Why would you edit a toddlers first preschool photo?!

[Stormwhale]

I'm really cross, possibly unreasonably so, I will leave that to you to judge.

My dd had her first ever photos at preschool. I got the proofs last month and the preview photos were tiny with writing across them, but they looked nice so I ordered them.

I got them today, and immediately saw that my child did not look right. She looks like a porcelain doll. It's clearly her, but she doesn't look right at all.

I emailed the photographer to ask if they had been edited as she looks different and if so could I have the originals. She has replied (very nicely, seems lovely, so this isn't personal) to say yes, they edit the skin and eyes.

What!?!? Why!?! Toddlers are perfect, they don't have spots or wrinkles or any imperfections! I love my dd exactly as she is, I don't want to have a photoshopped version!! What is the world coming to?!

I'm so cross that even tiny little children are not fucking good enough, so they have to be edited to weird levels of perfection. I'm fuming!

Aibu?

[WhatInTheWorldIsGoingOn]

How ridiculous. That is very sad.

I

[Sparlklesilverglitter]

I wouldn't want my baby skin and eyes edited! I can't believe any parent would edit/air brush a child

What does that teach them that you don't think they are beautiful without a bit of editing ?

[ineedamoreadultieradult]

Yanbu I would want a photo of my actual child not a computerised version of my child.

[Stormwhale]

She looks like a fucking robot child. Her face is so weirdly smooth that you could quite imagine peeling it off and finding robotics underneath. And they eyes look beyond weird. They are too shiny and odd looking.

[AtSea1979]

YANBU my friend had some photos done last year and a few days later the photographer rang her and asked her if she wanted her birthmark (tiny strawberry on face) editing out? No she damn well didn't, it wouldn't look like her DD with it.

[Lovefromhull]

Oh thats bad. Reality vs real life- all a bit blurry now- it's not right at all. My tablet started taking photos with something called " beauty face" - I haven't chosen that- how dare they assume that's what I want.
I hope you can get the proper pictures?

[EatTheCake]

Ffs!

No way have I or would I ever edit my DC but parents must air brush little toddlers or they wouldn't do it would they?? It actually quite sad when you think about it- little Timmy isn't good enough for the mantelpiece without some editing

[NickyEds]

Bloody hell! I've ordered some from ds's pre school and if they've been edited like that they'll be going back!

[DisappointingBanana]

I'd ask for my money back! How utterly stupid of the photographer!

[HeadElf]

That's awful

[Stormwhale]

I ordered the digital copies, so she is going to send me the originals. Again, she seems lovely, this is not personal, I am using fuming that this is clearly what sells photos. They are toddlers ffs.

[TheGhostsOfPresidentsYetToCome]

I hate this.

My niece's, taken at 18 months, had her recent chicken pox marks edited out. Made her whole face look like a cartoon girl. Horrible.

[ItsNiceItsDifferentItsUnusual]

This happened to an absolutely BEAUTIFUL pic of my ds when he was a few weeks old. Photographer was a total steamroller and printed with photoshop without making it clear. I had too much on to kick up a fuss at the time, but I'm still upset. He was smiling beautifully but looks like a fucking plastic doll. It's still in the cupboard.

[Twiggy71]

What no way would i ever have wanted my dc's photo edited especially the one were he had a huge chunk of hair missing as he'd gotten carried away with the scissors. The next thing they would be doing is adding hair on

[Stormwhale]

• just fuming.
  
  Sorry phone is having a fandango.

[Stormwhale]

I'm really cross for those of you who have had this too. The more I think about it, the more cross I'm getting.

[Boredbeforeievenbegan]

Yanbu, it's actually really sad.

[dingdongthewitchishere]

that's awful!

Good luck to the poor kids whose real face wasn't good enough for their parents, what a lovely thing to realise when you are growing up.

[harderandharder2breathe]

How horrible!

The only acceptable editing would be red eye or glare on glasses, i.e. Things wrong with the photo not wrong with the child

[Stormwhale]

She said they edited all the photos, so that is the standard for children's photos. I have been trying to articulate to dp why I'm so upset. It is really nothing personal against the photographer, it's just the fact that the perfection that is expected of adults when photographed is now filtering down to children too. And not just children in adverts on telly, but school photos. I'm exasperated at it. Real is never going to be good enough is it?

[heythereconniver]

I can understand how you feel but I don't think it's sad. Of course toddlers are always absolutely beautiful but sometimes they have a bit of dry skin on the day that it would be nice to not preserve on the dining room wall for all time!

Just my opinion.

[heythereconniver]

I do understand the problem with going overboard though.

[TheWoodlander]

God, yanbu. Most ridiculous thing I ever heard.

Mind you, I was looking at the pics of my dd's teachers at primary school on the website, and thinking, my goodness they're flattering pics. Turns out they were touched up.

[CancellyMcChequeface]

This is really sad.

I can sort of understand it for temporary blemishes with secondary-age students - a bruise, an acne flare-up - but doing it routinely, and for toddlers? Why would anyone want a photo where their small child looks like an Uncanny Valley robot-doll?

[JellyBelli]

It sounds like they used a beauty app! Thats nasty. I wouldnt want those.