|
Best Porn Sites | Live Sex | Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar |
Celebrity, Film & Television Discussion For all of your chat, opinion and thoughts on mainstream celebrities, film and television programmes. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
February 16th, 2020, 07:34 PM | #1 |
Vintage Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 310
Thanks: 6
Thanked 10,999 Times in 308 Posts
|
Is this Full Frontal shot of Helen Flanagan Real or Fake?
(The first image is the the original, the second is a lightened edit.) Is this image real or fake? I uploaded these images into the Helen Flanagan Thread and they were listed as a fakes, I understand why, its the same photo as the one that was released in the Sun years ago but without the towel. But I think this is in fact the original photograph. This is the image from the Sun below: First I'll give you the background on the image. Over the past couple of days an individual has been releasing nudes of Helen Flanagan (they are available in the Helen Flanagan Thread). According to this guy, he met the photographer in real life and they got to talking, the photographer told him they had nude photos of Helen from a shoot they did, the guy said he didn't believe it, so the photographer pulled the images up on the computer/laptop to prove it. At some point the photographer left the room and the guy didn't have enough time to download the images, so he pulled out his phone and took photos of the images on the screen instead (if you look at the images here or in the Helen Flanagan thread you can clearly see they were taken from a computer screen, you can tell from the resolution, wave feedback from the screen and you can also see the mouse pointer in some). So this takes us to the photo in question, the photo is the same as the only official topless shot we got from Helen years ago, except in this one there is no towel, this one is Full Frontal. According to the guy who uploaded the other nudes this is the original, there was no towel in the original shot and it was added later probably at the request of Helen herself. I personally believe the guy, I think the fact that he has released other nudes backs up his story, I think the towel looks photo-shopped and the lighting in the towel image looks off as well. So what do you guys think is this the original or is it a fake? |
The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to The Abstract For This Useful Post: |
|
February 16th, 2020, 08:25 PM | #2 |
Vintage Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Middle England
Posts: 4,491
Thanks: 10,176
Thanked 43,619 Times in 4,154 Posts
|
It's real imho. The towel was photo shopped in, so they could use the picture for p3.
Having had the shot and others related to it for a week now; asked not to share by original owner of the pix; I've had a good zoom & gander, and can't see anything untoward in the full frontal version, whereas versions I have of the towel shot look slightly off; again only imho. Story is that the guy who was hawking these around another forum had slept with the photographer; whose name escapes me, but she's a close friend of Helen & had taken all her nude, or close to nude shots. These 'outtakes' were on her computer & he took screenshots of them all with his phone; hence the angles and slightly poor quality. I'm sure the original images are 'tif' files, and of much higher quality as a result.
__________________
Arguing with a intelligent person is hard; but arguing with a stupid person is impossible! |
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to pharoahegypt For This Useful Post: |
February 17th, 2020, 09:12 AM | #3 |
Super Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 3,999
Thanks: 67,937
Thanked 63,072 Times in 4,010 Posts
|
Helen Flanagan shower shots
Hi there!
I will confess to not knowing who Helen Flanagan was before this. I can see why the skepticism, I thought when I saw it how easy it would be to fake, assuming the towel version was the original. But then there's the other "pressed against the shower screen" shot that adds to the plausibility of it being real. Fakes almost never come in multiple variant poses. Added to that, the towel does sort of look like it could have been added rather than removed. Looking closely for signs of tampering reveals some discolouration in the now exposed area but the shower screen glass with moisture, then filtered though being a photo of a screen adds interference that could be helping to hide evidence of tampering. Hard to make a definitive call on this one. |
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to PoloMintGuy For This Useful Post: |
February 17th, 2020, 09:49 AM | #4 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 2,256
Thanks: 79,772
Thanked 37,954 Times in 2,261 Posts
|
Just to chuck in my tuppence worth on Ms Flanagan's thruppeny bits (so to speak).
That towel is almost definitely fake, to my eyes anyway. I imagine that the only reason nobody noticed before now is because there are, uh, other more engaging things to concentrate on in that photo. I guess it's possible that the towel was there, but that area clearly seems to have been touched up (so to speak - again), and there would seem to be no reason to touch up a towel, even on this forum. But the others could well be fake too, if we consider the possibility that this 'full frontal' is actually just a photoshop of the towel pic - in other words, a photoshop of a photoshop. And the computer-screen feedback could just be a ruse to further obscure. She clearly had no problem with the original pic being released anyway, and I think I can speak on behalf of all our gender in thanking her for that. |
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to rosestone For This Useful Post: |
February 17th, 2020, 11:54 AM | #5 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8
Thanks: 636
Thanked 51 Times in 6 Posts
|
For me the towel has been added in, the folds of the towel at the bottom of the picture on Helen's left leg are very blurry, there is no form to its shape or any texture yet the spots of water on the shower glass are sharp across the image in the original but don't show on the towel image, I doubt that anyone would add water droplets to fake a picture.
In addition the water droplets are missing completely where the towel is in place, it's as though the towel is blocking the droplets which to my eyes is why the current bun image is a fake. Just my 10p's worth of opinion, hopefully the original will surface and prove this one way or another. |
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to mankini For This Useful Post: |
February 17th, 2020, 01:51 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Socially isolated
Posts: 217
Thanks: 4,491
Thanked 5,969 Times in 216 Posts
|
When I made the original post, I wasn't aware that there was any question over the authenticity
Having now read this discussion I've looked at the pic I posted and also the Sun version. I'm quite a keen photographer myself and also fairly competent using Photoshop I think the full nude is the original for the following reasons- 1. The "style" matches other, undisputed nudes taken at the same time 2. The shot is unusual in that as posted it's actually technically rubbish because even a high key pic should have some areas of very dark shadow whereas this shot has none. It's been lightened to show the detail in her fu-fu. The pic posted by The Abstract" earlier is, I suspect, the original which has quite deep shadows 3. The towel in The Sun shot should also cast a similarly deep shadow. The shadow wouldn't be evident where the towel is flat against her skin, but it should be evident between the top of her leg and stomach where the towel isn't in contact with either When I've got some time, I'll whack up the contrast in the Sun shot to see if it does reveal any shadow from the towel, but I don't think it will Just my ten cents worth...
__________________
Just when you thought image hosts couldn't get any more shit, along comes... |
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Gingerbonce For This Useful Post: |
February 17th, 2020, 02:38 PM | #7 |
Vintage Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 553
Thanks: 14,899
Thanked 24,450 Times in 551 Posts
|
It seems to me that given:
One thing I did just notice, though, she has a tattoo on her left inner thigh, which is visible in one of the leaks where she's wearing pants, but it isn't visible in the naked ones. I don't know that it should be, though, one's very dark in that area and it's probably covered by her other thigh in the other. |
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to spooled For This Useful Post: |
|
|