Two things:
1) Enough people noticed this botch job for it to become a thing because so many nosy people were still looking for something to speculate over. Once again the public do the media's job. Journalism isn't a job now, it's up to the individual to pursue the passion of fact-finding. Media doesn't cater to that vocation but instead focuses on "social" commentary, pushing buttons and flashing around the latest cause. Basically, it's all just click farming.
2) Edited photos (botched or not) doesn't necessarily become deceptive. I'll explain, but what is considered deceptive editing is subjective:
Is changing colors and tones on a photo deception?
How about altering/swapping out individual objects?
Are removing pimples deception?
How about adjusting hair?
How about lightening up eyes with to make them brighter (that was in LT's photo)?
The line from where manipulation moves from creative freedom to deceptive techniques is variable, is all I would say. The royals should probably err on the side of caution and not play this game, though.
My take: I don't care that creative liberties were taken with the official photos but I have a different perspective than the average person. I would hate to be restricted to only my best shot in every case without any room for flexibility.
Mentioning the medical context, I photographed my grandparents together when one was in a nursing home and I had to remove medical signage and other items directly behind them and reconstruct the background, because I wanted them to be the center.. by hiding that reality, was I an author of deception? Was I changing the reality? It made more sense to just take the picture and not force them to move location. They were comfortable and natural together and it seemed cruel otherwise to force them to change places to suit my ego.
If Kate is still uncomfortable with moving around and the kids aren't necessarily behaving, I can understand needing 10-20 snaps to get the most natural looks for each of them, respectively. And "tight" clothes don't necessarily mean she's not still having some pains... after my c-section (which I was sensitive in that area for about 6mo or so), I wore tight-ish clothing because temperature also effects discomfort... baggy rubbing clothes are not ideal when you have a scar that's healing and us both being on the small frame/thin side, I totally get that. Anyway, everyone's different.
In retrospect it should've been perfectly obvious their past images are more likely to be comped (multiple shots of the subjects stitched over the main photo where needed). It would be very difficult to get all 4 people in one still, 3 of them being young children, to match up with such perfect, natural expressions all in the same shot. It's possible, of course it is, but less likely. If they rushed the shot, even less possible. Usually one or two subject will be off and their takes maybe more "meh", their eyes closed or hand blocking faces, etc. Capturing socially awkward children is even more of a struggle to really get a shot where they "light up" so to speak is rarer. So that can also dictate a shot.
What complicates things is that for the royal family, image is key. I think avoiding such creative liberties with their portraits would've been more wise especially for a rushed shot/edit job. But then compare the alternative... what the public would receive would've been "cleaned up"/staged shots, aka, like the official photo with the King, his son and his son together. The result would likely be more stoic in presentation to get the kids to sit still and behave. Kate likely wanted to avoid that, but then to edit it so obviously, it still reinforces the message people only want a veneer.. clearly the point of sharing such an intimate image for the public is to share something more. So it's a controversial take (literally).
I suspect Kate wanted to show off the charm of the individual children and that
is her unique vision. That is how she sees her family. That is completely fair. I don't think it deserves serious backlash (some, but not a lot...) even if she comped their images to put in everyone's best shot. If it was just meant for documentation purposes, then just take the picture from the camera, optimize the tones set to auto everything and upload.. because that's as simple as it gets.. and maybe they should have done that for this image, kept it minimally invasive with editing work and let any scars and silliness from the kids show them as an imperfect family, but managing. So perhaps her message for the public was inappropriate given the circumstances and that criticism is very fair.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bitontheslide
(Post 11425594)
Little snippets of stories are planted by the media or social media outlets about the extended royal family and as if by magic, a teeming horde of people feel the need to jump in and share their opinions. We are being played like performing animals at the circus. I find it really annoying, because I know it is happening and yet I cant resist joining in :laugh:
|
Which stories now? I wanna jump in. Very gingerly, though.
