The Coronation of King Charles III and Queen Camilla, 6 May 2023


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
The CC did have Louise ahead of James but James is ahead of Louise in the line of succession. They were born before the date the change in the law.
 
Lovely idea for a photo and a historic image indeed. Prince George looks very proud!

But a pity they did not make a better photo/ hire a better photographer. It seems that they were all photoshopped in seperatly from each other. If somebody had put a pillow behind the King's back, HM would have been able to sit straight. The crown is not straight on HM's head either. As it is, it reminds me more of a poster for a comedic movie than anything else.

The standing photo is less bad. Nice to see the Queen next to her sister. It must be special and comforting to be able to share such a day together ánd to be able to rely on your sisters help during it.
 
Last edited:
They are pretty poor photos IMO and these defo look photoshopped.

I wonder if Camilla's pages jackets have something to do with her regiments / military links.
 
Kaye1850 said:
I have wondered why all four of KCIII’s pages are in identical scarlet jackets, while two of QC’s are in black, two in red?

Don’t think such things are random!
Click to expand...



2 represent the Grenadier Guards (Freddy P-B and one of the Lopes twins) and the other two The Riffles (Arthur Elliot and the other twin). Camilla’s regiments.
 
Marengo said:
But a pity they did not make a better photo/ hire a better photographer. It seems that they were all photoshopped in seperatly from each other.
Click to expand...

Glad I'm not the only one thinking this. In the first photo, with Charles, William and George, William honestly looks like a cardboard cutout ? But it's a lovely shot of George - he looks relaxed and happy.
 
If sure all photographers have tricks of the trade, it's part of getting the whole effect, whether it's todays Photoshop or yesteryear's more obvious images - i recall one years ago, possibly Cecil Beaton, it was a lovely black and white photo of the Queen Mother, but you could see little obviously hand drawn dots making her appear slightly less rounded, shall we say. I don't think using all the options available to them means the photographers are cheating, it's just today's photographers use digital means, and in years gone by they used manual tools.

However, the most important thing to ask in the pages photo – is where is the Equerry?!!! He could easily have fitted in behind the two shorter pages on the right – perhaps someone could try and photoshop him :whistling:?

I'm thrilled we have now seen two more photos, I really like the 'three kings' image; one more of the complete Wales family would be lovely, along with the whole Royal family including the York princesses and the Armstrong-Jones cousins, but I think we have more chance of seeing the former than the latter, especially in this age of the lets-keep-harry-and-meghan-happy-at-all-costs brigade, and anyone else who wants to point out that this family is of anglo-saxon, norman, germanic, pict and celt descendancy and therefore (unsurprisingly) only have pink complexions.
 
Last edited:
Oh, I was hoping for a picture of Charles and his heirs! Magnificent seeing all three in ceremonial clothing as well.

Though I do agree that something about the composition of the picture seems a bit off – maybe it would've worked better with Charles standing as well?

EllieCat said:
I'm thrilled we have now seen two more photos, I really like the 'three kings' image; one more of the complete Wales family would be lovely, along with the whole Royal family including the York princesses and the Armstrong-Jones cousins, but I think we have more chance of seeing the former than the latter, especially in this age of the lets-keep-harry-and-meghan-happy-at-all-costs brigade, and anyone else who wants to point out that this family is of anglo-saxon, norman, germanic, pict and celt descendancy and therefore (unsurprisingly) only have pink complexions.
Click to expand...

An odd thing to say. As though being of Anglo-Saxon, Norman, Germanic, Pict and Celt descendance bars complexion diversity somehow.

What's funny is I've seen more outrage over Andoh's comment than in the comment itself. Especially funny given your brigade remark – evidently you can add royalists embittered by a mere observation to the group that apparently need to be kept happy at all costs ;)
 
I think the Charles, William and George picture may have worked better if William was on a lower step so their heads were more closely aligned. George standing is about the same height as Charles seated and then William is towering over both of them.
 
Marengo said:
Lovely idea for a photo and a historic image indeed. Prince George looks very proud!

But a pity they did not make a better photo/ hire a better photographer. It seems that they were all photoshopped in seperatly from each other. If somebody had put a pillow behind the King's back, HM would have been able to sit straight. The crown is not straight on HM's head either. As it is, it reminds me more of a poster for a comedic movie than anything else.

The standing photo is less bad. Nice to see the Queen next to her sister. It must be special and comforting to be able to share such a day together ánd to be able to rely on your sisters help during it.
Click to expand...

IMO the problem is in the way the newspaper has presented it, with the background removed, William has became part of the masthead and does look like it he has been added in. . When you see the stand alone photograph it is lovely.
 
The more I see of images of the King wearing the purple tunic, the more I wish he’d chosen something less ‘gaudy’. It doesn’t enhance the ceremonial robes .
 
Love these new portraits as well, though I agree that a stylist, if present, could have done better. The robe of Camilla is all wrinkled down the steps and not well laid out. And Charles sitting with the bright purple thing is not helping either. The inclined golden stripes make him look a bit overweight (and I don’t think he is at all) so a standing picture and some photoshop could have helped more.

William can’t stand on a lower step because, if so, he would have ended up being too in the foreground or too on the side. I think the way it’s done it works.
 
When I see it, due to William's height that is where my eyes are drawn rather than to Charles in the centre.
 
:previous: I'm also in agreement that the coronation photos while very important weren't the best for a number of reasons. JGio mentioned the need for a stylist, Marengo mentioned a better photographer. I think with better photography the mention of why the color purple for Charles tunic would be a moot point plus from what I've read: Buckingham Palace notes "The Purple Coronation Tunic was newly designed for King Charles III but inspired by those worn by King George V and King George VI. Ede and Ravenscroft designed it with purple satin and gold artillery lace." https://royalcentral.co.uk/uk/a-king-at-his-coronation-the-outfit-worn-by-king-charles-iii-189302/

I have to think by the time these photos were taken the King and Queen were very tired. Prince George truly did shine in his photos!
 
Lady Daly said:
: Buckingham Palace notes "The Purple Coronation Tunic was newly designed for King Charles III but inspired by those worn by King George V and King George VI. Ede and Ravenscroft designed it with purple satin and gold artillery lace." https://royalcentral.co.uk/uk/a-king-at-his-coronation-the-outfit-worn-by-king-charles-iii-189302/
Click to expand...

Maybe a darker shade of purple would have been better. Across all portraits, the tunic takes different shades. Anyway, stuff to note down for the next Coronation.
 
At bloody last, two photographs that are essential to the collection. Had they released those last week, it would have saved me from a hangover. The only one missing is a Wales family portrait.

The coronation was not what I had hoped for. Now I realize I miss Queen Elizabeth II's glamour and regality - something neither Charles nor Camilla has IMO.
And I agree about his tunic. To be fair it makes me think of a satin pyjamas sweater.

I also agree about the photograph quality, they don't stand out. Which takes me back to my original question why Hugo Burnand was chosen in the first place. What makes him such an exceptional photographer.
He may have a royal warrant, as only one, but I don't see it.

For me, it was not worth it, and I'll pass this reign. I'll wait until it's William's turn.

Goodbye, so long, auf wiedersehen, farewell.
 
Skippy said:
At bloody last, two photographs that are essential to the collection. Had they released those last week, it would have saved me from a hangover. The only one missing is a Wales family portrait.

The coronation was not what I had hoped for. Now I realize I miss Queen Elizabeth II's glamour and regality - something neither Charles nor Camilla has IMO.
And I agree about his tunic. To be fair it makes me think of a satin pyjamas sweater.

I also agree about the photograph quality, they don't stand out. Which takes me back to my original question why Hugo Burnand was chosen in the first place. What makes him such an exceptional photographer.
He may have a royal warrant, as only one, but I don't see it.

For me, it was not worth it, and I'll pass this reign. I'll wait until it's William's turn.

Goodbye, so long, auf wiedersehen, farewell.
Click to expand...
As I have stated before, I agree with you about the lack of "glamour and regality" as you put it, when it comes to this last coronation. They wanted to have it all, tradition and modernity (and save money) - and I guess that´s not possible. At least not if you ask me!
But I think you cannot blame the new royal couple entirely. They are both pretty old and were not able to move so gracefully and dignified like the young Queen back in 1953. Because of their advanced age the built a ramp for them so the King and Queen didn´t have to climb up and later down the steps to the altar. The dramatic effect of elevated thrones was also missing. The most disappointing thing was when Camilla was crowned. The anointing was so rushed I hardly realised it. Obviously also because of health or mobility issues, she was not crowned in front of the altar like it was always been done. Instead, the Queen sat on her chair of state and the archbishop had to shove behind her faldstool to put the crown on C´s head while she anxiously moved back and had to fondle her hair (because her hairdo isn´t just made to fit to a crown...).
Queen Camilla looked a bit "naked" during passages during the ceremony when she neither wore a robe, nor, as normally the case, the two scepters.
Also the King´s anointing occured to me like it was done in a hurry. At the 1953 coronation, it was beautifully "staged" with The Queen climbing St. Edward´s chair at exactly the right time with the choir´s dramatically sung "Amen!" during Handel´s setting of "Zadok the priest". Charles was anointed DURING this anthem, which, from my point of view, took away a lot of its solemnity.
The carpetless nave without the use of parapets didn´t look like fit for a coronation to me as well...
So, in the end it was interesting to watch, but nothing you will always cherish for the rest of your life.
 
Last edited:
Skippy said:
At bloody last, two photographs that are essential to the collection. Had they released those last week, it would have saved me from a hangover. The only one missing is a Wales family portrait.

The coronation was not what I had hoped for. Now I realize I miss Queen Elizabeth II's glamour and regality - something neither Charles nor Camilla has IMO.
And I agree about his tunic. To be fair it makes me think of a satin pyjamas sweater.

I also agree about the photograph quality, they don't stand out. Which takes me back to my original question why Hugo Burnand was chosen in the first place. What makes him such an exceptional photographer.
He may have a royal warrant, as only one, but I don't see it.

For me, it was not worth it, and I'll pass this reign. I'll wait until it's William's turn.

Goodbye, so long, auf wiedersehen, farewell.
Click to expand...

I agree the whole thing didn't hit the mark for me at all. The Wales family looked regal but Charles and Camilla just looked very pantomine. Also I haven't met one person, not one, among my friends or work mates who want them as King and Queen and a few of them are big royalists.
 
I think the Tunic would have worked better with the traditional stockings. Perhaps white trouser would have worked better with it then the black uniform trouser.
As for the pics they are nice but nothing compared to those from 1953. But then Ceceil Beaton was a master in taking official pics of the royals so it was a difficult Job to fill.
 
sophie25 said:
I agree the whole thing didn't hit the mark for me at all. The Wales family looked regal but Charles and Camilla just looked very pantomine. Also I haven't met one person, not one, among my friends or work mates who want them as King and Queen and a few of them are big royalists.
Click to expand...

From what I have been reading (from UK sources) on social media and the papers, there were two main issues:

  1. King Charles is a 74-year-old man without an imposing body figure. He has a wringled face and looks quite frail these days, even more so with the (physical and emotional) weight of the crown on his head. Queen Elizabeth II in 1953 did not have an imposing body figure either (she was a rather "petite" woman), but she was a young, beautiful and radiant 27-year-old, who, despite looking serious throughout the coromation, actually seemed joyful and not like she was "in pain" as King Charles appeared to many viewers. For no fault of his own, King Charles was unfortunately negatively affected by the comparisons with his mother although comparing a 74-year-old man to a 27-year-old woman is like comparing apples and oranges and doesn't really make a lot of sense (still, people will inevitably do it anyway).
  2. Queen Camilla is not terribly popular (as actually shown by polls) and many people still have reservations about her being anointed, crowned and enthroned.

By the way, I also agree with other posters that, although there were constraints (from tradition) to what King Charles could wear to the coronation, his choice of attire was not particularly well-thought and contributed to giving him a rather cartoonish or comical image.
 
Last edited:
I find that most people are quite happy to have Charles and Camilla as King and Queen. However, people are never going to be as interested in an ordinary-looking couple in their 70s as they are in Royals who are younger and more glamorous.
 
Frankly if I were Charles and read this stuff, I would walk.
 
sophie25 said:
I agree the whole thing didn't hit the mark for me at all. The Wales family looked regal but Charles and Camilla just looked very pantomine. Also I haven't met one person, not one, among my friends or work mates who want them as King and Queen and a few of them are big royalists.
Click to expand...

That is true, I was awestruck by how regal the Wales family looked and truthfully, that is what I expect in that position.
It's not Charles and Camilla's fault that they lack that, but still.
William does have that regality and Catherine the glamour, so to me the math is done.

Hopefully when their time comes they can hire Matt Porteous. I always like his photos.

I have spent 20-plus years in royals land, but now I bow out. It's not my area anymore.

William (and Catherine), when it's your turn - I'll be there.

*Waves goodbye*
 
Last edited:
Hopefully it will be 20+ years until it is the Wales' turn. If Charles lives to the same age as his mother that is what it will be. I am sure William would love his father to reach or even pass the late Queen Mum in age as well so that he is the heir well into his 60s or even early 70s.

I am not even sure that Britain will still be a monarchy when it is William's turn for the simple reason the 'antis' are louder now than ever before and younger people have no real connection.

The fact that unless Charles dies there won't be any major royal event in Britain for probably 20 years also means less for young people to relate to.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Marengo
  • Sticky
The Coronation: Guest Arrivals, Guest List, Rehearsal and Receptions, 5 May 2023
6 7 8
Replies
215
Views
25K
Prinsara
Prinsara
Marengo
  • Sticky
The Coronation: Big Lunch, Concert, Big Help Out, 7 and 8 May 2023
2 3
Replies
83
Views
11K
Somebody
Somebody
Ista
General News for Charles III and Queen Camilla Part 2, February 2024-
2 3
Replies
60
Views
13K
winifred
W
Marengo
  • Locked
Charles III: Coronation Information and Musings - Part 2
15 16 17
Replies
501
Views
53K
Marengo
Marengo
iceflower
The Duchess of Sussex's Fashion and Style Part 1: November 2023 -
2 3
Replies
65
Views
8K
Granada
G

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom