Kate's New Picture

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’d guess this all has to do with Charles’ petulant jealousy when the public focuses on Kate. He despised the attention Diana received and still hates being upstaged. Will and Kate have to be careful never to upstage Charles and Camilla. This has to be hard to navigate from a PR standpoint because Charles is a pissy twit and Camilla is a hag, former mistress.

My guess is that she did have surgery, and Will and Kate wanted a break while Charles and Camilla’s team didn’t want the younger two grabbing the spotlight. Charles always makes bad decisions and his actions got this mess rolling.

I don’t care for Charles or Camilla but I’m having a hard time following your assertions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s pretty convincing that the Mother’s Day photo was an old photo edited to look new. But why - the Mothers Day 2023 insta photo was from the same photo shoot as the Christmas 2022 shoot; they also used a photo in the same clothes for Kate & Wills’ anniversary in 2023. So old photos shouldn’t matter.

My question is, whoever did the editing, why did they edit out her ring? Photos from the charity event show her wearing it, so one would assume they intentionally edited it out. But why? Bizarre.

I agree, it's so odd. The easiest explanation is that she just wasn't wearing the ring for this photo. I do think it was taken the same day as the baby bank video based on the clothes, but it looks like it was taken at home. Maybe she doesn't wear that giant ring 100% of the time at home but always wears it for public events, and this might have just been a photo taken at home (maybe even actually by William) because the kids were dressed up and Kate's hair and makeup were done for the event and they wanted a cute pic of the four of them together.

I also don't see any obvious photoshopping on her hand itself that would indicate the ring was removed from the photo. I think she just wasn't wearing it.

This person thinks Kate's hand was photoshopped. https://twitter.com/byetwit/status/1766844203445657913?s=20

Yikes! As if Kate would be photoshopping her whole hands like this. They need a better excuse

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s pretty convincing that the Mother’s Day photo was an old photo edited to look new. But why - the Mothers Day 2023 insta photo was from the same photo shoot as the Christmas 2022 shoot; they also used a photo in the same clothes for Kate & Wills’ anniversary in 2023. So old photos shouldn’t matter.

My question is, whoever did the editing, why did they edit out her ring? Photos from the charity event show her wearing it, so one would assume they intentionally edited it out. But why? Bizarre.

I agree, it's so odd. The easiest explanation is that she just wasn't wearing the ring for this photo. I do think it was taken the same day as the baby bank video based on the clothes, but it looks like it was taken at home. Maybe she doesn't wear that giant ring 100% of the time at home but always wears it for public events, and this might have just been a photo taken at home (maybe even actually by William) because the kids were dressed up and Kate's hair and makeup were done for the event and they wanted a cute pic of the four of them together.

I also don't see any obvious photoshopping on her hand itself that would indicate the ring was removed from the photo. I think she just wasn't wearing it.

This person thinks Kate's hand was photoshopped. https://twitter.com/byetwit/status/1766844203445657913?s=20

It’s interesting, the people you follow.

Eh, these things get passed around. Any comment on the moving index finger knuckle?

[Anonymous]

Can someone please link the photos from November that show the family wearing outfits similar to the ones in the Mother’s Day pic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d guess this all has to do with Charles’ petulant jealousy when the public focuses on Kate. He despised the attention Diana received and still hates being upstaged. Will and Kate have to be careful never to upstage Charles and Camilla. This has to be hard to navigate from a PR standpoint because Charles is a pissy twit and Camilla is a hag, former mistress.

My guess is that she did have surgery, and Will and Kate wanted a break while Charles and Camilla’s team didn’t want the younger two grabbing the spotlight. Charles always makes bad decisions and his actions got this mess rolling.

But his initial surgery was initially sold as quick. The cancer diagnosis didn't come until after Kate had announced she was stepping back through Easter.

Are you arguing with Charles' cancer diagnosis (type undisclosed) and treatment?

[Anonymous]

I saw a theory on Twitter that she tried to commit suicide by shooting herself in the stomach. That would be a decent explanation for the abdominal surgery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can tell that the photo of Kate's face was taken at a different time than her kids because the light sources are different.



Is this all because Kate's face is swollen from post-surgery steroids so that's why she's hiding it? If so, why don't they just say that???

that's why people were saying the zipper was portion on her is cut off. They replaced her head on this photo. Sick really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:87 pages...the lady is home sick and bored. She played around with the picture.

A friend of mine with decades worth of experience with Photoshop said that it takes considerable amount of experience/proficiency to edit a photo to even have it pass a first glance. She sincerely doubts Kate has the skill or knowledge.

I'm a semi-professional photographer with quite a bit of photoshop experience (I don't photograph much professionally anymore but did for years and continue to do photographs for family and friends including retouching regularly) I don't totally agree. It depends on what the retouching is. The programs have gotten better over the years and for a regular person, erasing a blemish, fixing the lighting or color contrast, and a variety of other minor retouches that can make a photo look "cleaner" and slightly improve the appearance of subjects is not that hard. I do suspect that Kate (or someone) has done this with photos SHE has taken over the years, and I don't recall any major scandals about those photos she's taken of her family looking very obviously photoshopped. I think she's a more-than-decent amateur photographer, looking at her photos, and there's no evidence that she has a heavy hand with retouching or a preference for heavily retouched photos.

The retouching of the photo published over the weekend was not minor. It was extensive, and that's why it was so badly done. Seeing the explanation that they were altering the color and pattern of clothing items now clarifies why it looks so bad -- altering the color and especially the pattern on fabric in a photograph is very tricky, especially when the subjects are seated or moving, as it can be very hard to make the new color/pattern look like it flows with the fabric and it can be especially hard to correct for lighting, leading the photo to look flat and cut and paste in a very specific way. This is what makes that photo look like it might have been spliced together and what led to some people speculating Kate's head was photoshopped in. That always sounded off to me, but the explanation that it's related to changing the color/pattern of clothing items make perfect sense when you look at the photo. Most of the glaring errors in the photo shop are clustered around the girl's "plaid" skirt and Kate's sweater, which was apparently actually an ivory color.

It is a botched Photoshop job but not because it's impossible to lightly retouch a photo as an amateur. It's because whoever retouched the photo attempted a very difficult alteration that would normally require a skilled, experienced hand (for instance, despite having used Photoshop a lot, I would not attempt that level of alteration and would tell a client who asked for it that it would be better to simply take another photo). A minor retouching would not have caused this kind of stir. This was a major alteration, executed poorly and possibly in a hurry, based on some of the glaring errors.

I still do not understand the purpose of changing the patterns/colors of clothing however. Is it so eagle-eyed viewers won’t realize it’s the same outfits as they wore publicly to some function a few months ago?

They re-wear clothes all the time, so that's not it. It was done so that the palace could pass it off as a recent photo to show that Kate is fine and all is well.

+1, they went out of their way to alter one item in each of their outfits. Charlotte's skirt, Kate's sweater, George's collar, Louis's sweater. The alteration was not to improve anyone's appearance but just to make this item look different (presumably than it did in the photos/videos of the November event).

And they captioned the photo with "[camera emoji] 2024" and credited William with the photo.

The only reason for any of this is to make it seem like it's a new photo of Kate post-surgery. Otherwise there is no reason. As has been clearly shown, they use old photos to commemorate certain days like Mother's Day all the time.

Don’t quit your day job Sherlock Holmes. :roll:

[Anonymous]

Does anyone think maybe the photo was AI-generated as opposed to photoshopped? It looked AI generated to me -- something off about the positioning of the kids and their smiles. AI-generated photos tend to have that quality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s pretty convincing that the Mother’s Day photo was an old photo edited to look new. But why - the Mothers Day 2023 insta photo was from the same photo shoot as the Christmas 2022 shoot; they also used a photo in the same clothes for Kate & Wills’ anniversary in 2023. So old photos shouldn’t matter.

My question is, whoever did the editing, why did they edit out her ring? Photos from the charity event show her wearing it, so one would assume they intentionally edited it out. But why? Bizarre.

I agree, it's so odd. The easiest explanation is that she just wasn't wearing the ring for this photo. I do think it was taken the same day as the baby bank video based on the clothes, but it looks like it was taken at home. Maybe she doesn't wear that giant ring 100% of the time at home but always wears it for public events, and this might have just been a photo taken at home (maybe even actually by William) because the kids were dressed up and Kate's hair and makeup were done for the event and they wanted a cute pic of the four of them together.

I also don't see any obvious photoshopping on her hand itself that would indicate the ring was removed from the photo. I think she just wasn't wearing it.

This person thinks Kate's hand was photoshopped. https://twitter.com/byetwit/status/1766844203445657913?s=20

Yikes! As if Kate would be photoshopping her whole hands like this. They need a better excuse

OMG!! SHE LOST HER HANDS!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can tell that the photo of Kate's face was taken at a different time than her kids because the light sources are different.



Is this all because Kate's face is swollen from post-surgery steroids so that's why she's hiding it? If so, why don't they just say that???

It's the same lighting.

DP here:
Absolutely not. The kids are front lit + from the top right, whereas Kate is clearly side lit.

Charlotte is in front of her and there may be a soft filter on her face. It's the same lighting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:87 pages...the lady is home sick and bored. She played around with the picture.

A friend of mine with decades worth of experience with Photoshop said that it takes considerable amount of experience/proficiency to edit a photo to even have it pass a first glance. She sincerely doubts Kate has the skill or knowledge.

I'm a semi-professional photographer with quite a bit of photoshop experience (I don't photograph much professionally anymore but did for years and continue to do photographs for family and friends including retouching regularly) I don't totally agree. It depends on what the retouching is. The programs have gotten better over the years and for a regular person, erasing a blemish, fixing the lighting or color contrast, and a variety of other minor retouches that can make a photo look "cleaner" and slightly improve the appearance of subjects is not that hard. I do suspect that Kate (or someone) has done this with photos SHE has taken over the years, and I don't recall any major scandals about those photos she's taken of her family looking very obviously photoshopped. I think she's a more-than-decent amateur photographer, looking at her photos, and there's no evidence that she has a heavy hand with retouching or a preference for heavily retouched photos.

The retouching of the photo published over the weekend was not minor. It was extensive, and that's why it was so badly done. Seeing the explanation that they were altering the color and pattern of clothing items now clarifies why it looks so bad -- altering the color and especially the pattern on fabric in a photograph is very tricky, especially when the subjects are seated or moving, as it can be very hard to make the new color/pattern look like it flows with the fabric and it can be especially hard to correct for lighting, leading the photo to look flat and cut and paste in a very specific way. This is what makes that photo look like it might have been spliced together and what led to some people speculating Kate's head was photoshopped in. That always sounded off to me, but the explanation that it's related to changing the color/pattern of clothing items make perfect sense when you look at the photo. Most of the glaring errors in the photo shop are clustered around the girl's "plaid" skirt and Kate's sweater, which was apparently actually an ivory color.

It is a botched Photoshop job but not because it's impossible to lightly retouch a photo as an amateur. It's because whoever retouched the photo attempted a very difficult alteration that would normally require a skilled, experienced hand (for instance, despite having used Photoshop a lot, I would not attempt that level of alteration and would tell a client who asked for it that it would be better to simply take another photo). A minor retouching would not have caused this kind of stir. This was a major alteration, executed poorly and possibly in a hurry, based on some of the glaring errors.

I still do not understand the purpose of changing the patterns/colors of clothing however. Is it so eagle-eyed viewers won’t realize it’s the same outfits as they wore publicly to some function a few months ago?

They re-wear clothes all the time, so that's not it. It was done so that the palace could pass it off as a recent photo to show that Kate is fine and all is well.

+1, they went out of their way to alter one item in each of their outfits. Charlotte's skirt, Kate's sweater, George's collar, Louis's sweater. The alteration was not to improve anyone's appearance but just to make this item look different (presumably than it did in the photos/videos of the November event).

And they captioned the photo with "[camera emoji] 2024" and credited William with the photo.

The only reason for any of this is to make it seem like it's a new photo of Kate post-surgery. Otherwise there is no reason. As has been clearly shown, they use old photos to commemorate certain days like Mother's Day all the time.

Don’t quit your day job Sherlock Holmes. :roll:

Stop trying to gaslight. The picture has been heavily modified. That's been confirmed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can tell that the photo of Kate's face was taken at a different time than her kids because the light sources are different.



Is this all because Kate's face is swollen from post-surgery steroids so that's why she's hiding it? If so, why don't they just say that???

It's the same lighting.

The light reflection in their eyes (there's a photography word for it) is a different shape. The kids' light source is more rectangular, while Kate's is round and pinpoint.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I saw a theory on Twitter that she tried to commit suicide by shooting herself in the stomach. That would be a decent explanation for the abdominal surgery.

Theories on Twitter deserve about as much attention as a Paw Patrol story line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone think maybe the photo was AI-generated as opposed to photoshopped? It looked AI generated to me -- something off about the positioning of the kids and their smiles. AI-generated photos tend to have that quality.

No, it's not an AI picture.