• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Royal photoshopping

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sirius Glass said:
then walked out of the palace, across the courtyard and let out the gate. Everyone seeing you will wonder why you are such a big shot to be allowed in.
Click to expand...

Half the people will assume you were trespassing and got a firm escort off palace grounds.
 

As there haven't been sentries posted at the gate since 1959 (granted, the late Queen was alive then), I cannot believe this story. Before then a sentry would simply ignore you if you tried to engage them in conversation - I observed that happening more than once.
 

I did not speak to a sentry. I spoke to someone at the gate. I leaned about this from a Fedor's travel book and later found it in other travel books.
{Edited by moderator}
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I’m still marveling at you being able to sign the King’s Viaitor Book during the reign of a Queen. Perhaps they were trying to fool the esteemed representative of the former colony

In the current environment, they’d probably charge admission and a separate administrative fee!
 

I posted the King's Visitor Book because if someone did it today and asked for the Queen's Visitor Book, that would be in very poor taste. So the proper term today is the King's Visitor's Book.
 
Last edited:

Unless you can prove you are from Surrey or were born within the sound of Bow Bells.


pentaxuser
 

“According to Robinson, in the political arena the upshot will be that every spin doctor will try to stop all doctoring of promotional images. “They’ll be accused of fakery even if they just do the most harmless bit of bringing someone closer to Keir Starmer. Authenticity is now the most valuable commodity there is.””

James Robinson of communications experts, Woburn Partners.

Completely misses the point that there is no ‘harmless’ editing that includes moving, deleting, adding or otherwise altering the positional relationships in the projected image. That’s the point of reliance in photography. Step outside of that and you have, at best, photo derived digital illustration, on which there can be no reliance.

But it shows how deep the malaise goes - a communications expert, presumably, aims to communicate as effectively as possible. Therefore, his ‘harmless’ alterations must be intended to strengthen the message. As such they have an effect and are, consequently, not honest and so not harmless.

As an analogy, I don’t really care if someone wants to clone out a coke can from a landscape picture that hangs in their wall at home, but I don’t consider it a photograph thereafter.

As an aside, the quality of editing is a bit clumsy and seems pretty pointless. I am surprised by that.

Mike
 

Why are we not surprised? I am busy counting the fingers on every hand in the photograph.
 
Sirius Glass said:
Why are we not surprised? I am busy counting the fingers on every hand in the photograph.
Click to expand...

My uncle had six fingers on one hand, five on the other. You'd never notice unless you counted as all were formed perfectly. It's a fairly common trait. Newborns' fingers and toes are always counted and extras are removed at birth by the obstetrician if there are too many. If he were alive, I'm sure he'd get a real kick at all the AI controversy and poorly executed photos.
 

Why do they remove ‘extra’ fingers? I’m sure there’s a good use for them - say if they became a swimmer or something.

Also, do not try this at home, I’ve read that sometimes very young children who have lost fingers actually regrow them. Removing at birth could just lead to new growth!

Mike
 
Where is the out cry over all the doctored advertising photos? People have even tried to sue Burger King and the rest of the garbage repackagers for false advertising. Unsuccessfully I might add.

Anything the royals are sending out is just "advertising" for their brand. Why should they be held to a higher standard than any other celebrities or fast food chains?

My only concern is that Kate regains her health, as I would for anyone recovering from major surgery.

Eric
 

I am not so sure about regrowing fingers. The last time I checked we are not genetically related to octopi.
 

It's hard to find six-fingered gloves.
 
Good news, folks. Kate has been videoed by an ordinary member of the public at what we call a farmer's market in the U.K. She was walking round, looking quite healthy

I suppose that a definite ending like that has killed this thread in that it has eliminated the raison d'etre for it entirely. I have noticed how we all seem to reach an endpoint very quickly on Photrio

pentaxuser
 
The second paragraph lists the uses of deepfake technology that have attracted attention and they are all very problematic.

That is telling in itself
 
If pentaxuser doesn't exist, who do we blame for creating/deep faking him/her/them, and why don't they use shorter sentences?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register