Official Portrait of kate Middleton

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Shes gonna need restelin

No one escapes it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The artist's last painting was very controversial but eventually sold 1k on ebay

http://entertainment.topnewstoday.org/tv/article/4036755/
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/12/18/80-year-old-botched-restoration-jesus-painting-sells-for-over-1000-on-ebay/

lol!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yeah what is up with the bags under the eyes though?

So it's not air brushed and and all blurry edged with a downward angle Myspace profile shot that you could post on Instagram™. She's going to be the Queen of mother-f*cking England. There are things that are more enduring than how many likes you get on FB--I know, hard to believe, not everyone cares to look like a fake, plastic perfect, 21 year old Barbie doll replicant.

umm no one said any of that. but those bags aren't even that visible normally I don't see why the artist would draw them. It seems like even if they were there, the artist wouldn't draw (highlight) your imperfections.

[Anonymous]

All we see of Kate is smiling paparazzi photos. No one goes around all day with an ear to ear smile on their face.

She is probably happy because the portrait represents what she looks like in ordinary life. She is used to her real face, not a barrage of smile-for-the-camera moments.

[Anonymous]

I get bags when I smile and they go away when I don't.

I think the same applies to her and the guy just messed up with mixing up the smiling eyes and the almost smiling lips.

Yup he messed up but she's too classy to complain.

[Anonymous]

It does not do her justice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yeah what is up with the bags under the eyes though?

So it's not air brushed and and all blurry edged with a downward angle Myspace profile shot that you could post on Instagram™. She's going to be the Queen of mother-f*cking England. There are things that are more enduring than how many likes you get on FB--I know, hard to believe, not everyone cares to look like a fake, plastic perfect, 21 year old Barbie doll replicant.

No, she isn't. She'll probably pick up another new title or two along the way, but "Queen" will never be one of them. Do we call Elizabeth's husband "King"? No. He's not a monarch, he's a consort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think it's hard to say this one is bad. It's bad. There, I said it. It's almost laughably bad. You know it's bad when a real life photo of her looks much much better.

THIS. It's AWFUL. She looks mean, haggard and old. She's gorgeous in real life. MY ass she loved that painting. Queen told her to suck it up and she did. The photographer wanted to capture the real Kate? Does he hate her?

FAIL. It's a painting.

[Anonymous]

its not that the painting makes her look hideous (though it sort of does), its that it is a hideous painting. as a work of art, it is just horrible. he's blurred most of the face, hyperfocssed the eyes, there's no defining sensibility in his approach, brushstroke is randomly applied, the colors have no distinct identity as conveying anything material. Its a horrible work of art. and anyway, painted portraits are so dated. WHy not an amazing photograph?

maybe she should have chosen one of these artists....

http://www.npg.org.uk/photoprize1/site12/index.php

[Anonymous]

The picture of Kate makes her look older than her mother. The cheeks are terrible, as well as the nose and the bags under her eyes. The eyes are bad as well. Someone needs to try again for a more realistic portrayal.

[Anonymous]

The expression is hard to read, because the unsmiling eyes conflict with the half-smile, which itself seems secretive. I don't need the wide smile she does at public events, so that's not it. My guess is, making the eyes reflect the half-smile (I don't think it's a smirk) would have required the artist to add lines around her eyes, basically like adding crows' feet, and that would have *really* aged her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yeah what is up with the bags under the eyes though?

So it's not air brushed and and all blurry edged with a downward angle Myspace profile shot that you could post on Instagram™. She's going to be the Queen of mother-f*cking England. There are things that are more enduring than how many likes you get on FB--I know, hard to believe, not everyone cares to look like a fake, plastic perfect, 21 year old Barbie doll replicant.

No, she isn't. She'll probably pick up another new title or two along the way, but "Queen" will never be one of them. Do we call Elizabeth's husband "King"? No. He's not a monarch, he's a consort.

Because he married the heir of the throne. The title of consort (king consort, prince consort) has been around for a long time.

She will definitely be queen, same as all the non-heir queens before her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I get bags when I smile and they go away when I don't.

I think the same applies to her and the guy just messed up with mixing up the smiling eyes and the almost smiling lips.

Yup he messed up but she's too classy to complain.

I think she's taking the high road too. I think she's also learned a lesson from Diana, and she has thought long and hard about what it means to be a royal. She's decided it's to her advantage to really toe the line. Being married to a man she loves, and who loves her, will make it all easier. Diana didn't have that.

[Anonymous]

I think this portrait would have been a lot better if he'd made her face rosier. She looks so dull and ashy. Even that small color change would have been much better. But based on Q.E.'s portrait, perhaps the ashiness speaks to dignity? Who knows, but this portrait is not good.

[Anonymous]

The Queen hates younger Royal women. At her age, that would be most everyone. I sense the Queen Mother hand in this choice of portrait.