As soon as our deadline had passed I nipped out of the office, handed over £2 of my (hard-earned) money and spent my lunch break pouring over 100 pages of the Royal wedding.

Having heard so much about the "intrusive" photos, it was too much to resist.

Was it going to be the Kate and Chelsy show? Were there actually any pictures of the less documented bride and groom?

Would I get to see the Queen and Prince Phillip strutting their stuff on the dance floor?

So many questions that only 15 minutes flicking through said magazine could answer. After having looked through the shots, it was "disappointed".

The wedding of Peter Phillips and Autumn Kelly was traditional with rather traditional photographs – nothing controversial as far as I could see.

Yes, there were a few slightly more candid shots of Princes William and Harry's girlfriends enjoying themselves at the reception – but it looked far tamer than any wedding I have ever been to.

Where were all the shots of dad dancing?

No-one was sliding on their knees across the marquee or being carried to the toilet after one too many flutes of champagne.

The picture special simply made the Royal Family look like (fairly) normal people, celebrating the wedding of loved ones and having a good time.

I really don't think they have got a lot to worry about.
After all, the bride and groom made £500,000 from the world exclusive deal and no-one at the bash was even pictured looking the worse for wear.

A Royal source has said it will not be happening again and that in hindsight it should not have happened in the first place.

Well, thank goodness for that - at least I don't have to shell out another £2 for the pleasure.