[Maru]

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.

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

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

Which stories now? I wanna jump in. Very gingerly, though.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Vanessa

Kate said she edited the photo herself. Not the first time they've done this with their pictures.
So I don't see anything wrong with it.
I'm just glad that she's on the mend.

well said Ness

[UserSince2005]

They don’t fool the brave

[Vanessa]

Originally Posted by UserSince2005

They don’t fool the brave

Maybe she's not looking her best and wants to get better before getting back to royal duties.
But she will be back.

[UserSince2005]

Originally Posted by Vanessa

Maybe she's not looking her best and wants to get better before getting back to royal duties.
But she will be back.

I just want to know she is safe. I don’t trust that William anymore.

[Vanessa]

Originally Posted by UserSince2005

I just want to know she is safe. I don’t trust that William anymore.

I don't trust him either. And I think he was definitely there when Thomas died. So he knew. Although i think it was accidental overdose.
Kate has her family for support, which is good.

[UserSince2005]

There is a huge scandal waiting to come out. I don’t know what it is yet but they can only keep it secret so long.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

Says the bloke who laps up every headline on Harry and Meghan

You have to laugh

Is that all you can scrape up?
Nothing to show that Kate and William are complainers?
Nothing to show that the Palace/family never defended Meghan/Harry?

I thought not. I'm the one who's laughing.

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by jet

Is that all you can scrape up?
Nothing to show that Kate and William are complainers?
Nothing to show that the Palace/family never defended Meghan/Harry?

I thought not. I'm the one who's laughing.

Sweetheart I don’t care enough

[UserSince2005]

Reminds me of Philip Schofield where for months social media was buzzing and we were told not to pay attention and how it was all nonsense, then the scandal broke.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

Sweetheart I don’t care enough

Of course you don't darling.

[Jordan.]

Originally Posted by UserSince2005

They don’t fool the brave

Caught again

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Maru

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.



Which stories now? I wanna jump in. Very gingerly, though.

very well said Maru, however, like who on here hasn't said let me have a look at that before someone uploads a photo to Insta or FB, we all want to look our best and if manipulation is the way to go I am here for it in all honesty I dont get the furore at all, and now people are demanding to see the original maybe its a mop head instead of Kate

[Glenn.]

Oop

[Parmy]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

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

The last time we were fed salacious gossip was just before ww2 started.

[Parmy]

William has been having having an affair with an uglier lady than Kate. Kate wanted revenge so had an affair with her friends boyfriend. The one that committed suicide by shotgun. It looks like william wanted revenge as well, to me.

[UserSince2005]

Originally Posted by parmnion

William has been having having an affair with an uglier lady than Kate. Kate wanted revenge so had an affair with her friends boyfriend. The one that committed suicide by shotgun. It looks like william wanted revenge as well, to me.

Oh my gosh. Wait for this to all come out as Charles dies. End of the royal family. Or King Harry ahahaha

[Parmy]

Originally Posted by UserSince2005

Oh my gosh. Wait for this to all come out as Charles dies. End of the royal family. Or King Harry ahahaha

Harrys hypocricy will end it when that happens.

[UserSince2005]

Defo lying to us. Where is Kate. What have they done with her!!!!

[Parmy]

Originally Posted by UserSince2005

Defo lying to us. Where is Kate. What have they done with her!!!!

Nothing, shes refusing to play ball cause William thumped her.

[UserSince2005]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Nothing, shes refusing to play ball cause William thumped her.

The beast! How dare he!!!

[Parmy]

Originally Posted by UserSince2005

The beast! How dare he!!!

Oh come on now, hes the soon to be king, not some jumped up teen horror actor. Let the guy relieve his frustrations. @He lost his mum too.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by parmnion

The last time we were fed salacious gossip was just before ww2 started.

[rusticgal]

Originally Posted by Vanessa

I don't trust him either. And I think he was definitely there when Thomas died. So he knew. Although i think it was accidental overdose.
Kate has her family for support, which is good.

Where have you got that info from….

[Vanessa]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

Where have you got that info from….

Just because the palace was so quick to say that William absence was not connected to Thomas passing.
Why the need to say it? It makes me super.