[IceOwl]

Quote:

A. The outer edge of the bra does not match the inside edge of her arm. The bra is hovering in space away and downward from her body due to a morph or more likely awkward padding.
B. A very abrupt tone change both below and above this strap again points to a morph but might also indicate an unnatural shift in the angle of the bra fabric to the flash cause by... padding.

(etc...)

I hope this is a joke, because if it's not, you're a fool.

[sheber]

You are being played.










sheb "over and over and over" er

[BP]

The more I look at these photos, the more I am totally convinced they are real. Nuff said.

[sheber]

Is it because there are 207 photos that you believe? I mean, the creator of the Loch Ness hoax took the secret with him to his grave (later to be revealed by his son, iirc) and there was only one photograph, yet thousands believed it to be real...

[rtpoe]

I believe TW Girl to be real for a number of reasons. First, it's rather long-running to be a hoax (morphed or padded). Second, in the absence of any definite information to the contrary (image analysis not withstanding), what harm is there in believing? Finally, so what? She's still pretty good looking to me.

rtpoe

[Nimrod]

Well before IceOwl calls me a fool again I will help him to understand that I was not saying that TWG was a flat chested twig with an odd habit of stuffing. If anything came from my review of image #200 it is that she is very busty for her frame, just not as much as the photos would imply.
Just as others here say that she is 100% real, I say that she is assisted and gave my reasons. The question at hand was whether or not she was real. I submit that she is not - but not that she was totally fake, just stuffed to the volume we see. Others have given their reasoning as to why they feel she is real, too bad IceOwl did not...
I have no problem with anyone who thinks she is 100% real, or 19 years old, or likes to eat spam & bologna sandwiches or even has IceOwl's phone number tattooed to her left butt cheek. There is no foolishness in either stance because, as I said first, I find the whole thing is silly.  

[notty]

Observations:

Why would anyone bother to fake 207 photos for a bunch of slobbering non-paying forumites? (rhetorical)

This girl was on the verge of having flapjacks.  She disappeared when she opted for a breast reduction.  Bet.

-notty

[Palomine]

Not that anyone asked for my opinion, but I too believe that most (and probably all) of her photos were released without retouching of any kind. JMO, from looking at all of them over time. I happen to LIKE (a lot) that natural pendelous hang she sported... such a fine contrasty visual compliment to her slender, leggy frame and apparently wholesome looks (I always imagined her to look like a young Carly Simon, or maybe a Sheryl Crow ...facially).

I'm not saying someone wouldn't make a couple hundred fakes... we all KNOW of models/sets/sources that HAVE done so to varying degrees of success. I also don't believe that the TW images were authentic because I somehow WANT them to be... I'd appreciate them just as much (and maybe even more, due to the effort involved) if they WERE admitted to be fakes. They're great images and she's gorgeous either way.

I just think that the TW pix I've seen (and excepting the post-release face-swaps, morphs, etc...) are authentic.

[g0ddmode]

 

Quote:
 Not that anyone asked for my opinion, but I too believe that most (and probably all) of her photos were released without retouching of any kind.

Well you do remember that TW did blur out this chic's face? Whats not to say that he did some other retouching?

[doggo]

 

Quote:
Well you do remember that TW did blur out this chic's face? Whats not to say that he did some other retouching?

That's a fair point. How long would it take him to blur out the face in each picture?

[sheber]

*sarcasm*

Much too long for it to be a hoax...

[doggo]

My point precisely. */irony*

[Liam]

[Typed the following before I saw what Doggo just posted.]

It’s difficult at times to see who’s being serious with their post, or joking, or being sarcastic.

I’m serious:  You’re comparing blurring out a face on a few(?) pictures each week, which anyone could do in a few minutes…  to the best photo manipulations anybody’s ever seen if it’s a hoax.

I see no comparison.

[sheber]

You can't see the forest for the trees.

[southy]

I always thought she was a fake,the whole 207 photo thing was a bit OTT imo.