British photographer: The Princess of Wales ‘is not a great photographer’

I’m not a professional photographer or even a good amateur photographer, but I know that the new Princess of Wales is not a very talented amateur photographer. She has problems with composition, lighting and she’s overly reliant on outdoor scenery. The only reason why people talk about “Kate, the Keen Photographer” is because she photographs her children for their annual birthday portraits. Which is fine, honestly. I don’t have an issue with that and I actually think it’s one of the nicest things she does. But according to one British photographer, Kate should probably leave it to the pros. This is funny:

The Princess of Wales has published some charming photos over the years to mark significant occasions, such as the birthdays of her three children. But celebrated royal photographer John Swannell says she is denying others the opportunity to make their name.

‘All the work I got with the royals really elevated my career; nowadays, someone like me just won’t have the chance,’ he tells me at a party to celebrate 185 years of Brown’s Hotel in Mayfair, with a special viewing of his work.

‘Those chances should be given to young English photographers.’ But he adds: ‘In some ways, though, Kate is probably right to do it herself. She’s not a great photographer, but she just snaps away, and with kids it’s easier if you know them.’

[From Eden Confidential]

“She’s not a great photographer, but she just snaps away…” LMAO. He’s right though, about everything – Kate’s not a great photographer, but it’s easier to photograph children “if you know them,” AND it would be nice to see Kate the Keen Photographer actually use her position to help out young British photographers on the come-up. I also understand why the Windsors like to keep things “in house” as much as possible too – for years, Princess Margaret’s husband, the Earl of Snowdon, got ALL of the plum royal portrait gigs. William and Kate use Getty photographer Chris Jackson – who is married to one of Kate’s staffers – for almost all of their family photoshoots and curated “event” photos. These people do not like to get out of their comfort zone, especially not with young photographers who might publish unflattering and un-airbrushed photos.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instar, Kensington Palace.

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

101 Responses to “British photographer: The Princess of Wales ‘is not a great photographer’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Rapunzel says:

    She photographs the kids so she gets money every time the pics are published. Remember the “Kate’s cuties” calendar?

    • ROO says:

      There’s a missed opportunity for fundraising for a charity! She could have the monies go to a charity helping underprivileged children interested in photography.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Roo, I will eat my hat if the idea of donating the proceeds ever so much as crossed Kate’s mind even once.

        Also, I love that he used the word “charming.” It has a “bless her heart” vibe to it, lol.

    • CourtneyB says:

      I don’t think she gets money. But under the licensing agreement, the Mail would need permission for the calendar (free to subscribers.) It’s likely part of the deal for favorable press and keeping some rumors quiet. They did one from 2016-21. No calendars for 2022 or coming up for 2023 it seems.

    • maralea says:

      OMG, these pics are so awesome. So simple and uncomplicated, they so much remind me of the pictures I took of my kids when they were this age…

      • SugarHere says:

        Sure, man. Let us not ever question Karen’s outstanding photographic genius. Her kids ‘pics have somewhat revolutionized the art of button pressing.

      • Kkat says:

        They are avg photos any mom could take.

  2. Becks1 says:

    Her photos are cute. I feel like she’s basically just putting everything in portrait mode though LOL.

    Her photos are like her hair, IMO. They’re fine. They’re enough. I think its cute that she releases the pictures she takes (and then keeps the money, lol, but whatever.) The issue with her as a photographer is that she’s not great, she’s not super talented, she’s not the best, etc. So when people (fans, RRs) talk about her like she is, there’s going to be a lot of eye rolls from the “real world.” (I compare that to her hair because her hair is fine, its the insistence that her hair is the GREATEST THING EVER that makes some of us roll our eyes and point out the wiglet.)

    The over the top praise for a mother taking pictures of her child is just….ridiculous.

  3. Eyeroll says:

    Yeah seems like a nonstory but funny dig nonetheless. Seems like many famous people like to use their own photographers. Meghan likes Msian and he does a great job.

  4. Snuffles says:

    “All the work I got with the royals really elevated my career; nowadays, someone like me just won’t have the chance”

    This isn’t about Kate being a bad photographer, it’s about royal photographers losing out on opportunities and money because Kate decided to do her kid’s birthday portraits. And profit off of them.

    I may hate the bitch, but I won’t begrudge her that. Their HER children and if she wants to make some of her own cash copyrighting her own photos, she has every right too. I have ZERO sympathy for these royal rota hyenas.

    • MF says:

      I wouldn’t have a problem with this if the RF weren’t constantly lying about family members not being allowed to make money. Because here is, yet again, another thing Kate is doing that Meghan would never be allowed to do.

      • Snuffles says:

        Very true. Just another example of their hypocrisy and double standards.

      • Becks1 says:

        Ditto that its the hypocrisy, but I also think that if Kate is so passionate about photography, then she could do more to champion amateur or up and coming professional photographers. Use someone besides Chris Jackson for your go-to photographer (didn’t he do their anniversary pics last year? that would have been a great opportunity for someone else.) If she wants to be the only one taking pics of her kids, I don’t fault her for that. But she could do more to champion other photographers besides chris jackson.

        And some might say that’s not her job, but if she’s so “supportive” of photography as an art etc, then she needs to show us that.

      • Eurydice says:

        @Becks1 – has she said that she’s passionate about photography as an art form? I can’t remember.

      • Becks1 says:

        I don’t know if she has come out and said those words, but its a narrative that’s been pushed for her more than once.

      • Eurydice says:

        @Becks1 – thanks. I would think that, with an art history degree, she’d be more interested in art, but we haven’t seen that, either. It seems to me that the only things Kate is passionate about are her children and becoming Queen.

      • Larry says:

        Lol, ouch. There are photographers who are artists – Jeff Wall springs to mind, but there are many, many more.
        I think the problem is: Kate’s approach to everything, from dressing to art, is very literal. That’s why she likes photography – because to her, it’s just point and shoot, she takes a 1-2-1 image of what it is in front of her. I suspect that during her art histort degree, she stopped paying attention when or before Panofsky and iconography came up – i.e. in year 1 term 1. An Arnolfini marriage her photography ain’t.

    • BeanieBean says:

      That was what I got out of the article. The missed opportunities to make bank on the royal kids.

    • michyk says:

      i agree with both of you guys! i have (or maybe had?) no problems with Kate keeping the copyright on pics of her kids. i thought it was a good way to control access to them. but that was before they started trotting them out at every opportunity to save their own reputations. you can’t really make that argument anymore with how often we’ve been seeing them lately. and also agree with MF about the general and ongoing hypocrisy around making money.

    • Jenn says:

      Right. This is stupid. She’s a mom taking and releasing photos of her own children.

    • Lorelei says:

      @Snuffles, I get what you’re saying, but at the very least, imo, taxpayer-funded Kate should donate the proceeds she earns from taking photos of her own taxpayer-funded children with a taxpayer-funded camera on one of their many taxpayer-funded properties. (I could go on and on but you know what I mean!) But our Kate would never.

      Also, that picture of Louis is *hilarious*

    • poptop says:

      I agree – it’s a pretty self-serving comment, and in sort of the vein of the kind of complaints that the Sussexes got for choosing to release things without going through the rota – it’s more about the money/access denied to them.

      That said, I do like the suggestion someone had above that she could link her passion for photography (that’s part of why she was given the patronage of the Royal Photographic Society) to her charity work. Sort of like with Hold Still book. It would give her the space to still get coverage as a keen amateur photographer, but also connect it to her supporting up and coming talent and/or giving kids who otherwise may not have the access the opportunity to develop a love of photography.

    • MaryContrary says:

      There’s a big difference between papparazzi shots of the kids, and having actual photographers take posed photos of their family. He’s not wrong.

    • Gillysirl says:

      I don’t think it’s about the money the photographers earn – it’s about getting their name out there.

      I bet there are some up and coming photographers that have fresh ideas for the portraits that would really help modernize the view of the royals. But they are sticking with the standard. It’s another missed opportunity.

  5. Pumpkin (Was Sofia) says:

    Whenever the subject of Kate’s photography skills come up I have said before that she’s fine as a hobbyist/mummy blogger photographer. She’s not the next coming of Annie Leibovitz or whatever that the British media hype her up to be. And that’s okay! It’s perfectly fine to be just average at things. She doesn’t need to be perfect at everything she does. But Kate being the “perfect princess” is a part of her image so the media will continue on anyways.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      I remember the time when she shopped around a photography portfolio to the art galleries hoping one of them would make an exhibition of her ‘work’. Was turned by them all.

      She’s an amateur at best.

      She also allegedly took photos of Leibovitz setup when she did that photo shoot that had George, Charles and TQ in.

  6. February Pisces says:

    For my job I do a lot of photography and I absolutely love it, but it isn’t easy. It takes years to really master it. What Kate does is she has a very good DSLR camera, puts the settings in auto and points and shoots her kids outside in natural light. That’s not photography, that’s just a mum taking pics of her kids. Real photographers are artists and Kate has absolutely no creativity whatsoever.

    • windyriver says:

      Yup. Even higher end cameras can be set up to function like point and shoots.

      It is nice to see the kids looking happy and, given how much we’ve heard about Nanny Maria’s role, looking like they have a connection with her (sorry, my cynicism is showing).

    • Belli says:

      To quote a photographer friend of mine, “using a shallow depth of field isn’t talent”.

      • phive says:

        Love that. I think Kate is under the impression that the more bokeh you have, the better the picture.

    • Twinkle says:


  7. Alexandria says:

    Basic portrait mode. Cute kids.

  8. Green girl says:

    I think it’s fine if she wants to take the kids photos. It’s a very normal thing to do. They just need to stop with the embiggening of Kate’s skills. Like the photos look fine but wouldn’t be out of place on anyone’s social media feed.

    And yeah it would be great if new talent was brought in for the photos for different occasions. But is being associated with the royals opening doors like it used to?

  9. GirlOne says:

    I think the guy is being quite fair. He understand why she does it.

    I hate when people get criticized for things they enjoy doing but may not be high-rat at. Lots of people enjoy photography who aren’t that great at it. Lots of people like to sing and aren’t very good at it. Lots of people enjoy running but aren’t very fast. Let them, they’re having fun.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      GirlOne, ITA. Now convince the rrs not to make her out to be a fantastic photographer. She’s a Mom taking pictures, so don’t try to convince the world that she’s good rather than average.

      • Lorelei says:

        Yes, I agree with @Saucy.
        I love playing pool, even though I *completely* suck at it, and don’t even know what I’m doing half the time—it doesn’t matter, because I still have fun.

        But I also don’t have the country’s newspapers touting me as one of the best pool players to ever grace the nation, and boasting about how lucky the U.S. is to have me, as I profit from something I’m not even that good at without the decency to donate the proceeds. That’s the issue we have with Kate when it comes to her ‘passionate talent’ for photography.

  10. girl_ninja says:

    That last photo of Louise is the same photo my sister took of my nephew. All she did was use portrait mode and “Voilà” lovely photo of adorable child. Kate is not even as talented as my sister. Kate is talentless and lazy. That’s what Kate is.

  11. windyriver says:

    Isn’t Chris Jackson married to Natasha Archer, Kate’s (former?) stylist?

  12. HeatherC says:

    He’ll be backtracking this statement after some pressure from the Wails is applied

  13. so_annoyed says:

    She is good as a mom taking photographs of her kids. 🙂 Her work looks like mine did before I started my business ten years ago. The issue is she needs to grow by taking classes, learning, and being creative, and I am not sure she has the time (or desire) to do so. If everyone around her tells her that her work is fantastic, which I am sure they do, she will never grow to get any better.

    I’m afraid I disagree that photographing your kids is more effortless. Mine give me huge eye rolls when they see my camera out, and a lot of bribing comes in handy to get some good shots. But, I am fantastic at photographing other people’s children. Once kids warm up, they are much better in front of the camera with someone they don’t know than their parents. (Just my opinion after ten years in business.)

    I teach photography workshops and see that she has a good eye for photos (which not everyone does). I hope she takes the time (or hires a mentor) to help her take her work to the next level before her kids get too big. Otherwise, she will be kicking herself.

    • Becks1 says:

      My boys LOVE having their pictures taken, LOL. I guess its so child-dependent (and age dependent too, bc what a kid loves at 3 they might not love at 8.)

      • so_annoyed says:

        Oh, totally! Each child is different, and at various ages, things change. I have four kids, who are a tad older now, and it gets more challenging to photograph them as they get older. I shoot documentary-style (candid), which seems more difficult as they age, than portraits. My nephews and nieces, who are the same age, don’t mind me photographing them. I really can’t win at times 🙂

        *But I know they appreciate it even if they don’t want to admit it.

    • BeanieBean says:

      🙂 This is Kate we’re taking about. She’s not going to put in the work.

    • Tennyson.sarah says:

      She started taking photography lessons in high school and continued every semester at St Andrew’s University! At least 6 years.

      • windyriver says:

        IF this is true (and that’s a big if) and you think that shows how proficient she is, you’re sadly mistaken, and she pretty much wasted her time. With that much study, she should have developed more skill. Her photos are no better than those taken by anyone with a decent camera who knows how to use portrait mode/eye autofocus – and every indication is, that’s what they are.

        Now, if she enjoys taking pictures of her kids, and they like posing, that’s another story. But propping her up as so much better than she actually is, is tiresome and annoying.

  14. Flower says:

    I feel Kate’s photo’s are basic at best. Also thus far they’ve mainly been of the Camb kids so it’s a win win as people are just happy to see them.

    I think the issue here is that they tried to extend that goodwill to the pre 2017 boogey woman of the BRF and it has fallen flat and exposed both Royal women for the empty, shallow, talentless, pointless scheming charlatans they both are.

    Also I love it for Camilla that she has chosen Levin as her “unofficial’ biographer only for the book to also fall flat.

    2/2 Camilla. At this rate of ‘popularity’ the UK pubic will be back at tomatoing Charles and Camilla.

  15. Michele says:

    When I look at Charlotte (I think that’s her name) I picture a boat load of sausage curls in her future.

  16. ThatsNotOkay says:

    Ooo! She can use a light meter. Wait, she doesn’t? It’s on auto? Well then, ooo, she can focus the lens. Wait, she doesn’t? It’s on auto focus? Well then, ooo she can center her subjects in the frame. Wait, there’s a box that guides her and she never deviates from the box? Well then, ooo…

    • sparrow says:

      Ha ha. I am not a camera person. I assumed she was really into the nuts and bolts of setting up etc but I find out today she is doing the same as everyone else but with the most expensive camera you can get. Fine as a hobby. Bit embarrassing to put yourself out there as a semi professional.

  17. SomeChick says:

    Snowden was a talented photographer and back then the technical part was so much more challenging.

    Idk about kids in general, but I’m sure he did get better photos of the adults due to them being familiar with him. Princess Margaret in the bathtub with the tiara is my all time favorite!

    Kate could certainly level up by taking more photos and really thinking about composition. I can get great photos with my iphone 7 but it’s mostly because I learned about composition (and light) in art school years ago. it’s not that hard really but you have to think about it.

    I also wouldn’t be at all surprised if Kate has an assistant do the processing after the ones they want to publish are chosen.

    • Nic919 says:

      There was a photoshoot that Annie Leibowitz did with the Queen a while back, with the grand kids and great grand kids and apparently Kate took some of her photos while making use of the set ups done by Leibowitz and her staff. They were not impressed.

    • Lana Fox says:

      Kate could level up…if she really worked at it.

      Which is unlikely?

      Especially when the media praises her SO MUCH for being mediocre.

      • Elizabeth says:

        She took a photography course after university back when the Queen asked, ‘What does she do?” And allegedly took photos for the Party Pieces website before her marriage. I don’t think she has done anything since. There was the book that the National Gallery put together of pandemic pictures that she helped to choose, but that is very different from actually championing up-and-coming photographers. Interestingly, both Kate and Eugenie majored in Art History, but Eugenie is the one who has made a career in the art world.

      • SomeChick says:

        Anyone can level up at anything by practicing. That’s not to say anyone could become amazing at anything. But you can always improve.

        I agree that it’s highly unlikely that she would. But she could. Hell, she probably takes better kid pix now than she did when she started. If she really wanted to improve, she could. I’m not holding my breath tho.

        And I totally believe she has an assistant doing all the retouching.

      • Tessa says:

        Elizabeth, she did not take that photography course after University. There was a story that she would study with Testino but Testino actually went to the media to deny she was taking any photography course with him. She supposedly was going to have an art exhibit. That never happened It was all smoke and mirrors with Kate. She did study art history and apparently had some photography course at University. Kate took the job at Jigsaw (part time, less than a year) after the Queen asked what Kate did. Kate was said to have photographed a cupcake for the Party Pieces catalog. And I don’t think Kate was the big influence in those selection of pictures in the National Gallery . Kate probably could have gotten work in an art gallery but apparently did not even try. Her aim was to get the proposal.

  18. Psudohnihm says:

    Ahhh… The old ‘Spray and Pray’ method. Lol.

    Probably why almost every MWAC think they are a professional now. They show only the shots they got lucky with then dupe people into hiring them.

    I spend tens upon tens of thousands on equipment, training, continued education, not to mention all of the legalese on the back end only to watch new “professional photogs” pop up month after month. These “professionals” drive the cost of photography down by setting pricing expectations no serious professional can can reasonably charge. So all I do is bide my time and wait for those same dissatisfied clients to come back to their own senses and realize the real value I offer. I might only give them 15 pictures but it’s going to be the best d@mn pics of themselves they’ve ever seen.

    • Becks1 says:

      I roll my eyes every time someone pops up on a mom group and asks for high quality professional pictures with full rights (although that may be pretty common these days) for something “reasonable” – you know, under 100. You’re going to get what you pay for!

  19. Lana Fox says:

    You know that if it was Meghan, she would have carefully cultivated a photo gallery featuring photographers who were women and people of color to give them an opportunity. And maybe included ONE of her own photos to help drum up publicity. It would have been all about showcasing diverse talent and providing others with opportunity…and the British press would have crucified her for being too produced.

  20. molly says:

    Speaking of Earl of Snowdon, I’ve always thought he took some terrible photos too. Especially with Diana. (The one with the boys on a knee in front of her with no shoes? WTF was that??)

    He obviously took some great ones too, but it was his relationship, not his skill, that kept that job.

    • Tessa says:

      The engagement photos he took of DIana where she posed were works of art. And superlative. In defense of Snowdon, he had an actual career as a photographer before he married Margaret. He had plenty of other work and was sought after.

  21. Well Wisher says:

    I’ve similar comments at the beginning but thought at the time. Let the young mother have some grace.
    Looking back I was naive, but still hold them today even if she has not proven to be gracious.

  22. AnneL says:

    If she wants to take the photos of her children, let her do it. Who cares if she’s not great at it? She seems to know her limits, so she does the easy thing and takes the pictures outside in natural light. All fine. It’s a fun hobby and probably helps her bond with her children. And let her pocket the money for it, too. She could use it if she finally decides to leave William and his temper behind.

    I guess I understand the photographer’s frustration but it does seem weird to me to me that he’s openly salty about it. There are plenty of other rich people who will pay him for taking photos of them or their kids. Don’t begrudge Kate her hobby.

    But yes, if she claims to love photography, she could and should do something to nurture up and coming photographers. Seems like a no-brainer.

    • Tessa says:

      that’s fine. But what bothers me is the Over Praise of her photographs. Like her hitting those piano chords and “starring” in the concert. Hobbies are fun, but the overpraise of Kate is really irritating. I would like to see royals help REAL professional photographers especially up and coming ones who want a career and be recognized. Kate cannot ‘nurture” real experts but she and other royal family members can hire someone to help him or her get ahead in the field.

      • AnneL says:

        Oh, I completely agree about the overpraise. But she gets that for whatever she does. For wearing a dress or piece of jewelry, for mumbling a few words or smiling at a child and accepting a flower. I do think her family is behind the embiggening but a lot of that is just on the BM.

        To be fair, Kate should have the self awareness to know she’s not all that and she doesn’t. And she should be more proactive about using her position and privilege to accomplish something. But I don’t think it’s a big deal if she wants to take her kids’ pictures.

  23. karkopolo says:

    I said this when the Camilla photos came out. They’re not great! She seems to just shoot wide open every time for the bokeh, but there is so much more you can do with portraits. The composition of those Camilla pics bugged me.

    I speak as someone who is also not great. I have watched hours and hours and hours of youtube videos trying to learn. But it’s a hobby, that’s it.

    Anyway, I agree that it’s one of those sort of harmless things about her. I just wouldn’t call her a photographer.

    • sparrow says:

      The picture of Camilla sitting with a flower basket is dreadful. The placement of the pillar to the right of Camilla disturbs the picture because it looks part of the subject not the background, essentially like it’s growing out of her head. Also, the line of the lawn meeting the trees in the background cuts badly near to Camilla’s elbows. The pale blue bush to the right draws from the pale blue of Camilla’s outfit so she doesn’t sing. It looks like Kate couldn’t even understand how to sit her subject. And I’ve only just looked at the picture for 10 seconds! People are saying she gets paid for this? I hope she gives that money away, perhaps as an educational grant type of thing for someone with talent who wants to do a course.

      • Tessa says:

        I don’t think Kate did the touch ups on Camilla’s photos. She snapped some photos and they were touched up by professionals.

    • Juniper says:

      THANK YOU! Those photos were not good at all. I was surprised they were being touted as such. I took classes in college, back in the dark ages when we still used dark rooms and was a photographer when I worked for a small weekly where we did everything. I was okay, but not great. Photoshop and processing helped me. It didn’t help that my editor was a cheap ass and would only purchase 100 speed film. We had to expense anything that actually worked.

  24. LizaLou says:

    Sort of off topic, but seeing the pic of Prince Louis makes me realize he scares me.

  25. EveV says:

    That picture of Charlotte is just bad. The only thing that saves it is she looks good in the picture, but it’s just a blurry green background. I don’t have a problem with her being the one to take the pictures, but I do have a problem with her keeping the money. That money should be donated to charity or used as scholarship money for someone that wouldn’t otherwise be able to afford art school. Khate is just the worst.

  26. equality says:

    When it came to her birthday pictures she flew in someone to glamorize her. Charlotte, at least, might appreciate that opportunity to have a professional shot. The RF are supposed to be supporting art and industry within the UK (and one would think the commonwealth) so why not support photographers? And, no, I don’t mean the RR. I’m not sure that some of them are that much better than Kate.

    • Tessa says:

      Professional photographers who really learned and worked on their skills I think would be a lot better than Kate. Kate never took the time to really concentrate on a skill. She dabbles. IMO

  27. Sarah says:

    She can’t win though. If she hired a photographer, people would say she’s too lazy to do it herself anymore. If she takes them herself, she’s selfish and not giving others work. Her kids are very photogenic and she probably enjoys taking photos of them.

    • C says:

      Nobody says either thing about her, lol.

    • Tessa says:

      The royals were never criticized for using true professional photographers like Beaton, Snowdon and Testino. The trouble with Kate is that she did little in learning about photography in the years she waited for the ring but she gets overpraised for what she does. I think millions and millions of children are very photogenic.

  28. Chaine says:

    If only she had given a chance to young, up-and-coming photographers like Brooklyn Beckham, he would not sadly have had to abandon his promising career.

  29. JL says:

    Amateur photography isn’t a new concept. But with digital equipment, editing tools and cheap presets it’s easier than ever for any mom to take their own family portraits. And maybe that’s what’s happening here. My brother is a professional photographer and there are so many amateur, untrained photographers now making up the industry. And for each one of them, there’s a dozen moms with phone cameras, photo-editing apps, etc. Why do WE like taking our own photos? Her decision to DIY it could be in part the same as our own.

    I agree that using someone else is the noble thing to do.

  30. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    Somewhere along the way, someone must have told Kate that it looks “professional” if she soft-focuses her backgrounds. But just like her makeup and fake smile, she OVER-does the background soft-focus to the point where her subjects look like they were badly photoshopped into the pictures. Her pictures are those of an amateur trying to over-compensate.

  31. C says:

    I mean, she’s not a great one. Neither am I, so it doesn’t really matter. She takes them so she can have the copyright. That’s pretty much it.

  32. Beverley says:

    Mediocre at best. She’s much more talented at sniping and hating her SIL.

  33. Tessa says:

    Kate is not a professional photographer she is strictly an amateur. She could have taken time to learn during the many years she waited for the ring. But did not. Snowdon was a Professional Photographer and had gallery shows and his work was praised. Before his marriage to Margaret. Kate is not even close to his skills in photography. His photos were works of art. Kate is a dabbler, she never took the time to really learn the craft.

  34. Jennifer says:

    Who cares? It’s a hobby. She’s never going to do it as a job. Let her take her snaps, whatever. Same as most people who aren’t pros.

    • Nic919 says:

      Most people don’t get praised by the country’s media for being so great at something when they actually aren’t. The empty false praise is the issue here not the photos of the kids.

  35. Michelle says:

    A lot of people have already pointed out–this is just portrait-mode on a good camera with natural light. But what I also think is funny is that these are not even good photos in the sense that their subjects look awkward and/or the photos are not flattering. The kids are cute! But their positioning is weird, or they’re not quite in focus, or they look a bit messy in a way that would be 100% fine for just whatever photos on our phones, but to release them as these official birthday photographs is odd to me. Like if these were my kids, I would look through the roll of pics for just a *slightly better* photo to put on the Christmas card. Again, not a knock on the kids at all. They’re super cute but maybe the photo literally right before or after the ones released was the shot to go with.

  36. Jay says:

    I’ll leave the critiques of her actual work to the rest of the commenters who actually know what they are talking about, but I can comment on the practical end of things, and I think the rota are telling the new POW that she’d best stay in her lane!

    I think that cover Camilla did earlier this year where she requested that Kate be the photographer has put the wind up with some of the rota. They don’t want to lose access to the family, or have Kate be the new go-to royal photographer.

    They needn’t worry, her track record of actually showing up to work is pretty poor, I can’t imagine she’ll start showing up at other people’s events, too to take snaps. On the other hand, I suppose that would be one way to pad her numbers?

  37. JRenee says:

    It’s the blurry backgrounds with all of her pictures. Is that a thing?
    For all who keep saying she’s a mom who has a right to be the person releasing photos of her kids, I could agree if she wasn’t allowed so many exceptions to “royal protocol “. They’re looking to build her up with anything she does. She’s been lobbed the ball so many times that she won’t really work to be beyond average at anything.
    As some of you have pointed out, she could really get into this and do all sorts of good things for her charities with this, but she doesn’t and yet she’s just a mom who gets to control the pictures that are released of her kids. Nope she’s always wanted to be praised for following the rules/ protocol etc. The heir and the spare ” belong ” to the Monarchy is what we’ve been told, but Kate the great has to be the best…

    • Erica says:

      Yes, the blurry background is called bokeh and having beautiful, creamy, soft bokeh in a portrait is considered a good thing.

  38. SolitaryAngel says:

    Charlotte is lovely; *her* hair is gorgeous! And it’s nice seeing the children smiling for real.

    That’s all I can say that is positive.

  39. The Royals are Ghouls! says:

    Eh, Kate’s a desperate racist loser, but leave her alone for her photography!

  40. SIde Eye says:

    I don’t know enough about photography to comment on whether or not she’s actually good at it. I do know that everything Kate does is hailed as genius by her stans when really, she’s just mediocre at everything and that’s being generous. The piano playing was a great example. I really hate the worship of mediocrity and it almost always seems to go hand in hand with a resentment/hatred of Black excellence.

    Having that said, I think besides Meghan and Harry, Charlotte is the most interesting royal. I absolutely love that pic of her where she glares at her mom in the car following her brother’s pinch. Whoever that photographer was, they totally captured a whole mood.

    Something tells me Charlotte is here for no one’s garbage – including her mum’s. I cannot wait to hear from her in 20 years, cause I believe we will and I cannot wait to hear what she has to say.

  41. Twinkle says:

    These photos here aren’t bad. Honestly, they look like stock photos you can license or those photos already in the photo frames you buy. If she were a professional she’s probably be working at her parent’s party business photographing kid’s parties. Lucky, she married well.