CCTV rules.

What you suggest seems at first glance sensible, but the problem with the law is that it doesn't always follow what appear to be common sense.

If I was the studio owner, I would check with the ICO before doing anything that could potentially land me in a big heap of unbearable pain.

Personally i wouldn't mind at all if i was notified but definitely not in any model only area such as changing areas or make up room but any communal area would be fine so long as a legible and prominent sign was on display

if I walked into a studio and saw CCTV that was pointing towards the changing area/loo/backdrop area I would immediately be suspicious. 

If I read:

 "CCTV is installed but NOT monitored. All recordings are saved to a secure HDD and will not be viewed unless there is a criminal allegation, when the HDD will be handed to the police for examination."

....  I'd think "yeah, right, bullshit".

Even if the owner was well meaning and thought it was secure. 

We have 2 cameras that cover the door to each studio, they are monitored to allow us to see who is going in and out of the studios. As we are a fully manned studio there is no need to have camera’s in the shoot areas and certainly would never entertain the idea of them in any area where there was an expectation of privacy:

Just don't have it in the bathrooms or changing room....

You can have it in the main studio, and office if you have one, with a notice of course.

I dunno why people think CCTV of a photoshoot would be any use to a perv, it would be grainy as hell. It's for use if an offence has taken place that is the only time anyone would look at it, and rightly so.

What about models who don't do full-frontal nudity? The CCTV might see everything and put them on edge.

Edited by K.M.

What's to stop the people involved from requesting a copy of the CCTV footage? They have that right whether there was a crime or not.

K.M. said

What about models who don't do full-frontal nudity? The CCTV might see everything and out them on edge.

This is a valid point.

Jerome Razoir said

IF one were to install CCTV in a studio and have a notice saying "CCTV is installed but NOT monitored. All recordings are saved to a secure HDD and will not be viewed unless there is a criminal allegation, when the HDD will be handed to the police for examination."

Who would believe it ? Those inclined to be trustful of the studio owner(s) would, those not inclined would not. 
It's a trade-off of risk, that those pictures get accessed (the HD gets pinched, the studio turns out to be a pervert) vs a bad experience with a photographer / false accusations from a model and a lack of evidence. 

I personally dont think I'd like it.

Would put me totally on edge and have me wondering what has gone on in the past to warrant it..

Possibly CCTV in entrance area with a sign to warrant who goes in and out?

It also throws into question the use of chaperones..for those photographers who dont like them it's a similar principle? Yes no?

Jerome Razoir

a) to be safe, I’d seek advice from the ICO

K.M. gonna be blurry as fuck you won't see much

I would rather be somewhere who takes safety seriously and has cctv in main places. Everywhere you go has the same.

I wouldn't be happy with that, and I'm not sure what you would be expecting to catch on it anyway?

Are you going to get everyone who comes in to sign a consent form?

Have you considered that - just like dashcam footage - the evidence can just as easily be used against you?

Obviously there has to be a lot of trust here. It's just one more thing which can be abused.