Kate's New Picture

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still don't get why they tried to pass the old photo off as new. They OFTEN use slightly older photos to commemorate holidays and birthdays. For instance, last year they used photos from the same two photo shoots to commemorate Christmas 2022, Will & Kate's anniversary in 2023, and Mother's Day 2023. They also used photos from another shoot (or possibly the same shoot but different outfits) to commemorate all the kid's birthdays. None of these photos were contemporaneous and in some cases would have been as much as 9-10 months old when posted. None of them were posted with a date -- you can see from the photos that they are "recent enough" to represent generally what they look like right now. It was fine.

So why did they suddenly feel the need to try and pass this photo off as recent? In fact, why even make it ambiguous? Share a photo from December 2023 that was prominently covered to commemorate Mothers Day so it's not even an issue.

I just don't get it. It's such an own goal. They lied, got caught in the lie, and still aren't even admitting it, instead posting a vague admission from Catherine that she sometimes toys with photoshop. It is very strange behavior from a press shop that is usually pretty good.

Didn't she have a recent new hire? Maybe down to inexperience? Could also track with the last minute photoshop?

Yes, I saw something about how she hired a new equerry. I don't really know what an equerry does these days, but it used to be the person who took care of the horses, and I don't believe Kate rides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still don't get why they tried to pass the old photo off as new. They OFTEN use slightly older photos to commemorate holidays and birthdays. For instance, last year they used photos from the same two photo shoots to commemorate Christmas 2022, Will & Kate's anniversary in 2023, and Mother's Day 2023. They also used photos from another shoot (or possibly the same shoot but different outfits) to commemorate all the kid's birthdays. None of these photos were contemporaneous and in some cases would have been as much as 9-10 months old when posted. None of them were posted with a date -- you can see from the photos that they are "recent enough" to represent generally what they look like right now. It was fine.

So why did they suddenly feel the need to try and pass this photo off as recent? In fact, why even make it ambiguous? Share a photo from December 2023 that was prominently covered to commemorate Mothers Day so it's not even an issue.

I just don't get it. It's such an own goal. They lied, got caught in the lie, and still aren't even admitting it, instead posting a vague admission from Catherine that she sometimes toys with photoshop. It is very strange behavior from a press shop that is usually pretty good.

Didn't she have a recent new hire? Maybe down to inexperience? Could also track with the last minute photoshop?

She recently got a new personal secretary, but they are not inexperienced, just new to Catherine's service. If that person doctored that photo and posted it on Catherine's behalf, they should already have been fired, and I also tend to think if that's what happened it would be an easy out for the family -- "An employee of the Kensington Palace made an error in posting a photo on behalf of the Prince and Princess. We apologize for the confusion it has caused and will handle the matter internally." No need to scapegoat Catherine herself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the pic was pre-surgery, and I am not sure why she insists on taking her own pics and editing them. She's not a pro, and that's ok. My guess is she looks like crap right now, bloated from steroids, and doesn't want people to see her that way. But of course it backfired spectacularly due to all the crazy conspiracy theorists out there.

Why so much photoshopping of the kids' clothes when that would raise red flags? Why imply it was a photo from 2024?

I think she's just not great at photoshop, had to photoshop swollen hands too...Nobody wants to see her looking big or bad in any way. I think about that sometimes: people like her or Jackie O., 20lbs heavier, wouldn't have been liked at all, or married who they did. The pressure to look perfect is real.

What I don't get is, why was everybody photoshopped?
- if they used a November 2023 photo, it was because she looked normal (no puffy hands or face yet). In this scenario, they'd avoid the need to photoshop Kate's face and hands. But they would need to photoshop the kids' clothes so people wouldn't suspect they were passing off an old photo.
- if they used a current photo, then maybe they'd photoshop Kate's face and hands to reduce puffiness. But then the kids could wear different clothes and there'd be no reason to photoshop the kids.

They could have used an old photo and not photoshopped it or claimed it was recent. If people didn't like it, they could have their supporters point out they often post older photos to commemorate holidays and remind people they said Kate would be out of the public eye until after Easter. Hold the line.

If they really felt the need to post a current photo, they could have taken a photo but used artistry to protect Catherine's privacy. A photo from a distance, a photo of her with the kids artistically backlit, etc. think of when new parents post photos of new babies. Sometimes people post close ups of their hands holding the baby's hands, and one reason for this is that a lot of new moms don't want photos of themselves right after birth.

The idea that their only option was to doctor an old photo and claim it was a new photo is crazy.

Right. But if they used the old photo, then there would have been no need to photoshop Kate, they just needed to photoshop the kids' clothes. And if they used a recent photo that showed her face and hands, then there would have been no need to photoshop kids, just Kate's hands (and maybe her face).

In either scenario, not everybody needs to be photoshopped. Yet they clearly photoshopped everybody.

Whoever does PR for Kate/Wm needed to use an older photo of Kate because she either isn't cooperating or doesn't look too good right now. At the dame time, they need to use newer pics of the kids, because, well, kids GROW. So Photoshop.

Fine. They used an old photo. Then why did they photoshop Kate's hand, if she was looking fine last November.

The kids didn't grow that much since November. They were photoshopped to change their clothes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the pic was pre-surgery, and I am not sure why she insists on taking her own pics and editing them. She's not a pro, and that's ok. My guess is she looks like crap right now, bloated from steroids, and doesn't want people to see her that way. But of course it backfired spectacularly due to all the crazy conspiracy theorists out there.

Why so much photoshopping of the kids' clothes when that would raise red flags? Why imply it was a photo from 2024?

I think she's just not great at photoshop, had to photoshop swollen hands too...Nobody wants to see her looking big or bad in any way. I think about that sometimes: people like her or Jackie O., 20lbs heavier, wouldn't have been liked at all, or married who they did. The pressure to look perfect is real.

What I don't get is, why was everybody photoshopped?
- if they used a November 2023 photo, it was because she looked normal (no puffy hands or face yet). In this scenario, they'd avoid the need to photoshop Kate's face and hands. But they would need to photoshop the kids' clothes so people wouldn't suspect they were passing off an old photo.
- if they used a current photo, then maybe they'd photoshop Kate's face and hands to reduce puffiness. But then the kids could wear different clothes and there'd be no reason to photoshop the kids.

They could have used an old photo and not photoshopped it or claimed it was recent. If people didn't like it, they could have their supporters point out they often post older photos to commemorate holidays and remind people they said Kate would be out of the public eye until after Easter. Hold the line.

If they really felt the need to post a current photo, they could have taken a photo but used artistry to protect Catherine's privacy. A photo from a distance, a photo of her with the kids artistically backlit, etc. think of when new parents post photos of new babies. Sometimes people post close ups of their hands holding the baby's hands, and one reason for this is that a lot of new moms don't want photos of themselves right after birth.

The idea that their only option was to doctor an old photo and claim it was a new photo is crazy.

Right. But if they used the old photo, then there would have been no need to photoshop Kate, they just needed to photoshop the kids' clothes. And if they used a recent photo that showed her face and hands, then there would have been no need to photoshop kids, just Kate's hands (and maybe her face).

In either scenario, not everybody needs to be photoshopped. Yet they clearly photoshopped everybody.

Whoever does PR for Kate/Wm needed to use an older photo of Kate because she either isn't cooperating or doesn't look too good right now. At the dame time, they need to use newer pics of the kids, because, well, kids GROW. So Photoshop.

But they use older pictures of the kids all the time. No one is confused. They posted a photo taken in fall 2022 for Mothers Day 2023. The kids grew. No one cared -- they understood that obviously families often just use the most recent good pic for something like that, which might be 4 or 5 months old. They did not "need" to post a photo of the children taken within the week. This requirement did not exist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I still don't get why they tried to pass the old photo off as new. They OFTEN use slightly older photos to commemorate holidays and birthdays. For instance, last year they used photos from the same two photo shoots to commemorate Christmas 2022, Will & Kate's anniversary in 2023, and Mother's Day 2023. They also used photos from another shoot (or possibly the same shoot but different outfits) to commemorate all the kid's birthdays. None of these photos were contemporaneous and in some cases would have been as much as 9-10 months old when posted. None of them were posted with a date -- you can see from the photos that they are "recent enough" to represent generally what they look like right now. It was fine.

So why did they suddenly feel the need to try and pass this photo off as recent? In fact, why even make it ambiguous? Share a photo from December 2023 that was prominently covered to commemorate Mothers Day so it's not even an issue.

I just don't get it. It's such an own goal. They lied, got caught in the lie, and still aren't even admitting it, instead posting a vague admission from Catherine that she sometimes toys with photoshop. It is very strange behavior from a press shop that is usually pretty good.

There's no vaild reason for it! They're scrambling and not thinking straight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:113 pages all over a tummy tuck.

She's the last person to need a tummy tuck

I had three kids and also had a tummy tuck and no amount of losing weight or working out would have addressed what the tummy tuck fixed. But that said a tummy tuck is an outpatient procedure, I imagine the royals are treated less like cattle but this is way too long a recovery timeline for a TT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13183233/Kate-leaving-Windsor-Castle-Prince-William-Westminster-Abbey.html

Proof of life today

This is not proof of life. We can’t even see her face.

More of SOS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't Rose also married?

Her DH is reportedly gay.

Her children are rumored to have been fathered by some one else

Her twins are older than Prince George. If they are really Willy's then they'd be 3rd & 4th in line.

Nope. Illegitimate kids don't count.

There would be a revolution if they tried to pull that off, French-style.

KATE MIGHT LOSE HER HEAD!

Shame. She already lost her hands.

No, Kate is popular, it would be the people revolting over a new mistressQueen Consort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still don't get why they tried to pass the old photo off as new. They OFTEN use slightly older photos to commemorate holidays and birthdays. For instance, last year they used photos from the same two photo shoots to commemorate Christmas 2022, Will & Kate's anniversary in 2023, and Mother's Day 2023. They also used photos from another shoot (or possibly the same shoot but different outfits) to commemorate all the kid's birthdays. None of these photos were contemporaneous and in some cases would have been as much as 9-10 months old when posted. None of them were posted with a date -- you can see from the photos that they are "recent enough" to represent generally what they look like right now. It was fine.

So why did they suddenly feel the need to try and pass this photo off as recent? In fact, why even make it ambiguous? Share a photo from December 2023 that was prominently covered to commemorate Mothers Day so it's not even an issue.

I just don't get it. It's such an own goal. They lied, got caught in the lie, and still aren't even admitting it, instead posting a vague admission from Catherine that she sometimes toys with photoshop. It is very strange behavior from a press shop that is usually pretty good.

Didn't she have a recent new hire? Maybe down to inexperience? Could also track with the last minute photoshop?

She recently got a new personal secretary, but they are not inexperienced, just new to Catherine's service. If that person doctored that photo and posted it on Catherine's behalf, they should already have been fired, and I also tend to think if that's what happened it would be an easy out for the family -- "An employee of the Kensington Palace made an error in posting a photo on behalf of the Prince and Princess. We apologize for the confusion it has caused and will handle the matter internally." No need to scapegoat Catherine herself.

BBC tried to give them a lifeline. Using Catherine as an excuse made it worst

[Anonymous]

THis Lady Rose person is horsey-faced. She's too genetically related to Willy to make babies.

[Anonymous]

Why does everyone assume she is unhappy with William? I am more concerned her operation didn’t go well and she is really sick. I have doubts she is any of those car photos. The one with her mom does not look like her. Even if you had surgery, it has been months.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Likely answers

https://x.com/tess78606957/status/1767245156577648788

No way. She is the best thing that ever happened to the BRF

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13183233/Kate-leaving-Windsor-Castle-Prince-William-Westminster-Abbey.html

Proof of life today

This is not proof of life. We can’t even see her face.

What would be a satisfactory proof of life?

We saw her face- and the claim was it was a body double.

Photo release - shown to be doctored not current


Today's photo - can't see her face.

So what do you need?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13183233/Kate-leaving-Windsor-Castle-Prince-William-Westminster-Abbey.html

Proof of life today

This is not proof of life. We can’t even see her face.

What would be a satisfactory proof of life?

We saw her face- and the claim was it was a body double.

Photo release - shown to be doctored not current


Today's photo - can't see her face.

So what do you need?

a photo of her face that does not have to rely on a telephoto lens. Clear and in focus. It is not difficult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13183233/Kate-leaving-Windsor-Castle-Prince-William-Westminster-Abbey.html

Proof of life today

This is not proof of life. We can’t even see her face.

What would be a satisfactory proof of life?

We saw her face- and the claim was it was a body double.

Photo release - shown to be doctored not current


Today's photo - can't see her face.

So what do you need?

Don't be obtuse. There have been three attempts at proof of life in the last week.

1) Blurry photos taken by american paps with her in the car with her mom

2) Photo issued from the palace that is immediately proven to be heavily doctored

3) Blurry photos taken by a KP placed photographer where she refuses to look at the camera.

What would obviously clear this up is a normal to high quality picture of her face. Which isn't exactly a lot to ask from someone who's literal job is to be photographed in places and who has a substantial staff paid to make her look good. The fact that they have not done this despite CLEARLY knowing it needs to be done and fumbling two attempts shows that something is wrong.