptism is not just a harmless piece of theatre.
Even today, Godparents vow to ensure the child is indoctrinated in the appropriate brand of Christianity and in some faiths the godparents are regarded as having as many rights over the children as their natural parents.
Indoctrinating children is wrong.
I'm deferring to the medical community on this one, where the benefits are believed to outweigh the risks. And frankly if it at all deprives anyone of sexual pleasure, I think that's a benefit as well. Like most guys, I'm not exactly of the mindset that I wish I got off faster in bed. And if circumcision has anything to do what that, then I'm happier my parents opted to have it done for me.
^^ Well said. This is almost word for word my husband's take on the subject when I discussed it with him :)
Well of course, it would be weird and even more counterproductive to say otherwise. It's like you'd hear Obama confess that he can now see that America has never brought democracy to any country they occupied. No one will state the obvious if he/she knows it's not going to bring any good to him ;).
Lol I think it happened to a lot of girls at least a few times, that she was thinking to herself; " Will you ever finish you * amateur?!?" :D . Longer is not necessarily better, what about nooners or discotheque bathroom adventure's, park benches when you scored at a party. Time is limited sometimes;)
-
My daughter is now talking about getting her own agent and keeps negotiating me up in price. I have no idea where you'd get the idea that this is exploiting your kids. You'd be the first stock photographer in history not to do it.
Plenty of us don't sell child pictures. I'm not entirely comfortable with where they could end up or the reaction they might cause from the subject if they pop up 15 years later, and if I would worry about that for my kids I won't do it with other people's, either.
Plenty? What happens in 15 years time? The child is likely not recognizable in their current form and even they were would likely take pride in their involvement in your work. You're message to your kids may in fact have an opposite effect. Especially once they figure out other kids get to work with their parents. I'd worry about the worrying.
I think you will find if you bother to look that there are a lot of microstockers who do not shoot kids. Everyone is free to choose what they want to upload and lots of us specialise in one thing or another. I'm not criticising those who feel fine about child shots, I'd be surprised if they hadn't thought it through and it's perfectly reasonable to conclude that it's all OK. It's also reasonable to think there might be pitfalls and you'd rather leave it alone. Same goes for people shots in general. Do you know how much legal trouble Doisneau got from people who claimed to be his Paris kiss couple?
Don't bother wasting your time trying to concoct an absurd guilt trip to lay on me, it won't work.
-
Don't bother wasting your time trying to concoct an absurd guilt trip to lay on me, it won't work.
Nothing like that at all. I always push folks a bit further than I should to see where and why their resolve lies. I usually learn something, thanks.
-
Well this thread made it onto the Microstockgroup newsletter :)
Let's now try and stay on track....
-
I think you will find if you bother to look that there are a lot of microstockers who do not shoot kids. Everyone is free to choose what they want to upload and lots of us specialise in one thing or another. I'm not criticising those who feel fine about child shots, I'd be surprised if they hadn't thought it through and it's perfectly reasonable to conclude that it's all OK. It's also reasonable to think there might be pitfalls and you'd rather leave it alone. Same goes for people shots in general. Do you know how much legal trouble Doisneau got from people who claimed to be his Paris kiss couple?
Well, that about sums it up. Some people shoot kids for microstock, and hopefully do it in a responsible and sensitive way, having considered the possible pitfalls, and some people choose not to. Lots of people prefer not to shoot models altogether, for the same reasons. To each their own.
-
Hmmm. Yet another attempt to derail this thread?
Sorry. Not biting this time.
My father in law has a great old Southern saying that seems appropriate here: Never try to teach a pig to sing. It only wastes your time and annoys the pig.
-
It's not a waste of my time if I get someone to start thinking;). I know what you're trying to say, you can't convince the a priori unconvinciable (read stubborn, those that are hiding from the truth - don't know the english expression, sorry). Good thing is that there are ppl among us, who are different, without them there would be no development and we'd still live in stone age. Why change stone for copper, right?
-
This thread is a case study in how conversational topics deviate.
No, it's a case to never mention religion or politics in a thread about taking pictures of your kids.
-
This is an interesting and very relevant topic.... so it will no longer be derailed by religious or political posts. Such posts will be removed.
-
Photos of my kids sell pretty darn good and I am thrilled about it. So are they actually. We have some Russian neighbors that subscribe to a Russian Magazine. The month before last they received their copy of the magazine. My wife and youngest daughter were on the cover. The neighbor kids couldn't get over here fast enough. My youngest (the cover model) was beaming with pride, my oldest was green with envy.
They are both in Microsoft Clip Art and both showed up in projects they were working on in school at different times as a complete coincidence. They felt pretty cool about that too. Countless other stories where their image is used online and in public area. They love it!
I don't get the fuss. Some posts implied a concern that something deviant would happen with the images. I think there is a better chance of that happening with unprotected images being taken from Facebook.
I break out the seamless white paper, set up a couple of lights and tell the kids it's time for them to earn their share of the house payment for this month. If you have children and don't feel good about shooting them for stock then more power to you. If you don't have kids and feel compelled to judge me for shooting mine for stock then you can stick it where the sun don't shine.
One more point to make: If I didn't do formal shoots of my kids for stock it's safe to say I wouldn't have nearly enough photos of my girls. It's tough to break out the gear if there isn't a direct purpose.
Mat
-
come on Mat your last response wont fly.Photo albums off our children will always exist.More so with mobile phones and cool point and shoot cameras.
Are you suggesting your children will be able to look on the web and see themselves growing up later in life !
-
If you have children and don't feel good about shooting them for stock then more power to you. If you don't have kids and feel compelled to judge me for shooting mine for stock then you can stick it where the sun don't shine.
Mat
You're being over-sensitive, nobody's judging. And while the thread says "our children" I think it's valid to consider "other people's children" as being part of the same subject. Which means everyone is entitled to an opinion.
My concern is not about weirdo usages, which is pretty improbable, I think a more likely problem is teenage embarrassment over old photos they may decide they don't like popping up in mass circulation publications years after they were taken. I'm not sure if that is something to be concerned about but I think it's something to take into consideration.
-
...And while the thread says "our children" I think it's valid to consider "other people's children" as being part of the same subject. Which means everyone is entitled to an opinion...
Actually that brings up an interesting point. Are we really talking about other people's children here? Or just stock photogs who use their own kids as models? And if we're talking about using other people's kids as models, that opens the discussion to parents who encourage their kids to be models, actors, singers, etc., and at what point they'd be considered exploiting their kids.
Really in the grand scheme of things a parent can do that might potentially embarrass the kid later in life, modeling for stock is pretty tame. Stock photos tend to be fairly generic in nature. That's the point of them. Highly useful, multi-purpose images. Not art photos in elaborate settings, costumes, makeup, etc. Compared to some of the other things parents do that might be considered by some to be exploitation (if they're hoping it turns into a payday), like acting, singing, dancing, and (i think) most embarrassing toddler beauty pageants.
I'm not necessarily saying that any of those things are exploitative, just throwing them out there in the context of a stock discussion. In the grand scheme of things, maybe stock modeling is fair down the list of things a parent can do to their kids that could possibly be considered exploitation, given the tame nature of stock and the myriad of other things a parent can do that might seem far more exploitative to some.
-
The issue is what can be considered "exploitatiom". Is exploitation to have the kids wash the dishes? Maybe if this is a regular chore, but if, his an occasional help, I think it's ok, it's even a lesson for life. Modelng is not a lesson for life, but if the kid enjoys it and if this doesn't occupy too much of the kid's free time, fine.
These parents who force their kids into modeling, acting, etc is another story, this normally means a lot of pressure on the kid.
-
Seems like the operative word in most of this discussion is "force". If you force your kids to model, that implies that they hate doing it, and that there is probably no compensation for it. I very much doubt (m)any of us who photograph our kids for stock are forcing them.
Most of the accounts I have heard are either that the kids are eager and enthusiastic to do it, or else are paid/compensated in some way.
My daughter always has gotten paid to model. She liked the money, and it beat having to mow the lawn.
Now that she is a full time college student and has a part time job and a boyfriend, she doesn't want to spend what little free time she has modeling. Fair enough. There are plenty of other people with kids who are eager to model. None of them are forced either, and all of them are paid.
On the issue of whether they will grow up to be embarrassed about it, I may be in a unique position to answer that, considering my daughter is now an adult, but did model for stock as a teen. She's not embarrassed when someone finds and in-action. She's not all that excited about it either. It's just no big deal to her either way. But she does certainly enjoy the perks the extra money has provided for her.
-
in my opinion I think that if children arenīt forced and like to all shooting etc I would say yes, they wonīt regret it later for sure, from 5 or 6 years (maybe less) they start "recording" what was for them a nice/pleasant experience and a bad one if thatīs the case.. I donīt see a downside if they enjoy modelling and be part of mom/dad work once they will see their pictures on websites (even on agencies) and they will have their opinion, if positive its all good! :)
-
It's too easy an option to photograph our children.How would those parents fair if they asked there childrens friends parents for permission to shoot there children for microstock.Would they get a posative response.I will pay you xxxx.The photo will be sold with a licence and could appear anywhere in the world........Dont worry !!!
-
It's too easy an option to photograph our children.How would those parents fair if they asked there childrens friends parents for permission to shoot there children for microstock.Would they get a posative response.I will pay you xxxx.The photo will be sold with a licence and could appear anywhere in the world........Dont worry !!!
Uh, yeah, I do that too. Heaven forbid it end up in a Snapfish or Costco ad.
-
shank too bad you appear only lately here, you are a joy! ;D
-
It's too easy an option to photograph our children.How would those parents fair if they asked there childrens friends parents for permission to shoot there children for microstock.Would they get a posative response.I will pay you xxxx.The photo will be sold with a licence and could appear anywhere in the world........Dont worry !!!
Uh, yeah, I do that too. Heaven forbid it end up in a Snapfish or Costco ad.
You can be as flippant as you want.Most would tell you to take a hike.....
-
It's too easy an option to photograph our children.How would those parents fair if they asked there childrens friends parents for permission to shoot there children for microstock.Would they get a posative response.I will pay you xxxx.The photo will be sold with a licence and could appear anywhere in the world........Dont worry !!!
Yep, I do that too. I simply don't see the negative here. Are you suggesting that no children should be used for stock?
As for the earlier argument about embarrassing the kids...trust me, I've got this covered. When they are in High School I will be picking them up in a 1979 Pinto wearing Khaki Shorts 3 sizes too small, black knee high socks with sandals and a Ms. Pac Man Half Shirt on. Embarrassment is inevitable if you are my kid :)
Mat
-
LOL, you posted that most would tell Sean to take a hike while I was making my post.
This is just silly because that simply isn't true. If you don't make it a big deal, it won't be a big deal.
Mat
-
It's too easy an option to photograph our children.How would those parents fair if they asked there childrens friends parents for permission to shoot there children for microstock.Would they get a posative response.I will pay you xxxx.The photo will be sold with a licence and could appear anywhere in the world........Dont worry !!!
Sometimes I pay them and other times I don't. Some parents mind, and say so, and others really like the idea, and say so. That's right, don't worry.
-
It's too easy an option to photograph our children.How would those parents fair if they asked there childrens friends parents for permission to shoot there children for microstock.Would they get a posative response.I will pay you xxxx.The photo will be sold with a licence and could appear anywhere in the world........Dont worry !!!
Sometimes I pay them and other times I don't. Some parents mind, and say so, and others really like the idea, and say so. That's right, don't worry.
-
As for the earlier argument about embarrassing the kids...trust me, I've got this covered. When they are in High School I will be picking them up in a 1979 Pinto wearing Khaki Shorts 3 sizes too small, black knee high socks with sandals and a Ms. Pac Man Half Shirt on. Embarrassment is inevitable if you are my kid :)
DADDY!! Is that you??
BTW, don't forget the fanny pack! ;D
Mat, you are absolutely right. Embarrassment is inevitable with kids. If you have teenagers and they aren't embarrassed by you, there's either something wrong with you, or with your kids. ;)
-
I just want people to be more careful and considerate when photographing children for money.
-
I just want people to be more careful and considerate when photographing children for money.
I'm not even sure money is the issue here. It sounds like there would still be opposition even if no money was involved. Most of the arguments against photographing your kids in this thread seem to be more focused on issues of embarrassing the kids, forcing them into modeling, not having control of where/how the images are used, etc.
-
I just want people to be more careful and considerate when photographing children for money.
sorry but I didnīt saw many advices from you about the subject, seem that you want everybody talk and time to time drop a bomb :P
-
I just want people to be more careful and considerate when photographing children for money.
sorry but I didnīt saw many advices from you about the subject, seem that you want everybody talk and time to time drop a bomb :P
My advice is always the same..be true to yourself and dont be afraid to stand on any cracks in the pavement.Live a little and laugh alot :)
-
I just want people to be more careful and considerate when photographing children for money.
Sorry, but who asked you?
-
It's too easy an option to photograph our children.How would those parents fair if they asked there childrens friends parents for permission to shoot there children for microstock.Would they get a posative response.I will pay you xxxx.The photo will be sold with a licence and could appear anywhere in the world........Dont worry !!!
Yes, asking others isn't a problem.
My wife has decided that she doesn't want our son to be a stock model. I would probably use him if it was just me deciding but I am happy to accept her wish. When I ask others if they are interested in modeling and having their kids model - if they are family or friends I also tell them that I have decided NOT to use my son and obviously understand if they don't want to use their children or themselves... and continue to explain how the images will be used or how much / little control there is when an image is used. Different people, different opinions, no side is 'right'
-
I don't see a problem with it as long as you don't photograph them in a provocative way. I don't really see how it would embarrass them. If they are a child...by the time they are in high school, no one would really recognize them unless the teenager told them.
-
I just want people to be more careful and considerate when photographing children for money.
What makes you think that you're in a position to judge or give advice to others or that people value or care about your opinion anyway?
-
I just want people to be more careful and considerate when photographing children for money.
What makes you think that you're in a position to judge or give advice to others or that people value or care about your opinion anyway?
Indeed.
I am curious - "more careful and considerate" than what? There don't seem to be any examples on offer of people who are not careful and considerate about photographing children.
Can you point to any examples of abuse that inspired your strongly worded opinions on the subject?
-
I just want people to be more careful and considerate when photographing children for money.
What makes you think that you're in a position to judge or give advice to others or that people value or care about your opinion anyway?
Indeed.
I am curious - "more careful and considerate" than what? There don't seem to be any examples on offer of people who are not careful and considerate about photographing children.
Can you point to any examples of abuse that inspired your strongly worded opinions on the subject?
I third this point. Leaf's post is great. A conscious decision was made by parents more than capable of making decisions for their family. My family made a different choice but I can't see how either could be considered right or wrong. I have the impression based on his post that he agrees.
For someone to imply that a decision I have made involving my children is exploitative or wrong gets my blood pressure pumping. Basically, it's none of your friggin business how I raise my children.
I am hoping English isn't your first language and there is a communication breakdown here because when you say "I just want people to be more careful and considerate when photographing children for money." I perceive that to mean "You aren't careful or considerate with your children."
Grrr
-
It's too easy an option to photograph our children.How would those parents fair if they asked there childrens friends parents for permission to shoot there children for microstock.Would they get a posative response.I will pay you xxxx.The photo will be sold with a licence and could appear anywhere in the world........Dont worry !!!
Uh, yeah, I do that too. Heaven forbid it end up in a Snapfish or Costco ad.
You can be as flippant as you want.Most would tell you to take a hike.....
What if he enjoys hiking?
-
The stock agencies love images of children.Designers love images of children.Good money can be made from shooting children.If you need the money you take photographs of your children ::)
I believe you can make money from other sources.That's really the point i'm trying to make !
-
The stock agencies love images of children.Designers love images of children.Good money can be made from shooting children.If you need the money you take photographs of your children ::)
I believe you can make money from other sources.That's really the point i'm trying to make !
You seriously talk some crap sometimes Shank. Most kids I know would much rather stand in front of a camera, than mow the lawn, wash the dishes, make beds, or do a paper round but you go ahead save some money, make your kids do the chores instead of employing somebody else to do it.
What is an hour or two here and there getting your photos taken when it means better holidays, and a better lifestyle in general?
-
The stock agencies love images of children.Designers love images of children.Good money can be made from shooting children.If you need the money you take photographs of your children ::)
I believe you can make money from other sources.That's really the point i'm trying to make !
You seriously talk some crap sometimes Shank. Most kids I know would much rather stand in front of a camera, than mow the lawn, wash the dishes, make beds, or do a paper round but you go ahead save some money, make your kids do the chores instead of employing somebody else to do it.
What is an hour or two here and there getting your photos taken when it means better holidays, and a better lifestyle in general?
Yes, he does.
What kids like isn't necessarily the best thing. It might be better for their general upbringing to be washing dishes for nothing than getting paid for being photographed, and some of them might prefer lying in a field with their friends smoking dope to either doing the dishes or getting photographed. That's why it is the parents who sign the form, not the kids: because they can't be relied on to distinguish between what they like and what is good for them.
-
The stock agencies love images of children.Designers love images of children.Good money can be made from shooting children.If you need the money you take photographs of your children ::)
I believe you can make money from other sources.That's really the point i'm trying to make !
That's not a point. That's a random statement. I'm still not sure what point you're trying to make or why you are feeling the need to make it.
-
I sell photos of my son, his little brother (who is not my child), and the children of some of my friends. I don't have a problem with it and neither do any of the parents, even though they don't get paid. Maybe if everyone else stops photographing children, my photos will sell better! :D
-
Maybe if everyone else stops photographing children, my photos will sell better! :D
thatīs the all point of this topic perhaps :P
-
The stock agencies love images of children.Designers love images of children.Good money can be made from shooting children.If you need the money you take photographs of your children ::)
I believe you can make money from other sources.That's really the point i'm trying to make !
You seriously talk some crap sometimes Shank. Most kids I know would much rather stand in front of a camera, than mow the lawn, wash the dishes, make beds, or do a paper round but you go ahead save some money, make your kids do the chores instead of employing somebody else to do it.
What is an hour or two here and there getting your photos taken when it means better holidays, and a better lifestyle in general?
Oh i see where your coming from now.You bribe the kids to pose by giving them no chores that week.If the image sells they get a nice holiday and a better lifestyle.
Lets hope a child can still flourish without having a camera following him/her growing up !
-
A few posts were removed for deviating back to a religious debate.
-
Leaf, I think you might close this topic as well, it seems to be moving in circles.
-
Leaf, I think you might close this topic as well, it seems to be moving in circles.
well it is certainly getting very close :)
-
I've only read the first page cause I'm pressed for time but personally, I would never sell photos of my [hypothetical] kids unless they were old enough to make rational decisions themselves. There are just too many sickos online and the thought of some paedo getting off over an image of my child wouldn't sit too well with me. Also a child's personality isn't developed at a young age so you have no idea how they're going to feel about it as adults. It's not something they can reverse if they don't like it. I was a really flamboyant kid... a real show off growing up but I've turned into a very private person. I don't share personal details of my life or family online, on facebook or anywhere. I'd hate to have posted my kids photos online if they grow up and turn out to be like me. They would hate it and there would be nothing they can do about it.
That's my view on the subject. Just like circumcision, it can't be reversed as adults if they don't like it (sorry I couldn't resist going off topic :D)
-
Thanks for all the comments.I'm still of the opinion it is to easy an option to photograph our children for microstock.
Until the next time....
-
'There are just too many sickos online and the thought of some paedo getting off over an image of my child wouldn't sit too well with me.'
There are a trillion images of kids all over the Internet if someone were so inclined. I'm not sure how a properly composed, exposed and dressed stock image would be any more applicable to this than any other image.
'Also a child's personality isn't developed at a young age so you have no idea how they're going to feel about it as adults. It's not something they can reverse if they don't like it.'
Reverse what? It's unlikely they look the same any more. No one would know unless you told them. What else? 'Gee, I wish I didn't take that hour out of my life every few months that I had a great time modeling for pictures that has paid for my college degree...'?
-
'There are just too many sickos online and the thought of some paedo getting off over an image of my child wouldn't sit too well with me.'
There are a trillion images of kids all over the Internet if someone were so inclined. I'm not sure how a properly composed, exposed and dressed stock image would be any more applicable to this than any other image.
'Also a child's personality isn't developed at a young age so you have no idea how they're going to feel about it as adults. It's not something they can reverse if they don't like it.'
Reverse what? It's unlikely they look the same any more. No one would know unless you told them. What else? 'Gee, I wish I didn't take that hour out of my life every few months that I had a great time modeling for pictures that has paid for my college degree...'?
That's cool that there's a trillion pics of kids on the net as long as there's zero pics of my [hypothetical] kids on there.
How would you know that no one will know unless you told them? What if this was your daughter... I didn't check the photographer so it'll be really funny if it actually is!
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-12761377-toothless-grin.php?st=12efd71 (http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-12761377-toothless-grin.php?st=12efd71)
What if this image ended up on signage for a dental ad and remained on a building for 20 years. Say your daughter's now constantly reminded... "HEY THAT'S YOU HAHAHAHAHA". Everyone tells everyone else and your poor daughter, who's now 22, has a very serious nature about her, is considering a career in politics, is stuck with that image for life... and no one ever takes her seriously because of it. Now did the few bucks you saved selling that image that went towards her college degree actually help her in life or did it scar her for life?
I'm not saying you're a bad parent for doing it or that it's wrong. I'm saying that it could be wrong and you won't know until she grows up. If she turns around and calls you an A-hole for ruining her life and writes you off you'll know it was wrong. On the other hand she might love you for making her childhood fun. My point is, you won't know... it all depends one what kind of person she turns out to be. She might turn to you and say "if you want to make a fool of someone for a lousy dollar on a photo, you should have taken some of yourself and spared me the lifelong embarrassment."
I tell you what, if that toothless kid was me and it was all over the net, in magazines or on billboards, I would be pissed off and bitter with my parents for doing it... to the point where I would consider them selfish. It doesn't matter how nutty I was as a kid. As an adult I'm a private person and wouldn't want crap like that of me on the net or anywhere. Of course that's just my opinion but the whole point is that your kids may grow up and adopt my opinion over yours and hate your for it.
-
So you are anonymous and childless yet you feel we should take your opinions seriously on this matter?
You think a photo of a child making a goofy expression will scar him or her for life? I happen to believe that childhood molds a person and helps create who they will be as an adult. If you weren't encouraged to be silly as a kid it's possible you could end up a private person and feel compelled to post anonymously in forums and express opinions on subjects that don't apply to you at all. I do not want that for my kids.
Instead, I set up photo shoots and encourage them to let loose and not be self conscious. I see it increase their self confidence. They take great pride in giving just the right pose for me and they do a pretty good job of it too.
The opinion of parents of "hypothetical" children really don't hold a lot of weight with me when it comes to how I raise my own children.
Mat
-
So you are anonymous and childless yet you feel we should take your opinions seriously on this matter?
You think a photo of a child making a goofy expression will scar him or her for life? I happen to believe that childhood molds a person and helps create who they will be as an adult. If you weren't encouraged to be silly as a kid it's possible you could end up a private person and feel compelled to post anonymously in forums and express opinions on subjects that don't apply to you at all. I do not want that for my kids.
Instead, I set up photo shoots and encourage them to let loose and not be self conscious. I see it increase their self confidence. They take great pride in giving just the right pose for me and they do a pretty good job of it too.
The opinion of parents of "hypothetical" children really don't hold a lot of weight with me when it comes to how I raise my own children.
Mat
So because you have your name displayed and an icon of some guy being stomped on his head, your opinion on this subject is valid and mine isn't? Your name, real or not real, means nothing to me. You're still someone I don't know... don't want to know. This isn't a question about photography really, this is an ethical question about kids and anyone can have an opinion on it. If I typed "hypothetical" it's because it's none of your business whether I have kids or not. I have an anonymous ID here but most people know my portfolio and that's all they need to know. I use a different name because I don't want my buyers typing in my username in google only to find a bunch of spew that comes out of this forum... I'd rather they find my images.
I personally find it not only horrible that people put up photos of their kids on the net in general but when they do it to make money out of it, I find it disgusting... sorry but I do, and I'm not alone on this. Outside of the photography community, you'll find this feeling is common. You can justify it all you like... a confidence booster? Come off it, if it's for that reason, snap a pic and put it in a photo album. Must you sell it? You're doing it for profit, not to benefit your child. If you can't even admit that, then your opinion is worthless to me as much as mine is to you. At least I'm not lying to myself as you are.
Also there is no correlation between privacy and confidence. I'm private as hell on the net and confident and open as hell in person. The internet is a crappy place full of psychos. Do you really need to be convinced of this? Yet you subject your own children to it... for a lousy bloody dollar.. or worse, a subscription payment of $0.30. Great parenting!
This is a forum. If you don't like my opinion, stiff crap. Get over it :)
-
'You're doing it for profit, not to benefit your child.'
You're under the mistaken impression those are mutually exclusive.
-
What if this image ended up on signage for a dental ad and remained on a building for 20 years. Say your daughter's now constantly reminded... "HEY THAT'S YOU HAHAHAHAHA". Everyone tells everyone else and your poor daughter, who's now 22, has a very serious nature about her, is considering a career in politics, is stuck with that image for life... and no one ever takes her seriously because of it. Now did the few bucks you saved selling that image that went towards her college degree actually help her in life or did it scar her for life?
Oh come on every kid that I ever went to school with had a class photo taken every year including the year that they had no front teeth. Every other kid in the class had a copy which could be brought out in later years to embarrass them. Why is that any different?
The sort of kid that happily models isn't likely to grow up to be an introverted private person that gives a toss about that sort of thing.
-
'You're doing it for profit, not to benefit your child.'
You're under the mistaken impression those are mutually exclusive.
They are mutually exclusive. As you said earlier, there are "trillions" of pics of kids on the net. Do we really need more? And must you take pics of your OWN kids? Aren't there other subjects you could cover to replace the income from kids' photos? Of course there are. You take photos of your kids because they're easier to take, they're available... always... and they're free. If you took photos of a subject that was less saturated and therefore more likely to sell, your kids would probably benefit even more from it because 1) you made more money and 2) you didn't exploit and possibly make their future tougher. Why not take a photo of yourself pulling a face and making a complete dick of yourself for a dollar? Sean, colour some teeth of yours black and pull that face in the link above and take a photo of yourself to sell as stock, would you do it? As an adult and a businessman, do you not portray yourself in a certain way? Do you not command some respect in your professional career? Maybe your children will want the same for themselves when they grow up and not want some clownass pictures following them around all their lives.
I would be furious with my parents if they did to me what you people (or some of you) do to your children. Let's hope your kids aren't furious with you when they grow up to be adults.
This isn't so much a question about whether sharing a photo makes you a bad parent. It's about a good portion of the world on the internet that's watching are sickos and it's because we live in a society that judges others heavily based on image that I don't think it's right to put those photos out there because they are out there forever.
You may be arguing here to justify you doing it because it's profitable but I reckon, deep down inside, you all feel a little guilty using your kids like that. Right? I'm sure you won't admit it because then you would have to stop, but I reckon I'm right.
Good night :)
-
What if this image ended up on signage for a dental ad and remained on a building for 20 years. Say your daughter's now constantly reminded... "HEY THAT'S YOU HAHAHAHAHA". Everyone tells everyone else and your poor daughter, who's now 22, has a very serious nature about her, is considering a career in politics, is stuck with that image for life... and no one ever takes her seriously because of it. Now did the few bucks you saved selling that image that went towards her college degree actually help her in life or did it scar her for life?
Oh come on every kid that I ever went to school with had a class photo taken every year including the year that they had no front teeth. Every other kid in the class had a copy which could be brought out in later years to embarrass them. Why is that any different?
The sort of kid that happily models isn't likely to grow up to be an introverted private person that gives a toss about that sort of thing.
And how do you know how your kids will turn out. Being private on the internet has nothing to do with being introverted. I'm extroverted but I won't share ANYTHING personal with you people because... what need is there for me to do so on the net?
lol are you really going to sit there and compare school photos shared between classmates to thousands of stock photos that are shared over the world with strangers... forever? You're not, right?
-
A little twist...
I receive guff over "making money" from photos of my blind and disabled daughter all too frequently. Never mind that she's an adult, makes her own decisions, and decided she wants to provide clients and agencies with images of a real blind and disabled person for their publications. For whatever reason, some folks think because she's disabled it means she can't possibly look out for her own best interests, so therefore think I'm exerting total control over her as mom and photographer and exploiting her for financial gain. Nothing could be further from the truth.
I guess I could always pay an able-bodied model who can also be hired for all kinds of shoots to fake being blind and disabled instead, so I'm not "exploiting" a real blind and disabled person who really wants to earn a living instead of living off of Social Security. And then I can train the able-bodied model to mimic the subtleties of being blind or disabled that took my daughter and me almost 30 years to learn and adapt to. And then I can go on to license zero images of my fake blind and disabled person, because savvy buyers recognize authenticity vs. BS when they see it. ::)
-
'You take photos of your kids because they're easier to take, they're available... always... and they're free. '
Lol, easy! It takes even more prep and direction and control. And most of us already said they are compensated in some way.
Sorry, but your ranting doesn't hold.
-
So because you have your name displayed and an icon of some guy being stomped on his head, your opinion on this subject is valid and mine isn't?
YES
Your name, real or not real, means nothing to me.
IT SHOULD
You're still someone I don't know... don't want to know.
MY FEELINGS ARE HURT BY THIS STATEMENT. I'M REALLY AN INTERESTING PERSON.
This isn't a question about photography really,
YES IT IS.
this is an ethical question about kids
NO IT ISN'T.
and anyone can have an opinion on it.
NO THEY CAN'T.
If I typed "hypothetical"
YOU DID.
it's because it's none of your business whether I have kids or not.
YES IT IS.
I have an anonymous ID here but most people know my portfolio and that's all they need to know.
I DON'T. WILL YOU POST A LINK PLEASE. I AM GENUINELY CURIOUS.
I use a different name because I don't want my buyers typing in my username in google only to find a bunch of spew that comes out of this forum... I'd rather they find my images.
IF I WERE MAKING POSTS AS RIDICULOUS AND IGNORANT AS YOURS I WOULD FEEL THE SAME WAY.
I personally find it not only horrible that people put up photos of their kids on the net in general but when they do it to make money out of it,
SHOULD I PUT PHOTOS OF MY KIDS ON THE NET AND NOT MAKE MONEY OUT OF IT? I DO THAT ON FACEBOOK. MY MOM LOVES TO SEE PHOTOS OF HER GRANDCHILDREN. WE JUST DON'T GET DOWN TO SEE HER NEARLY AS OFTEN AS WE SHOULD.
I find it disgusting... sorry but I do,
I FIND STEPPING ON SLUGS WITH MY BARE FEET DISGUSTING. THIS HAPPENED OVER THE FOURTH OF JULY WHEN WE WERE CAMPING (YES I TOOK PICTURES OF MY KIDS AND WILL BE SELLING THEM!) STILL NOT OVER THE SLUG INCIDENT. THAT IS REALLY DISGUSTING!
and I'm not alone on this.
YES YOU ARE.
Outside of the photography community, you'll find this feeling is common.
I WASN'T AWARE THERE WAS ANYONE OUTSIDE THE PHOTOGRAPHY COMMUNITY. YOU CAN'T GO TO THE GROCERY STORE WITHOUT SEEING AN AD FEATURING A CHILD SELLING AN ICE CREAM SANDWICH OR A BRAND OF PEANUT BUTTER.
You can justify it all you like
THANK YOU.
... a confidence booster? Come off it, if it's for that reason, snap a pic and put it in a photo album.
OK.
Must you sell it?
IF APPROVED..YES, I MUST.
You're doing it for profit, not to benefit your child.
I CAN'T DO BOTH?
If you can't even admit that, then your opinion is worthless to me as much as mine is to you.
THAT IS SAD.
At least I'm not lying to myself as you are.
I'M NOT LYING TO MYSELF. WELL, I DO LIKE TO THINK IF I GREW MY HAIR OUT IT WOULD BE THICKER THAN IT PROBABLY WOULD BE. PLUS I STILL KEEP JEANS IN MY CLOSET ABOUT 4 SIZES TOO SMALL THINKING THAT I'LL FIT INTO THEM AGAIN.
Also there is no correlation between privacy and confidence.
YES THERE IS.
I'm private as hell on the net and confident and open as hell in person.
NO YOU AREN'T.
The internet is a crappy place full of psychos.
THE INTERNET IS A WONDERFUL PLACE FULL OF PSYCHOS.
Do you really need to be convinced of this?
NO THANK YOU.
Yet you subject your own children to it... for a lousy bloody dollar.. or worse, a subscription payment of $0.30.
I MADE MORE THAN THIRTY CENTS OFF PICTURES OF MY KIDS THIS MONTH ALREADY IF YOU CAN BELIEVE THAT!
Great parenting!
THANK YOU.
This is a forum.
YOU ARE CORRECT.
If you don't like my opinion,
I DON'T.
stiff crap.
IS THAT KIND OF LIKE SAYING "TOUGH crap" ONLY BRITISH?
Get over it
OVER IT.
:)
:(
-
Pseudo, are you really one of the Olsen twins? ;)
-
'You take photos of your kids because they're easier to take, they're available... always... and they're free. '
Lol, easy! It takes even more prep and direction and control. And most of us already said they are compensated in some way.
Sorry, but your ranting doesn't hold.
Are you saying that shooting your kids is harder than shooting other kids? Come on, they live with you, they're available, you don't have to organise anything with parents, you can don't have to worry about paperwork, picking them up, dropping them off or whatever. You don't have to pay them. Of course it's easier. Sorry but your rant doesn't hold either. This is a sore spot for you. You don't like people reminding you that what you're doing to your own kids is wrong. You're happy being ignorant about it as long as it fills those pockets.
-
So because you have your name displayed and an icon of some guy being stomped on his head, your opinion on this subject is valid and mine isn't?
YES
Your name, real or not real, means nothing to me.
IT SHOULD
You're still someone I don't know... don't want to know.
MY FEELINGS ARE HURT BY THIS STATEMENT. I'M REALLY AN INTERESTING PERSON.
This isn't a question about photography really,
YES IT IS.
this is an ethical question about kids
NO IT ISN'T.
and anyone can have an opinion on it.
NO THEY CAN'T.
If I typed "hypothetical"
YOU DID.
it's because it's none of your business whether I have kids or not.
YES IT IS.
I have an anonymous ID here but most people know my portfolio and that's all they need to know.
I DON'T. WILL YOU POST A LINK PLEASE. I AM GENUINELY CURIOUS.
I use a different name because I don't want my buyers typing in my username in google only to find a bunch of spew that comes out of this forum... I'd rather they find my images.
IF I WERE MAKING POSTS AS RIDICULOUS AND IGNORANT AS YOURS I WOULD FEEL THE SAME WAY.
I personally find it not only horrible that people put up photos of their kids on the net in general but when they do it to make money out of it,
SHOULD I PUT PHOTOS OF MY KIDS ON THE NET AND NOT MAKE MONEY OUT OF IT? I DO THAT ON FACEBOOK. MY MOM LOVES TO SEE PHOTOS OF HER GRANDCHILDREN. WE JUST DON'T GET DOWN TO SEE HER NEARLY AS OFTEN AS WE SHOULD.
I find it disgusting... sorry but I do,
I FIND STEPPING ON SLUGS WITH MY BARE FEET DISGUSTING. THIS HAPPENED OVER THE FOURTH OF JULY WHEN WE WERE CAMPING (YES I TOOK PICTURES OF MY KIDS AND WILL BE SELLING THEM!) STILL NOT OVER THE SLUG INCIDENT. THAT IS REALLY DISGUSTING!
and I'm not alone on this.
YES YOU ARE.
Outside of the photography community, you'll find this feeling is common.
I WASN'T AWARE THERE WAS ANYONE OUTSIDE THE PHOTOGRAPHY COMMUNITY. YOU CAN'T GO TO THE GROCERY STORE WITHOUT SEEING AN AD FEATURING A CHILD SELLING AN ICE CREAM SANDWICH OR A BRAND OF PEANUT BUTTER.
You can justify it all you like
THANK YOU.
... a confidence booster? Come off it, if it's for that reason, snap a pic and put it in a photo album.
OK.
Must you sell it?
IF APPROVED..YES, I MUST.
You're doing it for profit, not to benefit your child.
I CAN'T DO BOTH?
If you can't even admit that, then your opinion is worthless to me as much as mine is to you.
THAT IS SAD.
At least I'm not lying to myself as you are.
I'M NOT LYING TO MYSELF. WELL, I DO LIKE TO THINK IF I GREW MY HAIR OUT IT WOULD BE THICKER THAN IT PROBABLY WOULD BE. PLUS I STILL KEEP JEANS IN MY CLOSET ABOUT 4 SIZES TOO SMALL THINKING THAT I'LL FIT INTO THEM AGAIN.
Also there is no correlation between privacy and confidence.
YES THERE IS.
I'm private as hell on the net and confident and open as hell in person.
NO YOU AREN'T.
The internet is a crappy place full of psychos.
THE INTERNET IS A WONDERFUL PLACE FULL OF PSYCHOS.
Do you really need to be convinced of this?
NO THANK YOU.
Yet you subject your own children to it... for a lousy bloody dollar.. or worse, a subscription payment of $0.30.
I MADE MORE THAN THIRTY CENTS OFF PICTURES OF MY KIDS THIS MONTH ALREADY IF YOU CAN BELIEVE THAT!
Great parenting!
THANK YOU.
This is a forum.
YOU ARE CORRECT.
If you don't like my opinion,
I DON'T.
stiff crap.
IS THAT KIND OF LIKE SAYING "TOUGH crap" ONLY BRITISH?
Get over it
OVER IT.
:)
:(
I'm obviously not going to read this utter rubbish but from the first few lines you seem a little bonkers and I fear that you're possibly one of those people I would want to protect my children from.
-
Pseudo, are you really one of the Olsen twins? ;)
lol that's funny. You make a good point but it's in my favour. I could be one of the olsen twins and scared for life because my crappy parents exploited me the same way you're exploiting your kids ;)
Goodnight!
-
'Are you saying that shooting your kids is harder than shooting other kids? Come on, they live with you, they're available, you don't have to organise anything with parents, you can don't have to worry about paperwork, picking them up, dropping them off or whatever. '
Yeah, you obviously don't have kids. To other children, I'm Mr. Locke, the photographer who pays them, so they are 'on the clock' so they have to listen and follow directions. You own may not take that attitude. Others come dressed, hair done, attitude ready. Yours, that's your job. And organization is just as hard. You think our kids sit around all day doing nothing?
Funny stuff.
-
'Are you saying that shooting your kids is harder than shooting other kids? Come on, they live with you, they're available, you don't have to organise anything with parents, you can don't have to worry about paperwork, picking them up, dropping them off or whatever. '
Yeah, you obviously don't have kids. To other children, I'm Mr. Locke, the photographer who pays them, so they are 'on the clock' so they have to listen and follow directions. You own may not take that attitude. Others come dressed, hair done, attitude ready. Yours, that's your job. And organization is just as hard. You think our kids sit around all day doing nothing?
Funny stuff.
Beat me to it! LOL
You definitely don't have kids! OMG...every single photo shoot I've done with both of my adult kids has ended up in an argument. I don't have that problem with other people's kids, big or little or all grown up. They are always on their best behavior and don't freak out when I tell them what to do. However, when it's my kids?
My Adult Kid: "I can't believe you criticized me, Mom!"
Me: "Well, I can't believe you're not grown up enough to be professional about it! Get over it!"
Easy...uh huh.
-
.... and I fear that you're possibly one of those people I would want to protect my children from.
You mean your 'hypothetical' children.
I'm sure we'd all love to hear your opinions on shooting pets, but only if you haven't got any.
-
alright.... it was fun while it lasted :)
Before we all become enemies, I'll stop the 'conversation'. Lots if interesting and good points though, thanks