The purpose of school photos has changed, hasn't it?

[merzeemee]

When I was a child in the 1970/80's the School Photo was an annual opportunity for a professional shot of me and my brother smiling, sitting still, and looking clean and smart in our uniforms. They were proudly bought, distributed to grandparents, compared from year to year, and fondly looked back on - especially the class photos of familiar faces with gradually forgotten names.

Now I'm a secondary school parent, I see them differently. They're an annual opportunity for the school to get cheap (free?) photos of every child and teacher. The childrens' photos are attached to their records in the school's Management Information System, helping staff to put faces to names. They are also used as profile pictures on school Microsoft accounts, so teachers and students remotely interacting via Teams can see a face rather than just a name. The teachers' photos are put on the wall of a corridor, again to help everyone to put faces to names.

The cost to the school is kept low because the photography firm makes its money from selling copies of the photos to parents, which is fine, so long as the quality of the photos remains high, and parents continue to buy photos.

Unfortunately, I haven't bought my children's individual school photos for the past 6 years, because they are always on an ugly mottled blue background, and I can take nicer pictures myself at home. I don't think the photographer makes any effort at all to take photos that are relaxed or flattering, and they are overpriced. I do buy the group photos, but certainly not every year. (This year the group photo was a clever montage of the whole year group's individual photos - a covid memento we weren't expecting because only individual shots were taken!).

Do you buy your child's school photo every year?

[DotBall]

I asked them to refund or correct and they told me they cant. I said you are a professional photographer of course you know how to take photos of people wearing glasses. Ridiculous

You can get lenses for specs that are non-reflective these days.
DS had his Yr11 photo taken and the twonk looked like he’d dressed himself backwards (they’d had PE by then and his polo collar was tucked under on one side).

Fair play to the company, a quick email about how my 15 year old seemed incapable of dressing himself and they redid the photos down at their studio 😂

[alrightfella]

I buy them even if they're shit.

My mum never bought mine

[Tilltheend99]

It would be cheaper for the school to get a standard digital camera and have class teacher take a headshot of each kid in from of white wall if they only want photos for their own record.

[waitingpatientlyforspring]

I've always bought them and feel upset that I missed my youngest yr 6 and yr 7 photo. My oldest was lucky as his secondary did school photos in sept of yr 7 so he got one before all this covid crap kicked me off.

They are now yr 8 and yr 9 and I really hope I get a school picture this year.

[Loveitloveitloveit]

I normally don’t mind them but refused to get one last year as, because of Covid, sibling photos weren’t allowed I was not prepared to pay for three lots of awful pictures!

[winstonsfinger]

For what it's worth, school photographers these days are very rarely "professionals" in the sense that you would expect. I'm not surprised to read that so many people think the photos are crap, or that they're not lighting them correctly. (Glasses glare etc)

They are very often people with a general interest in photography who've replied to an agency adverting for photographers. The adverts usually read (and I quote) something along the lines of:

'Potential candidates should preferably have some suitable or relevant photographic experience, however any application will be considered - Training will be provided."

Basically if you've ever held a camera, have an afternoon to spare for training, have a clear DBS check and are willing to work for peanuts/no guaranteed income/only as and when needed, you're good to go. The extortionate photo prices line the agency pockets, not the person taking the photos a lot of the time.

Of course there are some exceptions, but generally you aren't paying for a "professional" photo any longer.

[Abraxan]

If your child isn't great at having their photo taken that's not on the photographer, alot of time and effort goes into making the photos look nice, but only so much can be done when your little ones pull silly faces.

Actually this is the job of a decent photographer. Put the subject at ease, have them happy and relaxed. Then you'll usually get a lovely natural smiley photograph. Sit a child for a few seconds in front of an often unsmiling brusque photographer who is just trained to click and go then you'll often get a rubbish shot, even from a naturally photogenic bubbly child. It's often not silly faces that is the issue - it's not being given time to relax, being wrongly edited, being restricted to a basic 'auto' setting, not checking the reflection on glasses, not checking the child's hair or collar is straight, etc. All basic stuff.

[Abraxan]

@Tilltheend99

It would be cheaper for the school to get a standard digital camera and have class teacher take a headshot of each kid in from of white wall if they only want photos for their own record.

It's what most schools do anyway. Don't even need an expensive camera. Ours often use their class iPad, though we do have a school camera too.

[Chocolatehamper]

I used to buy the Primary ones because they were sweet!
The Secondary ones - I bought year 7, my daughter's year 11 last year and my son's yr 11 just recently... Only after threatening him with a stick if he smiled in it though because school photographers have a knack of making any smile look like a maniacal grimace worthy of a mass murderer!!
He did as asked (one of the plus points of an ASD child, he does as he's told to the nth degree!) so this years photo was him staring straight at the camera, no smile, just looking very upright and smart. I've sent copies to both sets of grandparents and proudly hung mine on the wall... he hasn't noticed it yet 😳🤣

[greendiva]

Over priced and usually shite.

[csigeek]

I’ve bought some this is as my son has started reception.
My daughter is 12, can’t remember the last time we bought hers haha

[Ddot]

I'm sure I read somewhere that school photos were because not many people had cameras and it was a way of having a likeness incase your child went missing

[anon666]

I don't buy them, I just see it as an excuse to extort money out of vulnerable parents who feel guilty for not buying them.

[Tigger1895]

I gave up on them when they brushed my child’s hair to the side, even though his hair couldn’t sit that way. First year and last year of school is enough, you have private photos to show how they have changed over the years.

[LittleGwyneth]

My mum called them 'plane crash photos' and never bought a single one of mine. She took far nicer pictures of us herself.

[rb124]

They still do School photo's?

[Tamrastarr]

I buy them, but only because my mum never bought ours and it made me sad

[Lottle]

@BoredZelda

They are also used to help detect eating disorders.

What? A 2 minute photo once a year is betters that than people seeing a child every day?

Sorry just seen this. Yes, definitely as you don't notice tiny changes over time. I'm certainly not saying this is their main role! But at a school I used to work at they would use photos to look out for weight changes