General News for the Wales Family 1: September 2022-March 2024

[soapstar]

I personally don’t see how the photo is “significantly” manipulated. I’ve seen way more manipulated photos released by these photo agencies.

 

[llj]

Ridiculous. I'm sorry William and Kate even bothered trying to please the press. It was a perfectly fine picture, who cares if it was a composite?

 

[MonacoRoyalFan]

I personally don’t see how the photo is “significantly” manipulated. I’ve seen way more manipulated photos released by these photo agencies.

Just too manipulated to be offered by these agencies is all.

Ridiculous. I'm sorry William and Kate even bothered trying to please the press. It was a perfectly fine picture, who cares if it was a composite?

A lot of people, apparently. So many people that they even released a photo at all to try to appease. So many people that it's on front page of the papers. Which is why this is a terrible situation KP has gotten itself into.

 

[Asteria12]

These agencies have released many images with far more serious manipulations, they've also canned some with editing errors like the current Wales' image and obvious editing errors like the Sussex image (her face was enhanced, not photo-shopped in). The thing is, its their prerogative to choose not to use an image, and I personally don't have a big issue with that. The biggest problem is the over the top reaction by the media, and in my opinion, its only because they haven't had anything to scream about for clicks ($$) while Catherine has been absent.

Its ridiculous.

 

[shady lady]

We have seen agencies do this before for what it's worth (and I think it's worth a lot).

Back in 2019, PA Media issued a "PICTURE KILL" notice on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's Christmas card photo.

So the issue isn't so much the photoshop and manipulation, but rather why would Kensington Palace do so in the current climate they are in.

Why do these agencies use the word “kill”? A nasty and unpleasant expression especially where photos of children are involved. Just my opinion.

 

[MonacoRoyalFan]

These agencies have released many images with far more serious manipulations, they've also canned some with editing errors like the current Wales' image and obvious editing errors like the Sussex image (her face was enhanced, not photo-shopped in). The thing is, its their prerogative to choose not to use an image, and I personally don't have a big issue with that. The biggest problem is the over the top reaction by the media, and in my opinion, its only because they haven't had anything to scream about for clicks ($$) while Catherine has been absent.

Its ridiculous.

THIS!

Also, can't deny that this photo was supposed to appease concerns that Kate is doing okay. Amid concerns where just a few days ago someone asked her uncle on national television "Where is Kate?" I'm not sure why they would manipulate it in any way that could end up so error-ridden. Some folks over there seem really bad at their job.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

Pretty silly to attempt to discredit AP, Reuters and AFP or question their professionalism. These are well-renowned agencies that have software in place to detect major photo manipulation – whether the source for the photo is William or the guy next door (though obviously the agencies stand to gain a lot more from a picture by William – meaning they need to protect their own credibility as well).

The only ones at fault here are KP for toying with the picture. What's sad is that the overall changes from the original photo are probably barely even noticeable.

 

[tommy100]

I wonder if it is simply a case of there being so much chatter about the photo shopping on this picture that the agencies feel they can't keep it up on their sites pretending its not been manipulated (photoshopped). There does seem to be rather a few inconsistencies so when you add these all up its more than just one or two tweaks. A friend of mine who uses their phone for a lot of photography said there are ways to use AI / apps to pick the best bits of various photos and combine them into one - so William may have taken 4 or 5 shots and used something like that to get the "best" or KP may have done similar - got a few shots from William and decided to combine them using the best bits of both.

I don't think the photo is "fake" in the sense it misrepresents that there was a photo taken by William or is comprised of parts of photos from another time but its been too manipulated and photoshopped.

It is a silly move by KP in the sense someone should check this sort of stuff out and given the current online chatter this will only cause more problems. I think after all of this is done and dusted and Catherine is back on duty someone needs to take a long hard look at their Comms team and their comms strategy and make changes.

 

[Sister Morphine]

Why do these agencies use the word “kill”? A nasty and unpleasant expression especially where photos of children are involved. Just my opinion.

It's a common industry expression. You often hear the phrase "kill the story" in newsrooms, meaning, don't print it or don't run it. There's nothing sinister about it, whether the photo in question has kids in it or a bale of hay.

 

[GondorHasNoPants]

I don't understand why there was any manipulation of the image at all. Did they not just take the snap, check it to make sure it wasn't blurry and didn't have red eye, then say 'yep, let's go with that'. Why would there be any need to edit a child's hand, of all things?

 

[ofkingsandqueens]

Photos are edited and touched up all the time, but I believe the issue is that a raw photo was requested and not provided by Kensington Palace. There's probably no metadata for the photo (info about when the picture was taken, on what type of camera, history of edits, etc.) which triggered the kill notice.

Also, this isn't just Hello! Magazine or some other gossip tabloid issuing this recall. Reuters and AP are highly reputable photo agencies with strict guidelines. I don't understand why people are discrediting this.

 

[Sister Morphine]

They should crack a joke about all this and post a photo of Catherine winking while holding a piece of paper saying, "This photo wasn't manipulated." If we're going to be silly, let's go all out and be really silly. Times like these require a good sense of humor.

 

[MonacoRoyalFan]

They should crack a joke about all this and post a photo of Catherine winking while holding a piece of paper saying, "This photo wasn't manipulated." If we're going to be silly, let's go all out and be really silly. Times like these require a good sense of humor.

Something we could imagine seeing from the Dutch royals, perhaps!

 

[MARG]

This is an unmitigated disaster that need never have happened. After the unauthorized personal photo of Catherine and her mother on the school run, there were many people online and foreign media noting how gaunt Catherine looked and "surmising" that she was not recovering as well as expected. This unerringly led to unwanted theories about Catherine's current health. Then, like mana from heaven, 'Mother's Day' gives KP the opportunity to release a photo of Catherine and the kids all smiling and laughing with Catherine, especially, looking downright radiant.

And they blew it in spectacular style. KP has lost a considerable amount of trust and goodwill from the media and, more importantly, from the UK and Commonwealth royal followers and fans. The one time that screamed give it to us straight, and they broke faith and photoshopped. They apparently don't care about what those outside the family think and, I should imagine, that they are in shock having the photo killed just as the Sussex Christmas Card was killed for essentially the same reason.

I don't believe that anyone either wanted or expected a positively blooming Catherine looking for all the world like she could take on the world. No, we would all have settled for happy looking Catherine and kids for Mother's Day. Everyone would have nodded their head and noted that she was coming along well and looked forward to her return to duty post Easter or, if they were very lucky, a few photos of the Wales family walking to Church at Easter with the rest of the BRF.

Pretty silly to attempt to discredit AP, Reuters and AFP or question their professionalism. These are well-renowned agencies that have software in place to detect major photo manipulation – whether the source for the photo is William or the guy next door (though obviously the agencies stand to gain a lot more from a picture by William – meaning they need to protect their own credibility as well).

The only ones at fault here are KP for toying with the picture. What's sad is that the overall changes from the original photo are probably barely even noticeable.

Pretty silly to attempt to discredit AP, Reuters and AFP or question their professionalism. These are well-renowned agencies that have software in place to detect major photo manipulation – whether the source for the photo is William or the guy next door (though obviously the agencies stand to gain a lot more from a picture by William – meaning they need to protect their own credibility as well).

The only ones at fault here are KP for toying with the picture. What's sad is that the overall changes from the original photo are probably barely even noticeable.

 

[kalnel]

Here's a link to an article from The Hill, a respected Washington-based news outlet that covers politics. (The Hill is mainly nonpartisan.) News agencies retract photo of Princess Kate over concerns it was manipulated

The article notes that AP, Reuters, and Agence France Presse have all killed the photo. The prestigious photo agency Getty Images has also pulled it. The Hill quotes the outlets saying that the photo does not meet their editorial standards or policies due to manipulation.

While I understand some of the comments above saying that it shouldn't matter if things are photoshopped, I'd point out that the serious news agencies work hard to report facts and truth. When a photo has been manipulated, even for minor cosmetic reasons, it no longer represents the facts or truth of the situation when it was taken.

BTW, most of the stories I've seen point to the area in the triangle formed by Kate's left hand, Charlotte's left arm, and Charlotte's hip. If you zoom in, it looks like someone may have used the "heal" tool in Photoshop, since it picked up the pattern from the plaid skirt in a distinctive way.

 

[MonacoRoyalFan]

Definitely seems like a composition photo.

 

[soapstar]

The Telegraph contacted the AP and they say the reason they pulled the photo was because of Charlotte’s hand. They haven’t mentioned any other manipulations.

A spokesman told The Telegraph: “The photo shows an inconsistency in the alignment of Princess Charlotte’s left hand.”

The agencies have a policy of not distributing photographs that have been overly edited. Kensington Palace declined to comment.

 

[Asteria12]

It is a poorly tweaked phone photo that was rightly pulled by photo agencies due to the bad editing! Why does everything have to blown out of proportion all the time? Catherine will appear, poised and polished, for her first scheduled engagement when she is fit and healthy enough to do so. In the meantime, people need to get a grip and move on from the hysterics.

 

[Royalist.in.NC]

When I looked at the photo, the first thing I noticed were skinny jeans, no engagement, wedding or eternity ring, and her hand placement were really off, like she had long arms! I have to agree that the photo looks manipulated. I get photoshop, and it is clear that most of the photos from KP have some degree of photoshop, but this one is one of their worst attempts. Feels like a collage of older photos put together

I also noticed no rings but thought, if I’d had surgery and was home recovering, I wouldn’t be wearing my rings either.
Wonder what was really manipulated? I’ll admit I don’t really get photoshop!

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

I'm almost postive it's just a matter of insignificant little enhancements. Completely pointless mistake by KP.

It is a poorly tweaked phone photo that was rightly pulled by photo agencies due to the bad editing! Why does everything have to blown out of proportion all the time? Catherine will appear, poised and polished, for her first scheduled engagement when she is fit and healthy enough to do so. In the meantime, people need to get a grip and move on from the hysterics.

I think this is another one that's on KP. Not unlike the DRF, W&K should take a good look at their comms people because that department seems like a whole mess.

 

[ladejesus]

What's so strange with Louis' fingers? Because he wrapped his middle finger around his ring finger? I have hypermobile joints and I can exactly reproduce that hand/finger holding with my fingers. And no, it doesn't hurt.

I bet he, like me, can also do that:

File:Fingersnake.JPG - Wikimedia Commons

commons.wikimedia.org

best wishes Michiru

Exactly! It took me exactly 5 seconds to figure out what he was doing and recreate it. I don't know if you can do it if you're not double-jointed (hypermobile joints). My mom couldn't do it. It did look like something was off with Charlotte's sleeve as someone mentioned but honestly, do they have any idea how hard it is to get a picture with 3 young children all smiling and looking at the right place at the right time? I'm sure they took a few and merged the best.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

It's clearly not Louis' fingers that's the issue. I'm also pretty sure none of the agencies have ever claimed it was.

 

[Minister of Court]

It’s a bloody fake. So disappointed in them. Wonder if William is now going to pull out of the Commonwealth service?

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

KP was given a free kick like 2 meters in front of the goal (provide a nice photo on the occasion of Mothers Day) and they still managed to blow it.

 

[Alison H]

The issue seems to be Charlotte's sleeve. It looks fine to me, but I'm not a photography expert ... but do people really have nothing better to do than worry about whether a little girl's sleeve is misaligned by a tenth of an inch or whatever? And why on earth would they bother photoshopping Charlotte's sleeve? What a fuss about nothing! There's a war in Ukraine, a war in the Middle East, a war in Sudan, a general election in the UK and a presidential election in the US due later this year, and yet I wake up to a voice on the radio telling me that Charlotte's sleeve seems to be slightly out of kilter! As ladejesus said, it's very difficult to get three kids all smiling at the same time - they probably just merged a few different photos.

 

[Hallo girl]

Good Morning, well I am back from my sleep folks.
It would be interesting to know, but I am sure nobody keeps records just how many photographs are rejected by the agencies.
From what I can gather with the latest this morning, it is something to do with Charlottes sleeve, no false heads or stand ins. I really want somebody to tell me what is so different from the issues pointed out on the Xmas card to the issue of Charlottes sleeve.
Is it because it is a family taken photograph rather than a professional one. I also think the use of language is important here, by saying manipulated rather than edited or even photoshopped there is an element of conspiracy, deceit etc etc. they are covering something up, not just it is a poor quality amateur photograph and we will not use it.

I would agree with other posters that KP need to be on top and above of their game to avoid all this hysteria but do you not think that if they really had something to hide the photograph would have been perfect . Maybe there was something to be said for the men in grey suits, and it is the modernisers that are causing the problems.

All this hysteria about a photograph is reminiscent of September 97. The stories, the theories etc etc.

Have a nice day everybody, and lets just be sensible now.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

The Christmas card is actually a good example for comparison.

Is it because it is a family taken photograph rather than a professional one.

No, the Christmas photo was posted through for example AP as well (and as such subject to the same guidelines as the Mother's Day photo). It, however, was not retracted (in spite of lots of public attention to potential doctoring – which should solidly debunk any remaining doubt as to whether the three biggest news agencies in the world are faced by online frenzy).

From what I can gather with the latest this morning, it is something to do with Charlottes sleeve, no false heads or stand ins. I really want somebody to tell me what is so different from the issues pointed out on the Xmas card to the issue of Charlottes sleeve.

One potential reason for the retraction could be the amount of "mistakes" or alterings not immediately apparent unless you study the picture closely or, as I assume the news agencies have done: run it through software that detects this type of doctoring.

For example, I just saw this close-up of the Kate's zipper (brightened) and immediately thought: Don't be silly, that is not a close-up but two different pictures on top of each other. But looking at the full size picture (taken directly from KP's twitter), you can see the funny line with neither hair nor zipper lining up in the picture.

Too many of these alterations can have flagged the image as having been AI-generated (not meaning that it is in fact AI-generated – apps that use AI to optimise photos in "post-production" come to mind as a possible reason for, say, lines not adding up).

All this hysteria about a photograph is reminiscent of September 97

The news agencies have their own integrity on the line when they put out photos or news releases. I know for a fact that at least AP has committed to not "using AI to alter photos, videos, or [...] AI-generated images". So you may think their reaction is hysterical but not retracting a photo they've detected to go against their principles could seriously damage their integrity.

 

[miss whirley]

Since the press agencies are taking an anti-camera phone stance (with it's automatic touch-up and "best take" features). I hope all future pictures of the kids are taken with a camera phone too, so the AP and other agencies can't publish the photos, after they've now backed themselves into a corner.

KP can still get the holiday/birthday pictures to the public via social media, yet the histrionic regular media will be excluded.

Of course KP is too classy to stoop to that kind of pettiness. But that's what I would do. lol

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

Wait, can you provide a source on AP, AFP, Reuters or Getty not accepting pictures taken on a phone? Insofar as I know, none of these sites have confirmed this to be the reason for retracting the photo.

KP is under no obligation to release anything through news agencies. They do it for their own purpose to get their content out.

The DRF released a clearly manipulated picture of Vincent and Josephine (cropping the rest of the family out from a previously released photo) for their birthday this year. Didn't have to be retracted from anywhere as it wasn't released through an agency but through the DRF's own website.

The idea that this is some slight against the BRF is truly baffling to me How are these agencies being "histrionic" for following guidelines that are in place for everyone?

 

[xenobia]

Catherine posted a statement on their instagram story:
"Like many amateur photographers, I do occasionally experiment with editing. I want to express my apologies for any confusion the family photograph we shared yesterday caused. I hope everyone celebrating had a very happy Mother's day"