Is this real or A.I??? If this is real I will dog fuck Billy Eyelish until she can’t stand for a week!!!

[Sloboogie]

That 2nd pic is super edited. The top is closer to reality

Not trying to knock any expertise you may have, but I've been in the creative field since 1998. When "anything" is in print, I like to look for the graphical errors and missteps of the re-toucher to hide their work. I've worked for several major publications in regards to the imaging alone, and I got a chance to actually see the RAW (heh) files before any retouching for this project (my sister-in-law) works for the imaging team for Vogue UK. Outside of the desaturation and background textile sharpening, I'd like to know what you think is edited.

Only reason I ask, is because the BGOL culture has shifted from a general appreciation of imagery, to "everything is fake". So I'm just curious to your findings.

 

[Gods_Debris]

Not trying to knock any expertise you may have, but I've been in the creative field since 1998. When "anything" is in print, I like to look for the graphical errors and missteps of the re-toucher to hide their work. I've worked for several major publications in regards to the imaging alone, and I got a chance to actually see the RAW (heh) files before any retouching for this project (my sister-in-law) works for the imaging team for Vogue UK. Outside of the desaturation and background textile sharpening, I'd like to know what you think is edited.

Only reason I ask, is because the BGOL culture has shifted from a general appreciation of imagery, to "everything is fake". So I'm just curious to your findings.

Lol, I mean I don't know why these niggas havent learned not to over-commit to these baseless speculations after all these damn years. Smdh

Billy "Scarlett Johansson " Eilish would get rawed.

 

[shaddyvillethug]

Raw and fucking breed

 

[therealjondoe]

Not trying to knock any expertise you may have, but I've been in the creative field since 1998. When "anything" is in print, I like to look for the graphical errors and missteps of the re-toucher to hide their work. I've worked for several major publications in regards to the imaging alone, and I got a chance to actually see the RAW (heh) files before any retouching for this project (my sister-in-law) works for the imaging team for Vogue UK. Outside of the desaturation and background textile sharpening, I'd like to know what you think is edited.

Only reason I ask, is because the BGOL culture has shifted from a general appreciation of imagery, to "everything is fake". So I'm just curious to your findings.

You don't think there was any touch ups done to her?
I'm betting they took her waist in a bit and rounded out her curves

 

[Dr. Truth]

Raw and fucking breed

She’s mine stay Aht!

 

[shaddyvillethug]

She’s mine stay Aht!

She’s not a mongoloid

Foh

 

[Dr. Truth]

She’s not a mongoloid

Foh

She got a vagina though , something that repulses you. Phaggit

 

[shaddyvillethug]

She got a vagina though , something that repulses you. Phaggit

she doesn’t eat dog or duck

Eat a dick

 

[parisian]

take a pic like I did... brah

you definitely showed and proved

 

[Helico-pterFunk]

 

[parisian]

Oh hell naw...

 

[Sloboogie]

You don't think there was any touch ups done to her?
I'm betting they took her waist in a bit and rounded out her curves

Everyone gets retouched, but her shape in the photo is a combination of her own shape and the clothing. Apparently, she is just getting into being comfortable with her own body.

 

[therealjondoe]

Everyone gets retouched, but her shape in the photo is a combination of her own shape and the clothing. Apparently, she is just getting into being comfortable with her own body.

I was looking at this pic and it looks like she has minimal curves

 

[stixx passin thru]

So is it real or not!?!??

nerp.. AI 80% of the time messes up the fingers..... look at the deformity of her thumb.

AI.

 

[ansatsusha_gouki]

Thought,she finally showed those titties....