Great theory and good explanation, BUT The two images have many differences that cannot be explained by the two angle theory. Look at Emas hair is both shots particularly the outline of her hair on the left. Note that the wisps of hair are very different in the two shots, not from two different angles, but because the photos were touched up differently. There was obviously quite a bit of rework done differently between the two shots, so an enhancement would be par for the course. Secondly. I’m surprised that so many people do not know how much photo manipulation is done all the time. Of course magazine covers are retouched. They ALL are, not to be dishonest, but to create a pleasing image to sell magazines. We do it everyday. A movie poster? Hello, every shot of those kids was made separately, chosen as the best for each, put into the final composite and turned into the poster. This is a movie poster, not national geographic. There is no claim by anyone that anything associated with this fantasy movie is real. Why are so may surprised by this?
Right on target Nick.Her Hair is TOTALLY different. When they played witht hat, they alos enhanced her chest. No magical camera angle that this guy is trying to shovel. Sorry, but it don’t fly.
The author lives in Vancouver, Washington, USA with his girlfriend and a menagerie of cats, rats, fish, birds, guinea pigs and robots.
Among other inanities, he strives to use investigative techniques to work young starlet breasts into every aspect of rational discourse — focusing on the discourse, thus making it not perverted. Also, has recently begun a career as “Internet hairstylist.”
He can be contacted via email and Jabber IM at ‘jer@nyquil.org’. He likes to be contacted.
(All press inquiries, however, ought be directed towards the author’s agent, Alistair Hoel, via email to ahoel@nyquil.org.)
Comments to this entry via RSS
jer@nyquil.org
