Dirty Lol's Thread

[Quintusson]

 

[Stew]

Did you notice that the 2 earrings are not matching

 

[Stew]

 

[Intuthu Kagesi]

Did you notice that the 2 earrings are not matching View attachment 277245

Neither do her mammaries ... photoshopped maybe?

 

[Missioner]

Neither do her mammaries ... photoshopped maybe?

CG bro. Desi hentai

It's easy to spot if you look at it closely. Real cameras flatten out the image, lenses battle to distinguish between foreground and background details, overly blurry back ground, 1st clue to spot a CG generated image.

Second is the subject only appears to have one light source, the light source also does not appear to be sunlight. The colour of the skin and fabrics is too dull due to low intensity light. Ok someone says the photo was shot in a studio with a backdrop, what if that's the case?

Fetch a cosmopolitan magazine from your wife's collection and page to the glamour section. Look at the model's hair, the reflections and highlights from the lighting. Hair is notoriously the most easiest thing to screw up when editing an image. This is why fashion photographers usually leave it up to the stylist to make it amazing. Any smoothing etc done to the image in post is then much simpler, especially when you consider how many images need processing. Now back to our lovely busty Indian goddess, notice how monochrome the hair is with very small variations in colour. Also notice how parts of the hair appears static. Thus my point. CG.

I am not knocking the artist, I think the work is amazing. It takes dedication and skill to create an image like that.

 

[Intuthu Kagesi]

CG bro. Desi hentai

It's easy to spot if you look at it closely. Real cameras flatten out the image, lenses battle to distinguish between foreground and background details, overly blurry back ground, 1st clue to spot a CG generated image.

Second is the subject only appears to have one light source, the light source also does not appear to be sunlight. The colour of the skin and fabrics is too dull due to low intensity light. Ok someone says the photo was shot in a studio with a backdrop, what if that's the case?

Fetch a cosmopolitan magazine from your wife's collection and page to the glamour section. Look at the model's hair, the reflections and highlights from the lighting. Hair is notoriously the most easiest thing to screw up when editing an image. This is why fashion photographers usually leave it up to the stylist to make it amazing. Any smoothing etc done to the image in post is then much simpler, especially when you consider how many images need processing. Now back to our lovely busty Indian goddess, notice how monochrome the hair is with very small variations in colour. Also notice how parts of the hair appears static. Thus my point. CG.

I am not knocking the artist, I think the work is amazing. It takes dedication and skill to create an image like that.

Hair ... she has hair? ... back to them mammaries

I am most impressed at the engineering of the clasp under said mammaries too ... mind you, also of her trust of said clasp

 

[Missioner]

Hair ... she has hair? ... back to them mammaries

I am most impressed at the engineering of the clasp under said mammaries too ... mind you, also of her trust of said clasp

That shirt does defy the laws of physics.

If those things were real I would spend my days motorboating myself into a coma

Sent from my 2107113SG using Tapatalk

 

[Drikusw]

 

[Stranger]

She has a temendous belly button

 

[Quintusson]

 

[Quintusson]

 

[Stew]

 

[YzeOne]

 

[Quintusson]

 

[Paul33]

 

[Quintusson]

 

[Quintusson]

 

[Quintusson]

 

[Intuthu Kagesi]

I'm just curious as to how you came across the web site

 

[Quintusson]

I'm just curious as to how you came across the web site

It's actually a FaceBook joke page which was recommended to me, likely due to my sense of humour shown in what I share.

 

[Drikusw]

 

[Paul33]

 

[Paul33]

 

[Paul33]

 

[Timwis]