Littlest Pecan Thief: Priscilla & David Waller's Baby

[Odd1Out]

The pic where the photographer isn't even looking through the view finder, just holding the camera straight over the baby- there is a comment about how they love how David is showing how protective he is. Uh, no, he's holding the camera strap out of the way of the picture. :roll:

[revengeforwanda]

Ditto to everything already said. Not only were those pictures odd, amateurish, and possibly unsafe, they were exceedingly bad. I didn't think they'd live up to the hype, but oh my, they rival anything I've ever seen on Awkward Family Photos. :? :shifty:

[miffy]

None of the men in my family wear wedding rings. When I get married I wouldn't want my husband to wear one, its weird to me.

Those photos are weird. Baby in suitcase?!?!?!

[Violet]

None of the men in my family wear wedding rings. When I get married I wouldn't want my husband to wear one, its weird to me.

Those photos are weird. Baby in suitcase?!?!?!

I think that it's only a recent tradition for men to wear wedding rings, my grandad never wore one but my dad does.

[Justme]

ok, those are some of the most bizar baby pic's I have ever seen. :roll: They *almost* make Chris Maxwell's photo's look *good*.

[WonderingInWA]

ok, those are some of the most bizar baby pic's I have ever seen. :roll: They *almost* make Chris Maxwell's photo's look *good*.

LOL! Yeah, almost.

[DarkAnts]

The pic where the photographer isn't even looking through the view finder, just holding the camera straight over the baby- there is a comment about how they love how David is showing how protective he is. Uh, no, he's holding the camera strap out of the way of the picture. :roll:

Some digital cameras have both view finders and screens. It could be the case with the camera in this photo.

[acheronbeach]

I thought perhaps the photos wouldn't be too bad - some people here do tend to snark pretty hard... but wow, those photos are just terrible and creepy.

Some are overexposed, a ton of them have the baby weirdly out of focus (a poor attempt at artistry?), the baby in the violin case is just fucking awful, and the hands picture looks like some woodland creature is grabbing at the baby for dinner.

[Ex 2x2]

Just noticed that David is in way more of the pics than Priscilla. Which really is just business as usual for these 2.

[Eternalbluepearl]

Very odd baby pictures and I laughed seeing a photo where Priscilla is in a blue and white striped shirt. It looked just like the pink and white striped shirt that every girl on 19 kids and Counting including Anna seems to own. If they buy all their clothes at thrift stores, how do they pull off so many matching shirts?!

[IReallyAmHopewell]

People without talent shouldn't try to be "artsy" in photographs. The suitcase thing is just wrong. Some of the others are just odd.

[PennySycamore]

I was told that it was a year's salary :shock: and was then told to get married to a rich man.

The diamond industry ads used to say that the engagement ring should cost a month's salary. I remember hearing that 32 years ago when I got married. I thought it was an extremely stupid criteria. My husband was in grad school when we got married and a month's salary was way too much when you got paid almost nothing. There's more to getting married than a damn diamond ring!

[WonderingInWA]

I got married in the 90's in the US and it was ALL THE RAGE to have a huge diamond ring (all my friends were one-upping each other). By the mid-90s (at least where I live) if the main stone wasn't at least one carat, you were considered unfortunate. What a ridiculous thing. So where my ring appraised at almost $8K, my husband's ring was $250! LOL. Nice. And we're divorced, so it just sits in my jewelry box.

ETA: OMG, I've become a Purity Baller! Woot! :)

[kunoichi66]

Wow. I don't think I would be willing to marry a dude who spent a YEAR'S salary on a damn ring no matter how wealthy he was.

I know! I'd think he maybe didn't have his priorities straight...

[WonderingInWA]

There used to be print ads in some of the young ladies' magazines in the late 80s/early 90s for one of the jewelry companies that said something to the effect "Is two months' salary too much to pay to celebrate your love?". LOL. Uh, yes, yes it is.

[Spider Burps]

I got married in the 90's in the US and it was ALL THE RAGE to have a huge diamond ring (all my friends were one-upping each other). By the mid-90s (at least where I live) if the main stone wasn't at least one carat, you were considered unfortunate. What a ridiculous thing. So where my ring appraised at almost $8K, my husband's ring was $250! LOL. Nice. And we're divorced, so it just sits in my jewelry box.

ETA: OMG, I've become a Purity Baller! Woot! :)

Someone had the gall to apologize to me for my engagement ring, and she even went so far as to say my husband can always replace it when he has a "better paying job." It's an antique and a family heirloom to boot, but none of that matters since the center diamond's size is apparently downright offensive. It was suggested I get a "good fake" ring until we could afford a "real engagement ring." I was absolutely speechless, especially considering this was brought up after I was already married. :doh:

[ILoveJellybeans]

I actually dont like the idea of having a huge ring on my finger, it would get in the way. Id prefer something that was quite plain and didnt get in my way.

[kunoichi66]

I actually dont like the idea of having a huge ring on my finger, it would get in the way. Id prefer something that was quite plain and didnt get in my way.

Yep. Just a plain band (or a claddagh ring) for me, thanks.

[WonderingInWA]

Someone had the gall to apologize to me for my engagement ring, and she even went so far as to say my husband can always replace it when he has a "better paying job." It's an antique and a family heirloom to boot, but none of that matters since the center diamond's size is apparently downright offensive. It was suggested I get a "good fake" ring until we could afford a "real engagement ring." I was absolutely speechless, especially considering this was brought up after I was already married. :doh:

W.O.W. I like the current trend here of using stones other than diamonds in wedding rings (if you must have a stone). The colored stones are so much prettier, I think. The center stone in my wedding ring was set really high because it was deep, so I caught it on things a lot when I first was wearing it, broke a couple prongs over the years. If I ever marry again, it will be nothing but simple gold band for me.

[Patsy]

I got married in the 90's in the US and it was ALL THE RAGE to have a huge diamond ring (all my friends were one-upping each other). By the mid-90s (at least where I live) if the main stone wasn't at least one carat, you were considered unfortunate. What a ridiculous thing. So where my ring appraised at almost $8K, my husband's ring was $250! LOL. Nice. And we're divorced, so it just sits in my jewelry box.

ETA: OMG, I've become a Purity Baller! Woot! :)

Yep. The "etiquette" of ring cost was determined by the diamond industry, then when big diamonds were in vogue and there weren't enough to go around, suddenly it was their carat value that was worth something. There are actually a fuckton of diamonds on earth, the industry just keeps the prices artificially inflated.

[argypargy]

I actually dont like the idea of having a huge ring on my finger, it would get in the way. Id prefer something that was quite plain and didnt get in my way.

My wedding/engagement ring is a single thin white gold band with a row of diamonds in it. I think it was about $500. I don't want a honkin' huge ring. I'd be constantly worried about losing it or damaging it.

[cjsmom]

W.O.W. I like the current trend here of using stones other than diamonds in wedding rings (if you must have a stone). The colored stones are so much prettier, I think. The center stone in my wedding ring was set really high because it was deep, so I caught it on things a lot when I first was wearing it, broke a couple prongs over the years. If I ever marry again, it will be nothing but simple gold band for me.

I'm a 90's bride too, and while my clear, round solitaire is pretty trendy for then, it certainly wasn't even close to a carat. I like the coloured gem wedding ring idea - it certainly gives more choice than I seemed to have. My right-hand ring, present from hubby last year on our 15th anniversary (not for the anniversary per se, but to signify a few milestones that all hit around August last year) has 'chocolate' diamonds in it, but is actually too big for me to wear every day. Our wedding bands are simple gold bands.

[Mela99]

I know! I'd think he maybe didn't have his priorities straight...

I actually had that conversation with my fiance. He thought 3 months salary was fair. I told him if he had that kind of money to spend, I'd be mad if he spent it all on a ring.

So we got my ring from Overstock, took a vacation, and put more money into our house.

He paid 990.00 for my ring, valued at 1280.00. Love Overstock.

[fundiemental]

The latest post on robertloveskendalyn.com is a "welcome baby Waller"-type post with some pictures from a post-birth baby shower.

/Public Service Announcement :)

[klf7412]

The latest post on robertloveskendalyn.com is a "welcome baby Waller"-type post with some pictures from a post-birth baby shower.

/Public Service Announcement :)

My respect for Priscilla just grew 10,000 times bigger... 26 HOURS of labor?! Go Priscilla!