to be fuming with SIL?

[CheerfulYank]

Last year we (DH's extended family) tried to get together and have a family picture taken. We could never work it out due to scheduling, so this year we started working on it in August.

A photographer in our town runs a special through today, a really good deal where she takes group photos in a local park, which is nice because the trees are all in full autumn colors.

We (DH's sister) and I find a date that works for everyone. SIL#2 (married to DH's brother) was a bit cat's bum mouth at it being outside but agreed. SIL1 and I said thataybe everyone should wear brown, white, and blue in any shade or pattern as it would coordinate, plus everyone has jeans, khakis l, etc. Everyone agrees.

There is MIL and FIL, DH and me and 2 DCs, SIL1 and husband, SIL2 and her husband (DH's brother), and their 2 DCs, and SIL3 (DH's other sister) her husband, and DD.

So we get this all arranged, send out emails with dates and times, etc. It's all settled.

On Thursday we get a snippy email from SIL2. "What day is pictures? Where are we meeting? What are we wearing again?" despite this being communicated several times. SIL1 replied with directions and a map and again said brown, blue, and white.

So this morning dawns bright and early. We get ready and go to the park, where evertone except SIL2 and BIL are wearing various casual clothing in (you guessed it, brown, blue, and white.)

BIL is wearing a black shirt. SIL2 is wearing a black long sleeved T-shirt with Harley Davidson in red letters. The two DC (9 and 7) are wearing teal and black Under Armour hooded sweatshirts.

I've seen an advanced proof of the pic and it looks ridiculous. It looks like they just wandered in to some random family's photo.

Also we broker into separate family units for pictures and they refused saying "oh we got one for the church directory, it's good enough."

I think it's completely passive aggressive of them and if they didn't want to be in it, they should have just said so.

AIBU to be upset?

Ridiculous that people can't wear their own clothes in picture.

Why colour coordinate? Seems control freakery?

I cannot fathom being part of a family were I am told to turn up at a park for a photo shoot in colour coordinated clothing!

Yabu....

I wouldn't bother getting involved in extended family photos again. MIL can just have separate photos of the family groups then people can wear what they want. Life's too short to fall out over this sort of stuff.
SIL2 was being deliberately disruptive by not saying initially that she couldn't be bothered with a colour scheme and they'd either wear what they wanted or not come though.
I suspect my family would struggle with a brown white and blue theme though as we're more into black including black jeans.

theonlygothinthevillage
Good point.
What i meant to say was that the only reasonable action would be to wear what was agreed or to be clear about your dissent from that decision.

Besides, given that jeans and a white t shirt/ brown jumper etc. could be worn it doesn't seem like a strict dress code, and my impression is that there would have been some discussion around the subject.

BIl and SIL appear to have been awkward about the picture. They might feel justified in being so, if they felt they were being railroaded, but awkward nonetheless.

I wonder whether BIL & SIL2 see themselves as rebels and just enjoy being contrary. I know a couple of people like that, they would happily turn up at a wedding in TShirts despite having suits at home. They see themselves as free spirits. It comes across as adolescent - fine in teenager, merely irritating in an adult.

Tbh, BIL wearing a black shirt doesn't sound too bad.

And SIL in black, but a logo not a pattern.

One of the kids in black like parents & other in teal, a kind of blue?

Thanks to the posters who've said "I like you" even though they think I'm controlling. :o

It really is what's done here, I swear! As pp have said, photographers suggest it as a matter of course and people just don't get photos taken without a cursory discussion of what's to be worn. As someone said, if everyone is in black or gray and one person in neon pink stripes, it looks odd, as though that person is supposed to be the center of the picture for some reason. Several of my (American, admittedly ) friends saw the photo on FB and questioned me about it.

Chanson everyone was wearing their own clothes.

We don't do this every year or even close to it. This is a once in a decade thing. It was just supposed to be something nice for MIL. I personally loathe pictures and didn't even want to do it, but since she wanted it I bit the bullet.

I know my SIL. For any occasion, even children's birthday parties, or for church or work, she wears nicer things. This wasna deliberate choice to show up for the family photo in something she doesn't consider "nice".

She gets her DC's pictures done at least once a year and has them in outfits that go together. She always gets them done at a portrait place attached to a store...it's JC Penney; I'm not sure if you have that there. They're not the sort of pictures I like. They're the sort that are beside fake streams, etc. When she arranged the cousin photo, the kids all wore black, gray, or pink per her decision. They are on a draped black velvet background. Frankly, it isn't a great picture...it's off frame, doesn't look great, etc. But I thanked her and bought one. MIL likes it because it is of her grandchildren and that was the intention, so great. :)

However, it isn't the kind of photo MIL likes. She has mentioned many times that she'd like a photo of everyone outside. So we set it up, and per our photographer's request and our own cultural norms, agreed on a color palette.

As op have said, her choice to not wear anything nice, not dress her DC as she would for her own photo, and not stick to the colors she'd agreed upon, is a deliberate fuck you. And I don't know why.

does it look any better in black and white ?

I'd guess that the reason she did the deliberate "fuck you" is because she didn't get to choose the colour scheme?

I see, it puts rather a different light on things if your SIL's family normally does colour co-ordinated family portraits in nice outfits but deliberately chose to wear a different style and colour of clothes to spoil this one. Sadly, maybe they don't want to take part in events like group photos with the larger family? Better to leave them to it.

yanbu. She should have nicely said that it wasn't really what she was happy with. At least then you would have been forewarned!

I think the idea of doing the photo in black and white or in sepia is a great one. Sepia might work as the trees would look lovely!

Could you pixelate SIL's clothes?

See, I actually wonder if the sil is the control freak here and she wanted to be the one to organise it and choose the colour scheme so she was being PA to ruin it. I think it's a real shame she did that. Maybe try again next year?

I wouldn't say that it is common in the US to dictate particular colors for a family photograph. I'm American and I have never witnessed anything like that.

I wouldn't be happy about being told what to wear. But I probably would have agreed if it seemed important to the rest of the family (while inwardly rolling my eyes).

I was just going to say perhaps it is particularly American to want to look all the same (like the Waltons??? Creepy) but it appears not. That good!

I think as long as there are not two clashing colour next to each other, what does it matter? It sounds as if they did that deliberatly but I would feel like doing that if someone told all my family what colours to wear. Unless we are on a football team/barbershop group why would we???!!

You guys dont 'get' this American semi-formal portrait thing. This isnt a couple of snaps at a family party. It is a professional portrait. They werent told to wear a uniform, they were asked to dress jeans or khakis (which nearly everyone owns) with tops in any of 3 colors, but no requirements as to style or pattern. With that many people, a bit of effort not to have a lot of colors and styles that clash does look better. It sounds like her husband and children didnt even dress for a portrait at all, much less understand that if they were determined to be casual, jeans and a white t-shirt would have passed muster, technically. If the whole family had at least as nicely dressed as her skirt and heels were for her, being in a range of black clothes might have been ok.

Lshe was trying her damndest to sabotage.

DeathRayStare I have honestly never heard of anything else! I'm sorry. :) People will meet up for casual photos in whatever, but for a posed group shot with a professional photographer, I really have never heard of anything else. If you type "family photo outfits" or similar on Pinterest, there are hundreds of options...because it is A Thing.

If she never did this, it would be one thing maybe, but as stated she has done this for her DC before and put them in coordinating outfits, and also she wear much nicer clothes for little things like children's birthday parties. I don't know why she took a stand on this.

Mokun it's possible. Last July SIL1 asked SIL2 if she could take our niece (the one in the acceptable teal sweatshirt ) shopping for her 7th birthday.

SIL2 hemed and hawed and then said no, but she had just been shopping and bought clothes for her DD and if SIL1 wanted, she could come choose something from that and give it to DD.

So basically she wanted our SIL to come and look at what she'd already bought, pick something, and give it to my niece and pretend it was from her.

At the time my DH said that she has real issues with money and allowing other people to spend $ on her DC, but...it was quite controlling really.

Thank you MomAgain :) Yes, that is what it is like.

I swear I wasn't trying to be controlling, I just wanted a nice portrait for MIL and admittedly, myself. I love DH's family and was excited to display it. I'm sure I still will, but it bothers me. Not the way it looks so much as, why did she do it?

maybe she sees it as a comment on the perceived not goodenoughness of her photo of the grandchildren.

I haven't RTFT yet, but I don't think you ABU OP. You only asked them to dress up for a picture. I can't really understand why they would want to deliberately stick out. If SIL has worn a plain black tee, I might believe she had done it by accident, but it was obviously a deliberate piss take.

I wouldn't be annoyed about the picture so much as their passive aggressive behaviour. WHY didn't she want to co-operate for you MIL? Sounds a bit spiteful tbh. I think that's what would wind me up.

Blackeyed maybe, but...this was everyone, not just the DC. I admit I don't like the DC's picture she planned, but I would never have scheduled a new picture of just the DC so soon...that would be a deliberate snub.

OK, your story about clothes shopping for the girls does make SIL2 sound unhinged.

The whole photo thing sounds totally unhinged to me anyway, even though I now know half the world does it But, yeah, seems you have a weirdo in your family and you may as well just accept that.

I actually had the impression American suburbia was full of families who go round dressed as matching sets I guess I ought to be relieved they only do that for the photos!

I do love chamomile tea, thank you! :)

She also won't let them come to play at my house after school (even though they and my DS beg) because she paid for their daycare and according to her DH is literally incapable of not using something she's paid for.

She also has always snatched her DC up and away at the sight of any animal (I mean, even kittens) and now they tremble at the sight of a dog. :( And then when my PILs offer to take the GCs to the petting zoo, they won't go but my DS will so it seems like favoritism.

And also she won't take them anywhere throughout the month of December because there are so many holiday shoppers about and they might be kidnapped.

Actually, the first two examples make it seem like she just has issue with me. Interesting...

:o Garlic no, not at all. I have known some people who dress twins alike but they are generally thought of as quite strange.