Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
TheWayTheLightFalls · 11/03/2024 09:20

I read the AP statement linked to above (https://apnews.com/article/princess-wales-kate-surgery-photo-manipulated-3863e9ac78aec420a91e4f315297c348).

I reckon someone at KP wasn't familiar enough with the AP guidance re Photoshop etc, the photo went out, it transpired that it was too manipulated to meet AP guidance - which is fairly strict, if you look at that link - and then the notice was issued.

I don't think this points to a broader conspiracy or issue, seems like a garden-variety cock-up to me, just amplified because of the usual madness around the RF.

FILE - A dog walker passes Kensington Palace in London, Friday, Jan. 6, 2023. The first official photo of Kate, the Princess of Wales, since she underwent abdominal surgery nearly two months earlier, was pulled from circulation by The Associated Press...

Why the AP retracted the first official photo of the Princess of Wales since her abdominal surgery

The release of the photo followed weeks of gossip on social media about what had happened to Kate since she left a hospital Jan. 29 after a nearly two-week stay.

https://apnews.com/article/princess-wales-kate-surgery-photo-manipulated-3863e9ac78aec420a91e4f315297c348

TempName247 · 11/03/2024 09:23

I agree with PP it will be a merge for best picture app. Can anyone actually cross their middle finger over their fourth finger? That’s the only thing that’s weird for me 🤣

Wellthisisntgreatreally · 11/03/2024 09:24

TempName247 · 11/03/2024 09:23

I agree with PP it will be a merge for best picture app. Can anyone actually cross their middle finger over their fourth finger? That’s the only thing that’s weird for me 🤣

Yes. It's really easy! I thought everyone could do it.

TheSnowyOwl · 11/03/2024 09:25

Flowerfairie · 11/03/2024 00:40

You said it "literally never happens". You didn't say it was a "really rare occurence" I trust no one who can't present basic facts correctly.

@VeniVidiWeeWeeif you’re finding it hard let me clarify. It happens about 4 times a year. Across ALL photos they release.

also that’s a really weird grammatical sentence that makes no sense

They don’t trust the sources of many of their photos so they are rejected before getting to the publishing stage. It’s very very normal for pictures to never end up being published.

Killing an article or picture is a media term. There is nothing massive about this. The photo isn’t legit, like a significant number of other pictures offered to the media. It’s embarrassing for the Palace but that’s about it.

TempName247 · 11/03/2024 09:25

Wellthisisntgreatreally · 11/03/2024 09:24

Yes. It's really easy! I thought everyone could do it.

I can cross it over my index finger but not the other way

CoolShoeshine · 11/03/2024 09:25

I remember a photo that was issued of the late Queen and Prince Philip, in their later years, which lots of people claimed was obviously photoshopped. Probably because it would have been difficult for both of them to walk outside to pose for the camera. No big deal was made of that by the photo agencies, could they be withdrawing this photo just to fuel the controversy for the media?

canina · 11/03/2024 09:29

Wellthisisntgreatreally · 11/03/2024 09:24

Yes. It's really easy! I thought everyone could do it.

I do this all the time!
But why oh why are there no rings on her fingers 😧
Is it a message like the Diana and the Taj Mahal? or just poor photoshop?

hotpotlover · 11/03/2024 09:33

canina · 11/03/2024 09:29

I do this all the time!
But why oh why are there no rings on her fingers 😧
Is it a message like the Diana and the Taj Mahal? or just poor photoshop?

This is the part of the story that I don't find unusual.

Her wedding ring is probably quite valuable and she therefore doesn't wear it on a daily basis.

I never wear my wedding ring (not because it's valuable, just because I find it uncomfortable)

Dymaxion · 11/03/2024 09:33

What I don't understand is , why the need for the Kill notice ? If the agency gets an image sent to them, do they run it through a process to check it is authentic or do they take it at 'face' value until someone notices something odd ?

Sparetoes · 11/03/2024 09:35

hotpotlover · 11/03/2024 09:33

This is the part of the story that I don't find unusual.

Her wedding ring is probably quite valuable and she therefore doesn't wear it on a daily basis.

I never wear my wedding ring (not because it's valuable, just because I find it uncomfortable)

I agree but it's just another sign that things are right. This has been put out as a PR exercise, they new it would be scrutinised and they've messed it up in so many ways. It's not just a family snap.

brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr · 11/03/2024 09:39

hotpotlover · 11/03/2024 09:33

This is the part of the story that I don't find unusual.

Her wedding ring is probably quite valuable and she therefore doesn't wear it on a daily basis.

I never wear my wedding ring (not because it's valuable, just because I find it uncomfortable)

If this photo was published to put an end to the speculation - particularly about their marriage - you would have thought their PR would have been very keen to show solidarity and have the PoW in shot AND all rings etc on show. The fact is it’s a weirdly composed photo with signs of manipulation, no PoW, no rings, and the last thing any competent PR should be putting out to calm conspiracy-minded critics.

They’re either incompetent (which I really doubt) or desperate.

TheSnowyOwl · 11/03/2024 09:44

Dymaxion · 11/03/2024 09:33

What I don't understand is , why the need for the Kill notice ? If the agency gets an image sent to them, do they run it through a process to check it is authentic or do they take it at 'face' value until someone notices something odd ?

They usually check but sometimes things get picked up after they are published. It’s unusual for a high profile picture to be taken down, hence all the publicity. I imagine in this case that they trusted the source and went with it before realising it had been altered.

pleasehelpwi3 · 11/03/2024 09:44

Deardoofus · 11/03/2024 07:02

@pleasehelpwi3 she is a mother of 3 🤔. Are you sure she has no genuine purpose in life? How rude your are. I hope you are proud of yourself for posting such nasty comments about a woman who is sick. Wow. Social media really does seem to directly undermine basic civility and humanity. Scary.

The royal family are not the real news here. Look at the worldwide online mob and how the hound one woman. That's what's noteworthy. People like this can be mobilised for anything.

Edited

I find your post melodramatic. I've wished her well, but it's a perfectly valid point of view to believe the royal family are a pointless waste of taxpayers' cash, especially at a time when public services are down the pan. Every day I drive to my state school to teach dodging potholes all the way, to teach a class without the necessary resources I need to do my job as effectively as I could ten years ago when schools were better funded.
What has Kate Middleton achieved in her life that will contribute to society? Fixated on marrying a prince, and then wasted all our money on a life of untold luxury. Yes of course I hope she recovers and is healthy, but she's no better than the Romanovs.

Panama2 · 11/03/2024 09:45

I thought that all photos were edited what's the problem?

BestBadger · 11/03/2024 09:46

Flowerfairie · 11/03/2024 00:20

Even if there is something in it, who cares? She’s human like everyone else and there’s more important stuff going on in the world

sure, but we don’t pay millions to whatever else is going on in the world.

I get your point, but we do spend millions on what is going on in the rest of the world. We spend millions on Ukraine, we've spent millions on military support for Israel in Gaza (as well as arming them), the MOD bribed the Saudis who we're supporting in Yemen etc

pootlin · 11/03/2024 09:47

Wellthisisntgreatreally · 11/03/2024 09:06

Looking online the tweaks to the photos are so minor and don't affect any of their faces or body proportions so why on earth is everyone up in arms? Are they suggesting a stand in has been used and the Princess of Wales has been edited on top? If so why not just say that?

Also if the royal family are still using the picture and not issuing a statement then it says more about the media than the royal family.

Edited

The media agencies don’t accept alterations except for minor changes to the tone. For Charlotte’s jumper sleeve to be misaligned it means some substantial changes have been made, perhaps such as the merge function pp refer to. It’s unlikely to be anything sinister.

For you to say media agencies refusing to use the picture ‘says more about them’ is correct. Media agencies have to abide by their standards, whereas the royal family machine aka The Firm appear to have none.

pleasehelpwi3 · 11/03/2024 09:47

MmedeGouge · 11/03/2024 09:16

“a human without a genuine purpose in life”
How can you say such a thing?
She’s a mother isn’t she, if nothing else?

Well her main purpose seems to have been to marry a prince and steal from the taxpayer.
A mother yes, aided of course by an army of nannies and servants, paid for by us, diverting money from cancer treatment and other much more worthwhile public expenditure.

VickyEadieofThigh · 11/03/2024 09:48

OliviaFlaversham · 11/03/2024 00:30

The three children have all crossed their middle and fourth fingers. Sibling joke I reckon.

Are people reading things into this in the way they did when Paul McCartney was barefoot on the Abbey Road album?

Beansandneedles · 11/03/2024 09:49

RobertaFirmino · 11/03/2024 00:13

Meanwhile, in Gaza...

Exactly, and Ukraine.

Kitkattylover · 11/03/2024 09:49

I can't think of one good/bad reason why they would manipulate Charlotte's hand in the picture, I'd never have noticed if it hadn't been all over the news pages, puzzling all of this, I am with the folk who think it's the press making a mountain out of a molehill to try and bully the Palace to make some kind of statement about it, which will also be picked apart letter by letter..

CapybaraBara · 11/03/2024 09:50

Reposting this from the other topic. Very intriguing discovery on Tiktok:

Go to the TikTok account "Allyn Aston" and watch the most recent upload! The creator has made a remarkable claim that the photo was most likely taken in November 2023 during a visit to a baby bank with Charlotte and George. The photos of that visit were released in December but the actual visit took place earlier.

  1. Kate was wearing that identical outfit of a turtleneck sweater, skinny jeans and boots. The only difference is that her sweater was white but the size of the cowl, length and ribbing looks identical. The Tiktoker suggests they simply Photoshopped the sweater in the photo to make it dark blue. (This would explain why her head looks like it's almost floating a blob of black shadow when the rest of the image is taken in bright daylight).

  2. Charlotte is wearing the same red sweater with the unique ribbed neckline, same tights and boots. In the Mothers Day photo she just had a matching red cardigan on top. Interestingly, her boots appear almost brand new in the picture from yesterday. Anyone with kids knows that shoes scuff faster than anything so the same pair would not look pristine in March 2024 if she was wearing them in November 2023. (Though giving them the benefit of the doubt that since they're Royal, they might get new boots every month).

  3. George is also wearing a checkered shirt under a blue jumper just like in the Mothers Day photo. She suspects they photoshopped the white collar to make it blue and blend it in with the jumper so it's not immediately noticeable.

If all that is true then that would be a pretty dire deception and definitely warrant the image being pulled from media outlets. Perhaps this discovery was made by someone with access to the baby bank PR images (also available on various blogs), combined with AI image manipulation detectors. Of course, it's still fully possible they just wore the same clothes from that visit in November so it doesn't necessarily suggest anything more.

Wellthisisntgreatreally · 11/03/2024 09:51

pootlin · 11/03/2024 09:47

The media agencies don’t accept alterations except for minor changes to the tone. For Charlotte’s jumper sleeve to be misaligned it means some substantial changes have been made, perhaps such as the merge function pp refer to. It’s unlikely to be anything sinister.

For you to say media agencies refusing to use the picture ‘says more about them’ is correct. Media agencies have to abide by their standards, whereas the royal family machine aka The Firm appear to have none.

The sleeve hasn't been moved, they've used an erasing or blurring tool and been heavy handed. You can follow the line of the jumper through the deleted portion. Someone just used a brush that was too large and didn't zoom in on the photo to edit it. Sloppy work rushed out without proofing.

coureur · 11/03/2024 09:51

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Echobelly · 11/03/2024 09:52

Not really. All PR photos are 'manipulated' to and people could probably find the same in any such photo if they were being as obsessive about them as they are bizarrely insisting on being about this one.

When Kate returns to her duties I fully expect we'll see reams of discussion online about all the signs she's obviously a doppelganger recruited to cover up what really happened to her 😅

brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr · 11/03/2024 09:53

Kitkattylover · 11/03/2024 09:49

I can't think of one good/bad reason why they would manipulate Charlotte's hand in the picture, I'd never have noticed if it hadn't been all over the news pages, puzzling all of this, I am with the folk who think it's the press making a mountain out of a molehill to try and bully the Palace to make some kind of statement about it, which will also be picked apart letter by letter..

Because the photo wasn’t taken in that composition. The sleeve manipulation is in the area where KM’s hand is on Charlotte’s body, as if that hand may have been composited in and the sleeve not properly cloned to cover it up. KM’s other hand is blurred on a focal plane where other things are in focuse. For me, it feels like KM wasn’t actually there, that the kids were posed with someone else or even nobody, and it was all stitched together.

Swipe left for the next trending thread