Dr Hany Farid, a professor of computer sciences at the University of California Berkeley, told The Telegraph the issue with Princess Charlotte’s sleeve looked like a “bad Photoshop job”.

Loading

“I clearly see what is being referenced here, with respect to her sleeve. It looks like a bad Photoshop job,” he said.

“I know we talk a lot about AI lately, but it is still possible to use traditional photo-editing tools.

“What you would be worried about here is if Kate wasn’t in this photo and had been digitally inserted. This would be a dramatic manipulation.”

There is no evidence to suggest that the princess has been inserted into the photograph.

Farid added: “You see her hands around the kids on both sides, you see her hair is touching the boy. The contact between her and the boy is very good.

“There are two likely stories. Perhaps there was something they didn’t like on the girl’s hand or sleeve, so they airbrushed it and did a bad job.”

Jake Moore, a former digital forensics officer for Dorset Police who now works as a global cybersecurity adviser for internet security company ESET, said clues of editing would lie in the lighting and direction of shadows in any picture.

He told The Telegraph: “The clues would lie in the lighting on the face, in the light and shade and the shadows.

“In a true image, the shadows will all be in the same direction as the light.

“For example, if in one image of four people, the light is all coming from one direction, the shadows will all match.”

‘Camera may have been responsible’

Farid said the manipulation could have been done by the camera itself, rather than the picture being edited.

Loading

“What modern cameras can do is take a series of photos in rapid succession and create a composite to get the best expressions for a more perfect picture,” he said.

“When it does this it can sometimes make mistakes.

“As such, there is clearly evidence of editing, but it is unclear if this was human-edited or camera-edited.

“The fact that it is on the left arm, makes it hard to think there is something nefarious.

“I think more likely than not it was an unintentional camera-induced artefact which is genuinely benign.”

Kensington Palace has declined to comment.

The Telegraph, UK

Get a note directly from our foreign correspondents on what’s making headlines around the world. Sign up for the weekly What in the World newsletter here.