MOMania

By Fulton County Mom

July 19, 2007 7:51 AM | Link to this

The school photos are a rip-off….I go to a retail outlet and get the photos done…I can get the smallest package and the disk for under 50 dollars…..With the disk I send photos to the family via email.

I do get more photos at Christmas though. That is because I send photos on cards.

I mean if I do not have the space for all these photos how do the family that have their own kids?

BTW my mother still has photos of us taken at discount places (ie Kmart) and they did not fade any more than the expensive (ala Olan Mills) photos.

By Jesse's Girl

July 19, 2007 8:39 AM | Link to this

The only place I will ever go is Garrison’s in Douglasville. They can get a good photo out of anyone! You cab even bring your pet….take photos in their garden…or with an antique car! Its not cheap. But I have the most beautiful family photographs….I’ve never regretted it. As far as school pics go….I get the absolute most basic package possible. The only good pics the girls have had at school are the candid ones taken by me or another parent. And any school looking to sign a contract with a new photographer….DO NOT go with Bill Miller Photography!!! Our school used them last year and there were so many screw ups, it was almost funny. Parents were being charged for pics they did not order or not getting the ones they did. And the pics were crappy to boot!

By Jennifer

July 19, 2007 10:06 AM | Link to this

I’m a fan of Picture People for professional photos. I just buy the most basic package of school photos because they are never good. I like really casual, plain photos that look candid and PP does a good job of that for us. No fake fireplaces or cheesy backdrops for me!

I do our Christmas card photo myself, normally on our front steps or by the fireplace.

By BC

July 19, 2007 10:35 AM | Link to this

I was actually suprised by the great pictures that Foto’s and More did at Discover Mills for my baby’s 2nd Birthday pictures. The baby was cranky and he was patient and actually got some really great pics! I would recommend it! And the prices aren’t bad either. Well definetely use them again!

By Hunter

July 19, 2007 10:45 AM | Link to this

My husband and I hire professionals to do our family photos. We find it works best to have the photographer set up in our home. We have the most beautiful family photo taken in our back garden. As for discount places — No No No and NO. That’s just embarassing, I couldn’t imagine sending my mother a photo of my children taken at a Wal-mart. My children’s school uses a great photographer, so their school pictures are always beautiful - but I only buy a small package of them since they are always in their school uniforms. Not the most photogenic of outfits.

By JOy

July 19, 2007 11:28 AM | Link to this

I stopped photographing my kids every three months at the age of 12 months. After that, we just relied on our photos taken with our digital cameras. I do buy the school photos, but I purchase the smallest, cheapest photo and only purchase them once a year. Yes, they now take school photos twice a year at some schools.

I’ve had success at JcPenny’s and the Picture People for their baby photos, but I’m willing to pay more now for our family portraits because we only do them about once every 3 to 5 years.

By Amy

July 19, 2007 12:00 PM | Link to this

Hanging them - my sister has done a beautiful job with her boys (now almost grown) - her hallway is a gallery - from baby through all the school pictures. That probably wouldn’t look good for school uniforms, but hers are great! Of course they are all head shots after the baby ones - these days they do all these funky poses at school.

I liked the K-mart pictures just fine for the babies, and I only get one set a year from school - yes, they take fall and spring now.

By me again

July 19, 2007 12:17 PM | Link to this

Hunter,

Who cares if the photos are from wal mart? If they are nice photos and inexpensive, why not?

School photos ARE a ripoff.

By fer

July 19, 2007 1:10 PM | Link to this

I don’t know about today’s inexpensive photos but 30+ years ago, I used to get my kids photos made at JCPenney’s — Pixy Photos they were called — and they have all turned a pinkish hue now.

And on the subject of school photos: I know they seem like a rip-off, but remember they are a method of fund raising for the schools.

By Penguinmom

July 19, 2007 1:31 PM | Link to this

When Olan Mills has an Olan Mills Kids place in Gwinnett, I took my kids at least twice a year. Then for awhile we couldn’t afford it so we relied on our own camera.

I tried Walmart one time but they were going to lunch at 1:30 in the afternoon when I was there to get the pictures done. We also tried Target but my youngest seemed to be terrified of the little dark room where they take the pictures. We have a funny picture of him looking like an Emmett Kelly clown with a really sad frown when he got his pictures made last time.

For the past couple of years we have used Ken Rada. He does the pictures for my son’s basketball team and in between will sometimes do pics of siblings. He is awesome with the kids. He puts all the pictures on the web so you can chose them and the sizes very easily. Plus you can send the link to grandparents and let them purchase their own copies.

For Christmas cards, we take our own pics outside with our digital camera.

I feel a little bad that we have 3mo, 6 mo, 1yr, etc of the oldest but the professional ones get less and less frequent with each sibling. Mainly for financial reasons, we haven’t gotten more than one professional picture a year for the last 4 or 5 years.

By anne

July 19, 2007 2:15 PM | Link to this

We were hanging photos all weekend and my husband started protesting hanging more photos of the children in the family room. He’s like, “I’m getting a little tired of looking at these kids all the time.”

That’s hysterical! (For once) I competely agree with your husband.

By nurse&mother

July 19, 2007 2:24 PM | Link to this

Yes, school pics are a rip off, but I still buy the smallest package. However bad they are, I still think it will be neat to have pics each year of them.

For a couple of years, I used Master portraits. (not wonderful, not bad for the price). Now I use a professional photographer in Calhoun named Keith Brookshire. He is a little pricey, but he is wonderful! He also has a money back guarantee. He is a super nice guy too.

We usually get a family photo of the entire family every year or every other year. Because the baby is still little and changes a lot, we will go every year for a couple of years. My children usually go twice a year. Keith also has specialty sessions (Santa at Christmas, lambs at Easter, outdoor spring and fall, pumpkins at Halloween, ice cream special for toddlers in the summer etc. )

We did not do the 3,6,9,12 mo sessions because they were really short (not to mention a little pricey). Instead, I decided to spend the same amount of money on two hour long sessions. I had a “mommy and me” session with some really good, tender moment shots with the kids when my son was about 2 months old. I turned around and had another family session when he was 7-8 months old. I have Keith just take a few family pics and the rest of the time (majority) is spent on the kids. I have never had bad pictures. In fact, everyone who sees them asks me where we go.

I would never talk negative of anyone going to Kmart or Walmart to have pics made. Not everyone wants to or has a small fortune to spend on their kids photos. I will say that my sister and I have some photos when we were little. Maybe from Sears? They too have faded and turned yellow pink.

I buy a lot of photos and give them out to family members. It is also a little insurance so that if I have a fire, someone else will have my precious photos. When I was three, our house burned down and most of our photos were burned.

By Hunter

July 19, 2007 2:28 PM | Link to this

I care if the photos are inexpensive. Just to explain my reasoning, let me say that when I send pictures of the kids to my mother or my husband’s mother as a gift I always put them in a nice frame. Now, imagine a Walmart picture in a 100 dollar silver frame? That just wouldn’t look right. I know you can’t “tell” that it’s a wal-mart picture from the front, but I would know and I couldn’t possibly give that as a gift.

By Tina

July 19, 2007 2:38 PM | Link to this

I get photos done (3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 mos) at Sears. They try to get you to do so many cheesy things, but I’ve figured out what I like and how to achieve it. It’s better than the school photos we’ve gotten thusfar. Too expensive! I’ve done stuff at Picture People, but find the experience way too exhausting. Truthfully, I have photos that I’m not sure what I want to do with yet. I try very hard to purchase the least amount possible (which my husband has a very hard time believing. I have a wallet full of photos of one child. Other child, not so many yet.

By JB

July 19, 2007 2:54 PM | Link to this

Hunter, Do you actually have a good, socially concious reason for refusing to use Wal-Mart pictures, or are you just one of those who buys something only because of the brand name? Like Vera Wang dresses for instance that are poorly made from shoddy material but people still pay thousands of dollars to wear one? If I wanted pictures taken in a studio I’d have no qualms about wal-mart if the quality was good.

But judging by the way you arrogantly responded to yesterday’s topic we shouldn’t be surprised by today’s rich-b*** mentality.

By Reluctant

July 19, 2007 2:54 PM | Link to this

We take our girls to Portrait Innovations. I love them. They take a ton of pictures, they really spend a lot of time working with the kids to get the best shots and try a lot of different poses, you get to review the pics on a huge plasma screen, they are usually printed in half an hour, and their prices are very reasonable. If not for Portrait Innovations we probably wouldn’t bother having professional pictures made. Between newborn and 1 year we have their pictures made every three months or so. Sometimes we have pics made for the holidays if we have the extra time and money. My two year old is at the stage where she hates having her pictures done professionally so we only taken her a handful of times in the last year.

We have a few pics of the girls on the fireplace mantle and on the entertainment center, but other than that I put them in a photo album. I really need to put at least some in frames and put them on the wall, but I just can bring myself to do it. My mom’s hall walls are filled with pics of the family and I think it’s hideous and I’m afraid that my walls will look the same.

By Fulton County Mom

July 19, 2007 3:00 PM | Link to this

Ok, we seem to agree that school photos are a gip (glad its not just me).

How about we convince the school of some other fundrasing thing that isn’t a joke….I hate Sally Foster stuff too!…..

By Stacey

July 19, 2007 3:14 PM | Link to this

I really like Wal-Mart’s pictures and that is where I usually go. Sometimes I will go in bound and determined to get nothing but the portrait special and end up buying a million pictures for about $75 because the additional poses are just too cute to pass up. My son’s school pictures are good quality but the poses and smiles are just always fake. Last years’ cheapest package was $25 for one 5x7 & ten wallets! What a ripoff! If you want to give pictures to grandparents and aunts & uncles, you have to buy the $75 package. Even then, you may not have enough to share with friends.

My sister-in-law has her kids pictures made about once a month at the little places inside the malls. They just take different poses using a digital camera and you choose the photos you want and can pick them up in an hour. To me, the quality is “hit or miss”. Some look very nice and others look like something her 9 year old may have taken.

I am one of those people who love the pictures where the kid has been crying. I think they are so adorable! The best pictures in the world are the snaggled tooth pictures, particularly if all four of the front teeth are missing. Kids seem to give their widest, most sincere smiles then! :-)

By Jesse's Girl

July 19, 2007 3:17 PM | Link to this

Hunter….I ask forgiveness in advance. But how does a self proclaimed heathen-hatin’ Christian such as yourself justify paying $100 for a flippin’ picture frame? Doesn’t exactly scream that you’re living a humble life.

By Tina

July 19, 2007 3:25 PM | Link to this

Jesse’s Girl and JB: Don’t take the bait.

By HL

July 19, 2007 3:27 PM | Link to this

We love Portrait Innovations. I have used the one in John’s Creek and Kennesaw. They are both great. We get them in 30 minutes even at Christmas time. You get 10x13, 2-8x10, 4-5x7, 8-3x5 and 32 wallets of one picture for $9.95, then you pay by the sheet or pose depending on how many poses you choose. We take about three outfits and always get great pictures. I normally spend about $100 for a HUGE stack of pictures. I keep some wallets, an 8x10 for the office and a 10x13 for the hall or over the fireplace. The rest I send to two sets of grandparents, four sets of great-grandparents, two uncles, many great-uncles and great-aunts plus cousins. I also stick them in the Christmas cards. As he has gotten older (he’s 2), we buy less at his birthday and only give them to grandparents and great grandparents.

By Jesse's Girl

July 19, 2007 3:36 PM | Link to this

YOU’RE RIGHT…YOU’RE RIGHT. I just hate to see people paying so much for such silly little things. Especially with places like Marshall’s, Ross, TJ Maxx…..I just like to educate the uneducated. It brings me joy.

By MOT

July 19, 2007 4:54 PM | Link to this

Besides being a rip off, school photos by and large are not good. Ours look rushed and phoney, they don’t tell kids if their hair is sticking out etc. They may be good quality as far as paper but who wants a quality photo that never fades when the pose, expression and composure are awful? And as mentioned they are outrageous!

Having ten kids, I planned to get periodic school shots of kids and supplement them with my own. But as the price rose and quality dropped we stopped purchasing school shots.

As luck had it, when the corporation my husband worked for forced him into early retirment after 29 years, he took a latent interest and talent and started a photography business. We do events and portraits.

I have been told by many how they wish we would take over the pictures for their schools, and we did make an inquiry after several moms approached us. We met with the prinicple and it was ludicrous: the photographer kicks back tons of money back to the schools, and teachers get all theirs for free, and there was so much stuff like that, it was hard to figure how anyone would get a profit, we sure couldn’t. And these outfits that come into the schools only pay their photographers less than $8/hour! So no wonder they don’t want to spend the time with the subjects.

As for how to handle all the pictures coming in the house:

1.the hallway or family room gallery showing children on one row from birth to graduation. 2.the frames that have an oval for a picture for each of the 13 years kids are in school, so all the school years are in one frame, not up and down the walls. 3.those photo room dividers, they are three paneled and hold oh I think about about 12 8x10’s. I call them room dividers and they could be used that way, but you can put them anywhere. 4.I keep a baby shot up, one of around kindergarten or first grade, one of middle school, and then something from high school: prom, homecoming, and then graduation. You don’t have to have every single year up. 5. A new idea now, with so many kids, I told my husband as I keep getting pics of grandkids, I am running out of room. So for mother’s day I got one of the really nice digital frames. HOlds over 200 pics, you can switch out the cards with a whole new set, it can be professinally posed and candid shots. I will have a few around the house and can even switch to seasonal shots as the seasons change. Like right now we have our beach trips all on one and it is fun to see the past years compared to this one. I can do that with holidays too. Really frees up walls and mantels and counters, etc. I still have some special framed ones out, but this will take over the keeping up with storing the pictures AND having a place to show them off!

And to Hunter: this frame was nearly $300 and I have my professional shots (done by my husband) and my candid shots (done by me, husband, kids).

Also Hunter and anyone else, professinals use labs that are quite cheap. You would be amazed how inexpensive/cheap it really is. Just because it does not have Walmart on it does not mean it was done anyway that makes it more highfallutin than the pros. They all source their paper, ink, etc from the same places.

Smile!

By Eleanor

July 19, 2007 6:46 PM | Link to this

Leave Hunter alone. It’s her money, her kids, and her pictures. Some of you are such HATERS! Keep your jealousy and inferiority complex to yourself—we don’t need it here on this blog.

By mel

July 20, 2007 9:27 AM | Link to this

We’ve had really good luck with Target Portrait studio in Woodstock and Roswell. We do an Easter picture and a Christmas family picture. (and then we get the smallest school pic package) I cannot take pictures digital or otherwise to save my life. They are always just out of focus, or I miss the “money” shot and wind up with the top of someone’s head, or a finger in the nose… I will happily pay the $50 for someone else to get everyone smiling!

By jml

July 20, 2007 9:32 AM | Link to this

uh Hunter, Casey???? Why all the different names to hind behind? Your a Btc*H not matter what you call yourself.

By nurse&mother

July 20, 2007 9:35 AM | Link to this

Eleanor, you should read some previous blogs and you will get a clearer “picture” (pun intended) of the hipocracy from the poster you are taking up for.

By nurse&mother

July 20, 2007 9:36 AM | Link to this

Eleanor, you should read some previous blogs and you will get a clearer “picture” (pun intended) of the hipocracy from the poster you are taking up for.

That is why she is getting static.

By JB

July 20, 2007 9:37 AM | Link to this

Eleanor: It’s not necessary to assume that we’re jealous of Hunter just because she refuses to use Wal-Mart pictures simply because they’re from Wal-Mart. That’s just a silly reason to be jealous of someone. Sure, she can use whatever photo studio she wants but we were just explaining to her that photo processing in general is an inexpensive business.

By Hunter

July 20, 2007 9:45 AM | Link to this

JB / Jesse’s Girl, I do have a good reason for not using Wal-mart for photos. The reason is that I detest Wal-mart and know that their photos would be the same low quality as every other cheap Chinese import that they sell. And yes, I would, have and do spend money on a Vera Wang dress, should the occasion arise to wear something elegant. I also have no qualms about spending money on clothing for my children from D&G, or any other retailer of their choice. No “off the rack” stuff for my family. And as far as the picture frames go, I usually only buy them as a gift, generally for my mother and my mother-in-law, and the two of them deserve nice gifts, not something cheap out of a discount store.

By nurse&mother

July 20, 2007 9:54 AM | Link to this

About digital photography, I avoided going digital for many years. I was never impressed with a lot of digital pictures that I had seen. The guy at Wolf Camera asked me one day,”Have you not gone digital yet?”. (I take lots of pictures-sort of a hobby of mine) I told him that I was not impressed with what I had seen so far as far as digital goes. He told me it just depends on the camera.

Long story short, I ended up buying a Nikon D-80 and I LOVE it! It has 10 megapixels and it works just like my old Nikon, only better. I don’t have to hold the camera out to make a picture. I look through the view finder just like my old one. I can tell instantly if it is a good shot. I can also alter the picture from my camera( turn pics black & white, take out the red eyes, crop, zoom in etc.) I did spend a lot of money on it, but like I said, this is a hobby of mine and they had a “10 month no interest” deal.

There are a lot of other perks to it, although I have not even scratched the surface on what all it can do. Another cool feature, is that you can keep holding the shutter release button, it will continue to take pictures at about 3 pics per second.

By Jennifer

July 20, 2007 10:05 AM | Link to this

One thing that keeps me from using discount photo chains is the discount employees. You can find people that do a good job no matter what they are paid, but generally if you pay a little more you get better customer service. JC Penney has inexpensive photos, but their waiting room and review process leaves a lot to be desired. Picture People isn’t ultra-pricey, but it’s better to me because they take more time with getting good photos, their review and purchase process is super easy, and I have yet to encounter a grumpy photographer or counter associate.

I totally understand that working with kids isn’t the most pleasant thing in the world, but I had a photographer at JC Penney tell me to bring my 14-month old daughter back when she was 2 so that she would behave better. That was my last visit to JCP for pictures and every time I walk past their waiting room I get a happy feeling knowing I won’t have to go back into that madhouse. For the most part, cheap things are not a good deal.

By JB

July 20, 2007 10:39 AM | Link to this

I don’t blame you for detesting wal-mart. But it’s not about what your mother-in-law or whomever “deserve.” It’s about spending your money wisely. Vera Wang dresses fall apart and I’d rather get something high-quality if I’m going to spend the money, and likewise, why pay $50 for something that costs 19 cents to produce? It’s just falling prey to the business owners who make you think something is high end and then charge you way too much for it. I’d rather get good deals on stuff and invest and save the money that I have for retirement or traveling. But that’s just me. To me, stuff is just stuff and it doesn’t matter where it came from. I like myself and my pictures to look nice and classy and I can have that without anyone charging me an arm and a leg for it.

By Hunter

July 20, 2007 10:45 AM | Link to this

JB, I can understand your opinion. It makes sense. However, I personally disagree with you. If cheap and cheerful works for you, that’s great. I was brought up understanding that you get what you pay for and if you want something nice then you need to be prepared to spend a few dollars for it. No regrets, no buyer’s remorse, just satisfaction with your purchase. I actually still have a Vera Wang dress that my mother bought for me to wear to my Senior Prom in 1997. It is still in fabulous condition, has not fallen apart and is ten years old. I am not sure of your experience(s) with her clothing, but I have to say that I have never seen anything Wang just deteriorate.

By Jess

July 20, 2007 10:47 AM | Link to this

Come on! What would Hunter’s snotty family and friends think if they received a cheap walmart photo in that 100 dollar silver frame! They would think she was in the poor house and we just can’t have that now can we!!

By JB

July 20, 2007 11:00 AM | Link to this

They would think nothing of it because they wouldn’t know the difference.

By Stacey

July 20, 2007 11:03 AM | Link to this

My co-worker had a family portrait done at Portrait Innovations last Christmas and they were gorgeous. They were well focused, the colors were bright, poses and background looked natural, etc.

By DB

July 20, 2007 11:05 AM | Link to this

I’ve never been much for lots of professional kiddy photos, because, as an amateur photographer, I’ve got ZILLIONS of photos of my children and family, looking natural and enjoying doing things that they love, like swimming, skiing, music, etc. All modesty aside, there aren’t too many photographers that could do much better than I do. I did have a pro come into my home and do a four-generation shot of my grandmother, my mother, me and my daughter, which I treasure, but it was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Dragging kidlets into photography studios is my idea of hell on earth! We had a professional photographer come out and do our extended family for my parent’s 50th anniversary, and it was HORRIBLE — the idiot photographer kept putting people in direct sun where they would squint, and I had to keep suggesting camera angles, exposure for shade, etc. When we got the photos back, not a ONE of them was any good — my parents were so disappointed. :-( I should have just taken the darn things myself!

nurse&mother, I was an early-adopter of digital photographer — my first one was an old Sony Mavica that actually recorded picture on discs! Resolution wasn’t fantastic, but it had a 16X macro zoom that I had a lot of fun with. The camera store guy was right — you have to play with lots of cameras to get one that is comfortable and responsive within your price range. I’ve had some duds, but I love my current camera. And I absolutely adore being able to take 300 shots at an event to pick and choose that one or two that really capture the moment — and just erase the rest! (Mine has a continuous shutter — as long as you hold it down, it keeps firing … great for stop-action stuff!) Digital is so much cheaper than film and developing, because you DON’T have to develop the marginal photos. I brought back 900 shots from a recent vacation, of which I may end up developing only 40 or 50, if that. Digital rocks!

By Becky

July 20, 2007 11:16 AM | Link to this

I’m content with my photo’s that I take with my digital camera…I don’t spend a lot of money on pictures, because most of my family doesn’t keep up with ones you give them anyway…

By DB

July 20, 2007 11:30 AM | Link to this

ROLF at the prom dress comment, especially since I have a no-name off-the-race prom dress from 1974 that is still in such great shape that my neighbor’s daughter borrowed it to wear to her prom last year! A designer label is not always a guarantee of quality.

I wouldn’t shake my head so much at the hundreds of dollars that some girls waste on their prom dresses IF they didn’t make a point of letting everyone KNOW how much they spent on it, and if it wasn’t consigned to the back of the closet afterwards as “oh, everyone’s seen that one, already.” After all, it’s their (or Daddy’s) money — spend it as you please. But it’s amazing how some folks equate money with class.

By anne

July 20, 2007 11:38 AM | Link to this

God God, people, stop snarking at each other about photo frames and go out and contribute something to the world. This is truly pathetic.

By HHmmm

July 20, 2007 12:00 PM | Link to this

You make me giggle Ann. Have a good Friday you lunatic

By Hunter

July 20, 2007 12:11 PM | Link to this

Honestly, why are some people so defensive? I would think it’s simply because you can’t afford a Vera Wang dress, you can’t buy your children a pair of 400 dollar jeans from Dolce & Gabbana. You probably buy picture frames at Wal-mart when you get your cheap family portraits taken, spending less on 50 photos than I spend on one high quality shot. But, that’s fine. I think you should spend less time criticizing those of us who can afford nice things and more time trying to get to our level. It’s nice here.

By JB

July 20, 2007 12:24 PM | Link to this

Oh puhleeze…just keep spending your money however you please and let us spend it more wisely and stop assuming that we’re jealous of you. I will never desire to start trying to “get to your level” because I already make good money and I spend it wisely.

By DB

July 20, 2007 2:49 PM | Link to this

Hunter, or whoever you are, we don’t object to you spending your money any way you choose. Hey, it’s your money, spend it as you please, it’s great for the economy and frankly, more power to you. What I, personally, find amusing is the tone of your posts that suggest that because you like to spend your money in certain ways, you are somehow a more superior person.

Bragging is never attractive, dear, and distinctly declasse’.

By Joy

July 25, 2007 1:35 PM | Link to this

Why on earth would you buy any child that is still growing a pair of $400 anything! No need to say anything else Hunter, you have shown your stupidity (whether you make millions a year or not). I know I am not a regular, but that was the stupidest thing I have ever heard and it forced me to comment.

By cobbmom

July 25, 2007 3:46 PM | Link to this

Hunter is a troll plain & simple. First off, if she’s really paying $400 for D&G jeans, she’s dumb as rocks because they typically go for a little under $200 a pair, often you can find them for under $100. So I suspect she’s a lonely pathetic person just looking for attention.