Breast Expansion Archive Forum

Discussions => General Discussion => General Discussion: Obsolete Threads => Topic started by: JeffSmit9 on September 05, 2008, 01:13:22 AM

Title: Must be something in the water
Post by: JeffSmit9 on September 05, 2008, 01:13:22 AM
Saw this big busted girl resting her breasts on the locker....then later walking around...


Jeff, as outlined in the Forum Rules, please don't post any comments or photos that contain identifying information about the location where a sighting was made.  In this case, the title of the thread and a comment you made in this message gave too much information.
Title: Re: Must be something in the water
Post by: JeffSmit9 on September 05, 2008, 01:14:56 AM
here she is resting them...
Title: Re: Must be something in the water
Post by: Goldeneye on September 05, 2008, 02:18:37 AM
Hahahahahahahaha the second picture
Title: Re: Must be something in the water
Post by: well_endowed on September 05, 2008, 04:16:09 AM
You are really really creepy.

You have absolutely no right to take photos like that and share them in this way. It's disgusting.

If you put this much effort into developing a personality maybe you'd be able to date a girl and not just stalk them.


  To quote my fellow moderator Palomine from another thread:
    "While everyone's entitled to their opinion, there's nothing remotely illegal going on nor any violation of the BEA User Agreement when such photos are posted provided any identifying info is removed prior to posting".
I've removed references to the location where the photos were taken to give the subject a greater degree of anonymity.  
Title: Re: Must be something in the water
Post by: AlexiaFan on September 05, 2008, 06:15:57 AM
ouch
Title: Re: Must be something in the water
Post by: bignatslover on September 05, 2008, 08:47:11 AM
I don't think our man Smitty violated anything; although maybe he should take out the name of the   (location) he was in.

I for one love candid shots; it is like having footsoldiers out there scoping the cities for you.  I dreamed of stuff like this before the internet.  Of course we should always keep things tasteful, respectful, and provide anonymity to the subject.  I think in large part everyone has tried to be good about that.

NOW - about the actual pictures...

I LOVE that second picture.  If she isn't resting them, perhaps she is preparing to set up a booth to charge admission for a look?  
Title: Re: Must be something in the water
Post by: JeffSmit9 on September 05, 2008, 08:56:32 AM
Should i stop posting?  here is another..
Title: Re: Must be something in the water
Post by: Adman on September 05, 2008, 10:09:57 AM
Keep posting as far as I'm concerned...candids are my favorites
Title: Re: Must be something in the water
Post by: LuckyLonghorn on September 05, 2008, 10:35:44 AM
You're well within your rights to photograph anything and anyone you like in any public place in America. If they have great big boobs, though, it's your duty.
Title: Re: Must be something in the water
Post by: anakinsrise on September 05, 2008, 10:58:21 AM
Keep posting i love the candid breast shots
Title: Re: Must be something in the water
Post by: gonZo on September 05, 2008, 11:45:50 AM
  (Note: all these "Edited by gonZo" footers happened because I had to change the name of the thread in every post.)
Title: Re: Must be something in the water
Post by: TheZookie007 on September 06, 2008, 01:22:00 PM
Quote:

bignatslover: I LOVE that second picture.  If she isn't resting them, perhaps she is preparing to set up a booth to charge admission for a look?  

I'd buy them for a dollar!
Title: Re: Must be something in the water
Post by: Bleep on September 06, 2008, 08:42:14 PM
I love it! In the second pic it is like she is using them as a kick-stand... and resting up to finish her journey.
Title: Re: Must be something in the water
Post by: MasterDragonfly on September 07, 2008, 09:07:38 AM
Here's a handy-dandy reference penned by an actual lawyer called The Photographer's Right.

That said, I'll admit to being a big fan of candids such as these.

That said, I'll also admit that these women might be dismayed at finding their likenesses on a site such as the BEA.  I would completely understand it if the copyright holder elected to obfuscate the woman's face.  Even slightly.  (A hideous sworl might be overkill, but you get the point.)  I do appreciate an attractive face, so making the face appear out-of-focus or underexposed or otherwise making identification ambiguous wouldn't be horrible.

Props to Jeff for making the effort to begin with.