Everyone has the same reaction to the National Gallery’s final unveiling of two new paintings commemorating King Charles and Queen Camilla’s coronation in 2023. Peter Kuhfeld, who has been working with the monarch for many years after being commissioned by him to paint Princes William and Harry as little children, painted Charles’ picture. However, Paul Benny was the artist who painted Camilla, 77.
Fans were obviously excited to see the newest additions to the collection of royal pictures, which were recently made public today (6 May), following the uproar surrounding Jonathan Yeo’s 2024 unveiling of Charles’ first official image.
In The first portrait, Charles was surrounded by Satan, the curtains have now been drawn, and the light is showing his true likeness, the spectre of Satan is retreating. My prediction is 2026 we will see the truth. pic.twitter.com/0I0zGvTkEC
— AlienLifeForm (@Alien_LifeLine) May 7, 2025
However, many quickly took to social media to complain that the photo was “blurry” and just not quite as beautiful as Camilla’s, indicating that not everyone was overly delighted with the portrayal of 76-year-old Charles.
One X user penned: “Charles’s portrait looks like a Wallace and Grommet [sic] character – you can imagine it hanging in Wallace’s house. Camilla’s portrait is lovely.” “His face is very blurry. Camilla’s portrait was giving more presence and depth than Charles’s,” quipped a second. A third chimed in: “King Charles portrait looks like he’s from the 1700s lol.”
“The Queen’s is perfect. The King’s too blurry,” hit out a fourth, while a fifth agreed: “Looks blurry. Out of focus.” A sixth commented: “Comparing the portraits of King and Queen, I think she’s come out of it much better than he has. There’s something a little underwhelming about his portrait, as if he’s shrinking into the background. There’s a bit more forthright glamour about hers!”
“I think Camilla’s is much better,” another user remarked, while another declared: “Compared to the level of detail in previous ones, King Charles’ portrait looks… cheap. Lighting and composition are good, though.”
“In regards to body language, I think the artist could have chosen a different posture.”
And a final X user said: “I think the King should have gone with the same artist as the Queen!”
Imposter demon pedo Charles new portrait
So looks like a snake 🐍 head in his hand and
What the bejangles is that lurking in the curtains 🤔 pic.twitter.com/bNDfyxaACz
— Emerald Truth (@emeraldtruth222) May 6, 2025
“I believe he was happy. After five sittings with the King, Kuhfeld took over 18 months to finish the painting. “It’s a very strange thing for a sitter to look at themselves,” he said. “I just hope that I’ve got an aspect of the man and King, I just think that’s very important.”
The King is depicted in the throne chamber at St. James’s Palace in both full-length portraits, while the Queen Consort is seen in the garden room of Clarence House, the couple’s London residence.
