Royal Gossip
September 19, 2018, 06:41:22 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Pages: 1 ... 33 34 35 [36] 37   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Prince George's Christening - 23rd October  (Read 89886 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
theduchess
Baroness
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 959



« Reply #700 on: October 30, 2013, 04:26:52 pm »

^ I can see something but the light in the photo is strange.
Logged

All my life, I've been fighting my way upstream.
AnaBolena
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3298


We Read To Know We Are Not Alone - C.S Lewis


« Reply #701 on: October 30, 2013, 05:22:07 pm »

The lighting is strange because the entire image is a collage aka fake.

http://i1142.photobucket.com/albums/n617/LadyBopeep/Fake_zps5743bf57.jpg

Look at the areas I lightened in PS - see the blocking - Waity's neck -no shadows where they "should be".

This image is a public Lie.  thumbsdown

Logged

“Without music, life would be a mistake.”
Fly on the wall
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 13105


Lady of Threads


« Reply #702 on: October 30, 2013, 06:04:01 pm »

The Official Royal Christening Photo Looks Like the Most Perfect Instagram Shot Ever



We've certainly seen some amazing photos of Prince George's christening, but the latest official image, released by Kensington Palace on Saturday, takes the royal cake. In a beautifully intimate portrait of Kate, William, and baby George, it's more apparent than ever just how happy the family is. We also can't get enough of the Instagram-like filter treatment that the photo has—reminding us yet again just how refreshingly down-to-earth the royals seem.
http://www.elle.com/news/culture/royal-christening-prince-george-photo?src=sem&mag=elm&dom=out



It does like a IG shot
Logged

NEVER *despise* correction,for those who correct you ,truly LOVE you .They are willing to displease you and possibly lose your friendship ,rather than see you destroyed. Those who *despise* you ,on the other hand ,will allow you to FAIL...because what do they care ?

Every praise is not good and every criticism is not evil..!
Val
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 5719


« Reply #703 on: October 31, 2013, 08:33:12 am »

So obvious that this was cobbled together after the criticism/comments everywhere that Waity and George appeared to have no connection.  Waity's mean eyes hungrily seeking the camera and George being held like a piece of wood.
Logged
Stephanie
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 5850



« Reply #704 on: October 31, 2013, 05:51:46 pm »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2481513/Tributes-Prince-George-stomach-churning-says-Labours-Tom-Copley.html
Logged
MOSAIC
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2833


« Reply #705 on: October 31, 2013, 06:02:10 pm »


Good for him having the courage to post this in his blog.  Talking about "valuable time being taken up
to congratulate two wealthy aristocrats for procreating."

If only he knew, or more important, if only he and others could say the truth.   flower
Logged
serene grace
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 10395


Appointed Moderator


« Reply #706 on: October 31, 2013, 11:12:27 pm »

So obvious that this was cobbled together after the criticism/comments everywhere that Waity and George appeared to have no connection.  Waity's mean eyes hungrily seeking the camera and George being held like a piece of wood.

It was a bit odd the way she held him.
Logged

[/URL]
ChickP83
royal watcher

Offline Offline

Posts: 84


« Reply #707 on: November 01, 2013, 01:02:40 am »

The lighting is strange because the entire image is a collage aka fake.

http://i1142.photobucket.com/albums/n617/LadyBopeep/Fake_zps5743bf57.jpg

Look at the areas I lightened in PS - see the blocking - Waity's neck -no shadows where they "should be".

This image is a public Lie.  thumbsdown



I looked at the image and I'm not quite sure what you're talking about? Where should the shadows on her neck be?
Logged
Maria
courtier
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 268


« Reply #708 on: November 03, 2013, 12:20:57 pm »

The official photos are only amazing when you have seen the video of the Royal Family arriving for the ceremony and how cold and dull everything was. It didn´t look glamorous or royal at all, more like an ordinary backyard. It felt more like the christening of the illegitimate child of a distant cousin with the cook or something like that, not like the baptism of the beloved heir to the throne!

And the official photos which were released directly after the ceremony looked cold and dull. Were they taken at Whimpo & Waity´s new flat? Because it didn´t look like Clarence House or any royal residence. It seemed quite small (for royal circumstances).  Guess, someone had to put a lot of work to produce a new pic where they looked more like a loving family with a bit of chemistry between Mummy, Daddy & Baby. Whimpo and Waity are two spoilt children, parenthood doesn´t come natural to them.
Logged
Alexandrine
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14770



« Reply #709 on: November 03, 2013, 01:27:22 pm »

^it's clarence house
Logged



“Three things are to be looked to in a building: that it stand on the right spot, that it be securely founded, that it be successfully executed.” ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Maria
courtier
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 268


« Reply #710 on: November 03, 2013, 07:26:26 pm »

Really? I mean, I believe you, but there were a lot of interviews, clips, etc. from Clarence House and there a nicer, bigger rooms at CH. Maybe Camzilla didn´t want the Mansons around the "good" furniture?  sly
Logged
Fly on the wall
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 13105


Lady of Threads


« Reply #711 on: November 04, 2013, 11:25:43 pm »

The Queen will be left holding the baby at Christmas

 Queen Victoria may have been happy to have been pictured holding the future Edward VIII in 1894, but none appeared of the Queen holding Prince George at his christening. Mandrake offers a possible explanation

 Queen Victoria may have been happy to have been pictured holding the future Edward VIII in 1894, but none appeared of the Queen holding Prince George at his christening. Mandrake offers a possible explanation[/b]


The christening of Prince George marked the first time that four generations of monarchs — present and future — had gathered for a picture for more than a century. It was in 1894, at the christening of the future Edward VIII that such a majestic grou
 

There was, however, one shot that William and Daniel Downey, the court photographers of Ebury Street, Belgravia, managed to take that Jason Bell appeared to have neglected in his much-talked-about set of photographs last month: the reigning monarch with the baby.
 

“Of course, it is the obvious shot and I don’t for one moment think that it didn’t occur to Mr Bell to take it,” a senior courtier tells me, somewhat teasingly, when I raise the question. “I mean, the man is a professional, after all. All I can really say on this matter is: 'watch this space’.”
 

Mandrake is reliably informed that Bell did indeed photograph the Queen holding Prince George, but the picture was witheld on the highest possible authority. The reason is simple. The Queen herself wishes to publish the picture — a touching study, so I am told — on her Christmas card this year. The two of them together may also, so I am told, appear on the card that the Cambridges send out.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/10422566/The-Queen-will-be-left-holding-the-baby-at-Christmas.html
Logged

NEVER *despise* correction,for those who correct you ,truly LOVE you .They are willing to displease you and possibly lose your friendship ,rather than see you destroyed. Those who *despise* you ,on the other hand ,will allow you to FAIL...because what do they care ?

Every praise is not good and every criticism is not evil..!
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 8900


« Reply #712 on: November 05, 2013, 12:34:18 am »

I hope the Queen had a Christmas card with her first two great grandchildren, the Phillips children--hopefully last year.  I know George is a future King but she has other great grandchildren.
Logged
Fly on the wall
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 13105


Lady of Threads


« Reply #713 on: November 05, 2013, 12:37:22 am »

a card with HM and all of her great grand kids would be nice.
Logged

NEVER *despise* correction,for those who correct you ,truly LOVE you .They are willing to displease you and possibly lose your friendship ,rather than see you destroyed. Those who *despise* you ,on the other hand ,will allow you to FAIL...because what do they care ?

Every praise is not good and every criticism is not evil..!
CathyJane
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4971


« Reply #714 on: November 05, 2013, 12:53:30 am »

So obvious that this was cobbled together after the criticism/comments everywhere that Waity and George appeared to have no connection.  Waity's mean eyes hungrily seeking the camera and George being held like a piece of wood.

It was a bit odd the way she held him.

Kinda like she had never ever held him before.  Cool
Logged
Yooper
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11112


Moderator


« Reply #715 on: November 05, 2013, 04:31:36 am »

^^It would be perfect to see the Christmas card with HM and PP with all their great and grandchildren.  Period.  How lovely.   loveshower
« Last Edit: November 05, 2013, 04:33:34 am by Yooper » Logged


\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\"  Thomas Jefferson
Jane23
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 8312



« Reply #716 on: November 05, 2013, 07:54:47 am »

The Queen will be left holding the baby at Christmas

 Queen Victoria may have been happy to have been pictured holding the future Edward VIII in 1894, but none appeared of the Queen holding Prince George at his christening. Mandrake offers a possible explanation

 Queen Victoria may have been happy to have been pictured holding the future Edward VIII in 1894, but none appeared of the Queen holding Prince George at his christening. Mandrake offers a possible explanation[/b]


The christening of Prince George marked the first time that four generations of monarchs — present and future — had gathered for a picture for more than a century. It was in 1894, at the christening of the future Edward VIII that such a majestic grou
 

There was, however, one shot that William and Daniel Downey, the court photographers of Ebury Street, Belgravia, managed to take that Jason Bell appeared to have neglected in his much-talked-about set of photographs last month: the reigning monarch with the baby.
 

“Of course, it is the obvious shot and I don’t for one moment think that it didn’t occur to Mr Bell to take it,” a senior courtier tells me, somewhat teasingly, when I raise the question. “I mean, the man is a professional, after all. All I can really say on this matter is: 'watch this space’.”
 

Mandrake is reliably informed that Bell did indeed photograph the Queen holding Prince George, but the picture was witheld on the highest possible authority. The reason is simple. The Queen herself wishes to publish the picture — a touching study, so I am told — on her Christmas card this year. The two of them together may also, so I am told, appear on the card that the Cambridges send out.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/10422566/The-Queen-will-be-left-holding-the-baby-at-Christmas.html

BS ... the press didn't get the picture and now are coming up with those idiotic excuses to why Liz didn't hold baby Middleton ...
Logged
Pepe Le Skew
Baroness
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 841


This is what it sounds like


« Reply #717 on: November 05, 2013, 01:37:44 pm »

Maybe they're busy photoshopping in a dusty, back of the palace tech room:  clone stamp Baby George in place of the sturdy blue handbag.

 easter-James
Logged
serene grace
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 10395


Appointed Moderator


« Reply #718 on: November 05, 2013, 02:28:38 pm »

So obvious that this was cobbled together after the criticism/comments everywhere that Waity and George appeared to have no connection.  Waity's mean eyes hungrily seeking the camera and George being held like a piece of wood.

It was a bit odd the way she held him.

Kinda like she had never ever held him before.  Cool

Yes it was as if she doesn't do a lot of the hands on. She held him so awkardly. IMO

I would hope PW and Kate send a photo of them with baby George as a new family, that would seem more logical. IMO
Also wouldn't the friends and family want a photo of the couple with their baby Prince? I wonder why the press is saying the couple will use a photo with just the Queen and George for their Christmas card?  huh
Logged

[/URL]
Maria
courtier
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 268


« Reply #719 on: November 05, 2013, 07:06:15 pm »

They´re just a weird family. Sad as it is. Willy & Waity have as much chemistry with their baby as they have between each other. Can only repeat myself: I hope, Georgie has a loving nanny and grandma Carole shows him more affection. Would love to see  her with the baby.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 33 34 35 [36] 37   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines | Imprint Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!