View Single Post
Old July 10th, 2017, 08:30 PM   #19
Rubinski
Classic Models Super Moderator
 
Rubinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Avatar is NGC1097
Posts: 4,075
Thanks: 58,429
Thanked 133,798 Times in 3,984 Posts
Rubinski 500000+Rubinski 500000+Rubinski 500000+Rubinski 500000+Rubinski 500000+Rubinski 500000+Rubinski 500000+Rubinski 500000+Rubinski 500000+Rubinski 500000+Rubinski 500000+
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by listcheck77 View Post
In my opinion: The Chic Magazine February 1979 set is not our model...wrong hair (carpet and drapes), wrong eyes, wrong cheek bones, wrong teeth, and too skinny.
I am not sure yet.

Hair is lighter, but easily colored, or shopped.
Otherwise very similar length and condition.

Bush shape is close, but maybe not a match.
Labia is very close?

I'm not seeing wrong eyes or wrong cheek bones, but maybe I'm not comparing the right pix.

Wrong teeth?
The Chic set is very shopped.
Especially in the shot where her teeth are prominently seen.

Too skinny?
Not that I can see yet.

I was seeing other slight differences, but not solid enough to be sure.

Maybe 1979 is a little too early, or maybe that explains the slight differences.
Younger does sometimes mean thinner.

Possibly not her, but pretty close.

Any other details or comparisons?
More opinions or info?

Thanks in advance.

If the consensus if not her, I can remove her and open a request for her later.

I have some more photos from other sessions that could be our Mystery Girl (or the Chic girl).
Rubinski is offline  
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Rubinski For This Useful Post: