Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
monsieurboombastic

Is This Pic A Fake

26 posts in this topic

yipp definately a fake. Especialy the 5th one down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Photoshopping on an agency site? Wow. Dog bites man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm sure we all expect a bit of airbrushing but when its sloppily done like this its just counter-productive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

or perhaps that's the way she actually looks and it's the other photos that are photoshopped to hell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

doesnt look like a fake to me, 2nd picture down on the left you can see the crease where she is turning her head. I think its just a funny angle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks fake to me, the head and body just don't look proportional and totally unnatural.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd assume the lady is 'real' but the pics are certainly airbrushed. I can understand the desire for ladies to have their pics airbrushed but as soon as I see pics like that I wonder if they've been taken from Playboy or Penthouse and immediately I'm feeling wary. I then look at the other ladies and it seems too good to be true...

Despite this, if I had the money and was in the capital, I would book a lady from the agency as they do look outstanding and not overpriced.

Something tells me I'd be disappointed though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pic looks ok to me but then I am blind as a bat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fr 110607 published today about this very lady albeit with a different agency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the photos here eyes look brown but the profile says blue, I also think that Catalina and Linda have stolen their pics from the same model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A photoshopped pic may be deceitful but it is not a "fake" and calling it one blurs important boundaries. The pictures of the girl have clearly been photoshopped, presumably to slim down her figure and enlarge her breasts. Any experienced punter and most unexperienced ones would know to take such pictures with more than a pinch of salt, know that they give only the loosest impression of the girl you will meet though they will indeed be her photos. But suggesting that the agency is using stolen pictures of models is an unjustified calumny in this case and something that should never be said in any case unless you have reasonable proof beyond your own myopic fantasies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strangely enouh the picture does not look like a 36G in my :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a thing on the interweb called tineye which will at least tell you if a photo is in fact of someone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a thing on the interweb called tineye which will at least tell you if a photo is in fact of someone else.

Except placing a banner across the middle often breaks the tineye searching, so that in itself should be a big red flag.

Edited by WykeTyke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except placing a banner across the middle often breaks the tineye searching, so that in itself should be a big red flag.

That's a valuable piece of info mate - thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a valuable piece of info mate - thanks.

It is much less of a problem for Google Reverse Image Search. If you put any of Linda's pics through GRIS it picks up the matches on the other escort sites where she is listed despite them all having their own banners across the pics. A GRIS check will also show no hits other than London escort and listings sites strongly supporting the case that the photos are not stolen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

google reverse image is definaltey the way to go. Personally I dont think these are stolen pix either, they are not listed on any model or stock photo sites. Just that and another London listing and its common for a girl to work in more than one place

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I download all the pics and check one by one by photoshops and can categorically say the 'head' was superimposed on a different 'body'. Whether the 'facial pic' is the WG is irrelevant because of their attemps to deceive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I download all the pics and check one by one by photoshops and can categorically say the 'head' was superimposed on a different 'body'. Whether the 'facial pic' is the WG is irrelevant because of their attemps to deceive.

If this is true - and I do not know (not as good as I thought I was at analysing pictures after the aforesaid comments). Then 'fake' would be an accurate term even though the WG concerned could prove to be a prototype of the pic...

Edited by Superego

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of the other ladies on the site have clearly had their pics taken in the same studio as Linda. Lorena's pics, for example, show the same table and chairs, Halona's have the same white chair and vases, Anja's have the same white chair and the table, and so on. So Linda's pictures come from the same photographer's studio. The explanation that Linda visited that same studio, had her pictures taken as the other girls have had them taken, and then had them photshopped as doubtless many of the other girls have (though not so hamfistedly) is the explanation that makes the most sense. Next to that the suggestion that one model has visited the same studio and had pictures of her body taken and then Linda has visited the same studio and had pics of her head taken to be imposed on the first girl's pics is ridiculously elaborate and unbelievable.

I am proud of my role in exposing agencies that have used fake pics. "Fake" means they are using pics of one girl while the person you will meet is someone entirely different. Using the word "fake" of merely photoshopped pics massively devalues the term and, effectively, legitimates the pure B&S outfits as no worse than the photoshoppers when they hugely are. Claiming pictures are not of the listed girl or that one head has been imposed on another body with no real proof, when the evidence in fact is wholly against it, is infuriating as it harms the credibility of this forum and undermines those of us who make sure they have reasonable proof before they make such accusations.

Edited by DanLeno

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No def not when you make the skin uniformed in photoshop it can give the edges a surreal look to them. Digital pics are so severe that even the most beautiful chic in the world gets airbrushed. Although when it goes overboard bc someone is lazy as it takes ages to do it correctly you end up with extremes, a guy whodoes my pics sometimes I could hammer him over the head bec I have freckles and he insists on wanting to erase them so makes you look dummyish sometimes.

Edited by heather

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of the other ladies on the site have clearly had their pics taken in the same studio as Linda. Lorena's pics, for example, show the same table and chairs, Halona's have the same white chair and vases, Anja's have the same white chair and the table, and so on. So Linda's pictures come from the same photographer's studio. The explanation that Linda visited that same studio, had her pictures taken as the other girls have had them taken, and then had them photshopped as doubtless many of the other girls have (though not so hamfistedly) is the explanation that makes the most sense. Next to that the suggestion that one model has visited the same studio and had pictures of her body taken and then Linda has visited the same studio and had pics of her head taken to be imposed on the first girl's pics is ridiculously elaborate and unbelievable.

I am proud of my role in exposing agencies that have used fake pics. "Fake" means they are using pics of one girl while the person you will meet is someone entirely different. Using the word "fake" of merely photoshopped pics massively devalues the term and, effectively, legitimates the pure B&S outfits as no worse than the photoshoppers when they hugely are. Claiming pictures are not of the listed girl or that one head has been imposed on another body with no real proof, when the evidence in fact is wholly against it, is infuriating as it harms the credibility of this forum and undermines those of us who make sure they have reasonable proof before they make such accusations.

An excellent analysis here...

However, I would add that not every would-be punter will actually visit a WG in the instance we are discussing, especially if he doubts the picture is 'fake'.

So 'fake' cannot solely be decided upon the aforesaid latter consideration (in bold).

Many times I have not visited a WG because I have felt the pictures are not 'real', 'doctored', 'photoshopped', 'airbrushed', 'fake' or any other such similar adjectives.

The photos has its own ontology ie 'existence' (independent of the WG) and this is what should be described as 'fake' in a given moment and time. At a later stage when further evidence has been obtained - if at all (ie by visiting the lady) - further judgements can be made on the photo and its relativity to the WG concerned.

Edited by Superego

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some escorts are now having videos on their sites. I am a computer useless type and do not know if it is possible to photoshop or alter video. When you play the video and compare to the pictures you can see where the pics have been enhanced.

Though that does not guarantee the peson who opens the door is the person on the video or that the shot dates from around 1985. (Big hair and shoulder pads are a bit of a giveaway there)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0