Prince William appeared on the front cover of Vanity Fair magazine, sporting more hair than usual.
Don't worry, our second favourite royal hasn't had a hair transplant. That's Photoshop trickery at work. William joins a long line of celebrities, and even royals, who have benefitted from a little pre-published enhancement.
There is a serious message here though, or rather a question. Why is this necessary? Ok, so airbrushing has been going on for many years and we all know the arguments for and against, but surely the royal family should enjoy some sort of immunity? They're not reliant on their next big movie, contract or interview, so why is image so important that such measures should be required?
It gets worse
Let's assume that the Prince's new hairdo is just a little harmless fun. It gets a little more sinister though, when you consider what Grazia magazine did to the size of Kate's waist for their wedding cover special.
I mean seriously, look at the size of her mid section. Is that really necessary? She's not exactly a big girl in the first place and she's already adored the world over, so why the obsession with so-called perfection?
One final shocker for you. Even baby Prince George has been subjected to Photoshop enhancements, before he's even old enough to walk. See the fake rosy cheeks Us Weekly gave him.
The moral of the story is this - don't always believe what you see in a photograph.
Back to the real world, this advice applies to scalp micropigmentation too. You only need to read articles like these, to realise that all is not always what you think it is, or what it is implied to be. If you want a high quality SMP treatment, do your homework and ask to see proof of your providers results, proof that is harder to fake. Videos are preferable to photos. The real thing in person is even better.