Yet another picture agency has ‘killed’ the Mother’s Day photo due to credibility issues

[Helfs]

KP PR are really not doing well with this!

Associated press
AFP
Reuters
Getty images
And now PA media have all issued picture kill notifications to their editors and publishers regarding the Mother’s Day image due to how highly edited it was

Not going to help with the conspiracy theories

Through the front windscreen.
They usually drive blacked out cars anyway, so a side photo would normally show nothing.

I think it depends on your views on editing and photoshopping.

My view is, I think there are 2 groups:

Group 1 - editing and photoshopping is now part of life. It is pretty much standard for everyone to edit their photos before uploading to social media.
Some people will just do a light re-touch and others will do more hard re-touching.

Either way it's no big deal.

Group 2 - editing and photoshopping is a lie. People who edit their photos are changing what they really look like and it is not the truth.
How can you trust what they say or look like if they are willing to change/edit thier photo.

Personally, I am in Group 1. I couldn't care less that the photo has been edited.

Where I think the "scandal" is the reaction from some press agencies.
I was quite naive, I suppose, and assumed all press agencies accepted that official photos from the royals may or may not have been edited.

I didn't think any of the press agencies would care.

Turns out some of them do care. That has surprised me.

Light retouching is normal.
As has been explained some of the photo agencies only issue a kill notice if they think a photo might be fake.

Conspiracy theorists think the photo might not have had Kate in (as she is too unwell/dead/abducted by aliens) and she’s been photoshopped to look like she is there. I think.

@DoYouSmokePaul Do you not think photo agencies might have the skills to detect fake photos or photos showing signs that they could be faked?

And if the editing means the photo shows something that isn't factual?

But isn’t it just desperation? To prove she is alive/still married/not grown an extra head? They must feel as though their hands are being forced and they’re doing stupid things.

They need to stop, stick to their original plan of nothing till Easter and let the world continue to go crazy. Eventually they’ll get over it, but the damage is done. People will always believe she is a body double/is an abused wife/was getting dumped/cheated on, same as the world will always half believe that Charles had Diana murdered.

I do not think photo agencies care about retouching such as wrinkles being smoothed or improvements to appearance. They will not want to circulate a photo that may have been faked such as people added or taken away, or the background totally changed.
I do not know what the original photo taken looked like, but releasing that photo would clear things up if it was simply improving appearance.

Yup, a light-hearted message of "Oh dear, we got this one wrong! These are the photos we took, we were trying to get the best of everyone in one shot and messed up. Sorry for the confusion, hope everyone had a lovely day." accompanied by a few versions of the photo with closed eyes, pouting kids etc would have cleared it all up by 9am today.

But they haven't done that...

I agree. They are letting the tail wag the dog. They should never attempt to take on SM frenzy - but be clear on their preference and need for privacy around health and just stick to their plan.

And won’t get near as many clicks! 🤣

And why would she do that? There is no reason not to smile for the camera?

For what it's worth I'm pretty sure she's had a face lift. That's about the only thing I can think of that leave you unable to be seen in public for 3 months. The swelling takes this long to be barely noticeable. The immediate swelling goes in 3-4 weeks but one looks puffy for a good few months.

They made such a massive song and dance about it being abdominal^^ surgery that my immediate thought was 'it's not abdominal surgery'

Not much else would keep her not just off work but completely invisible for this long.

That doctored picture was thrown together to make it look like she looked normal at Mother's Day which is after the surgery. It's scared herring. She'll come out after Easter looking fresher and they'll say she's fresh after having her long break.

The only other photos are:
A) in the car with sunglasses on being driven by carol. Kate looks bloated and not at all like her. Some people even questioned if it was her
B) today's car shot of them leaving Windsor where she is studiously looking the other way at a brick wall.
Contrast to other photos of her smiling out of the car.
Why would she not smile and wave. She's been hidden away. Normal people knowing the world is looking would smile and wave to reassure people. You can do that even if you feel shit. Yet here she is turning her head as far away as possible.

There is no reason she wouldn't show her face in a car. Smiling without sunglasses.

It's her face people. She's had work on her face.

The BBC's expert Prof Farid from Berkley who specialises in analysis of digital images said he couldn't find any evidence of it being generated by AI when he ran it through his systems and also said nothing to suggestion KMs face was added in afterwards

I'm not 100% sure what you mean, but I'll try and answer best I can.

My own view is all editing shows something that isnt factual, thats kind of the point of editing a photo. - you are changing the facts and the reality.

I think that's why some of the press agencies have taken a hard stance on this, as they view editing as 'not factual' and therefore will not publish photos that have been edited.

My own view is a not more nuanced and I see a lot of grey areas.

On one end of the scale, I can't see a problem with editing your own photo. With the intention of improving what you look like.
I've done it myself 😁I had to upload a picture at work. Damn right I edited out the wrinkles and the spot on my chin.
Did I lie? Yes
Does my photo show something that isnt factual? Yes.

On the other end of the scale. Is what Piers Morgan did at the Mirror. He published a fake photo of British troops torturing Iraq prisoners. The whole photo was fake and he lost his job
Was the photo a lie? Yes
Did the photo show something that isnt factual? Yes.

Both photos are not factually correct. But my view, and this is just my view, I think there is a world of difference between my factually inaccurate photo and Piers Morgans factually inaccurate photo.

Thats why this has caused a bit of a furore- We all have our different standards of what we find acceptable editing.

So sorry of I've misunderstood your question

@myrtleWilson Four international photo agencies were not convinced.
Maybe the photo agencies have more advanced technology at their disposal?

And this is not about getting rid of some wrinkles or improving skin complexion, that is normal.
The action the photo agencies took is a very big deal.

There's more to it. I wonder if the meta data told a different story. It's likely an old edited photo which the meta data may show.

Possibly @BenefitWaffle - he was described as the "father" of digital image forensics and works for news organisations so isn't completely wet behind the ears in this field.

This is why they think they van just get away eith it, that people are so stupid they will just swallow all the bs they feed. Because to think otherwise is just so unfathomable.

Same when you've been fed bs then the truth comes out people refuse to believe it...oh no your a conspiracy theorist blah blah.

🙄

What bs have we been fed that we refuse to believe? It’s clear she’s doctored the photo, quite severely. Not disputing that. But are we disputing that William has beaten her? That they’re having a secret divorce they’re covering up (why would they do it like this when they’ve always been open about separation me in the past?) that she’s dead, that’s god knows what - I think it’s fine to call those people conspiracy theorists because that’s exactly what they are. It’s getting utterly out of control.

I look at this as someone who wasn’t ever really interested in the royal family, although well done Kate, I’m more engaged now than ever; it reminds me of those Facebook posts, someone checks in at the hospital and then you have a load of replies
‘ are you ok hun? ‘
reply ‘ I’ll dm you’

it’s very odd to give half a story and then not expect enquires/theories/rumours. Especially members of the royal family who have been liaising with the press since day one. If you want privacy, say nothing. Have they not learnt from the Sussex’s?

We all know that the royal family need the press to remain in favour. Previously Kate has always been seen in such a positive light, I wonder if that will start to turn.

I don’t think some people are grasping it.

No one cares why she / they edited - the press agencies certainly don’t. People in the public eye edit their pictures more often than not and I’ve never seen one pulled.

The media going against the RF by publicly saying this is photograph is too edited, that’s the story.

In all this time she hasn’t been papped on a public highway - and then only when KP have inadvertently whipped up the tin-hatters with their dodgy photo - she is immediately seen for the first time on a public highway.

I don’t think this is strange. If you are a photographer, your time is literally money. If you are hanging around one of the various entrances to Windsor castle hoping you strike it lucky on a day that Kate will be going out (bearing in mind it’s quite likely that medical professionals will be coming to her, and not vice versa) then that’s what - some 40 days now you will have been hanging around since she left hospital, with no guarantee of an income? While there are BAFTA events/film premieres/other total events ongoing that you shoot and sell your pictures of? The economics just don’t support a photographer staking out the palace.

Today William had a rare, announced in advance diary engagement do that’s a far more likely opportunity to snap him as he heads into Westminster Abbey. Plus he’s big news right now - a photo will definitely sell. And today Kate happened to be in the car with him. Happy day for Kelvin!

(the ability to take photos through the windscreen is totally dependent on road layout and the presence of security vehicles too. They can’t always get those photos. Coming out of Clarence House yes, because the car will have to turn right or left into the Mall from a stationary position. Driving into Buckingham palace they are almost always side on though. Etc. )

It's normal in the tabloid press but these agencies are news agencies.

Most news organisations follow their own strict guidelines on the use of manipulated photographs, only using them when accompanied by an explanation that the image has been changed from the original.

News agencies, such as AP, therefore make a commitment to their clients that their photos are accurate and not digitally manipulated.

AP's rules only allow "minor adjustments" in certain circumstances, including cropping and toning and colour adjustments, as well as the removal of dust on camera sensors. It says changes in density, contrast, colour and saturation levels "that substantially alter the original scene" are not acceptable.

They can't use edited pictures as they may be of war or crime scenes where editing changes the narrative. They are super strict. Smoothing complexion would NOT fit the guidelines as it is altering reality.

They don't make exceptions. Even for RF family pictures.

It's a very composed group shot. The children are in clothes that don't suggest a quick, spur of the moment snap by dad who called them in from kicking a ball around. Additionally, the poses of the children suggest a planned photo. So the likelihood of a messy lawn / dog taking a dump / any other photo bomb is very, very slim.