Anonymous wrote:I mean...I actually like it. Its way better than the disaster which is her original (solo) official portrait.

They gave her a soft face. As for William...at least its accurate, they didn't try to airbrush off that smug smirk he's always hosting.

It looks like they gave him a few inches and subtracted a few pounds

It doesn’t look like her at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I noticed the body language -- to me, it's odd she's leaning away from William not into him. It just seems off and I don't care for this portrait at all... ha, as if my opinion matters! ; )

I thought exactly the same, it was the first thing I noticed! They seem so disconnected from each other.

I seriously wonder if they even 'sat' for the portrait? I mean it looks like their PR people just sent the artist a photo of them together, had him frankenstein them looking away from the camera and gave Kate different jewelry.

Anonymous wrote:I mean...I actually like it. Its way better than the disaster which is her original (solo) official portrait.

They gave her a soft face. As for William...at least its accurate, they didn't try to airbrush off that smug smirk he's always hosting.

I dislike the pose and the way they are looking to the side but I LOVE both Kate's outfit and the way it is rendered. This is very classically her and the artist really has a way with light and texture because it's very beautiful. It reminds me of the way satin and silk and fur show up in many Dutch masterworks -- where the fabric seems to glow in this soft and inviting way.

But even that may work against the composition because her dress and shoes are so striking and he is much more understated -- it pulls the balance to one side and makes the portrait look off center somehow.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They look bored and unapproachable. Why are they facing away from the onlooker?

This. What are they looking at off to the side and why?

+1

The artist says he wanted them to look casual and approachable but instead the look sort of... accidental? This would be fine as a photo but is weird as a portrait because it winds up looking like they are standing at a cocktail party or something. Like you find yourself wondering "what are they looking at?" and then the answer is obviously "nothing" because this is a staged portrait not a candid photo. It makes no sense.

You can do a portrait with the subject looking away, but it needs to look more natural. Like this one of Lincoln, one of my favorite presidential portraits. He looks thoughtful and internally focused, which is appropriate for a leader, and the portrait really emphasizes his physicality:

Anonymous wrote:I noticed the body language -- to me, it's odd she's leaning away from William not into him. It just seems off and I don't care for this portrait at all... ha, as if my opinion matters! ; )

I thought exactly the same, it was the first thing I noticed! They seem so disconnected from each other.

I noticed the body language -- to me, it's odd she's leaning away from William not into him. It just seems off and I don't care for this portrait at all... ha, as if my opinion matters! ; )

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They look bored and unapproachable. Why are they facing away from the onlooker?

This. What are they looking at off to the side and why?

Reminds me of another former senior royal who is fond of such poses.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks good, and it’s certainly better than the portrait a few years back, which made her look like a 50 year old woman.

eh this is better but still not great -- she is much prettier than both paintings.

Agree it doesn’t do her justice!

Anonymous wrote:They look bored and unapproachable. Why are they facing away from the onlooker?

This. What are they looking at off to the side and why?

I mean...I actually like it. Its way better than the disaster which is her original (solo) official portrait.

They gave her a soft face. As for William...at least its accurate, they didn't try to airbrush off that smug smirk he's always hosting.

They look bored and unapproachable. Why are they facing away from the onlooker?

What are they looking at?

Anonymous wrote:It looks good, and it’s certainly better than the portrait a few years back, which made her look like a 50 year old woman.

eh this is better but still not great -- she is much prettier than both paintings.

Anonymous wrote:oh yay - another thread bashing her looks. you guys are nasty.

think she is way prettier than this irl. Her face is weird in this painting.