[DJPFC]

I give up.

Second that.   I don't think I have ever seen anything more blatantly doctored, manipulated and phony than that set of photos.  They are all grainy and have inconsistent edges and pixels along with blatantly different faces in every photo.  There's no wonder most of the shots she takes are with an obscured or cropped face -- it's to conceal the fakery that's going on in all of them.  And to echo an earlier quote, she looks like 10 different people in 10 different photos and this batch only reinforces that.  

In fact, I just found this:

http://www.(prohibited T).com/phpBB2/files/model_shoot3_small_918.jpg

Which looks vaguely familiar, no?

http://img188.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=08088_3248662805_2d71f533f3_o_123_165lo.jpg

Obviously that second one has a photoshop inserted lens flare effect on her sunglasses, so the first one was done before the second one, even though the second one is higher resolution.  
Either way, this entire thing is complete and utter scam and sham and I'm really not sure why anyone would even bother with going to this kind of effort.

[greenmartian]

DJPFC,

So you have found in the new set of offered pictures evidence of some photoshopping among a number of them.

That doesn't preclude the reality that she is real.

I refer to my comment:

e)--with Bugla's contribution, we now have high-resolution pictures of previously highly low-rez extant images, plus others previously unseen...and the high-rez'es show less suspicions of photo manipulation (but when it's there, you can actually see it)

And I mean, when there is evidence of photo manipulation, you can actually see it clearly.


But there are two photos of her in Bugla's contribution without manipulation of her face.  I posted one; there is another of her (with that now-familiar wrap that she's sitting on) also, previously unseen (at least by me); there is also another of her in her pirate costume.

I don't have an answer why there is so much effort to obstruct her face.

But I ask this, DJPFC--why not attempt to see if you can get her to pose for your website?  That could answer a lot of your concerns, I would think.

[mlincoln86]

You guys remember the site, "geocities.com/wet_t_" ?? From waaaay back. DEJA-FUCKING-VU

[DJPFC]

DJPFC,

So you have found in the new set of offered pictures evidence of some photoshopping among a number of them.

That doesn't preclude the reality that she is real.

I refer to my comment:

e)--with Bugla's contribution, we now have high-resolution pictures of previously highly low-rez extant images, plus others previously unseen...and the high-rez'es show less suspicions of photo manipulation (but when it's there, you can actually see it)

And I mean, when there is evidence of photo manipulation, you can actually see it clearly.


But there are two photos of her in Bugla's contribution without manipulation of her face.  I posted one; there is another of her (with that now-familiar wrap that she's sitting on) also, previously unseen (at least by me); there is also another of her in her pirate costume.

I don't have an answer why there is so much effort to obstruct her face.

But I ask this, DJPFC--why not attempt to see if you can get her to pose for your website?  That could answer a lot of your concerns, I would think.

I'm not debating that there's a woman out there somewhere who is the original subject matter in these shots.  My point is that she most likely doesn't look at all like the way she has been portrayed in these shots because they are all very heavily manipulated, with photoshop being used to alter her body, face, locations and other things,  so folks in here celebrating that the "mystery is solved" is really not accurate.

I am also certain that if we ever contacted this person, whoever she is, that nothing would ever come of it.  We might get a response and get strung along for a while, but ultimately nothing would ever happen.  We have seen this kind of fakery before (we get a lot of model submissions) and this smacks of exactly that sort of thing from top to bottom.

[ltfields]

The truth is out there...   

[DJPFC]

The truth is out there...   

Exactly.  And these are all supposed to be the same woman:

[mlincoln86]

EXACTLY. The third picture looks like a completely CGI creation- as in, not even a real person behind it...as if she was entirely generated in Maya or whatever program. You'd have to be a complete schmuck to not see that they are all different people.

[rjdmech]

I wonder how many cc boobs they really are 1200, 1500, 2000? I am sooo curious.

[greenmartian]

DJPFC,

I understand your skepticism.

However, even in the montage you created, we can see that there are images with direct similarities.

I think we can say this:

--in the first row, images 1, 2, and the third image in row 2 are the same person (the third image in row 2, if we follow what Regicide stated in an earlier posting, that the sequence with the wrap was from around 2005, so she would look younger in that picture);

and (perhaps separately, perhaps not)

--in the first row, image 3 (despite someone claiming this was done in Maya, it doesn't look like it to me--when I have seen completely computer-generated girls, and especially their faces, it can be seen right off the bat--that doesn't mean that there hasn't been a photo manipulation program applied though to her face), as well as the right-most B&W image (out of either row), as well as the 1st B&W image and the fourth image in row 2 are also of the same woman.

--I can't say anything of the side profile image, for there is nothing to compare it to.

But to me, it appears that all of these images (the side profile image I don't know if we can link it or not) are of the same person.  Just taken from different angles, and at different times, with a number of them having photoshop (or some other manipulation program) applied to them.

DJPFC, I also understand your reluctance to contact Miss Lyn via model mayhem...you have a 50/50 chance of getting anything.

But there are perhaps two other sugestions to get some conclusive information.

We know, that two of the images (black and white in your montage) are allegedly from a calandar.  It is possible, via some spadework, to track down the calendar, and then track down the photographyer who did the images for the calendar, and find out about Miss Lyn that way.

There is also another way to prove the picture that Regicide posted of Miss Lyn from the foyer of the exotic dance club is real.  


Please do not publish information that could be used to identify or locate any person in real life. If you wish to convey information to DJPFC, you may PM him.

[mlincoln86]

images 1 and 2 , top row are CLEARLY not of the same person. Not even close. They couldn't even pass as relatives.

[petrocks]

These 2 pics I circled are of the same person. I'm not trying to be cruel or anything but, aren't they of a man? Seriously, looks like a man, open the pic to full view.  
And DJ is one million percent correct, those pics are NOT of one person. Come on now, some common sense eh? 

[greenmartian]

Thanks Gonzo for pointing out my "near occasion"....sorry about that.  I just thought that the information imparted was nebulous enough about Regicide's picture...apparently not.

Here's one of the photographs from Bugla's contribution, which I like...in full format here.  From time to time (when I get time) I'll post some of them...the ones I like the best.

This is the one from what Regicide says probably is early on, circa 2005, before she got her current BE.  This is from what I call the "beach wrap" set....

She looks pretty cute, if you ask me.

[petrocks]

Greenmartian, I'm confused. Could you tell me if in fact, you are stating that these four pictures are of the same woman? The 2 bookend black and white pix, IMHO, are the same person, possibly a man, have a bit of a clownish look with the big eyes and longer lip line etc... but look NOTHING like the cutey in the middle pic, just look at the longer, skinnier faces in the black and whites! Also, the bottom purple pic is the face of a 50+ year old woman, look at the larger, heavier/older looking eyes, skin tone and the eye brows are all wrong. If you think they are all of that cutie, you really are from Mars and have out of this world thinking!    Are you indeed, emphatically stating they are all of the same woman? YES or NO.  

Mod edit: for replacing the 1-1-1 violation image that was removed and also editing out the moderator warning I left (nice way to say 'thanks' for being given a second chance after breaking your word to the Owner btw) this user has earned two weeks off in which to reconsider whether he'd like to participate here per the rules the BEA Owner requires. The thread will be locked for a bit to prevent him from digging himself deeper into his hole (and should he decide to do so elsewhere in relation to this, we'll simply extend the duration of his temp ban). -Palomine

Few minutes later: thread unlocked. We return you now to your regularly scheduled programming.

[TysonWarm]

To me, that bottom picture's face looks like Casey James.  But, maybe that's just me.  With the veil over her face it is hard to tell who it is.

[petrocks]

To me, that bottom picture's face looks like Casey James.  But, maybe that's just me.....

Well, you're closer..... Casey is 44 years old. LOL