I'm thrilled! Kate puts on a brave face as she sees first official portrait critics are calling 'rotten'

Painting is sure to be divisive - but Kate is said to be 'thrilled' with it

The Duchess is shown grimacing rather than smiling

Hair has a coppery tinge and there are shadows and lines under her eyes

Artist wanted to capture her 'charm, serenity and intelligence’

Beauty, they say, is in the eye of the beholder.

But as the Duchess of Cambridge’s first official portrait was unveiled to the public yesterday, art critics were, unusually, largely united in their condemnation.

‘Ghastly ... rotten ... an out and out disaster,’ was the view of the editor of the British Art Journal, Robin Simon.

Scroll down for video

The Duchess attended the gallery for the unveiling of the first official portrait of her painted by Paul Emsley

Real impact: The painting is much bigger than lifesize - which one art critic called a 'jolly brave' choice

One to show the grandchildren? The pregnant Duchess looked in high spirits as she arrived at the gallery for a private viewing this morning ahead of the public unveiling



Their muse: The Duchess introduces her husband to artist Paul Emsley after viewing his portrait at the National Portrait Gallery

‘It’s only saving grace is that it’s not by Rolf Harris,’ was the best that David Lee, now editor of The Jackdaw and a former editor of Art Review, could manage.

Kate, on her first official outing for almost a month, was far more polite. ‘It’s just amazing. Absolutely brilliant,’ she told the artist, Paul Emsley, when she met him at the National Portrait Gallery, where the picture will hang.

Her husband, Prince William, nodded sagely. ‘It’s beautiful, it’s absolutely beautiful,’ he concurred.

From others, however, the biggest criticism seemed to be the generally ageing nature of the portrait, which took three and a half months to produce.

Most seemed to think it makes the duchess, who turned 31 this week, look at least 15 years older.

Portrait of the artist: Emsley working on the painting at his studio in Bradford-upon-Avon, Wiltshire, using a photo taken when the Duchess visited him there in May

What he saw: The artist said he wanted to emphasise Kate's 'sparkling green eyes'

Then there are the shadows and creases which give her a rather baggy-eyed look, not to mention the squareness of her jaw and the rather coppery tint to her famously tumbling brunette locks.

One onlooker at the gallery yesterday couldn’t get over what they described as her ‘grey, smoker’s skin’, while another commented that her mouth appears to be set in a grimace rather than the promised enigmatic smile.

HAVEN'T WE SEEN THOSE EARRINGS BEFORE, KATE?

The glittering sapphire and diamond earrings Kate wears in her portrait were once owned by Princess Diana, who received them as a wedding present from Prince Charles.

William’s mother was given the earrings by Charles because they bore a startling resemblance to her engagement ring – which is now also worn by the daughter-in-law she never got to meet.

Diana famously wore the jewels on the cover of Vogue in July 1994, as well as on numerous other public occasions.

After her death it is understood they were returned to Charles who gave them to his ‘darling daughter-in-law’ when she married William in 2011. Kate first wore them in public on her royal tour to Canada, after having them slightly remodelled.

While the director of the National Portrait Gallery, Sandy Nairne, declared himself delighted by such a ‘captivating image’, most members of the public who trooped into Room 37 after the unveiling took one look at the portrait before turning excitedly to the half-naked video of sleeping footballer David Beckham made by Sam Taylor-Wood, which was playing nearby.

To be fair, royal portraiture has always been a subjective issue. Rolf Harris, who was asked to paint the Queen in 2005, admitted that in the early stages he made the monarch look like a ‘pork butcher from Norwich’.

Mr Emsley, who has garnered plaudits for his wildlife paintings, has always divided critics with his realistic, almost ‘photographic’ style of painting .

Renowned critic Brian Sewell has described it as ‘sickening’, but the artist has won several prestigious awards including the 1997 BP Portrait Award.

The National Portrait Gallery, of which Kate is patron, drew up a shortlist of four painters but the duchess, who graduated from St Andrews with a 2:1 in history of art and previously studied at the British Institute in Florence, plumped for Mr Emsley.

She posed for the artist before she became pregnant, having one sitting at his studio in Bradford-on-Avon, Wiltshire, followed by another at Kensington Palace in London, in May and June last year.

He also worked from a series of photos he took of the duchess .

The finished picture shows her in a Windsor blue pussy-bow blouse imagined by the artist because she wore different outfits for each of her sittings.

Yesterday Kate, wearing a burgundy dress from High Street store Whistles and displaying no sign of her 12-week baby bump, brought along her parents, sister and brother for the great unveiling.

They spent around ten minutes looking at the picture before attending a private breakfast reception, after which the media were allowed in.

Asked what the duchess thought of his work, Mr Emsley said yesterday: ‘I think, from what I can see this morning, she’s delighted with it. I’m very happy about that.’

He said Kate had personally chosen the photo she wanted him to work from because of the way her hair fell, the light on her face and her expression generally.

But he admitted he had changed the colour of the duchess’s eyes slightly on finished oil to match ‘the background and the colour of her blouse’.

He added: ‘What she wanted was that the portrait should convey her natural self as opposed to her official self.

‘The fact she is a beautiful woman is, for an artist, difficult. When you have lines and wrinkles it is much easier as an artist to capture them as a person. Obviously she has none of that.

‘But I tried to do that with her smile and hope I have succeeded.’

The portrait, which is likely to have cost upwards of £20,000, has been donated to the gallery by art philanthropist Sir Hugh Legatt.

The Duchess appeared to be showing the first signs of a baby bump as she was photographed outside the gallery



Kate arrives at the gallery with Prince William. The baby is likely to be moving about but its movements will be too small for Kate to feel them just yet

Did he get it right? The artist, who has previously painted Nelson Mandela, was keen to capture Kate's ‘charm, serenity and intelligence’ as well as her ‘sparkling green eyes Art enthusiast: The young royals chose Emsley from a shortlist drawn up by the NPG

Warm: An animated Kate told Emsley the portrait was 'amazing... absolutely brilliant'



VIDEO Kate keeps baby bump under wraps at private viewing

Scrawl: Louise Mensch retweeted an 'official portrait' posted online by writer Jenny Colgan

Support: Kate's father Michael, left, and brother James Middleton also attended the viewing this morning



Family occasion: Kate's mother Carole Middleton and sister Pippa, leave the gallery after viewing the new portrait Classic style: Pippa and Carole looked rather serious as they left the gallery holding almost identical handbags