Kate Middleton admits that she edited Mother's Day portrait

Mar 11, 2024 12:47


Like many amateur photographers, I do occasionally experiment with editing. I wanted to express my apologies for any confusion the family photograph we shared yesterday caused. I hope everyone celebrating had a very happy Mother’s Day. C
- The Prince and Princess of Wales (@KensingtonRoyal) March 11, 2024
Kate Middleton revealed that she was the one ( Read more... )

conspiracy theories, what is the truth, royalty / royal family

Leave a comment

starsremain March 11 2024, 12:08:55 UTC
I don’t get what’s so bad about editing a photo? Do people think the kids/Kate don’t exist as is? Like they’re scarred/disfigured and putting out old photos to pull a fast one on people?

All these celebrities edit the photos they publish. We’ve had so many posts of the Getty Image vs IG post, so I’m honestly shocked people seem to want to attach or believe any conspiracy theories.

Reply

teenageriot16 March 11 2024, 12:15:15 UTC
Apparently the AP do not publish edited or manipulated photos, so they asked Kensington Palace for the raw photo and KP refused to provide it.

There’s been so much speculation about Kate, they then publish this weird AI type manipulated photo on Mother’s Day. Everyone realised it’s weird, and their excuse is that Kate went a bit nuts with Photoshop? Hilarious.

Reply

cathangel March 11 2024, 12:15:17 UTC
This is out of the norm because press agencies like AP & Reuters don’t go out of their way to emit a kill order on badly edited photos. These were likely AI & probably why they made a big deal out of this.

Reply

the_pinkdress March 11 2024, 14:20:07 UTC
Exactly this is what people aren’t getting… it’s likely AI generated based on the specifics of the mistakes, rather than some photoshop. Which would mean that they’re just lying again.

Reply

pretty_angel March 11 2024, 15:04:24 UTC

The mistakes are actually typical for combining different photos when you don't have the right eye for details. Then again Photoshop now has AI-supported tools so there's a bit of that, too.

If the picture were generated by AI you would have them melt into each other and at least one of the hands would have like 6 fingers. lol

Reply

the_pinkdress March 11 2024, 15:17:38 UTC

There is a weird six fingered hand, and note how each kid coincidentally has crossed fingers? That could just be a nice family tradition, sure, or an AI glitch. George's hands also seem different sizes and Kate's seem to have that AI look to them too. Kate's shirt forgets it has a zipper at one point. George's teeth look off. Then there's all the issues with the clothing. To me this indicates more of a reliance on AI generation, although you're right that it might just be overlap between this and photoshop. Either way IMO this is not just a few tweaks or filters on an amateur photoshop, this was serious enough that the photo itself couldn't be considered authentic.

Reply

pretty_angel March 11 2024, 15:39:55 UTC

It absolutely is not a few filters that much I agree. But when I look at the picture I can literally see what tools have been used to piece together different parts from various photos. That's mostly just sloppy handiwork.

Reply

britty_stitches March 11 2024, 15:35:28 UTC
Re your last sentence, I dont think y'all understand how progressed some of the technology on its own is. And people in powerful positions would have higher chances of having access to the best in paid applied AI technology. The hands arent always fucked even when you use the free little prompt generator sites anymore. There have been magazines, with live action models+AI applications on the cover and in ads and the hands are fine. There are also programs that can be used alongside for quick editing AFTER a photo is generated. So yes, its possible it was AI generated. And its possible they were just too lazy to properly edit it correctly after the fact. So in your first paragraph you are right. But that would still make it technically AI generated, even if it was through photoshop itself.

Reply

pretty_angel March 11 2024, 15:57:56 UTC

Oh, I'm very much aware of how good AI has become - which is exactly why I don't think this is made whole cloth by AI. It's hard to put into words but AI still has some issues that make it look very artificial to the trained eye. It often fools regular people though, that much is true. Idk how many versions it'll take until even professionals can't tell anymore.

However, the point I was trying to make is that there's a difference between already having the raw material in the form of several real photos that are then clumsily combined into one and being rendered by AI.

Reply

iamtheliquorr March 11 2024, 19:04:11 UTC
I use photoshop a lot for my own amateur photography (and by that I mean doing photo shoots and posting photos of my guinea pigs to the gram lol) and at fashion school and I agree with your commentary on this thread. I would guess she tried to combine two different photos and used photoshop’s AI tools in an attempt to blend them

Reply

totteringg March 11 2024, 16:32:56 UTC
They probably used one of those editing programs that has AI tools to make editing easier but does so less precisely than a human would. It does seem bizarre to imagine her editing the photos herself though.

Reply

diablo_dancer March 11 2024, 12:33:33 UTC
It’s different when it’s sent out to news agencies as a release and the agencies then distribute to papers etc. Far higher standards that paper/websites covering a picture form Instagram.

Reply

syvlie0o0 March 11 2024, 12:38:43 UTC
The photo was specifically sent to news agencies so they could disseminate it, as news. On top of that, they're refusing to release any of the original images.

Reply

xdecadentx March 11 2024, 12:52:04 UTC
I think the outlets that called this out say they don't distribute manipulated images.

I don't think most care about it and imagine most celebs are editing pictures and putting them on Instagram but that's different to a news outlet publishing them, but for it to be such a reaction the digital analysis probably means it's more than a little editing.

Reply

curdlesnoots March 11 2024, 14:42:26 UTC
Along with what everyone else has said, AP likely would’ve gone back and asked for a replacement, unedited version of a photo and updated that (with a notification to their subscribers/clients/news outlets to update their copies).

That they issued a kill rather than an update shows the BRF were unwilling or unable to supply an unedited version.

Reply

sarahvma March 11 2024, 17:08:58 UTC
And probably because it would've meant sending along like five separate images. Also that they're indignant at being questioned, hence this current mess.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up