Wedding photos

[Strawbsss]

My brother got married last weekend.

Lots of family photos taken by a photographer.

Family and bride and groom are now sharing these photos online.

Sister has now kicked off as she doesn't want her kids pictures on the internet.

This has been her wish since the kids were born and we always respect it, but she actively got her children in multiple photos on the day. She has even added random guests from the wedding to ensure they haven't uploaded any.

Brother has now removed them.

AIBU to think this is a bit shit? My brother has paid a lot of money for these photos and now he cannot share a set amount because sister says so.

Tell me if I'm being a crank but I just think if she felt that strongly about her kids ending up online, she shouldn't have pushed them into photos?

Agree so in the future there’ll only be photos of people at family events above the age of 18 - weird.

people on this thread wanting to dictate to people how they use SM and how they share their wedding photos is the usual mn batshittery.

It is simple: if you don't want your children on SM you tell people. and if they want to upload their wedding photos, they pixelate or emojify the faces. It isn't rocket surgery.

And just as so many people feel they get to dictate whether their children are put on SM, it is perfectly reasonable for people to take photographs and refuse to include the children of parents that think their inclusion gives them the right to dictate their SM

I'd tell your brother to ask the photographer if he can remove the kids from the big group photo. Or do a version withiut them. And maybe if there are one or 2 others. Or if not the photographer, I'm sure someone he knows can do some lo-fi photoshop that isn't as naff as a sticker.

This is entirely on the brother. He knew his sister’s (very reasonable) no social media rule, and didn’t plan to have pictures with and without the children for social media. (As I’ve posted upthread I have done this when hosting christening and my wedding, where I had the photographer take some to record everyone that attended and others without the children who aren’t on social media that can be shared.

Of course the children should have been in the photos as family and guests. But if they were to go on social media then the needed to be edited to blur the children’s faces, or organise a shot without them.

It's the brothers wedding.
He and his new wife had far more important things to be thinking about on their wedding day than the SM rules of individual family members.

How self absorbed and presumptuous to imagine this would be the bride and grooms priority.

The sister should have kept her children out of the photos if she was that fussed.

Beyond self absorbed to be making a fuss after the event.

Real attention seeking behaviour.
So tacky to be going back to the newly married couple with demands AFTER the event.

The polite thing to do would be to keep them out of it and say nothing.
It is NOT their day.

Discreetly take your children aside and saying nothing would be the polite thing to do at a wedding IMO, not making your SM choices a complete PITA for others on their wedding day or afterwards.

I think its weird to prioritise social media likes over your sibling's feelings. Your sister didn't need to issue a reminder that she doesn't want her children posting on social media because it isn't a new stance. If your brother was in any way emotionally intelligent he'd have arranged to have group photos with and without the children.

And not sharing 1 of the photos on social media doesn't make the photos redundant. Presumably he paid for them as a forever reminder of their wedding day, as opposed to just for social media?

This 👆🏼

Because family photos at weddings are not just for social media?! Some of us have lives that don’t revolve around posting everything online. Why did people take wedding photos pre Facebook and instagram?

Oh the hardship! 🤦🏻‍♀️ Presumably he can still use the unedited photo offline?

The photographer may own copyright of the image, but unless everyone signed a suitable release form, they do not necessarily have the right to use the likeness of people for advertising / marketing / competitions. The bride & groom can’t sign a form to give them this right on behalf of anyone else.

Social media is a funny one, because technically, the poster will have ticked a box at some point to say they have the permission of the copyright holder to post - which they may not have from either the photographer or the person within the photo (for their likeness).

Your poor brother.

She's a drama queen attention seeker. It was on her not to plonk her children in front of the camera!

Does she always expect all the attention to be on her?

If I was your brother, I would pay extra to get her and her children removed from every single photo, that should keep her happy.

Legally she can't object as the photographs were taken in a public place, however I appreciate the dilemma.

One solution would be for the online images to have the children blurred, perhaps the mother would be happy to pay the additional cost?

Completely agree.

Can you imagine exactly the level of lack of self awareness you would have to have to be twittering on to a newly married couple about not showing any photos of your children, having been stupid enough to allow them be photographed in the first place.

Top parenting tip...
Keep your children away from people being paid to take large group photos at other peoples wedding.

I don't allow photos on my children online but for me its about them being in an identifiable setting if that makes sense?
In this situation, I would have wanted them in a group family photo for the memories, for personal family use but would have spoken to my sibling before to ask for 2 to be taken, 1 with and the second with them facing away from the camera or not in the photo at all.
If its family, I would have expected the conversation to happen before not after especially for a big event like a wedding! So I think your sister should have thought about this in advance really.
I often take my kids into group photos and just turn them away from the camera, I did this recently at a family friends wedding. So they are there but not identified.
With non formal photos, in friends / family situations, we take the group photo so its available for personal use but when posted online people cover kids faces with a heart emoji.
At the recent family friend wedding, there were photos taken by the photographer of my child playing, which went up on a 'private' website which was accessible to all guests, I still don't love that but figured that she's not in an identifiable setting, so I haven't kicked up a fuss about it. I don't like it though.

My sister's children are adopted because of a very shit beginning to their lives where if people discovered where they lived they'd have to move to a totally different area of the country for their safety!
We as a family respect the fact that they can't be on SM - it's not difficult. We take photos with the children in for ourselves and then photos without my sister's family in for social media.
I've always found sharing pictures of other people's children on social media weird anyway!