Quoted from DBLM:Let's be real clear on this: NO IMAGES OF CHILD PORN ARE ACCEPTABLE. Zero. Anything greater than the number 0 makes you a scumbag. It is up to the courts to determine if John did something wrong and he is entitled to due process.
Too much ambiguity in the law for me to agree with that. Examples? Eighteen year old kid takes consensual pictures of him/herself with their sixteen year old girlfriend. http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/04/07/sexting.busts/ Two sixteen year olds in North Carolina takes pictures and video of themselves and the files are found on one of their phones. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/09/21/n-c-just-prosecuted-a-teenage-couple-for-making-child-porn-of-themselves/?utm_term=.8756a769e761
Given the choice, I'd personally define child porn as any non-consensual image/video taken, with the caveat that ability to consent legally being dependent on the age involved. If the legal system is going to charge a fifteen or sixteen year old as an adult with a crime, then they should have the legal ability to consent to pornography.