Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Another Royal photo photoshopped

117 replies

AdultFemaleWoman · 17/03/2024 23:51

Another terribly badly photoshopped photo with th Queen

Photo

https://twitter.com/Le__Katerina/status/1769399269365088335?t=Z6Za7VhDhY9w75MNGm1-6A&s=19

OP posts:
DelilahJane · 18/03/2024 09:36

The twitter link is to a Sussex squad member. The Sussex Squad has a million gripes with the RF. One is that the Sussex children aren't in any of the group great-grandchildren photos.... Even though they weren't born / didn't attend Balmoral. They're not a particularly bright bunch.

LovelyTheresa · 18/03/2024 09:53

Tetchypants · 17/03/2024 23:54

Ffs. Are we doing this with every photo Kate’s ever taken?

The Kardashians et al must be bricking it if photoshopping images is now disallowed.

To be fair, I would love if the Kardashians were no longer allowed to alter their pictures, as it would mean that they would disappear altogether.

CandidHedgehog · 18/03/2024 09:56

Tetchypants · 17/03/2024 23:54

Ffs. Are we doing this with every photo Kate’s ever taken?

The Kardashians et al must be bricking it if photoshopping images is now disallowed.

If a Kardashian ever becomes a head of state, I think we may have bigger problems……

Fast800 · 18/03/2024 09:57

Of course it was edited. How else did she manage to get 10 kids looking at the camera at the same time, smiling and with their eyes open?

LightSwerve · 18/03/2024 10:07

CasperGutman · 18/03/2024 09:32

It's reasonably likely a nursery class photo will have been edited from multiple shots, but probably only using parts of several photos taken by the photographer on the one day, in the same setting. It would be much more difficult to add in a child who wasn't even there, e.g., using a snap from home.

I know my children's nursery photos were composites from multiple shots (though they didn't really try to hide it - there were children from the morning and afternoon groups all there, who wouldn't have been posing together, and the background had been edited out so it was just the children in a white space if you know the style I mean).

My last secondary school photo from a quarter of a century ago is a composite edited together from at least two photos, so it's hardly a new thing.

Openly stating a keepsake picture is a composite is fine but not allowable for proper news photos.

CandidHedgehog · 18/03/2024 10:09

The issue with these photos is that what most people think of as photoshopping - smoothing wrinkles, using a composite of two or more photos taken at the same time to get everyone facing forward and smiling etc. is fine these days. As people say, there probably aren’t any photos in the press today (other than war / disaster photos) that don’t use it.

Outright fabricating an event that never happened is still not acceptable, particularly when it comes to people who have a public role (like the RF).

I know nothing about photoshop - never used it, don’t see it until the errors are pointed out - so I have no idea if the ‘Mother’s Day’ and ‘Queen with her great grandchildren’ photos are photoshopped (i.e. tidied up a bit) or outright fabricated (Kate / Queen never there).

The thing is, no one else knows either since the originals haven’t been released.

Also, Kim K did fabricate an event in her reality show - a scene in a car of her and Kris discussing her doubts about her second marriage that was purported to be filmed before the wedding and it transpired was actually filmed during the divorce. She got absolutely shredded for it in the press.

DoIhavegreeneyes · 18/03/2024 10:09

FFS, Julia Margaret Cameron used 'dodging' techniques to balance her pictures.
The Cottingley Fairies were manipulated a hundred years ago. They created less fuss.

Eaterysarnie · 18/03/2024 10:16

Our school photos are deinitely not photoshopped as they are awful.
Always about 20 kids rolling eyes or squinting, eyes shut.

I dont think the fr should release photos which are xomposites of multiple photos.
Its unnecessary.

However its true at school and rf etc that some of the kids photographed by being more important ie teacher or ta children etc will have better photos released.

LightSwerve · 18/03/2024 10:20

DoIhavegreeneyes · 18/03/2024 10:09

FFS, Julia Margaret Cameron used 'dodging' techniques to balance her pictures.
The Cottingley Fairies were manipulated a hundred years ago. They created less fuss.

They created enormous fuss, because they were faked.

MistyGreenAndBlue · 18/03/2024 10:22

KnickerlessParsons · 18/03/2024 09:34

The portraits of old - oil paintings and the like - are all "photoshopped" too.
People would have asked the artist to make them look a bit taller/make their nose smaller/not paint every wrinkle.

This isn't a new thing that's come along with new technology. 'Twas forever this. Human beings are a vain people.

Henry VIII famously edited out his then current wife - Katherine Parr - and had (the then long dead) Jane Seymour added to a family portrait in ghostly form because he was on the outs with Katherine.

It's also pretty certain he wasn't as tall as he appeared in portraits.

Achillo · 18/03/2024 10:30

DdraigGoch · 18/03/2024 06:24

Wait until you hear that portraits of old weren't done in a single sitting and contain some artistic licence.

That's ok thanks, I heard that when I was wee.
It's part of the reason technology can be used to show something is accurate.

jeffgoldblum · 18/03/2024 11:07

Shockingly all magazines edit their pictures too!!
🙄 did you really think all the celebrities are thin line less and perfect??

pickledandpuzzled · 18/03/2024 11:12

I was a bit shocked to discover that the boudoir photos are shopped. I assumed they were flattering angles and poses etc.

It’s demoralising to realise they aren’t.

LadyWithLapdog · 18/03/2024 11:26

My kids’ school photos aren’t composites. Neither were mine for graduation years ago. I know because I was ill that day and they didn’t add me in retrospectively.

thecatsthecats · 18/03/2024 11:45

Wow, wait until you find out about Stalin, OP.

Fun fact, all those extreme Victorian corseting photos are mostly primitive photoshop. Corsets we're far more practical and supportive than images would suggest.

Achillo · 18/03/2024 11:51

thecatsthecats · 18/03/2024 11:45

Wow, wait until you find out about Stalin, OP.

Fun fact, all those extreme Victorian corseting photos are mostly primitive photoshop. Corsets we're far more practical and supportive than images would suggest.

Have lost count of the 'wow, wait until you hear about' on this thread. There's a fair chance we have already.
People expect the RF to hold themselves to a higher standard than Stalin.
The whole RF shtick is based on them being somewhat better than the rest of us. So for it now to be at the level of equating their behaviour to the Kardashians etc., it throws the cat among the pigeons.

CandidHedgehog · 18/03/2024 12:26

Achillo · 18/03/2024 11:51

Have lost count of the 'wow, wait until you hear about' on this thread. There's a fair chance we have already.
People expect the RF to hold themselves to a higher standard than Stalin.
The whole RF shtick is based on them being somewhat better than the rest of us. So for it now to be at the level of equating their behaviour to the Kardashians etc., it throws the cat among the pigeons.

This. Unless they’ve spent their entire life in a cave, everyone knows that there have always been ‘tweaks’ to paintings / photographs etc.

It’s just that we expected the RF to be trustworthy (because that’s the public image they’ve been pushing for literally centuries - since Queen Victoria) and to, at worst, polish up their photos.

If they have been faking them entirely, that’s a big deal. If they’ve been doing so to hide serious issues, that’s an even bigger deal.

I have no idea if they have been. I’m absolutely not in the confidence of the Royals.

If the photos (Mother’s Day and Queen with great-grandchildren) are genuine (and I think they may well be), the RF could apparently prove this by showing the originals (not necessarily to the public - showing them to chosen experts would do). They haven’t and that’s why the issue rumbles on.

It probably is just inept PR (possibly because Kate does at least contribute to the RF PR strategy and she’s not well enough at the moment) but the Palaces don’t normally leave this sort of space for conspiracy theories to flourish.

JPGR · 18/03/2024 12:54

I find this bullying of the POW really distasteful. Most photos in the media are altered a bit. What does it matter.

ThisGreyPoster · 18/03/2024 13:00

This was not simply a family photo. No one would care then. It was released to the media. Some of that media state clearly that this type of photoshopping is not allowed for photos they publish.
We expect the Royal Family not to lie. It is clear now they do. The trust has been eroded.

ThisGreyPoster · 18/03/2024 13:01

@JPGR Depends on the publications. In trusted publications there are strict rules about photos. They can not be altered much at all.

jeffgoldblum · 18/03/2024 13:10

Sorry but....
this is simply not a family photo,
It's an m and s family photo !
🤣

ThisGreyPoster · 18/03/2024 13:11

Fine laugh. But decent media will now double check all the photos the Royal Family send them. They are no longer a trusted source.

jeffgoldblum · 18/03/2024 13:13

🤭

QueenOfTheLabyrinth · 18/03/2024 13:34

MistyGreenAndBlue · 18/03/2024 10:22

Henry VIII famously edited out his then current wife - Katherine Parr - and had (the then long dead) Jane Seymour added to a family portrait in ghostly form because he was on the outs with Katherine.

It's also pretty certain he wasn't as tall as he appeared in portraits.

He was over 6ft according to his suits of armour.

CandidHedgehog · 18/03/2024 13:48

JPGR · 18/03/2024 12:54

I find this bullying of the POW really distasteful. Most photos in the media are altered a bit. What does it matter.

But surely the argument is that if this sort of ‘picture faking’ is going on (and as I’ve said before, I don’t think it is), it’s not the POW doing it, it’s other people doing it and slapping Kate’s name on it to give the photos a veneer of credibility.

I don’t think it’s bullying to suggest the Palace need to stop making Kate the scapegoat. If she did screw up minor photoshopping on the Mother’s Day photos (and I think this probably is the explanation), she’s physically ill and off work - someone should have taken a second look. If it wasn’t her, having her take the blame to take advantage of public sympathy for her illness was tacky in the extreme.