Kate Middleton photo controversy: New details show when the photo was edited
As the photo controversy around Kate Middleton continues to grow, new details have emerged about the timing of edits on a family photo that was later retracted by global news agencies amid concerns it was "manipulated."
The original, edited file of the photo Kate, the Princess of Wales, shared Sunday on social media, shows the photo was processed twice in Adobe Photoshop.
According to the metadata of the file, obtained by ABC News, the photo was processed in Photoshop first on March 8, at 9:54 p.m., local time, and again on March 9, at 9:39 a.m., local time.
Kate shared the photo on Mother's Day in the U.K., along with a message thanking people for their "kind wishes and continued support" as she recovers from abdominal surgery. Prior to the photo, Kate had not been seen in an official capacity since Christmas Day.
Kate signed the post on X with the letter "C," for her full name, Catherine, indicating she had personally signed off on the message.
Photo credit for the photo, showing a smiling Kate surrounded by her three children, was given to Kate's husband, Prince William.
Just hours after the photo was shared on social media and distributed by Kensington Palace, multiple global news agencies retracted the photo. One of the agencies, The Associated Press, told ABC News in a statement Sunday it retracted the photo "because at closer inspection, it appears that the source had manipulated the image in a way that did not meet AP's photo standards. The photo shows an inconsistency in the alignment of Princess Charlotte's left hand."
ABC News' review of the original file of the photo sent out by Kensington Palace shows the image was taken on a Canon 5D Mark IV camera using a 50mm Canon Lens. Visually, the image is the same as the image posted on social media.
It is not clear whether a single computer or multiple computers were used to process the photo through Photoshop.
On Monday, Kate issued an apology, writing on X, "Like many amateur photographers, I do occasionally experiment with editing. I wanted to express my apologies for any confusion the family photograph we shared yesterday caused. I hope everyone celebrating had a very happy Mother's Day."
The apology, also signed with Kate's initial, "C," did little to quell the controversy, however.
On Thursday, a leader of one of the news agencies that retracted the photo, Agence France-Presse, told BBC News Radio that Kensington Palace is no longer considered a trusted source for the agency.
"No, absolutely not," said Phil Chetwynd, global news director at AFP. "Like with anything, when you're let down by a source, the bar is raised."
According to Chetwynd, issuing a "kill notice" for a photograph based on manipulation is a very rare occurrence.
At the same time, conspiracy theories have continued to swirl online about Kate's health and well-being, with some people questioning whether Kate's face was edited into the photo from another photo shoot.
Most royal experts and visual verification experts alike seem to agree that the editing in Kate's Mother's Day photo seems minor, likely nothing more than an effort by a mom to make herself and her kids look as good as possible.
Hany Farid, a computer science professor at the University of California, Berkeley, told ABC News earlier this week that his analysis of the photo shows "minor manipulation," and no evidence it is an AI-generated photo.
"I think most likely it is either some bad photoshop to, for example, remove a stain on the sweater, or is the result of on-camera photo compositing that combines multiple photos together to get a photo where everyone is smiling," Farid said. "Either way, I think it is unlikely that this is anything more than a relatively minor photo manipulation."
But questions remain about how and why the palace and William and Kate landed in such a controversy, and why they are remaining silent.
There has been no further comment from the palace nor William and Kate on the topic since Kate's apology Monday.
ABC News' Kerem Inal contributed to this report.
