Giant No More

On Friday Alexis finally had her three-year doctor's appointment, and I learned something I had suspected--she's no longer REALLY tall for her age. The kid was born tall and then stayed in or above the 95th percentile for height and weight right up until her 2nd birthday when she slipped a little ways, down to the 75th percentile. This year, however, she slipped even further. She is now in the 50th percentile.

For some bizarre reason that I can't even begin to explain, hearing that was like someone took away a bunch of my Good Mommy Gold Stars. Had I not fed her right? Should I have forced her to eat less salad and more potatoes? Should I have insisted she drink two cups of milk instead of just one? Would she be taller if I made her drink juice instead of water?

Stupid, I know. Ridiculous, even.

You don't have to tell me height can't be controlled. You don't have to tell me it doesn't matter ONE IOTA. I know. I also know I was one of the shortest kids in my class in 4th grade, but came back after summer break to be the tallest girl in 5th grade. Mr. Husband is 6' 2" and I am 5' 8", so odds are Alexis will be tall. And if she's not? WHO CARES?

Gah!

I need my head checked for even giving Alexis' height a moment of thought. It's ridiculous.

But.

It has dawned on me that since the kid STILL doesn't have much hair, and she's no longer a giant for her age, I should be able to get by with calling her "2 and under" a little bit longer.

That might just come in handy from time-to-time. *ahem*

You Know Your Kid is a Pittsburgher When . . .

. . . She insists on putting french fries in her salad.

Kid Pics, Volume 1

A while back someone was harassing me about photography and basically asked me to explain how I manage to get so many halfway-decent photos of Alexis. I happen to think there are lots and lots and lots and lots of people who rock the camera action MUCH better than I do, but after some brow-beating, I agreed that I would post a few tips to getting halfway-decent photos of a kid. I figured I would post them on the weekends when hardly anyone is reading anyway. I'm not sure how many there will be . . .until I get bored of it, I guess. Anyhoo.

In the not-so-distant past, I was one of those people who bought a disposable camera once per year, and still never managed to actually fill it. In fact, I know that somewhere in this house is an undeveloped disposable camera that has the before photos from when we remodeled our kitchen five years ago. I never had it developed because I never managed to take 36 photos, and now the camera is lost. Nowadays, I take more photos in one day than I used to take in a year. Nearly all of them are of Alexis, and the #1 thing I have learned with all that practice is to fill the frame with kid. For example:

Bad!

See how it's hard to focus on the kid with all that crap in the background? It's distracting, and Alexis is so small in the photo that you can't really see her.

But if I move in closer, it's a much better photo:

(Totally a crappy set of photos, but they serve the purpose.)

Here's another example of filling the frame with kid:

It's no secret that I lurve me some extreme close-ups. I happen to think kids have the most incredible facial expressions, and the only way to truly capture them is to get close. (BTW, I have been using a 50mm lens--i.e. NO ZOOM--since mid-December. So far I have found that using my legs to get closer to what I'm photographing is much better than any kind of camera zoom because it forces me to really "see" what I'm trying to get in the frame.)

Of course, sometimes you want to photograph more than just a kid's face. You still probably want to fill the frame with kid. Like this:

Just to complicate things, there are times when the "rule" is meant to be broken. Like this one:

In that photo, it's the white space that makes the photo. If Alexis were filling the entire frame, you wouldn't be able to see the trail of footprints, or the otherwise undisturbed snow. All that blankness gives the photo a certain tone, and that would be lost with a close-up.

I tend to check my backgrounds and figure out if they detract from the photo. If they do, I move closer. Once I think I'm close enough, I move even closer. That's how I end up with a lot of photos that I'm happy with. Like this oldie but goody.