Updated Title: Wrangling FILs and Photographs

GuitarSlayer

I'm mostly a lurker, but I have posted here related to the BSC FILs.  FI and I got engaged last May, and his mother did nothing but whine about it and how we didn't call every family member personally transatlantically.  After several months of getting nothing but insults about our wedding plans, I convinced FI that it was OK not to talk to these people anymore about the wedding; they will find everything out just like everyone else -- on the wedding invitation.   

FI mentioned to his father in an email early this week that we got our wedding pics done.**  Thinking that we meant engagement photos, FILs now want a photo of us to put in the paper to "Announce Our Engagement" and to post on Facebook.

Considering we've been engaged for over a year now, I think it's too little too late, both in terms of whoring us out to their friends for status reasons, as well as announcing the engagement; it's old news.  FI doesn't want to burn a bridge, as he holds out hope that they will get over themselves.

The relationship with FILs has been touch and go from the jump.  We aren't doing an engagement shoot just for them, so we don't have a fancy photo to put in a newspaper, just photos of me and him being nerds at historical sites.  Should we supply them this and not say anything about the long delay, or should we just decline the wedding announcement/bragging rights request altogether? 



**(FI and I get hitched in December, but due to academic schedules, this is the last time we see each other til then.  So we got prettied up in our wedding suit and cocktail dress and got it done in a small studio session, as they did it back in the early days of wedding photography.  We've elected not to have a pro photographer at our tiny, under 25-person wedding, so we're sort of doing the opposite of the infamous unplugged wedding - we don't care what the guests do re: cameras.)

Updated:  See below for more info; in summary, the announcement in the paper is ok, but we don't trust FILs to not use photos inappropriately.

southernbelle0915

I think newspaper announcements are pretty common. I often see them with a photo - sometimes professional, sometimes not. I guess I don't see what the big deal is.

It doesn't sound like you're opposed to the photo. Rather you are assuming they want to "whore you out to their friends for status reasons". (wut? are you guys celebrities?)

This isn't really an etiquette question. Or if it is, I'm not seeing it. So do what you feel comfortable with.

Maggie0829

GuitarSlayer said:

I'm mostly a lurker, but I have posted here related to the BSC FILs.  FI and I got engaged last May, and his mother did nothing but whine about it and how we didn't call every family member personally transatlantically.  After several months of getting nothing but insults about our wedding plans, I convinced FI that it was OK not to talk to these people anymore about the wedding; they will find everything out just like everyone else -- on the wedding invitation.   

FI mentioned to his father in an email early this week that we got our wedding pics done.**  Thinking that we meant engagement photos, FILs now want a photo of us to put in the paper to "Announce Our Engagement" and to post on Facebook.

Considering we've been engaged for over a year now, I think it's too little too late, both in terms of whoring us out to their friends for status reasons, as well as announcing the engagement; it's old news.  FI doesn't want to burn a bridge, as he holds out hope that they will get over themselves.

The relationship with FILs has been touch and go from the jump.  We aren't doing an engagement shoot just for them, so we don't have a fancy photo to put in a newspaper, just photos of me and him being nerds at historical sites.  Should we supply them this and not say anything about the long delay, or should we just decline the wedding announcement/bragging rights request altogether? 



**(FI and I get hitched in December, but due to academic schedules, this is the last time we see each other til then.  So we got prettied up in our wedding suit and cocktail dress and got it done in a small studio session, as they did it back in the early days of wedding photography.  We've elected not to have a pro photographer at our tiny, under 25-person wedding, so we're sort of doing the opposite of the infamous unplugged wedding - we don't care what the guests do re: cameras.)

If you don't want to give them a picture then don't give them a picture.  Have your FI tell his Dad that the pictures were just for you and him and that at this point putting an e-announcement in the newspaper is a year too late.  If his parents continue to throw a hissy then go back to not talking to them about anything wedding related.

I am kind of confused as to why you would elect to take pictures all dressed up in your wedding attire months before your wedding instead of having the actual wedding day photographed.  I guess for me I would want the actual day/ceremony documented rather then play dress up months before and then hope that one of your guests get a good shot or two of your ceremony. But to each their own.

GuitarSlayer

The beef is that we've been engaged over a year, and they want to announce it now.  Is it against etiquette to announce the engagement in the paper over a year late?   (I have a feeling they will lie and say to the paper that we got engaged this May rather than last May, but I might be paranoid at this point.)

As for the status thing, FI's parents are very big into bragging about marrying off their children and taking credit for raising them.  It's weird, in my perspective.  We've limited what photos we send to them, because every. single. one. ends up on Facebook, including those that we stated explicitly "please do not post this on social media." They don't understand security settings, so everything is on public.

pegasuskat

In my area our local newspaper runs engagement photos closer to the wedding, usually 6 months or less.  Most of the one's I have read are actually within a few months of the wedding date.  Then within a month after they run a wedding photo.  I'm in a small town, but most of the photos are just a simple shot of the couple - sometimes just a head shot.  I saw one Sunday that was in the old timey clothing, and thought it was cute and different.  In other words, no big deal.  If they are difficult in general I'd let them have something like this and save my fight for bigger battles.

southernbelle0915

GuitarSlayer said: The beef is that we've been engaged over a year, and they want to announce it now.  Is it against etiquette to announce the engagement in the paper over a year late?   (I have a feeling they will lie and say to the paper that we got engaged this May rather than last May, but I might be paranoid at this point.)

As for the status thing, FI's parents are very big into bragging about marrying off their children and taking credit for raising them.  It's weird, in my perspective.  We've limited what photos we send to them, because every. single. one. ends up on Facebook, including those that we stated explicitly "please do not post this on social media." They don't understand security settings, so everything is on public.


******************************insert imaginary box here************************************

It's a little late, sure, but I don't think it's "against etiquette". If they were wanting to throw an engagement party, yea, it's too late for that. 

Sure, if you don't want the pictures on FB, then don't send them. Personally, this is not a hill I would die on but you're not me and this a total personal choice, so do whatever you feel comfortable with.

To the bolded - did his parents not raise him? Was he raised by grandparents or an aunt/uncle or a nanny? 

Maggie0829

GuitarSlayer said:

The beef is that we've been engaged over a year, and they want to announce it now.  Is it against etiquette to announce the engagement in the paper over a year late?   (I have a feeling they will lie and say to the paper that we got engaged this May rather than last May, but I might be paranoid at this point.)

As for the status thing, FI's parents are very big into bragging about marrying off their children and taking credit for raising them.  It's weird, in my perspective.  We've limited what photos we send to them, because every. single. one. ends up on Facebook, including those that we stated explicitly "please do not post this on social media." They don't understand security settings, so everything is on public.

Again, if you don't want them to put an announcement in the paper then don't give them a picture.  I personally would think it odd to have an engagement announcement a year after it happened.  It would be like having an e-party a year after the proposal.  The time for that has come and gone.  And really I just find e-announcements dumb.  

And from the sound of it I wouldn't put it past your FILs including information about your wedding in the announcement or extending invites to people that you don't have on your guest list.

I would just say no and then move on.

But as for the bragging about marrying off their kids.  Well parents tend to be a little proud when their kids grow up and do good things like getting a great job or finding the love of their life and getting married.  And I mean if they did raise them and the kid turned out to be a pretty damn good member of society then I think it makes sense for the parents to be proud of that and be like "that is my baby!"

redoryx

pegasuskat said:

In my area our local newspaper runs engagement photos closer to the wedding, usually 6 months or less.  Most of the one's I have read are actually within a few months of the wedding date.  Then within a month after they run a wedding photo.  I'm in a small town, but most of the photos are just a simple shot of the couple - sometimes just a head shot.  I saw one Sunday that was in the old timey clothing, and thought it was cute and different.  In other words, no big deal.  If they are difficult in general I'd let them have something like this and save my fight for bigger battles.

This. I often see engagement announcements happening in the 6 month range before the wedding and never think anything of it. This is including couples who had been engaged for awhile before the announcement ran, too.

I honestly don't see the big deal and this seems to be less about the actual announcement and more about your relationship with your FILs 

novella1186

This is not a hill I would bother dying on. This seems to be kind of important to his parents, and it seems like you don't live in the same town as them (I might be wrong here and if so, sorry) so I'm going to guess that most of the people you know won't even see this announcement? 

My parents asked if I wanted an announcement in the paper in my hometown and I said no, mostly because-- to me-- it seems pointless and weird. But most of my friends have moved away from the area so it would have pretty much been for my parents and their friends anyway. If they had insisted on it, I would have just let them do it. It wouldn't hurt H or me one bit. 

As Southernbelle said, though, this is a personal choice. 

AddieCake

I agree this isn't a hill I'd die on. If they want to post a pic in the paper, it's not a big deal. 

GuitarSlayer

Maggie0829 said:

I am kind of confused as to why you would elect to take pictures all dressed up in your wedding attire months before your wedding instead of having the actual wedding day photographed.  I guess for me I would want the actual day/ceremony documented rather then play dress up months before and then hope that one of your guests get a good shot or two of your ceremony. But to each their own.

Having a pro photographer at the event is a very modern and rather moneyed concept, and it's frankly not necessary.  From what I've learned on the board, hosting is primary, so I'm following that addage.  The studio is more cost effective than hiring someone for the day; we're on a tight budget, and I rather host everyone properly rather than get photos of us "in action" at a restaurant table.  The shoot was under $150; if you know a pro who can do a wedding for that in the NYC area in mid-December, let me know! 

In regard to the "play dress up" comment, we've never represented ourselves as married to anyone.  Both my parents and grandparents got their photos done in studios.  I'm unsure if my grandparents were married at the time, as the photo was taken by government personnel in the postwar as a part of recording the refugees; they got it done when they had a camera in camp.  My parents got theirs done when they got their paychecks.  My grandparents wore their best, as did my parents, as did I and my partner.  We have worn these clothes before, and we will again, just like my grandparents and parents.  So no, we're not "playing dress up."  We're a young couple with a small budget, and pictures were taken when they were affordable and all the compnents were available (and on the same continent). 

Wedding photos in my family are commemorative rather than documentary; my family has never felt the need to have THE SECOND THEY GOT MARRIED recorded.  We know it happened, they know it happened, God knows it happened, the neighbour knows it happened.  It's nice to know what a person wore and what they looked like at a certain age, but to spend money for "live action photography" seems odd, especially since I hear about how people have watched their wedding DVD once or looked at the whole wedding album twice. What was the point?

GuitarSlayer

redoryx said:

pegasuskat said:

In my area our local newspaper runs engagement photos closer to the wedding, usually 6 months or less.  Most of the one's I have read are actually within a few months of the wedding date.  Then within a month after they run a wedding photo.  I'm in a small town, but most of the photos are just a simple shot of the couple - sometimes just a head shot.  I saw one Sunday that was in the old timey clothing, and thought it was cute and different.  In other words, no big deal.  If they are difficult in general I'd let them have something like this and save my fight for bigger battles.

This. I often see engagement announcements happening in the 6 month range before the wedding and never think anything of it. This is including couples who had been engaged for awhile before the announcement ran, too.

I honestly don't see the big deal and this seems to be less about the actual announcement and more about your relationship with your FILs 

It honestly is.  FI asked me to post this because we're both paranoid about what they will do with the newspaper/facebook stuff.  He thinks they're going to try to do a shower with both bride and groom in absentia.  I'm trying to see whether or not it's unreasonable; it seems the consensus is that it's not wacky, we're just paranoid. 

STARMOON44

This doesn't seem like a big deal. I'd just give them a photo. Also, transatlantic phone calls? This isn't 1927 those also aren't a big deal. It sounds like you just don't like them but digging in your heels on little things usually isn't productive.

GuitarSlayer

STARMOON44 said:

This doesn't seem like a big deal. I'd just give them a photo. Also, transatlantic phone calls? This isn't 1927 those also aren't a big deal. It sounds like you just don't like them but digging in your heels on little things usually isn't productive.

The one phone call FI did have to make (to the grandmother) was $1.50 a minute on his cell, because I don't have a landline with international dialing; I normally communicate with Skype but "that isn't good enough" per his mother.  If we were to call every relative, and spend 20 minutes each, as his mother wanted, the price would have been astronomical. 

Maggie0829

GuitarSlayer said:

Maggie0829 said:

I am kind of confused as to why you would elect to take pictures all dressed up in your wedding attire months before your wedding instead of having the actual wedding day photographed.  I guess for me I would want the actual day/ceremony documented rather then play dress up months before and then hope that one of your guests get a good shot or two of your ceremony. But to each their own.

Having a pro photographer at the event is a very modern and rather moneyed concept, and it's frankly not necessary.  From what I've learned on the board, hosting is primary, so I'm following that addage.  The studio is more cost effective than hiring someone for the day; we're on a tight budget, and I rather host everyone properly rather than get photos of us "in action" at a restaurant table.  The shoot was under $150; if you know a pro who can do a wedding for that in the NYC area in mid-December, let me know! 

In regard to the "play dress up" comment, we've never represented ourselves as married to anyone.  Both my parents and grandparents got their photos done in studios.  I'm unsure if my grandparents were married at the time, as the photo was taken by government personnel in the postwar as a part of recording the refugees; they got it done when they had a camera in camp.  My parents got theirs done when they got their paychecks.  My grandparents wore their best, as did my parents, as did I and my partner.  We have worn these clothes before, and we will again, just like my grandparents and parents.  So no, we're not "playing dress up."  We're a young couple with a small budget, and pictures were taken when they were affordable and all the compnents were available (and on the same continent). 

Wedding photos in my family are commemorative rather than documentary; my family has never felt the need to have THE SECOND THEY GOT MARRIED recorded.  We know it happened, they know it happened, God knows it happened, the neighbour knows it happened.  It's nice to know what a person wore and what they looked like at a certain age, but to spend money for "live action photography" seems odd, especially since I hear about how people have watched their wedding DVD once or looked at the whole wedding album twice. What was the point?

Ok.  But I still don't get it.  Just like you don't get the point of photographing the moment someone gets married.  Sorry not sorry but I wanted that moment captured so I could look back on it when I am old and gray.  And like I said in my post "to each their own."

And really I could ask you the same thing in regards to the bolded.  How often will you look at your pre-wedding pictures?  What was the point of those?  The point was because you wanted to capture yourself at a certain moment in time.  Which is exactly why people hire photographers for their weddings.

So we will just go on thinking that what the other thinks/does is odd.  No biggie.

STARMOON44

GuitarSlayer said:

STARMOON44 said:

This doesn't seem like a big deal. I'd just give them a photo. Also, transatlantic phone calls? This isn't 1927 those also aren't a big deal. It sounds like you just don't like them but digging in your heels on little things usually isn't productive.

The one phone call FI did have to make (to the grandmother) was $1.50 a minute on his cell, because I don't have a landline with international dialing; I normally communicate with Skype but "that isn't good enough" per his mother.  If we were to call every relative, and spend 20 minutes each, as his mother wanted, the price would have been astronomical. 




Why would you tell her or anyone else you're using Skype? Lean away from the drama. Give them a photo and move on.

lyndausvi

This is so not a hill I would die on.  I would have given them a picture anyway, so if they wanted to put it in the paper.  So be it.     

I get they were not very supportive in the beginning, but they seem to be somewhat interested now.   I guess I do not understand holding a grudge.   Which it's clear at least to me, you are holding a grudge.

Bottom line is these are your photos.  You are complete control on how they are used.

southernbelle0915

It kind of sounds like there's a serious power struggle going on and that this really isn't about the photo at all. 

lyndausvi

I think people do engagement announcements closer to the wedding because there is a less of a case it will not go through.  

Not everyone who has a long engagement breaks it off, but it does happen more often then you think.     

Maggie0829

What does the FI want to do in all of this?  Does the FI want to give them a picture?  Or does he not?  I would just leave the decision up to your FI.  These are his parents so if he wants to have this kind of relationship with them then that is his choice.

GuitarSlayer

STARMOON44 said:
Why would you tell her or anyone else you're using Skype? Lean away from the drama. Give them a photo and move on.

We offered the Skype calls as an alternative to the cell phone calls she wanted.  They do not have my Skype information, since she temper tantrumed over our offer to contact every person she wanted.  We were willing to do what she wanted -- call everyone -- but she only wanted it done one way -- via FI's cell phone.  We found this to be unreasonable.

What photo should we give them?  We don't have formal engagement photos. 

Maggie0829

GuitarSlayer said:

STARMOON44 said:
Why would you tell her or anyone else you're using Skype? Lean away from the drama. Give them a photo and move on.

We offered the Skype calls as an alternative to the cell phone calls she wanted.  They do not have my Skype information, since she temper tantrumed over our offer to contact every person she wanted.  We were willing to do what she wanted -- call everyone -- but she only wanted it done one way -- via FI's cell phone.  We found this to be unreasonable.

What photo should we give them?  We don't have formal engagement photos. 

One of you pre-wedding photos?  Or just any old photo that you like.

OliveOilsMom

STARMOON44 said:

STARMOON44 said:

This doesn't seem like a big deal. I'd just give them a photo. Also, transatlantic phone calls? This isn't 1927 those also aren't a big deal. It sounds like you just don't like them but digging in your heels on little things usually isn't productive.

The one phone call FI did have to make (to the grandmother) was $1.50 a minute on his cell, because I don't have a landline with international dialing; I normally communicate with Skype but "that isn't good enough" per his mother.  If we were to call every relative, and spend 20 minutes each, as his mother wanted, the price would have been astronomical. 

Why would you tell her or anyone else you're using Skype? Lean away from the drama. Give them a photo and move on.

Ditto.  You could start to simplify your relationship with FILs by using simpler words with them.  Instead of saying, "We are going to Skype grandma and tell her about our engagement." you just say, "We are going to call grandma and tell her about our engagement next!"  It sounds like FILs are old school and you two are much more new school.  So simplify your language, they can't critique your methods if they don't know how you are doing something.

As for the photo for the engagement announcement, if you don't want to give FILs a picture, then don't.  Your FI should tell his parents that you aren't interested in having an engagement announcement in the paper or on facebook.  If they press further, he should tell them that they have not respected your privacy on social media before, so you will not be giving them anymore photos. 

Perhaps a compromise you can make with your FILs would be agreeing to send wedding announcements to a list of people they determine.  Wedding announcements just state that B&G were married on x date in y city.  They usually go out the day of or day after the wedding and do not include any pictures.

Maggie0829

lyndausvi said:

I think people do engagement announcements closer to the wedding because there is a less of a case it will not go through.  

Not everyone who has a long engagement breaks it off, but it does happen more often then you think.     

Also I think when in a lot of e-announcement it tends to make mention of when they are going to tie the knot, right?  But I am guessing that OP and her FI don't want that kind of information advertised.

GuitarSlayer

Maggie0829 said:

What does the FI want to do in all of this?  Does the FI want to give them a picture?  Or does he not?  I would just leave the decision up to your FI.  These are his parents so if he wants to have this kind of relationship with them then that is his choice.

Given that people have posted re: engagement announcements being significantly after the actual engagement date (closer to the wedding), we're ok with it going in the newspaper.  So that's the principal question settled. 

I've asked him what he wants, knowing that.  He's on the fence, and told me to post here.   He is ok with giving them a photo, but he doesn't want them to post it everywhere on Facebook.  He's also not certain about what to give them, as none of our photos are staged engagement shoots, like many people seem to have.  Again he wants to please them but not be a doormat...he's said multiple times (in the convo we're having as I type) that he doesn't want this to be a pass for them to have a shower for us or to be used on invitations for said shower.  (They're jonesing about a shower; she did this for FSIL, and she held court with the church ladies while FSIL opened gifts with me in a corner, no joke.)

As PP have surmised, it's becoming more of a concern of what they're going to do with the photo, and how to handle it (i.e., if they actually try to host a shower with neither of us there, if they put it all over facebook, etc.) .  I'll change the title to reflect the new "WWTKD?"

Maggie0829

GuitarSlayer said:

Maggie0829 said:

What does the FI want to do in all of this?  Does the FI want to give them a picture?  Or does he not?  I would just leave the decision up to your FI.  These are his parents so if he wants to have this kind of relationship with them then that is his choice.

Given that people have posted re: engagement announcements being significantly after the actual engagement date (closer to the wedding), we're ok with it going in the newspaper.  So that's the principal question settled. 

I've asked him what he wants, knowing that.  He's on the fence, and told me to post here.   He is ok with giving them a photo, but he doesn't want them to post it everywhere on Facebook.  He's also not certain about what to give them, as none of our photos are staged engagement shoots, like many people seem to have.  Again he wants to please them but not be a doormat...he's said multiple times (in the convo we're having as I type) that he doesn't want this to be a pass for them to have a shower for us or to be used on invitations for said shower.  (They're jonesing about a shower; she did this for FSIL, and she held court with the church ladies while FSIL opened gifts with me in a corner, no joke.)

As PP have surmised, it's becoming more of a concern of what they're going to do with the photo, and how to handle it (i.e., if they actually try to host a shower with neither of us there, if they put it all over facebook, etc.) .  I'll change the title to reflect the new "WWTKD?"

Well you can't control what they do with the picture once you give it to them.  They can make giant posters and post them around their town if they want to.  So if you are that concerned that they are going to take your photo and put it on facebook and have a shower without you present (which they can do with or without a picture) then don't give them a picture.  If they want an engagement announcement in the paper so bad your FI could probably submit it himself over the internet.

As to what picture to use, well it can be any picture you want.  It could be your pre-wedding pictures.  It could be a goofy picture.  It could be one you take right this minute.  It doesn't have to be a specific engagement posed picture.

novella1186

I don't think sending a photo will make or break whether this unwanted shower happens. If your FMIL is as determined as she sounds, she can host a shower without any photo at all. It's not requirement. 

Maggie0829

And from your posting history it seems that you and especially your FI have had many issues with his parents.  So between those issues and probably being resentful because of those issues I get why you don't want to give them a picture.  So at this point I would tell FI "I am leaving this decision up to you and will support whatever you decide." and then wash your hands of it.

MyNameIsNot

GuitarSlayer said:

I'm mostly a lurker, but I have posted here related to the BSC FILs.  FI and I got engaged last May, and his mother did nothing but whine about it and how we didn't call every family member personally transatlantically.  After several months of getting nothing but insults about our wedding plans, I convinced FI that it was OK not to talk to these people anymore about the wedding; they will find everything out just like everyone else -- on the wedding invitation.   

FI mentioned to his father in an email early this week that we got our wedding pics done.**  Thinking that we meant engagement photos, FILs now want a photo of us to put in the paper to "Announce Our Engagement" and to post on Facebook.

Considering we've been engaged for over a year now, I think it's too little too late, both in terms of whoring us out to their friends for status reasons, as well as announcing the engagement; it's old news.  FI doesn't want to burn a bridge, as he holds out hope that they will get over themselves.

The relationship with FILs has been touch and go from the jump.  We aren't doing an engagement shoot just for them, so we don't have a fancy photo to put in a newspaper, just photos of me and him being nerds at historical sites.  Should we supply them this and not say anything about the long delay, or should we just decline the wedding announcement/bragging rights request altogether? 



**(FI and I get hitched in December, but due to academic schedules, this is the last time we see each other til then.  So we got prettied up in our wedding suit and cocktail dress and got it done in a small studio session, as they did it back in the early days of wedding photography.  We've elected not to have a pro photographer at our tiny, under 25-person wedding, so we're sort of doing the opposite of the infamous unplugged wedding - we don't care what the guests do re: cameras.)

Updated:  See below for more info; in summary, the announcement in the paper is ok, but we don't trust FILs to not use photos inappropriately.

If you got hitched already, the time for an engagement announcement has passed. It's time for a wedding announcement, because the wedding already happened. 

lyndausvi

Maggie0829 said:

lyndausvi said:

I think people do engagement announcements closer to the wedding because there is a less of a case it will not go through.  

Not everyone who has a long engagement breaks it off, but it does happen more often then you think.     

Also I think when in a lot of e-announcement it tends to make mention of when they are going to tie the knot, right?  But I am guessing that OP and her FI don't want that kind of information advertised.

The few I've seen just say "getting married in the fall"  or "in Dec", but no details beyond that.

Maggie0829

@MyNameIsNot - They aren't married yet.  They get married in December.  But they had their wedding photos done ahead of time and I am guessing since they are going to be in school they will be away from each other until their wedding in December.

Correct me if I am wrong OP.