The Celebrity X-Ray Thread

Fake or not.............heh heh........looks real enough for me Thank Mollmutt:twisted:

 

Hahaha! Good point

I'd love to see them manage "X-raying" an obviously 100% opaque black bra.

Nipple placement seems a bit off the chart as well.

Nice fantasy fodder though =)

 

hey do you guys know of a program other then photoshop hat you can do the see through things? thx

 

i've heard the gimp is a free equivalent to photoshop. i use it for some little things, i am by no means an expert.

 

Ah, the wonderful power of assumption...

 

Just because you can't see them poking you in the face, doesn't mean they aren't there. Here's where I got my nipple placement from.



Very few women have them dead center and even on each breast you know.

Write back when you get a clue on how this process works.

 

Speaking of poking... I've been poking around Photoshop since
before version 3 was released back in -95 (so I'd have to say I
have a pretty good clue on how levels/curves/channels work) : )

I'm not here to bash or flame in any way, but to add nipples and
areolas to a pic like that (where there's not even a subtle pokie
or see-through) is just a bit too far fetched for me. Just speaking
my mind. Sorry about disagreeing that "assuming = exact science".

Like I said in my last post; "the wonderful power of assumption"...

Most of your pics are top notch though. Keep up the good work!

: )

 

Sorry - sometimes things can be interpreted poorly when written, but I took the phrase "an obviously 100% opaque black bra" as meaning it was impossible to get any details, which isn't always the case. I am a little sensitive sometimes when someone calls my work into question as I won't do a pic unless I'm very sure of what I'm seeing is actually there.

Glad to know you like what you see, and have been using PS a while - definitely an awesome program! I've been using it since before it was ported over to the PC.

 

Buddy, there is no areola visible in the pic that you posted...only aberrations and artifacts are present. The image isn't even high enough quality to make out any detail such as an areola at such high magnification. What you did is draw the outline of an areola and color it...while that may be considered artistic...it surely is not factual. Can you please refrain from getting overly defensive when someone questions the factuality of the image? I have over 15 years of photographic and editing experience...with work in nearly all photographic formats, so please do not attempt to discount my knowledge by labeling me some sort of ignorant amateur (as you have with the previous poster).

 

ya ive heard of that but its a PAIN to download. so is there anything else?

 

You ARE clueless & ignorant. You signed up for this site just to come on here and talk trash about something that has generated 4,500,000 hits? Go back thru all the pages on here and check out the work that has been done. There is always the occasional pic that creates cynicism between posters. But overall, everyone knows that this is REAL. There also has been fakers on here, and for the most part they are dealt with, as will you I'm guessing & hoping. It's just like the Jennifer Aniston "leaked" pic. It's 110% real, and your missing out on a great thing. Have a good day spamming forums or doing whatever it is that you do in cynical land.

 

bus2 u can try PAINT.NET for a starter way.. its not great but for more sheer outfits it works fine. i still work with it some cause im just more use to it then photoshop..

i made out the areola just fine in that pic in question by using nothing but the contrast/darkness sliders using only paint.net.. dont see why some are havin trouble seeing it.. im a newb and it took all of 20 seconds to make out pretty clear. its a good little program bus.. worth a download if nothing else if all ur looking for is something free and easy to use, with good controls and options.

momz.. u took the words outta my mouth. i spotted it in seconds.. dunno why some just wanna come and try to ruin and discredit others good time.. i work hard on my pics for ppl. and wont fake anything on any pic i try.. if i cant do it then i just cant.. but i try in give whats 100% there along with a original copy to boot.. so anyone that wants to try to discredit can take the original and try themself.. ill even take the time and walk through what i did.. i should make a step by step post on how the details start to appear and its nothing fake about what i find..

 

I hope some of this pics are possible

Sha (German singer)





Mareile Höppner



Thanks :wink:

 

poor quality original however.. must have a bra on too...

i see the haters are out c through...

they should be happy that people take the time to try these photos..

 

i brought up the darkness actually just a hair. and dropped the contrast just a few digits.. then went into color control and took out all the blue.. i was gonna color the nipple on the left but i left it bare.. zoom in to 200% or so and see whats actually there.. totally untouched for the haters. for the right nipple all that was done is the the red slid up to about 30 or 40. thats it.

thanks c-through for all your help and time spent giving tips.. been a great help. and anybody wanting to get into this id be glad to give the same help i was lucky enough to receive myself. just send a message and ill do what i can to help get u started atleast.

 

The same to me here! Real as crystal clear!

 

http://tvcapturesb4andafter.blogspot.com/

 

Anything here?

 

^That`s an excellent pic of Scarlett,even without an x-ray

 

Umm... No - not "everyone knows that this is REAL" because sometimes there
truly is nothing there. It's like the image of Jesus on the slice of toast or when
people see all kinds of stuff in the clouds, or monsters in lakes.

Look hard enough and you'll see/imagine pretty much anything : )

I bet if I look close enough at some random dog there'll be hairs crisscrossed
to form an image of Jessica Alba 100% nude with a pendant round her neck
saying "This is REAL you numbnut!".

Like I've said before, there's a whole lot of assumption that goes into some
of the pics in this thread, giving us an idea/hint - but I wouldn't call it an
exact science like some people do : )

Some pics work - some don't - and every now and then someone photoshops
the ones that don't only to have someone like you defending it.

Chill out dude, just cause (you love this thread and) he doesn't agree with some
of the images authenticity doesn't mean he's bashing you personally : )


Here's a good example of assuming Good effort though.