Nailed It: The Results Of A 'Professional' Photographer's Amazing Family Portrait Photo Session

January 15, 2018

family-portraits-1.jpg

These are the photographs that mother Pam Zaring received eight months after paying 'professional' photographer Lesa Hall $250 to take some family portraits of her and her family posing in Forest Park in St. Louis, Missouri. I don't know, I'm not sure I would have watermarked those photos if I were Lisa. In Pam's own words while I email Ms. Hall to see if she offers and Glamour Shot style packages:

Ok. This is NOT a joke. We paid a photographer, who claimed to be a professional, $2-250 for a family photo shoot. Please see these FOR REAL photos she delivered to us....She said the shadows were really bad on the beautiful, clear, sunny day and that her professor never taught her to retouch photos. I literally have not laughed this hard in YEARS!!!! You can't make this stuff up.....again, this is NOT a joke - final product

I don't think Lisa even needed a professor to teach her how to retouch photos -- clearly she's a natural. Like she was born with a copy of Photoshop in one hand. If my Glamour Shots photoshoot turns out this well I'll consider it a success. "Yeah, but you're ugly." Your hurtful words aside, I can't believe Lisa was able to deliver these photos in only eight months. I wonder what was going through her mind all the time. Because my guess is 'absolute perfection', although she did forget to touchup the dogs' faces.

Keep going for several more shots as well as an unedited photo of the family for reference.

family-portraits-2.jpg

family-portraits-3.jpg

family-portraits-4.jpg

family-portraits-5.jpg

family-portraits-6.jpg

family-portraits-7.jpg

Thanks to becca b and Alexandria, who recognize museum-quality photographer when they see it.

  • Sasz

    I totally want my portrait like this. Some might suggest it would be an improvement

  • TheQiwiMan
  • Meh

    Still better than the original.

  • Nicholas Conrad
  • TheQiwiMan

    My first thought as well.

  • Mike VanIn

    Bulldust "article". Poorly written, having all the hallmarks of fake reporting: repeated reassurances that it's authentic, being the most obvious. Multiple misspellings, poor grammar and syntax, and the totally unrelated "reference" photo, add up to THIS IS FAKE.

  • Megatron Jenkins

    Yeah, this is a load of bantha poodoo, slow news day, GW?

  • Larry Schaefer

    I call bullshit on the whole thing. The story didn't make complete sense more social media clap trap.

  • This professor she was studying under, I'm guessing he taught history, or something like that.

  • asdfadfs

    this reminds me of a movie...

  • Jason Christopher

    I don't believe this story one bit.
    Someone made funny pictures and then made up a whole story to go with it, surely.

  • DThor

    Agreed. Nothing in the photos outside of the faces suggests there was exposure issues. This is 10.0 on the bullshit meter.

  • paperboy

    I'll take some free photos of the mom if they need some.

  • carterdana

    Shadows are all wrong (hey, this actually sorta fits!...)

  • Reminds me of that scene in never back down, when Baja jumps the boat into the cabanas and then says it was stolen and files an insurance claim against rival beach club.

  • Munihausen

    This has to be a joke.

  • Andyman7714

    Seriously, how bad could the shadows have been to send these instead? Doesn't make sense.

  • ntgCleaner

    Rule #1 of being a photographer. Place the sun behind the people.

  • captaindash

    #1 rule of being a photographer, learn your shit before trying to get paid. The sun behind people is not necessary in the very least if you know what the fuck you're doing.

  • Chris Lev

    I see the problem. She didn’t touch up the dogs faces. That’s some serial killer type photoshop.

blog comments powered by Disqus
Previous Post
Next Post