Controversial Photo of Kate: This is probably the wrong section, but here goes. It seems that Kensington Palace released a doctored image of Kate and her kids for English Mother's Day.

Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum

Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰

General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)

Controversial Photo of Kate

Page 1 of 5 next> last>>

Mar 13, 2024 08:17:06 #

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

This is probably the wrong section, but here goes.

It seems that Kensington Palace released a doctored image of Kate and her kids for English Mother's Day. It was sent to major newspapers to show how Kate was doing after her surgery. The newspapers pulled the picture after they became suspicious that the picture was manipulated. Take a look and see what you think.

One article - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/photo-agencies-kate-picture-editing-scandal-b2511726.html

(Download)

Mar 13, 2024 08:24:42 #

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Looks fine to me.
But I don't go looking for hand or clothes "details".
I just enjoy the shot as a whole.

Mar 13, 2024 08:45:51 #

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Longshadow wrote:

Looks fine to me.
But I don't go looking for hand or clothes "details".
I just enjoy the shot as a whole.

Newspapers have to be (should be) careful about publishing phony photos.

Mar 13, 2024 09:25:10 #

kvanhook Loc: Oriental, NC

I heard from the news that it was Kate's picture, taken by her husband, and that she did the editing herself. If so, wasn't it her's to do with as she saw fit? I don't think she was deliberately making a "phony" image.

Mar 13, 2024 09:25:15 #

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

jerryc41 wrote:

Newspapers have to be (should be) careful about publishing phony photos.

Yes for "news", but a touched-up family photo?

But the Royal Family is always under scrutiny. Little, if any, privacy.

God forbid someone should remove zits on teenagers.......

Mar 13, 2024 09:51:35 #

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Longshadow wrote:

Yes for "news", but a touched-up family photo?

But the Royal Family is always under scrutiny. Little, if any, privacy.

God forbid someone should remove zits on teenagers.......

According to the news, it was more of a composite photo, meant to show that Kate is doing fine when, maybe, she isn't. This wasn't a case of adjusting contrast and exposure, and it's unlikely that Kate did this herself. Because the royals are talking, rumors will continue to spread.

Mar 13, 2024 10:32:19 #

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

jerryc41 wrote:

This is probably the wrong section, but here goes.... (show quote)

Personally I think they are trying to make a mountain from a mole hill. Kate has admitted she did some adjustments to the photo and that she is an amateur photographer. Therefore, it seems the photo would not be perfect.

Mar 13, 2024 10:37:27 #

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

PhotogHobbyist wrote:

"Some adjustments" covers a lot of territory. Bruce Jenner had "some adjustments" made. If major newspapers refuse to publish this picture, the adjustments were probably more deceptive than aesthetic.

Mar 13, 2024 10:37:43 #

Burtzy Loc: Bronx N.Y. & Simi Valley, CA

Yeah, it's clear those hands holding the kids come from nowhere and really aren't Kate's. She clearly has no arms. And certainly an AI which so far is not very good at hands, crossed the fingers of the younger boy. But really, the things that supposedly were manipulated are so minor as to be a nothingburger...and as we know, nothingburgers hid in the background of all photos. What a waste of journalism.

Mar 13, 2024 10:44:56 #

GregS Loc: Central Illinois, USA

I agree...looks good to me. What am I missing??

Mar 13, 2024 10:53:56 #

insulator Loc: JASPER, ALABAMA

Looks fine to me except the extra set of hands, who do they belong to?

Mar 13, 2024 10:55:16 #

Canisdirus

On the bright side...when the world war kicks into gear, we won't have to be inundated with this piffle.

Mar 13, 2024 10:55:25 #

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Jerry, there is a nine-page topic in main discussion forum on this monumentally important news item! How could you have missed it?? https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-801836-1.html

.

Mar 13, 2024 10:56:32 #

srg

jerryc41 wrote:

Did Bruce save the "Raw" version so that he could return to the original in case he changes his mind?

Mar 13, 2024 10:57:31 #

kpmac Loc: Ragley, La

This will be filed away in my "Who cares?" archive.

Page 1 of 5 next> last>>

If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.

General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)

Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections

UglyHedgehog.com - Forum