I can't seem to understand how other families seem to manage pictures of smiling, neatly dressed children. It's not that our kids don't have nice smiles, are unable to sit still and can't follow directions; apparently requiring these three things to occur simultaneously while someone captures the image with a camera is too much.
Photo sessions tend to be an effort to take as many pictures as possible and hope that one is okay (or in the case on my folks' Christmas card, being able to cut and paste kids as needed). Cameras and multiple children seem to be a recipe for disaster, and crying usually ensues.
Case in point is my effort to take a "spring photo" on sunny afternoon this week. After determining it was unrealistic to cart 3 kids, the boppy, a blanket, and camera down the street to sit in front of some daffodils, I asked my neighbor if we could use their luscious, green grass. Thankfully she even assisted with the baby (who was awakened from a nice nap to be changed twice before being subjected to the glaring sunlight). It was five minutes of torture for everyone. Unfortunately I erased the worst shots, but this is typical of what we manage to get.
Andrew is absorbed in his Thomas train whistle while Stephen pesters Matthew.
This was the best of the lot. We seem to have better luck with the profile shots which don't require the boys to have decent smiles or to actually look where I tell them to.
I guess Eeyore was right: "We can't all and some of us don't. That's all there is to it."
I always wonder what people did before digital cameras at least we can just hit delete and not pay to have them developed. Our picture sessions always end with me screaming, "SMILE! BE STILL! LOOK AT ME!" The boys look cute anyway - like the matching outfits. Glad you've started a blog - it's fun to keep up with what's going on and I'm sure those boys will keep you supplied with plenty of stories!
ReplyDeleteClara