NEW DELHI: The Mother’s Day photo released by the Palace, featuring Kate Middleton and her children, has become the center of widespread conspiracy theories, from suggestions of digital alterations to speculative comments about the children’s outfits.
As per a Daily Mail report, the speculation has escalated following online claims that the Princess of Wales was digitally inserted into the photo from a previous Vogue shoot. Viewers dissected the image, suggesting that the photo was actually compiled from different moments, primarily because of discrepancies like clothing and seasonal inconsistencies.
Critics argued that the Princess’s image was directly lifted from a Vogue cover from eight years prior, pointing out similarities between the photos. However, this theory was quickly discredited by Eliot Higgins of Bellingcat who said, “There’s so many minor differences … that it’s clearly just a photo of the same woman from about the same angle, not the same exact photo. It hurts my brain that I even have to point this out.”
The controversy extended to the attire of Princess Charlotte and her brothers. Detractors suggested that the photo was a composite from different events, specifically pointing out Charlotte’s red sweater and pink bracelet, insinuating that the photo was taken in December rather than March.
However, imaging technician Lee Walton has debunked these theories, affirming, “Whatever the online conspiracy theorists would have you believe, I can categorically say no one’s head or hands have been entirely replaced.”
Further scrutiny arose regarding the timing of the photo due to Prince Louis’s missing tooth, suggesting that the portrait could not have been from December as he had all his teeth during Christmas at Sandringham. This detail implies that the photograph was indeed taken after Christmas, the Daily Mail report said.
Environmental details such as the greenery in the background were also questioned. Critics speculated that the photo must have been taken earlier in the year, yet the UK’s mild winter could explain the early blooming, as noted by Guy Barter of the Royal Horticultural Society.
Despite the palace’s silence on releasing the ‘original’ photographs, the consensus among experts is that the discrepancies noted by the public are likely the result of standard photo editing, a practice not uncommon in amateur photography as admitted by Kate herself. The intent, presumably, was to create the perfect family portrait by combining the best elements from several shots.
This incident sheds light on the public’s fascination with royal imagery and the scrutiny faced by public figures in the digital age.
The lack of details regarding Kate’s medical procedure and her prolonged absence from the public eye has sparked rumors on social media platforms.
Even Britain’s usually pro-princess tabloids have raised issues about the apparent opacity surrounding her health condition.
As per a Daily Mail report, the speculation has escalated following online claims that the Princess of Wales was digitally inserted into the photo from a previous Vogue shoot. Viewers dissected the image, suggesting that the photo was actually compiled from different moments, primarily because of discrepancies like clothing and seasonal inconsistencies.
Critics argued that the Princess’s image was directly lifted from a Vogue cover from eight years prior, pointing out similarities between the photos. However, this theory was quickly discredited by Eliot Higgins of Bellingcat who said, “There’s so many minor differences … that it’s clearly just a photo of the same woman from about the same angle, not the same exact photo. It hurts my brain that I even have to point this out.”
The controversy extended to the attire of Princess Charlotte and her brothers. Detractors suggested that the photo was a composite from different events, specifically pointing out Charlotte’s red sweater and pink bracelet, insinuating that the photo was taken in December rather than March.
However, imaging technician Lee Walton has debunked these theories, affirming, “Whatever the online conspiracy theorists would have you believe, I can categorically say no one’s head or hands have been entirely replaced.”
Further scrutiny arose regarding the timing of the photo due to Prince Louis’s missing tooth, suggesting that the portrait could not have been from December as he had all his teeth during Christmas at Sandringham. This detail implies that the photograph was indeed taken after Christmas, the Daily Mail report said.
Environmental details such as the greenery in the background were also questioned. Critics speculated that the photo must have been taken earlier in the year, yet the UK’s mild winter could explain the early blooming, as noted by Guy Barter of the Royal Horticultural Society.
Despite the palace’s silence on releasing the ‘original’ photographs, the consensus among experts is that the discrepancies noted by the public are likely the result of standard photo editing, a practice not uncommon in amateur photography as admitted by Kate herself. The intent, presumably, was to create the perfect family portrait by combining the best elements from several shots.
This incident sheds light on the public’s fascination with royal imagery and the scrutiny faced by public figures in the digital age.
The lack of details regarding Kate’s medical procedure and her prolonged absence from the public eye has sparked rumors on social media platforms.
Even Britain’s usually pro-princess tabloids have raised issues about the apparent opacity surrounding her health condition.