Kensington Palace released two new portraits of Prince Louis & Charlotte


Princess Charlotte of Cambridge turned three years old a few days ago, but Kensington Palace only released – or re-released – an old photo of her. Generally, we do get new photos of the Cambridge kids on their birthdays, so it was slightly notable, although perfectly understandable given the fact that the Duchess of Cambridge recently gave birth to Prince Louis, and the family hadn’t organized a photoshoot for Charlotte. But, as it turns out, Kate did do a photoshoot for Charlotte… and Prince Louis! For her birthday, Charlotte got to pose for one photo with her new little brother. Kate shot the photos and the palace released two: one of Charlotte kissing Louis and one of little Lou solo, taken just a few days after he was born.

First of all, is it wrong that I want an adult-sized white jumper/sweater that looks like Louis’s in the solo photo? That little sweater is awesome. Secondly, I do feel a little bit sorry for Charlotte! It’s HER birthday and everybody was making a fuss about her brother. I mean, the girl is a princess who will have a wonderfully easy life, but still.

What else? Little Lou is very red, isn’t he? And he’s a big baby – one of the biggest royal babies in the past 100 years or so. I’m trying to make out his coloring, but we really can’t tell. His eyes look dark right now but all babies have dark eyes. I hope he’s a redhead!! We probably won’t know about his coloring for a while, unless Will and Kate do a full-family photoshoot for George’s upcoming birthday. But something tells me that George would be displeased at the idea of sharing his birthday spotlight with his siblings.

Photos courtesy of Kensington Royal’s Instagram.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

147 Responses to “Kensington Palace released two new portraits of Prince Louis & Charlotte”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Jane says:

    That second picture is just precious!

  2. Lily Randall says:

    Princess Charlotte keeps nailing these PR ops. 💐

  3. Roe says:

    Kate really isn’t a good photographer

    • Aloe Vera says:

      It would be great if she knew how to use the automatic focus (and perhaps not have the f stop at 5)

    • Bee says:

      Both photos are out of focus. The subjects are lovely but the photos really could be better, even by amateur standards. Maybe, Kate needs glasses?

      • jwoolman says:

        They look fine to me. I really don’t see all the fuss about it. The kids are clearly in focus, who cares about the background?

        If they had a professional shoot, then people would just complain about wasting taxpayer money on professional photographers. Parents can get better pics of kids in the home than professionals anyway.

      • Tanguerita says:

        @jwoolman
        that’s the point- the kids are CLEARLY not in focus. But Katie fancies herself a serious photographer, so there.

    • Nic919 says:

      No she isn’t but no one has the guts to tell her. So we end up with ridiculous situations like this one where the photos had to be embargoed by the UK press but everyone else published them anyway. And Chris Jackson has enough of a relationship with the family that he could have gotten photos that were better composed and just as touching. It’s not like Charlotte and George aren’t used to staff being around, and Nanny Maria is there all the time too.

      • Ann says:

        I know William and Kate do not work much, that is a fair point. But, wow, could we – just once – say that the children are cute in these pictures? Do we really need a professional photographer to see the kids? I can see how cute they are just fine in these pictures. Some commenters will never ever give Kate a break.

      • Luna says:

        Yeah, what I see are loving photos taken by a mom.

      • Nic919 says:

        Regular mothers also don’t require embargoes for their photos either which is what was being critiqued here. No one is saying the kids aren’t cute but the royals play constant PR and this is just another example of it.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Another person who cannot tell the difference between criticism and hate? We are 15 years into the Bill and Kate Middleton show; these photo games are just one more example.

      • dodgy says:

        @Ann – Kate supposedly did art history and photography. She has nothing but time to get better. It’s been seven years, she can get better.

      • minx says:

        These kids will have millions of professional photos taken of them during their lifetimes. It’s nice to see some casual snaps.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Given their control freak parents, I wouldn’t count on that minx. Many see this as just another example of their obsession with control, nothing cute or fun.

      • notasugarhere says:

        This also highlights their peevishness around not releasing a separate photo for their daughter’s birthday. If all they are going to do is release blurry snaps taken by Mummy Kate, where is the harm in releasing a separate one of Charlotte? It all smacks of their control freak natures.

      • Megan says:

        As parents of three children under the age of five, William and Kate have every right to control the public’s access to their children. Just because you want to see more of them doesn’t mean you are obligated to meet your demands. Critizing them for raising their children as they seem fit certainly sounds like hate to me. But that’s just my read.

      • Luisa says:

        @Megan, I have the same read as you. Also, there is demand and expectation of photos and then these photos aren’t good enough cos Kate is useless at everything, including taking photos of her kids. And also, these photos are criticised for being non-professional yet not natural enough, see below comment, “they look staged”. So yeah, it totally reads like hate to me.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Their extremist attitude, threatening the press, and going against what is legal for everyone else in the country are the problems. I’m not advocating allowing paps to follow their every move, rather a lightening of their obsessed, control freak natures enough to realize they’re only making it worse.

        See the good example of Madeleine of Sweden, who releases photos regularly on her social media accounts. Her kids are never going to be working royals, while all of the W&K kids are going to live off the taxpayers their entire lives. Part of the reason the royals stay in their positions is the idea that people connect with them; difficult to do when you see a posed photo of their kids once a year.

      • Veronica T says:

        The taxpayers are going to be supporting these kids the rest of their lives. I don’t think putting out a birthday photo, Christmas photo and Easter photos is too much for the public to expect. Kate and Wills need to be more grateful for their extreme privilege on the backs of the taxpayers or they may find themselves looking for jobs. (HAHAH. Not happening, but my meaning is clear! )
        And Harry has threatened the press too, and from my reading, has filed more complaints against the press than any other royal. But he is the good guy here, right?? Groan. I bet he is worse than William with his kids.

      • Nic919 says:

        Also putting her copyright on the photos means that Kate profits from the photos and not a professional photographer who actually needs the money. With so few pictures of the new baby and the kids the price for the photos is higher than usual. So where does the money go? Charity?
        The royals dole out tidbits here and there and get away with their wasteful lifestyle because few care or dare to question them.

      • notasugarhere says:

        If Harry has kids, they will not end up as working royals unlike however many kids W&K have. He’d have more reason, and legal justification, in keeping them out of the public eye. Like Edward and Sophie have kept their kids away from the public.

      • TyrantDestroyed says:

        Ugh I didn’t realize about the copyright for the photos. Keeping the business into the family. Soon the official photographer will be Marshmallow Uncle.

      • PrincessK says:

        Most people are ordinary people and not photography fanatics and do not give a hoot what the ‘experts’ say. The photos are lovely.

    • notasugarhere says:

      She was an Art History major, not a Fine Arts major. We’ve seen her lack of photography and painting “skills” for years, but there are those who will insist these photos are brilliant.

    • Wiffie says:

      God forbid someone even attempt to play with the arts, especially because less than 100% of people enjoy her art!! SHAME THAT MOM! TAKE AWAY HER CAMERA! SHE DOES NOT DESERVE IT!!

      LAWD.

      • RedOnTheHead says:

        Wiffie, totally agree. I can’t get my head around all the criticism for some pics a mom took of her children. They’re just pics, unless I missed something I haven’t read anything about anyone pretending it’s “art”. I don’t have any strong feelings about Kate one way or the other, but it seems like some people just can’t give her any kind of a break. I wonder if her critics ever stopped to think that maybe this is just a mom having a loving moment with her babies.

      • Luisa says:

        @Wiffie, lol totally agree.
        Not a Kate fan in any way but lawd give me a break. If they were professional, people would be complaining that these people are so stiff and cold and why can’t the useless Kate even manage to photograph her own kids?

      • Lilly says:

        Ha ha. I did some senior portraits in my family and they still love them. They’re not “professional,” but taken with a great camera. Everyone still loves them, especially the contrast with the usual type of portraits. It’s corny, but love adds a aspect that can’t be recreated.

    • someone says:

      Maybe my eyes are bad but I think the pictures look great

      • Argonaut says:

        I can’t find a single spot in the photo of Charlotte and Louis that is actually in focus. On a technical level, they are not good photos. cute kids, but the photography skills just are not there. I would expect better for photos they choose to release to the public. No one is saying Kate shouldn’t take photos of her kids, we are questioning why HER photos are the ones she insists on releasing them to the public instead of letting a pro handle the public photos. Aren’t the Cambridge’s all about keeping private moments private anyway? Or is it a money game, like how Kate’s dad took that awful backlit shot of them with baby George and Lupo? Keeping it all in the family?

    • minx says:

      The best pictures of my kids were taken on the fly. By “best” I mean the cutest, the sweetest, the funniest, etc. They were just doing something cute and we snapped. THOSE are the ones I got enlarged and then framed, and those are the ones on our bookshelves and end tables. I frankly never cared for professional or school pics of my kids—the lighting, the posing—and have none of those displayed. An example: Our year old daughter, wearing a diaper and t shirt, climbed up on the couch where her 8 year old brother was engrossed in his Game Boy (remember those?). She felt asleep, angelically, on his shoulder—and he’s still playing the Game Boy. My husband snapped. It is the cutest, sweetest, funniest picture. People rave about it. Maybe not the highest quality, but who cares? It has a place of honor on our bookshelf.

      • Esmom says:

        I’m with you. My mom asked me just last week why I never send her my kids’ school photos. I said it’s because they look unnatural and unflattering and don’t capture their personalities. I always order the cheapest option then throw them in a drawer.

        I know some people who do professional shots every year with their kids, sometimes in multiple seasons! Not that they turn out badly but to me that’s a ton of money to spend when regular snapshots are reflective of some of the best moments.

      • LadyT says:

        I completely agree. My favorite photos are of my children captured through my eyes. They are snapshots of my treasured memories. I never valued the “professional” pictures nearly as much.

      • Luisa says:

        @Minx that sounds so adorable.

      • minx says:

        Luisa, thanks! The picture that is my avi here on the left is my daughter about 18 years ago. She got into lipstick and smeared it all over her face. She was grinning proudly and my husband just snapped the pic.

      • Luisa says:

        @Minx, awww it’s too cute. Good thing you didn’t wait for a professional photographer to capture that eh? ;)

      • SmalltownGirl says:

        This! I have professional family photos done every year but when I think of my top 10 photos of my kids, those aren’t the ones that come to mind. It’s the photos I take myself, capturing the real, very sweet moments. Like the picture of my oldest bent over the baby seat to greet his new baby brother. Those pictures capture a warmth that professional photos just can’t.

      • Honest B says:

        Again none of you are in the royal family producing photos that will be published worldwide. If you were wouldn’t you at least want to take photos that were in focus?

    • Veronica T says:

      She would have taken better pics with her iphone. I thought they were out of focus, so got my glasses and they are still out of focus!!! Not very good!

  4. Jess... says:

    That picture of Charlotte with her baby brother is adorable.
    And the Duchess may not be a good photographer, but nobody better than a mother to capture sweet moments like these! Children are always more comfortable around their parents than any random professional photographer, so I don’t mind that the pictures are not “great”. They are sweet and that’s all that matters to me

  5. TyrantDestroyed says:

    Both photos are very sweet. If I had access to many resources like Kate I would consider having the photos taken by a professional instead .
    Louis reminds me of my daughter when she was born she had the same coloring and size and tons and tons of hair.

  6. DazLondon says:

    For the baby being red. It’s been really hot here in London the past couple of days

  7. Esmom says:

    His coloring reminds me a lot of my older son’s so much when he was a newborn — his rosy, almost suntan-looking glow was actually a touch of jaundice. Not enough to keep him in the hospital but I did have to bring him out in the sun for vitamin D in just his diaper (it was summer) for several minutes every day for about a week to clear it up.

    Lovely children!

  8. lightpurple says:

    Not just his little sweater, I want his whole little outfit. It looks SO comfortable and soft. I think Charlotte had something similar or maybe even the same outfit when she was about the same age.

  9. WMGDtoo says:

    Kate really does an amazing job of capturing sweet moments with their children. She missed her calling. She has a great eye.

    And they have such adorable children. I watched a video of William talking the children to see their mother and brother. Charlotte was waving to the crowd. Not the least bit fazed by the attention.

  10. kiddo says:

    Were these taken with an iPhone5? or…?

  11. Suzanne says:

    They certainly make beautiful babies…That Charlotte is a mini me of the Queen. I just LOVE her little cherub face. Beautiful family.

  12. Ladykeller says:

    They may be useless human beings but they sure do make cute babies.

  13. HeyThere! says:

    I have a photo like this of my kids when my youngest was brand new. It’s one of my favorites!

  14. Shambles says:

    That kid looks like he already knows he’s better than me

  15. grabbyhands says:

    All the pictures of the kids have been cute so far, but nothing is going to top George’s Baby Churchill phase for me.

  16. Luna says:

    These photos make my ovaries twitch all over the place.

  17. SmalltownGirl says:

    The pictures are gorgeous.

    Also, I snorted at they “why not just arrange for a professional to do it” because I am a mom of 3. We do professional photos and there are some lovely shots but it’s also a bit of a shot show to get 3 kids to behave. We have no family photos from my middle child’s newborn shoot because my older would not do-operate, but I have tons of pictures of my oldest snuggling his brother, taken I’m the sweet moments that just happen when my kids are feeling relaxed and not under pressure.

    I am not a great photographer and maybe the quality of photos doesn’t compare, but getting the kids in the moment is more important and honestly that’s what these pictures feel like. Kate captured a sweet moment between her two youngest children and shared it with all of us.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Whereas they have used professional photographers or staff before, which resulted in some of the best (of the few) we’ve seen. The George birthday one by a staffer was particularly good.

    • Liberty says:

      I agree with Smalltowngirl….It is a sweet and more intimate photo of the children, and they were comfortable it’s fine. I might side-eye the skills if they’d hired her to shoot British Vogue’s key fall fashion layout, yes.. But not here.

      My grandmother keeps saying that Princess Charlotte has such an adult face and expression, she will certainly be running that family and advising her doppelgänger, the Queen, soon. She feels George has ceased looking thunderously Churchillian and now looks a bit tremulous, as if he knows and accepts that there is a new Lord Mayor in town: little Charlotte. She also thinks Louis already looks like a canny businessman who has his own plans. 😀

  18. Merritt says:

    The picture of Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis is very sweet. I wish there had been a solo picture of Charlotte released since it was her birthday.

  19. Jen says:

    Adorable children. Would have loved to see a 3 year old portrait that shows Charlotte’s face. From that angle, she really resembles George. I hadn’t noticed before.

  20. violet says:

    That is one – big – baby. Charlotte is adorable, she really is. Why isn’t George included?

  21. Svea says:

    As for the red, probably a pitta.

  22. Lucy says:

    Look at that little guy! I think he’ll end up resembling Kate.

  23. Cynthia says:

    I want to say something nice about these beautiful kids but someone (you know who) will reply and tell me to stop because they don’t just like how the public is cooing over these kids and their parents are useless blah blah

  24. alittlesugar says:

    George was not included because he was at school the day the photos were taken, on Charlotte’s birthday which was a weekday.

    We’ll probably get the first all 3 sibling photo and the first family photo at Louis’s christening, whenever that is going to be. Plus plenty more chances to see George and Charlotte on that day & also at Harry’s wedding. We are seeing them more than ever this year!

    • Carolind says:

      The photos were not taken on the same day. The one of Louis by himself was taken three days after he was born. The one of the two of them was taken around a week later.

      To me the photos seem perfect (but I don’t pretend to know everything) and why should Kate (and I am not a fan) not take photos of her own kids and release them?

  25. Mylene - Montreal says:

    The fact that she take the picture herself his really nice. It is just me or he look like William ??

  26. Scram says:

    I prefer candid photos to and have no problem with a mother taking them even if she’s a bad photographer and there are other options available, but this immediately read as posed to me, as in someone told Charlotte to kiss her brother, so I don’t get any warm feelings looking at it. Charlotte is a cute kid, a baby is a baby, and that’s about it.

  27. Carmen says:

    Awww. That second picture hit me right in the feels.

  28. Berry says:

    Wish there was a solo photo of Charlotte on her third birthday. Also, I think Charlotte may have inherited some of Granny Carole’s intelligence. Nothing better than watching a smart and confident little girl!

  29. littlemissnaughty says:

    Their kids are adorable.

    Let’s be real though, her taking the pics has always been about her. Not “a mother taking sweet photos of her babies”. She needs her name on them. If that were me, I would make sure the few times a year I release pics of my kids, they are 100%. But no. They need to be so normal, so average. Good for entertainment though.

  30. cee says:

    Charlotte had blue eyes, so until a kid turns 2 years old the coloring can change. Louis seems a bit jaundiced but that will clear away with short periods of exposure to sunlight (I was one of those… there are a couple of baby photos of me with my bum in the sun).

    Kudos to Kate and all mums who give birth to really big babies! I’d be screaming for a C-section.

  31. Skylark says:

    Love the pic of Louis. He’s got a slightly testy ‘Will this take long?’ and ‘A frilled pillow? Really? I appreciate you want to come across as frugal and I’m ok with my sister’s hand-me-downs but could you not have found a more manly pillow for my debut?’ vibe about him.

    Charlotte’s adorable. She and Mia Tindall are bringing delightful fiesty to the house of windsor.

  32. Jag says:

    All that money and they can’t afford a camera that can take an in-focus photograph, or lessons to learn how to take one. As a photographer in a former life, it makes me cringe.

    The children are adorable.

    • Argonaut says:

      seriously! Let a pro take these photos for the public, at least they can focus a lens properly so we can see the subject.

      • MrsBump says:

        can you really not see the subject? Maybe a new phone/monitor might be in order?
        I get the criticism of her photography skills when she had her pictures exhibited but this is seriously next level nit picking. It’s her kids, let her decide how to take their pictures

      • Nic919 says:

        When people pretend she is the next Ansel Adams, then yes the criticism of her technique is fair. She also copyrights the photos. How many regular moms with their iPhones do that?

      • Argonaut says:

        @MrsBump the photo is NOT in focus. this is just photography 101. i don’t see this as being much different than having her photography exhibited. she’s releasing these photos she took for worldwide publication!

        there’s nothing wrong with being a hobby photographer. kate should stick to that, let the family enjoy her candid shots of the kids, and let the pros shoot the photos for the world to see.

      • notasugarhere says:

        That would make sense, Argonaut, but then people wouldn’t be able to praise her for her blurry, amateur snaps.

      • Lobbit says:

        How many of us regular moms have people using pictures of our children to raise their public profile? I’m thinking of that writer who posts Instagram composites of Prince George (and Meghan Markle) alongside his own snarky, deeply misogynistic commentary. This man has seen his insta following skyrocket – all by using George’s image as proxy as he goes in on Meghan, the Queen, Charlotte – but mostly Meghan. I were Kate, I’d be livid. You better believe I’d avail myself of copyright protection as much as possible.

      • LL says:

        Lol @ Nic19. why does it grind your gears when people compliment Kate?? Who cares what people think of her photography. Btw, everyone who takes pics on their iPhone has copyright of their own pictures, duh.

  33. Cher says:

    Cute pictures. But, doesn’t Louie look a little bit too red??

  34. Digital Unicorn says:

    Kids cute but photographs bad, either she needs a better camera or a refresher course on how to take a good photo.

  35. Beluga says:

    The kids are adorable, it’s a pity about the pictures being out focus. Would have loved to see Charlotte in her own photo for her birthday as well. These must have been taken fairly early as it looks like Louis has a touch of jaundice that’s probably cleared up by now.

  36. notasugarhere says:

    Interesting to see how many brand new, pro-Middleton posters there are on here in the last week…

    • Bethany F says:

      i think people are getting confused by the criticism of the photos because they personally are moms and they take photos of their kids like this and they’re not perfect photos either and so they’re taking it as a slam on moms taking imperfect photos of their own kids.

      but if it’s not about you (and it’s not, we’re discussing royalty and public figures here), don’t make it about you. it’s silly for the palace to release these amateur shots. these people are NOT normal. they are NOT like us. that’s their whole purpose. so as always with the cambridge fam, why the pretense of normalcy??

      • SmalltownGirl says:

        I’ve been here for years just changed my name because I previously used my first name.

        And the thing is being royal isn’t going to make a newborn and a 3 year old co-operate. The posed picture are hard to get at that age. It takes forever and sometimes the best shots are that quick slightly blurred shot mom manages to snap on her phone or camera.

        They could have professional pic done and they probably should, but the older two will be in a wedding in a couple weeks and Kate may not want to use up the quota of “stand still and let people take your picture” moments. Plus the picture she took is sweet.

      • notasugarhere says:

        It is odd, Bethany F. They have access and the ability to offer much better, even involving photographing kids. The photos of Princess Madeleine’s kids show it is possible to get good shots of infants and young children.

        Are these KM-taken shots better than the first shot of their son, swaddled and in shadow that was taken (and copywritten and profited off of?) by Michael Middleton? I’d say not. They have chosen not to learn or do better, but what else is new?

      • JennyK78 says:

        Yes, nota everyone commenting must be new to the site?! Maybe we’re all sick of your holier than thou attitude towards Kate. I mean you really seem to detest the woman. Why do you channel so much energy into slagging her ALL THE TIME? It really boggles the mind.

    • Wowsers says:

      Not new at all. Just sick of NOTA’s relentless nasty attitude, like everyone else commenting.

    • Lobbit says:

      Well, I’m not new. And I don’t care about Kate Middleton – I’m more of a Meghan Markle sort – but the way you people pick at the woman for sport over ridiculous things like the quality of her photographs (because seriously, who gaf??!!) makes her a really sympathetic character for me.

    • MrsBump says:

      No Nota, we are trying to keep the view balanced. Im happy to criticise Kate for being lazy but the level of hatred spewed upon her by commentors like yourself is nearing Daily Mail levels.
      You however, predictably saw another middleton conspiracy

    • MrsBump says:

      No Nota, we are trying to keep the view balanced. Im happy to criticise Kate for being lazy but the level of hatred spewed upon her by commentors like yourself is nearing Daily Mail levels. And we are commenting now rather than before because your comments have reached ridiculous levels of spite ever since the coverage of the RF has increased here.
      You however, predictably, saw another middleton conspiracy. To be fair your mental gymnastics when criticising W&K and praising H&M can be quite entertaining :)

  37. Jenn says:

    Im guessing I’m basic (and maybe blind) but I wouldn’t have known a professional didn’t take these. They’re lovely. I think real photographers see a lot (instantly) that non photographers don’t. But most regular people probably think these pics are nice. Like I was like “ they’re not out of focus?” Then i looked again and I guess maybe they are but I wouldn’t have noticed.

    • perplexed says:

      I wasn’t able to tell they were out of focus either.

      All I can tell is that the kids are really cute, and I think its undeniable that the kids’ cuteness is real.

    • Becks says:

      I Think the pictures are fine – cute kids cute outfits, etc – but I think the criticism is because the pictures are just “fine.” They are very basic and simple. They look exactly like a picture I would take – which is fine – but we hear so much about how talented Kate is with the camera and she’s such a skilled photographer and don’t you know she majored in art history in college!?!?!?!

      And the reality is…..she’s a fine photographer. It’s all just fine. She reminds me of the “momtographers” around here who get a good camera and think that’s a substitute for understanding photography.

      It’s not really a slam on Kate so much as its a slam on the people praising her.

  38. sza says:

    All I want in life is to be able to sleep like that baby. Just out like a light. And yes-they are gorgeous kids.

  39. Josie says:

    Michael Middleton wasn’t paid for the photos of George in 2013 and Kate won’t be paid for these, either. They’re considered public domain material and KP instructions include a release for publication.

    Every mum with an iPhone actually does have copyright of the photos she takes, and giving attribution is just SOP.

    You wouldn’t know it from the vitriol here, but the editors of the UK Sunday papers were genuinely pleased by the embargo. It went until midnight UK time which meant most UK residents wouldn’t have seen the photos until they saw the papers on Sunday morning. Several reporters on Twitter referred to the embargo as a gift to the press.

    Actually I thought today’s anti-Cambridge analysis would be talk about whether William planted the story about Harry hating the UK press so he could turn around and give them this gift. But sure, Kate’s troubles with focus under low light conditions and foolish belief that people would value “mum’s photos” as much as professionally lit work will suffice for today.