Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Thank you. For context, she took 30 photos that I appear in and my face is entirely or partially obscured in each photo. No one else’s face is obscured at all in any photos she took.
I’m not going to say anything, but it seems like too many to be a coincidence and if she she was just a bad photographer, why isn’t anyone else’s face obscured?
What do you mean by "obscured"? Like she's posting pictures of people smiling at the camera, but you were standing behind someone, and in another one you are standing kind of behind a post, etc? Or like you were in the picture but she blurred it? I need more detail about how you were "obscured" in 30 pictures.
Anonymous wrote:Thank you. For context, she took 30 photos that I appear in and my face is entirely or partially obscured in each photo. No one else’s face is obscured at all in any photos she took.
I’m not going to say anything, but it seems like too many to be a coincidence and if she she was just a bad photographer, why isn’t anyone else’s face obscured?
Anonymous wrote:Just assume it’s a coincidence and use other photos. If she says anything about why you’re not using her photos, just state matter of fact that you wanted to use where your face isn’t covered. You will sound like a lunatic if you accuse her, trying to ensure that you are fully or partially blocked. How many pictures are we talking about here that she took and you are obscured?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I would be so thrilled. At least they aren’t bad pictures if there are no pics of you at all. My “work event” photos always make me look like a cow chewing its cud or something. Ugh
+1. The idea of work event photos is awful. My office did start this collection of photos a year or so ago — oddly, I’m not in any of them even thought I know I was at most of the events.
Anonymous wrote:Thank you. For context, she took 30 photos that I appear in and my face is entirely or partially obscured in each photo. No one else’s face is obscured at all in any photos she took.
I’m not going to say anything, but it seems like too many to be a coincidence and if she she was just a bad photographer, why isn’t anyone else’s face obscured?
Anonymous wrote:OP you’d benefit from reading The Four Agreements. The second one is “don’t take anything personally”
“Whatever happens around you, don’t take it personally… Nothing other people do is because of you. It is because of themselves. All people live in their own dream, in their own mind; they are in a completely different world from the one we live in. When we take something personally, we make the assumption that they know what is in our world, and we try to impose our world on their world.”
Anonymous wrote:Thank you. For context, she took 30 photos that I appear in and my face is entirely or partially obscured in each photo. No one else’s face is obscured at all in any photos she took.
I’m not going to say anything, but it seems like too many to be a coincidence and if she she was just a bad photographer, why isn’t anyone else’s face obscured?
Anonymous wrote:Thank you. For context, she took 30 photos that I appear in and my face is entirely or partially obscured in each photo. No one else’s face is obscured at all in any photos she took.
I’m not going to say anything, but it seems like too many to be a coincidence and if she she was just a bad photographer, why isn’t anyone else’s face obscured?
Anonymous wrote:I would be so thrilled. At least they aren’t bad pictures if there are no pics of you at all. My “work event” photos always make me look like a cow chewing its cud or something. Ugh