Most popular pages: Top 100 - Best OnlyFans - Birthdays

The model on this page is fake.

Olivia Casta image 1 of 4
Official websiteInstagram accountOnlyFans accountFansly accountX account
Olivia Casta image 2 of 4
Olivia Casta image 3 of 4
Olivia Casta image 4 of 4

Olivia Casta

aka Olivia Clรกudia Motta Casta More info on her aliases

Olivia Casta alias list:
Olivia Cláudia Motta Casta
User Rating: 8.72/10 (548 votes)
Saving vote...
Deleting vote...
Your Rating: X/10
You need to be registered
and email-confirmed if you want to vote.
Rollover to rate this babe
Current rank: #15164 Ranking Graph
She was the #1 for 14 days
1107 have favorited her
  • Age: 28 years young
  • Born: Thursday 15th of August 1996
  • Ethnicity: Caucasian
  • Profession: Virtual Influencer
  • Hair color: Brown
  • Eye color: Green
  • Height: 5'8" (or 172 cm)
  • Weight: 130 lbs (or 59 kg)
  • Body type: Slim
  • Measurements: 36-25-34
  • Bra/cup size: 34D show conversions
  • Boobs: Real/Natural
  • Instagram follower count: 3.0m (as of May 2025)

About Olivia Casta

Olivia Casta is a fake model. Behind her is Russian model Maria Tretjakova, using a filter similar to FaceApp's teen filter to make her appear much younger and change her facial appearance. Maria used to be active on OnlyFans and Instagram but is now only active as "Olivia Casta.".

Olivia Casta Performances

Solo: Nudity (Topless Only)

Olivia Casta Photos (Uploaded By Our Users)

Leave a comment

Commenting is disabled for non-registered users. Please register and login if you want to leave comments.

User comments

Fake or not, did your meat get hard?
If not, you have a problem.
And, your problem is not mine.


Posted by BDE2 2025-06-28 01:45  🛈  

Reply to

Satire?

Posted by LeLoyon71 2025-06-28 03:37  🛈  

And I wonder when this debate will finally end, because it has been going on for 3 years now ๐Ÿ™ƒ

Posted by Ruskij 2025-06-21 11:40  🛈  

It's insane that there are still guys(see below) who refuse to believe it's the other model with AI filters even though this site showed definitive proof and she has been exposed on other forums. Once a guy gets horny, his brain shuts off lol. AI taking over and guys are falling in love with girls who don't even exist and defending their honor on sites like this lmao.

We are seeing guys who will freak out about fake models and refuse to believe the reality that they don't exist. And they will refuse to listen to anyone. We are going to be seeing a lot of that in the coming years. Dudes are going to go nuts over AI women. They are even giving money to these AI women on Onlyfans and other sites lmao.


Posted by NateDawg 2025-06-18 11:27 (edited 2025-06-18 11:51)  🛈  

Reply to

It all points to one guy with multiple accounts. joster-dilan, Reegnant, babehfyat, and even Romariostephan are all one and the same person.

Update: I've blocked these 4 accounts and removed the comments for making multiple accounts and being disrespectful.


Posted by Pryda (admin) 2025-06-18 13:43 (edited 2025-06-19 12:49)  🛈  

Reply to

@ Pryda (admin) ๐—ช๐—ต๐—ถ๐—น๐—ฒ ๐—ฑ๐—ถ๐˜€๐—ฐ๐˜‚๐˜€๐˜€๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป๐˜€ ๐—ฎ๐—ฏ๐—ผ๐˜‚๐˜ ๐—ฝ๐—ผ๐˜๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜๐—ถ๐—ฎ๐—น ๐—ถ๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜๐—ถ๐˜๐˜† ๐—บ๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ถ๐—ฝ๐˜‚๐—น๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป ๐—ฝ๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐˜€๐—ถ๐˜€๐˜, there is no definitive evidence confirming that โ€˜Olivia Castaโ€™ and โ€˜Maria Tretjakovaโ€™ are the same person as of June 18, 2025.

Itโ€™s important to recognize that nearly every model featured on this platform has, at some point, used techniques like airbrushing, Photoshop, or AI-powered tools to enhance their appearance. These practices have been widespread in photography for decadesโ€”๐—น๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ด ๐—ฏ๐—ฒ๐—ณ๐—ผ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ ๐˜๐—ผ๐—ฑ๐—ฎ๐˜†โ€™๐˜€ ๐—ฑ๐—ถ๐—ด๐—ถ๐˜๐—ฎ๐—น ๐—ฒ๐—ฑ๐—ถ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด ๐—ฎ๐—ฝ๐—ฝ๐˜€ ๐—ฏ๐—ฒ๐—ฐ๐—ฎ๐—บ๐—ฒ ๐—บ๐—ฎ๐—ถ๐—ป๐˜€๐˜๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐—บ.

Olivia Castaโ€™s case is far from unique. The power to alter images has existed for generations, used by professionals through lighting tricks, retouching, and digital manipulation. ๐—ช๐—ต๐—ฎ๐˜ ๐—ต๐—ฎ๐˜€ ๐—ฐ๐—ต๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ด๐—ฒ๐—ฑ ๐—ถ๐˜€ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—ฎ๐—ฐ๐—ฐ๐—ฒ๐˜€๐˜€๐—ถ๐—ฏ๐—ถ๐—น๐—ถ๐˜๐˜†โ€”today, virtually anyone can refine how they present themselves online with just a few taps.

From celebrities and influencers to everyday users, digital enhancements are commonly used to create more polished, idealized versions of oneself. This ongoing evolution raises valid questions around authenticity, perception, and how we define identity in the digital age.

Returning to the โ€˜Olivia Castaโ€™ topic, the debate remains fueled by hearsay, conspiracy theories, and online speculationโ€”๐—ป๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ฒ ๐—ผ๐—ณ ๐˜„๐—ต๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—ต ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ ๐˜€๐˜‚๐—ฝ๐—ฝ๐—ผ๐—ฟ๐˜๐—ฒ๐—ฑ ๐—ฏ๐˜† ๐—ฐ๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ฐ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐˜๐—ฒ ๐—ฒ๐˜ƒ๐—ถ๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐—ฐ๐—ฒ. Meanwhile, over a hundred+ obviously AI-generated or digitally altered model profiles continue to circulate, on Babepedia unchallenged. ๐—ง๐—ผ ๐—พ๐˜‚๐—ฒ๐˜€๐˜๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป ๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ฒ ๐˜„๐—ต๐—ถ๐—น๐—ฒ ๐—ผ๐˜ƒ๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐—น๐—ผ๐—ผ๐—ธ๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—ผ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐˜€ ๐—ณ๐—ฒ๐—ฒ๐—น๐˜€ ๐—ป๐—ผ๐˜ ๐—ผ๐—ป๐—น๐˜† ๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ฐ๐—ผ๐—ป๐˜€๐—ถ๐˜€๐˜๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜, ๐—ฏ๐˜‚๐˜ ๐˜‚๐—ป๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐—ถ๐—ฎ๐—ฏ๐—น๐˜† ๐—ต๐˜†๐—ฝ๐—ผ๐—ฐ๐—ฟ๐—ถ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—ฎ๐—น.

Given all this, I believe itโ€™s premature and potentially ๐—บ๐—ถ๐˜€๐—น๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐—ฑ๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด ๐—ณ๐—ผ๐—ฟ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐˜€๐—ถ๐˜๐—ฒ ๐˜๐—ผ ๐—ฑ๐—ถ๐˜€๐—ฝ๐—น๐—ฎ๐˜† ๐—ฎ ๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—ณ๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ถ๐˜๐—ถ๐˜ƒ๐—ฒ ๐˜€๐˜๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ฒ๐—บ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜ like โ€œ๐—ง๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—บ๐—ผ๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—น ๐—ผ๐—ป ๐˜๐—ต๐—ถ๐˜€ ๐—ฝ๐—ฎ๐—ด๐—ฒ ๐—ถ๐˜€ ๐—ณ๐—ฎ๐—ธ๐—ฒโ€ at the top of the โ€˜Olivia Castaโ€™ profile. As of now, there is no verifiable evidence proving that โ€˜Olivia Castaโ€™ and โ€˜Maria Tretjakovaโ€™ are the same individual, or that this persona was wholly AI-generated or digitally constructed.

Until such evidence is made publicly available, ๐—ถ๐˜ ๐˜„๐—ผ๐˜‚๐—น๐—ฑ ๐—ฏ๐—ฒ ๐—บ๐—ผ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐˜€๐—ฝ๐—ผ๐—ป๐˜€๐—ถ๐—ฏ๐—น๐—ฒโ€”๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ฑ ๐—บ๐—ผ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ ๐˜๐—ฟ๐—ฎ๐—ป๐˜€๐—ฝ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜โ€”๐—ณ๐—ผ๐—ฟ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—ฝ๐—น๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ณ๐—ผ๐—ฟ๐—บ ๐˜๐—ผ ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐˜ƒ๐—ถ๐˜€๐—ฒ ๐—ผ๐—ฟ ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—บ๐—ผ๐˜ƒ๐—ฒ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฎ๐˜ ๐—ฎ๐˜€๐˜€๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป. If the site feels compelled to address the ongoing speculation, ๐—ฎ ๐˜€๐—ถ๐—บ๐—ฝ๐—น๐—ฒ ๐—ฎ๐—ฑ๐˜ƒ๐—ถ๐˜€๐—ผ๐—ฟ๐˜† ๐˜„๐—ผ๐˜‚๐—น๐—ฑ ๐˜€๐˜‚๐—ณ๐—ณ๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—ฒ. For example: โ€œ๐—ง๐—ต๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ ๐—ถ๐˜€ ๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ด๐—ผ๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด ๐—ผ๐—ป๐—น๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ฒ ๐˜€๐—ฝ๐—ฒ๐—ฐ๐˜‚๐—น๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป ๐—ฎ๐—ฏ๐—ผ๐˜‚๐˜ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—ฎ๐˜‚๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—ถ๐˜๐˜† ๐—ผ๐—ณ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ถ๐˜€ ๐—บ๐—ผ๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—น'๐˜€ ๐—ถ๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜๐—ถ๐˜๐˜†, ๐˜„๐—ต๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—ต ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—บ๐—ฎ๐—ถ๐—ป๐˜€ ๐—ฎ ๐˜๐—ผ๐—ฝ๐—ถ๐—ฐ ๐—ผ๐—ณ ๐—ฎ๐—ฐ๐˜๐—ถ๐˜ƒ๐—ฒ ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐˜ƒ๐—ถ๐—ฒ๐˜„ ๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ฑ ๐—ฑ๐—ถ๐˜€๐—ฐ๐˜‚๐˜€๐˜€๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป, ๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ฑ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐˜ƒ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐—ถ๐—ผ๐˜‚๐˜€ ๐—ฐ๐—น๐—ฎ๐—ถ๐—บ๐˜€ ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ ๐˜€๐˜๐—ถ๐—น๐—น ๐—ฏ๐—ฒ๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด ๐—ฎ๐˜€๐˜€๐—ฒ๐˜€๐˜€๐—ฒ๐—ฑ ๐—ณ๐—ผ๐—ฟ ๐—ฐ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ฑ๐—ถ๐—ฏ๐—ถ๐—น๐—ถ๐˜๐˜†.โ€ This approach respects the truth, reflects the current uncertainty, and avoids misleading visitors with unverified assumptions.

Transparency mattersโ€”especially in a digital landscape shaped by both perception and pixels.


Posted by Teagan 2025-06-19 05:37 (edited 2025-06-19 05:37)  🛈  

Reply to

That means this site can't be taken seriously, then. Isn't this so-called site Admin. Pryda should be mindful of these things to avoid deceiving its customers.

Posted by admstge-99 2025-06-19 09:57  🛈  

Reply to

I agree that today, there is little evidence on Olivia's social media to back up our claims that her face is AI-generated and that her body is that of Maria Tretjkova. They/she have done a good job at cleaning up past mistakes and improving the technology to make it very believable.

I feared for a while that the day would come when we would have to re-defend claims that were clear as water when we made them, simply because AI tools are getting better, and Maria/Olivia and her team (?) are really good at cleaning up and improving their setup.

To defend the "fake" label, we have to go back to photos and footage from years ago, back when it was still clear to the average surfer that she was fake.

As mentioned before, we have a blog post where we show such proof. It's clearly linked on this page (click the "Rise of the fake model" link under her photos). It presents the proof that you are looking for. Furthermore, I invite you to try some image AI detection tools. Take any of the photos currently on her Instagram. Most tools will likely say it's close to 100% human. But try it with her old photos from 2021/2022 and before, and the results will shift to the other side. We have just added a new section to this blog post, focusing on AI image detection.

If you still disagree, I invite you to debunk our claims with convincing proof.

Also, ask yourself these questions:
- Why is she removing all of her old material?
- Why has Maria Tretjakova removed all of her social media?
- Why is there no clip of her talking? Why is she always alone in her photos and videos?
- Why is she almost always looking at the camera?
- Why was she never interviewed?
- Why was there a person here making 4 accounts just to sow doubt? They were not posting in any other profiles.


Posted by Pryda (admin) 2025-06-19 13:43  🛈  

Reply to

Iโ€™ve been following this whole debate for a while now and thought Iโ€™d chime in, if thatโ€™s alright. These same questions keep coming up, but most of them donโ€™t really hold up when you look at them with a bit of perspective and common sense. So here we go:

Why did she remove old material?
Probably for the same reason lots of creators do, to refine her image and remove earlier content that no longer fits the current aesthetic or standard. Itโ€™s normal for people to want more control over how they present themselves online.

Why did Maria Tretjakova delete her social media?
If she retired from modelling in 2021, as has been suggested, then wiping her online presence seems like a fairly reasonable step. Loads of people do that after stepping out of public life. It doesnโ€™t automatically mean anything sinister.

Why is there no clip of Olivia speaking?
Actually, there is. She ran a New Yearโ€™s giveaway not long ago, and in her own posts mentioned that winners would receive a personalised video greeting. Itโ€™s unlikely those people would share a private message publicly, and even if they did, itโ€™s not guaranteed the video would stay online for long. But the idea that โ€œshe never speaksโ€ just isnโ€™t true.

Why is she always alone in her photos and videos?
Thatโ€™s kind of the point, her content is focused, styled, and curated. Itโ€™s a one-person aesthetic, and plenty of people on Instagram do the same. Itโ€™s about mood and presentation, not some secret conspiracy.

Why is she always looking directly at the camera?
Because thatโ€™s what portrait photography usually involves. Models tend to know their best angles, and if looking at the lens works for her, why wouldnโ€™t she stick with it?

Why was she never interviewed?
Maybe she doesnโ€™t want to be. Not everyone is chasing interviews or press exposure. Being private isnโ€™t the same thing as being fake.

Why did someone create four accounts to argue about this?
One might just as easily ask why so much effort is being made to prove a theory that, by the authorโ€™s own admission, relies on dated material and AI detection tools of questionable accuracy. The internet attracts all sorts: fans, critics, and people with far too much time on their hands(I also just created an account today to join the discussion)

Bottom line: most of these questions have pretty ordinary answers. None of them prove anything, and in most cases, the explanation is justโ€ฆ sheโ€™s a model managing her brand in 2025 like everyone else.

I donโ€™t mean to offend anyone, I think everyone will stick to their opinion anyway.


Posted by RetardedSenpai 2025-06-19 17:08  🛈  

Reply to

You give plausible explanations that make sense if you want to believe (in) her. But why are you only focusing on these side questions instead of focusing on the main proof from the blog post? Specifically, the old photo comparisons with the birthmarks, the TikTok screenshot, the old AI-generated images, and the new ones that are labeled as generated by Stable Diffusion, which is great for generating high-quality and consistent faces.

"by the authorโ€™s own admission, relies on dated material"
The whole point is that the dated material contains the fingerprints of being AI-generated. The new stuff is too well-made.

"AI detection tools of questionable accuracy"
We never wrote that the accuracy is questionable. We used multiple tools, and most of the results aligned, with high confidence.

"I think everyone will stick to their opinion anyway"
You're right. It feels like a losing battle. In 2022/2023, nobody was doubting her fakeness. But the better she becomes, the more people will believe she's real.


Posted by Pryda (admin) 2025-06-20 01:04 (edited 2025-06-20 11:11)  🛈  

Reply to

Sorry, but I can't see much value in your points since they are based on her being real and then working back from there. I have never heard her speak ONCE. If you check YouTube or search on Google, there is no video of her speaking. Her videos all have that distinct AI feel. While AI is getting better and better, you can still tell.

This site literally showed that Maria took some of her old Instagram pics and used a filter to create Olivia. The same exact pics! You can't explain that away or come up with a defense. That was in 2021/22. She has much better tech now.
https://www.babepedia.com/blog/rise-of-the-fake-model/#more-2089

But we are fighting a losing battle. Guys WANT to believe and there are more and more AI models now that they are falling in love with. In the end, a guy's sex drive always win out and they are now choosing to see AI as real.


Posted by NateDawg 2025-06-20 01:47 (edited 2025-06-20 01:48)  🛈  

Reply to

Exactly, @NateDawg

Posted by LeLoyon71 2025-06-20 08:06  🛈  

Reply to

@Pryda

The thing is, this isn't the normal, AI enhanced model.. it's literally somebody else. You'll notice that through all of these arguments against her being labeled as fake, they skate over that fact. I don't know how long your logs go back in terms of comments, but I do believe that about a half a year ago there were several people who found proof that it's a scam, and I think that's when you changed it. To put it nicely, many of these people are embarrassed that they've been donating to a scam, so they're going to defend it regardless of if they know that they're actually correct or not.


Posted by LeLoyon71 2025-06-20 00:39  🛈  

Reply to

The "fake" label was added in early 2022, and then we added that "rise of the fake model" blog post to go deeper into it. People will indeed believe what they want to believe.

Posted by Pryda (admin) 2025-06-20 01:10  🛈