+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Tips and Deals (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: Just because you capture a duchess' bare bottom on film, does that mean you have to get it out there? (/showthread.php?tid=167613)
Re: Just because you capture a duchess' bare bottom on film, does that mean you have to get it out there? - N-OS X-tasy! - 05-28-2014
Lemon Drop wrote:
[quote=billb]
There are thousands of identical pics of Kate's derriere online.
She's no prude unlike the photoshop deniers who can't contain their rampant envy.
Oh, right! Phony photos never get replicated across the interwebs.
Unless she comes out publicly and says this photo is legit, I assume it's not. As with pretty much everything regarding these people.
So you assume pretty much every photo you encounter online is not legit? That seems an odd approach.
Re: Just because you capture a duchess' bare bottom on film, does that mean you have to get it out there? - Lux Interior - 05-28-2014
N-OS X-tasy! wrote:
So you assume pretty much every photo you encounter online is not legit? That seems an odd approach.
When it comes to celebrity nudes, a healthy dose of skepticism is reasonable.
Re: Just because you capture a duchess' bare bottom on film, does that mean you have to get it out there? - N-OS X-tasy! - 05-28-2014
Lux Interior wrote:
[quote=N-OS X-tasy!]
So you assume pretty much every photo you encounter online is not legit? That seems an odd approach.
When it comes to celebrity nudes, a healthy dose of skepticism is reasonable.
Assuming every photo is a fake until confirmed as authentic by the subject of the photo goes a mite beyond healthy skepticism.
Re: Just because you capture a duchess' bare bottom on film, does that mean you have to get it out there? - space-time - 05-28-2014
Film? What did the use, 35mm, 645, ?
Re: Just because you capture a duchess' bare bottom on film, does that mean you have to get it out there? - Lemon Drop - 05-29-2014
N-OS X-tasy! wrote:
[quote=Lux Interior]
[quote=N-OS X-tasy!]
So you assume pretty much every photo you encounter online is not legit? That seems an odd approach.
When it comes to celebrity nudes, a healthy dose of skepticism is reasonable.
Assuming every photo is a fake until confirmed as authentic by the subject of the photo goes a mite beyond healthy skepticism.
Is English your first language?
Re: Just because you capture a duchess' bare bottom on film, does that mean you have to get it out there? - N-OS X-tasy! - 05-29-2014
Lemon Drop wrote:
[quote=N-OS X-tasy!]
[quote=Lux Interior]
[quote=N-OS X-tasy!]
So you assume pretty much every photo you encounter online is not legit? That seems an odd approach.
When it comes to celebrity nudes, a healthy dose of skepticism is reasonable.
Assuming every photo is a fake until confirmed as authentic by the subject of the photo goes a mite beyond healthy skepticism.
Is English your first language?
Yes.
Re: Just because you capture a duchess' bare bottom on film, does that mean you have to get it out there? - Lemon Drop - 05-29-2014
N-OS X-tasy! wrote:
[quote=Lemon Drop]
[quote=N-OS X-tasy!]
[quote=Lux Interior]
[quote=N-OS X-tasy!]
So you assume pretty much every photo you encounter online is not legit? That seems an odd approach.
When it comes to celebrity nudes, a healthy dose of skepticism is reasonable.
Assuming every photo is a fake until confirmed as authentic by the subject of the photo goes a mite beyond healthy skepticism.
Is English your first language?
Yes.
you completely misunderstood what I wrote above, just curious.
Unless she comes out publicly and says this photo is legit, I assume it's not. As with pretty much everything regarding these people. (the royal family, most gossiped about people in the world)
How did that become I doubt every picture on the internet?
Re: Just because you capture a duchess' bare bottom on film, does that mean you have to get it out there? - N-OS X-tasy! - 05-29-2014
"These people" could just as easily refer to celebrities in general; "the royals," as you specified in your follow-up post, is much more concise. Don't blame me for the fact that you were unclear in your original statement.
Re: Just because you capture a duchess' bare bottom on film, does that mean you have to get it out there? - OWC Jamie - 05-29-2014
N-OS X-tasy! wrote:
[quote=Lemon Drop]
[quote=billb]
There are thousands of identical pics of Kate's derriere online.
She's no prude unlike the photoshop deniers who can't contain their rampant envy.
Oh, right! Phony photos never get replicated across the interwebs.
Unless she comes out publicly and says this photo is legit, I assume it's not. As with pretty much everything regarding these people.
So you assume pretty much every photo you encounter online is not legit? That seems an odd approach.
You can accomplish a 10 second google image search and find a history of the exact same pictures taken under the same circumstances and more , the exact same well-tanned golden glutes.
Or you spend hours defending a stupid statement.
Have fun.
Feel free to spew ESL bigotry at immigrants and second generations too.
Re: Just because you capture a duchess' bare bottom on film, does that mean you have to get it out there? - RAMd®d - 05-29-2014
Given who shot the pic, I would assume that a denial would be quick, either by the Royals spokesperson or the photographers, if this were actually 'shopped.
So until someone officially steps up to say it's legit, I'll assume it's not.
I would bet money she's wearing a thong, something slightly more modest than the typical floss variety.
And given that there are other pics out there, I thing this is a pretty cheap shot.
Maybe Diane needs the clicks.
I'd rather think this was the work of some minion.