Official Portraits of the Duke and/or Duchess of Cambridge and Family

[EIIR]

LOL There is something comforting in being able to count on some people to never change. We can always count on Argentina for the negative vote on everyone except there own.

Yes, NGalitzine, some things are as inevitable (and as welcome) as a bird defecating on your car just after you've washed it.

 

[cepe]

The artist who painted William and Harry is also the artist that Charles commissioned to paint Catherine as a present for William. I'd love to see that. But she said that it is very difficult to paint a young, beautiful woman and this artist has basically said the same thing. The Yeo painting of Prince Philip shows his experience and life, with his good looks still showing through.

I've done life drawing and older people are easier - a tad baggy and saggy but easier.

 

[soapstar]

I don't think people are disappointed because Kate doesn't look perfect or whatever. We all know she has wrinkles/flaws - there's been a million videos and photos of her. So I doubt anyone expected the artist to make her free of imperfections.

My problem with the portrait, is that the background makes it look a little too dark and depressing. IMO, that's what gives her an air of someone much older (not the lines).

Having said all that, I don't hate the portrait. I'm not in love with it, but it looks okay. At the end of the day though, as long as Kate and Paul are happy with it, that's all that really matters.

Good for him for standing by his work and his technique. At the end of the day, that's all you can do as an artist, try your best. He liked it, Catherine and William liked it and I'm sure the Middletons liked it.

There's many more to come.

I too liked that he stood by his work, while also acknowledging that art is subjective. I'm sure it can't be easy hearing critiques of your work, but I think he's handled it very well.

 

[Dman]

I agree, I did think the background of the portrait was too dark. Also, some of the pictures that's being taken of the portrait seems dark and others light. I think it will make a difference to some if it's seen in person and not just in the papers and videos.

I have heard people say that Catherine is much more beautiful in person than what you see in the pictures of her.

 

[Dman]

Pictures;
The Duke & Duchess of Cambridge at The National Portrait Gallery:
MYROYALS &HOLLYWOOD FASH

 

[COESpiral]

Were I seeing this painting in person as opposed to a picture of the painting on the internet, I might have a vastly different opinion. But as I won't be getting to London any time soon, I can only judge what I'm seeing through the wonder of the world wide web.

As it is, I'm not that crazy about it. It seems dark and if he, as reported, was concentrating on the eyes, he missed the mark. They seem dull and lack the natural sparkle she normally has. The mouth doesn't bother me, nor does the nose, and the hair is lovely, but I'm really disappointed by the eyes. Those are the window to the soul and I don't think he captured that.

But as I said, standing in a different light, looking at it up close, in person, these things might be vastly different and what's missing in a photograph could show up big as life in real time. I'm hoping so, anyway.

For a first portrait it's not horrible but I admit to expecting more. That's my own issue, though. I look forward to future artwork of William, Catherine, and their family.

 

[Osipi]

I've looked at the portrait a few times and each time I get different reactions to it. I've thought it really doesn't look like her, I've thought it rather plain, and I've thought it very simple.

I think as some as said, it may make a world of difference seeing it in person and up close and perhaps from stepping back more. The beauty of art is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[Grandma828]

I would love to be able to see the protrait in person, but not much chance. Somehow, I think it will grow on people over time.

 

[TLLK]

And the guantlet has now been thrown down definitively.....

Stay safe, my friends.

 

[TLLK]

She's an art history major. She KNOWS Emsley's major work. She knew he would do a bust length and a full frontal. She knew he would focus on her eyes and any breaks in the planes of her face. And she knew that he would not feel a need to be 100% flattering. No doubt she picked him because she knew his work and knew he would do this sort of Portrait.
If you have ever noticed, most people, Kate among them, are not "prettiest" looked at full face from the front. But this is what he does and she chose him from a short list. He is extremely well respected because of the work he does. If you want pretty pics of the Duchess, please visit Zimbio or Getty Images. This is a different thing altogether, and she knew that it would be before she sat for the portrait.

Knowing that she chose the artist and was familiar with his previous work, style and technique then I feel safe in stating that she is likely very happy with the result.

 

[someonelikeyou]

Yes, the black background is too dark. Also, the dark (teal?) blouse.

A lighter background, and perhaps a lighter top with a slight décolleté appearing would have been brighter, somehow more appealing.

I don't like that the artist changed her eye color. Seems kind of "un-portraitishy" to me.

 

[Danishla]

I agree, I did think the background of the portrait was too dark. Also, some of the pictures that's being taken of the portrait seems dark and others light. I think it will make a difference to some if it's seen in person and not just in the papers and videos.

I have heard people say that Catherine is much more beautiful in person than what you see in the pictures of her.

I personally think Catherine is more beautiful when she "smiles", although the portrait does resemble her, it is not her best look. . . . (now the artist did a great job to show off her beautiful hair)

 

[Jessgan]

Dunno bout u guys.. The portrait looks like a portrait of a wicked witch. No offense to Kate but it doesn't really portray her in the best light

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

One of the worst portraits I have ever seen. Are there no more talented painters out there? Have they all died? It is truly one of the worst portraits I have ever seen of anybody. Late must be being bet diplomatic to the artist in public. A part from how bad she looks I agree the background is too dark.
I don't think I am going to be able to look at it again, it is that disappointing. Some says that Kate has wrinkles but they definitely are not that obvious. Also even when she's not smiling her cheek bones are higher than in this picture, they look like they are falling down her face.

 

[sophie25]

I agree with the poster who said that portrait makes her look like a witch. The first thing I thought was how nasty and sinister her facial expression was, it's not a warm representation at all IMO but very cold and calculating looking.

 

[christythedreamer]

Ugh I hate that portrait of her. Kate looks beautiful but the photo is a wrong choice for the potrait. Firstly, it doesn't do justice of her beauty at all. I know they want it to be natural but these eye-bags and wrinkles are too much--they make her look really old. Another thing that bothers me the most is that smug expression, it looks quite scary. Finally, the portrait, in my opinion, is quite inappropriate for a royal, it doesn't scream "official portrait" to me.

However, I love Kate's outfit at the opening. She looks amazing, I never really like her looks before but she looks radiant after pregnancy. Perhaps she's now less "bony" feeling and I love her look!

 

[Hollie]

I thought the portrait looks very realistic. Kate probably looks just like that without all the eye makeup, blusher and foundation.

I quite like the portrait to be honest It does leave a great impression. The artist could have done something like the Madame Tussauds wax figure: flawless, perfect, minimal eye bags, no wrinkles... but it would be no different from all the airbrushed photos out there. Not to mention it looks unreal after some time.

 

[HereditaryPrincess]

I thought the portrait looks very realistic. Kate probably looks just like that without all the eye makeup, blusher and foundation.

I agree with you- if I hadn't known it was a portrait then I would've thought it was a photo. I think that the portrait made Catherine look older than she is, and IMO it also made her look tired, as her eyes seemed to be quite dark.

I have to say that I didn't really like the portrait, overall...

 

[hkittybaby]

I agree with you- if I hadn't known it was a portrait then I would've thought it was a photo. I think that the portrait made Catherine look older than she is, and IMO it also made her look tired, as her eyes seemed to be quite dark.

I have to say that I didn't really like the portrait, overall...

I agree with you
The original pic looks so much better

 

[grevinnan]

The painter is an artist, not a photographer. If she had wanted a true and real picture of her she would have to chose a photograph. By chosing an artist she will get the artist's impression of her. His style is not necessary something I would chose but she did. An artist's rendition is always that, the work of an artist.

 

[genegirl99]

First impression I got: too dark, now looking at it a few times I'd like it better if it wasn't so dark.

 

[Anna Catherine]

I don't agree. I thought the potrait was really well done. By the looks of her reaction on video, she seemed to like it too. I thought the artist did a great job. I don't know what is so wrong with the potrait. Of course that's just my personal opinion and I'm no artist...but still

 

[The Daddy]

As long as the Duke and Duchess are happy, that is all that counts!

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I've seen the picture the artist was working from and I have no idea how he can take something that looks pretty and turn it into something so ugly. Even in the picture Kate's lips are pursed but she doesn't look smug or wicked at all.

 

[padams2359]

I think everything is fine in the portrait except her eyes look unbalanced, and her cheekbones are too low.

 

[Nico]

Well for a good laugh (no disrespect intended toward HRH of course, some people on this forum being a little touchy sometimes ) . I bet Catherine has a good sense of humor ...

Kate Middleton portrait: Now that's an art attack! Picture given a makeover as pranksters create alternative portraits | Mail Online

 

[GracieGiraffe]

I'm starting to feel a little sorry for this artist. I did not like the portrait myself, and said so. Apparently, it's very difficult to capture a subject by paint - it's not a photograph.

I have no issue with art critics panning him - that's part of the business and the artist must have a thick enough skin to deal with it. But making fun of this portrait has gone positively viral (and some of it is quite funny). It seems that anything about Will and Kate (those photos, the DJ hoax) goes immediately viral. The public's obsession with these two is becoming absolutely toxic. Did we learn nothing from Diana? From the nurse last month? I'm starting to wonder whether this kind of notoriety will mean that this poor man never works again. Not that I haven't taken my own shots at this portrait; I'm part of the public obsession that has become toxic. Perhaps it started toxic with Diana and has just been laying dormant. With all of this stuff swirling around them, how can Will and Kate ever settle down and raise their family and keep sane in general? Kate's emotions and sensitivities are already on overdrive right now - how do you handle all this even when she can understand that on an intellectual level none of this toxicity was caused by HER, or Will for that matter? I'm starting to get a little worried about her and about anyone who "crosses" them. It's an insanity I've never seen before - Diana had the benefit of living her life before the internet truly took off.

All I'm saying is, I hope this poor guy is well and laughing it off, and it brings him more success than ever. And I hope Kate and Will aren't thinking about this either.

 

[Dman]

As I said before, many of the royal family had portraits done and the finished product was met with mixed emotions but the criticism over this official portrait is just too over the top, Imo. I even turned on Yahoo! and they had a poll about the portrait, of course the percentage was negative.

Catherine knows art and I'm sure she knew not everyone will like it. I'm not too sure she cares about the harsh comments about the portrait. The National Portrait Gallery commissioned the portrait under her patronage and I think they are pleased with the result.

I'm also sure the artist likes his work and not laying awake at night over the negative comments.

 

[camelot23ca]

I'm sure the artist will make out fine from all this. He seems to be well regarded with a solid body of work behind him. One portrait could conceivably make the career of a completely unknown artist plucked from nowhere but it's not going to unmake the career of someone with an established reputation.

I think the dust needs to settle somewhat before the portrait can be fairly assessed. IMO the first portrait of Kate was either going to get completely panned or be built up as the greatest portrait in the history of portraits - there was never going to be a middle ground reached by either the public or the art community, just because of the ridiculous amounts of attention, publicity and emotion every single thing associated with the Cambridges attracts. Not to say that everyone will necessarily start loving the painting as time passes, but I do think in five or ten years time many will look back and find there's nothing about this portrait that warrants extreme reactions of any sort.

 

[Mariel]

the only thing really wrong with this picture is the smirk. As I said before, Kate has a number of expressions. Possibly one of them is a smirk, if she is faced with a ridiculous exasperating situation. But to chose a smirk as the primary representation of her expressions is weird. Perhaps the artist thinks that Kate does find the world ridiculous and exasperating. And one could not blame her if so.