bobkater
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by bobkater
-
-
-
-
-
Another annoying censorship – the uncensored original sought
Apart from the silly censorship, the image also suffers from serious noise. The noise can be fixed, on the right, but nothing can be done about the censorship. Only the uncensored version can fix that.
For fun only, not intended for purists, this colorization.
-
Warning – Nudity
SpoilerVogue Australia
The full photo has a fairly high resolution.
The problem is, Edita’s part is very small, and if it is isolated for better visibility (on the left), resolution and definition are necessarily poor. So we increase both these parameters on the right.
I clarify that enhancement is not mere upscaling, as it also increases quality as well as resolution. For example, the enhanced image on the right has better definition even at its larger size than the original at its smaller size.
-
Warning – Nudity
Spoiler25 Magazine video cap.
Brought in to focus and magnified on the right. The odd color streaks and other artifacts are part of the image and so they are also enhanced. Removing them (by retouching) would falsify the image. They should thus be accepted as giving the picture its peculiar character, as intended by its creator.
-
-
Warning – Nudity
SpoilerSource: Visualizing,fashion
Here are three more pics from the same collage.
https://www.bellazon.com/main/uploads/monthly_08_2016/post-93571-0-1593836636-03351.jpg
On the left, losslessly cut out to prevent quality loss.
On the right, enhanced and magnified x2.
Wanted: The full photos with max resolution and quality.
-
You’ve done it again elef, it’s higher resolution than the one I posted, so it’s a good find.
The search is still on for the full photo, as opposed to the collage, that should have highest resolution.
Warning – Nudity
SpoilerAs the new version has higher resolution than the old one, its enhancement also has higher resolution and definition. Collectors are advised to do the substitution. New version on the left, its enhancement on the right.
-
Warning – Nudity
SpoilerAnother one for the detectives.
The low resolution version on the left is the only one I could find.
It will be very nice if someone posts a higher quality.
In the meantime, I’ve magnified this x4 (on the right).
The artistically colorized version below is provided for amusement purposes only and is not intended for serious collectors.
-
Is this Edita?
Censored nudity
SpoilerThe photo is from my personal collection, and to get there it means that it was mentioned as being her where I found it, which I can’t remember. But looking at it again now, I’m not so sure it’s Edita. What do the experts say?
I’ve enhanced the photo anyway, hoping it’s her, so if it’s not, it will be a shame. If it is her, it will be a bigger shame that it’s censored.
If it is Edita, can someone come up with the uncensored version?
-
Warning: See-through Nudity
SpoilerBy Camilla Akrans for Numéro #96 September 2008
The original has probably already been posted in this thread, but image search doesn’t seem to work and the thread is too long for me to check. Besides, many images have disappeared.
The problem here is excessive darkness, so the requirement is to increase visibility.
On the left, the original from my collection. On the right, after enhancement.
-
Warning – Nudity
SpoilerCap from 25 Magazine video, Nov 2013
This cap has very likely been posted here and Edita fans probably have it in their collections. Well, here’s an upgrade for them!
On the left: the cap has mediocre resolution and definition.
On the right: after enhancement and magnification x2.
-
Warning - Nudity
SpoilerHere is another one for our detectives.
Until a proper version of this boob flash is found, I’ve made a best effort on what I had.
On the left, the only version I could find has the useless preview resolution of 120x120.
On the right, after enhancing to 480x480, still poor resolution but better than no photo for collectors.
Perhaps someone can find a better quality original.
-
Thanks for the support guys, above and by PM.
In return, I’ll try to make worth looking at a photo that causes me frustration, not being able to believe it was taken by a professional photographer.
Warning – Nudity
SpoilerOn the left, the original, suffering from very poor definition and visibility. On the right, after enhancement.
-
5 hours ago, Grievous said:
You're putting a lot of work into this when there are so many better photos of her boobs.
Just saying. LOL
Thanks for providing feedback, and being honest at that.
It’s true that it can take a lot of work, but so far I see it as a live opportunity to improve my skills by practice in a real life demanding situation, while offering something at the same time.
It’s also true that there are a lot of other good pics of the model, but this does not mean that new ones are superfluous, or this and many other threads would die or be locked. From my experience and knowledge of human nature, keen fans and collectors like me will already have most of her worthwhile photos. So, for them, those they don’t have acquire a high rarity value. This is the principle behind the astronomical prices that rare items fetch.
I also see it as giving the opportunity to those who already had in their collections the pics I post to improve their quality and thus value of their collections. Something like upgrading software.
Nevertheless, I am glad saber intervened, because if my contributions here are not appreciated, I won’t bother any more, or take them elsewhere.
Those reading this can PM me what they think, or post here of course.
-
-
2 hours ago, Camlm said:
Where is this from?
The photos I post mostly come from my personal collection.
Unfortunately, I don’t even remember where I found it, but probably it was on a site that just reproduces photos massively without giving the source, so it wouldn't help. If I discover something, I’ll come back, but better don’t set your hopes too high.
-
-
-
-
Warning - Nudity
SpoilerFrom Lui Magazine Video, Sept 2013
On the left, a video cap at max resolution of720p (height).
On the right, after enhancement and magnification to 2000x1500.
Note that the enhancement process is not retouching, it doesn’t change features such as the nose or remove pimples and tattoos, but tries to restore image quality from the info it contains. Some people may nevertheless object to it, it’s up to the individual, but note that there are lots of enhanced photos on the web, without being declared as such. Furthermore, cameras can enhance the photos they take at source.
-
-
.jpg.39be8405958d2d62509cff191df382e4.jpg)
.jpg.0b90ac0baa848b2b302ec6b6cc56935b.jpg)
.jpg.32fcefd5dfb3bd7d59dd507a302ef936.jpg)
Edita Vilkeviciute
in Female Fashion Models
Without trying to act as mini-moderator, I express the opinion that:
Reposting something already posted that can be found is redundant and counts as spam. It makes an already long thread even longer.
However, some old images have been deleted and are of course welcome to be posted again. Also, some existing images are “reposted” in better quality.
There’s also the problem that it’s very difficult for a poster to search a long thread such as this to see if an image has already been posted. So, if in doubt, I’d say post again.