Which portrait is better? Kate just had her first “royal” portrait, and let me tell you, it looks far from royal. While she may be a “commoner” she has married into the Royal family. At least give her some jewels. But that was not the case here. I truly believe the artist made her portrait less significant than Dürer’s self portrait from 1500.
While Dürer made himself look like Jesus – notice the hair, the facial features, the religious hand signal, the glamorous coat… Kate, the Duchess of Cambridge, has been painted to almost blend into the background and has been blurred – almost appearing like a vampire. Nevertheless, what I still cannot get over are the great similarities between both portraits.
Notice their forehead space. The shape of their eyebrows. The hair as a framing device. Skin exposed to make their necks look elongated. Perched lips. And both are set against a dark background to bring the figure to the foreground. However, Kate’s is created in a less realistic manner than Dürer. How can this be?!
It is so ridiculous that it is not even worthy of being a royal portrait.
She needs a re-do. Yes, I said it.
There ya go. If you wish to see it in person, please feel free to go to the National Portrait Gallery in London. See for yourself.