thecrisis's Page

Comments by thecrisis

Comments on profile pages (29)

Wha-?! Every single pic I posted that showed any nudity got removed. :(

Posted by thecrisis on WettMelons2025-01-31 08:55

What the huh is a virtual influencer?

Posted by thecrisis on Shoji San2025-01-31 06:21

I had just watched this crime movie the other day on TUBI in which I didn't realize that she was one of the co-stars until I saw her name in the end credits. I racked my brain thinking "How did I miss her?" as I went back and sped through it all over again trying to pinpoint what must've been a small role, but still couldn't find her.

So I decided to just let the movie play again as I paid closer attention this time to listen for someone to say her character's name...

Turned out it wasn't a bit part at all and she acted with the main leads in many scenes. I just didn't recognize her and had never heard her speak before then. She did fine, but it was a bit like seeing your school teachers outside of school when you were a kid.

Or like seeing Emily Bloom randomly acting in an episode of "Its Always Sunny...".

The flick was called DEADLY MATRIMONY (2018), by the way, for anyone curious.

Posted by thecrisis on Keeley Hazell2025-01-25 16:52

I'm a 25 years in professional artist (and photography hobbyist). I honestly don't care to converse with you either over such a ridiculous topic (when her makeover can be reasonably credited to both her weight loss AND professional photography). Shocker, both can be correct without you dismissing one and exclaiming the other.

Also, Playboy photoshoots have always been TERRIBLE and overly hazed to excessively airbrushed with uncreative posing and unimaginative camera angles (as well as practically no utilization of a depth of field).

But yeah, Mark Twain Tom Sawyer.

Posted by thecrisis on Chloe Surreal2025-01-25 15:48

I think everyone should be flagging this profile for removal. This is an entirely made-up cartoon. NONE of the social media links actually link to anything and a web search for any of it's names produces only anime.

So what's the point of having it take up space?

Posted by thecrisis on Shoji San2025-01-25 15:23

@ Pryda
I honestly don't understand the fear that people would arbitrarily distort a pic or even enlarge one to meet a minimum 1024 pixel height. That is not an unreasonable low bar to meet as even the most general pics available from social media are 1080 pixels, but a lot of these sub-1000 pics seem to be the first preview image grabbed from galleries when all it'd take was a second click to grab the larger pic.

Hell MANY of the hi-res pics I've been submitting to replace the deluge of lo-res images is simply by 'Yandex reverse image search' or typing info about the pic into 'Google image advance search set to 2mb - 6mb'.

Enforcing a minimum standard would encourage people to grab better copies of images rather than lo-res 300x600 pics. And go a long way to ensuring a quality control.

Hell there is even a 564x564 square pic in Sydney Sweeney's gallery. That is roughly the size of the native resolution of computer app icons (which used to be 512x512).

Sigh. Sorry.... end of rant. I'll end my crusade.

Posted by thecrisis on Annett Gebhardt2025-01-24 19:06 (edited 2025-01-24 19:14)

Discounting the transformation her weight loss made on her current appearance (and insisting that older pics when she was chubby is how "she REALLY looks") is like saying the singer Adele "really looks" 50 lbs. overweight still, despite her weight loss; or Michael Jackson "really looks" like his younger pics despite the endless plastic surgery; or ANYBODY's current day pics mean nothing because its their pics from 10 years ago that "reveal how they really look".

That is preposterous.

Posted by thecrisis on Chloe Surreal2025-01-24 18:47

She has once. In a video.

Posted by thecrisis on Tessa Fowler2025-01-24 11:36

I think fans of this chick should be making requests to trash some of these pics and replace them with her current hawt thin self since she is unrecognizable now. The galleries don't match the profile pic.

Posted by thecrisis on Chloe Surreal2025-01-24 04:46

🧐 HONEST QUESTION :
How does a new profile of a non-famous babe that just LAUNCHED 2 DAYS AGO (on January 22nd) already amass 60+ votes and reach #2 on the all-time Top List?

Also, are the pics uploads guidelines only suggestions and not mandates? The rules say pics have to be "high quality" and at least 1024 pixels in length, yet SO MANY pics on this site are around 400ish to 890ish. I've only been on this site for over a month now and have been diligently trying to upgrade the TONS of lo-res pics on EVERY profile to hi-res images, but if even brand new 2025 profiles are allowing these lo-res, icon-sized pics in then the guidelines mean nothing and there's really no point in me uploading HQ images anymore.

Posted by thecrisis on Annett Gebhardt2025-01-24 04:31 (edited 2025-01-24 11:05)

No the tits are real... it's the face that is significantly faked through a face filter app.

Posted by thecrisis on Honey Bee2025-01-23 18:46

I've flagged for this to be done over a month ago. Seems to be a slow (or tricky) process to merge them I guess.

Posted by thecrisis on Devon Shae2025-01-21 14:25

No shade, but how is this like the top ranked Cosplayer on this site? Of all of the great costuming, artistic photos, professional photoshoots, non-face filtered, authentic IRL bodies (not poorly malformed in photoshop), prettier and sexier girls out there (with much more diverse uploaded pics galleries) -- how is this what's right at the top?

Posted by thecrisis on Kalinka Fox2025-01-21 07:06 (edited 2025-01-21 07:10)

@ Lalalamn As the uploader of the biggest sized images up there, I can confirm that her eyes are indeed 'hazel', not regs 'ol green. The images I have are usually 2xs or 3xs the dimensions and have higher fidelity than whatever I manage to upload (after resizing, and minimal compression if need-be, to get it under 1 meg).

Also just by reading the description of what hazel eyes look like it describes EXACTLY what her eyes look like.

Posted by thecrisis on Ana De Armas2025-01-17 06:42

That's why they call it the "uncanny valley". Your brain knows something is off, but its so strange that you can't pin point it. From what I can tell she is using an app face filter. That's why if you glance your eyes from any one random pic to the next it feels like the exact same face is pasted on every one. Also, notice how the face is usually in HD but the rest of the photo can have compression artifacts or digital fuzz. That is IMPOSSIBLE to have in an unaltered photo.

Posted by thecrisis on Biancadata2025-01-13 17:45

Whatever dude. I've not changed what I said. All I did was use more synonyms and word options for words you took issue with: "extend" (adds to) and "from the ribcage" (circumference around...); The measurement around the rib cage (the torso, the circumference of the upper body minus breasts and arms) IS exactly what the "band size" is.

The bust letters are then the number of inches the boobs adds to it when included in the tape measure. Yeah the bra cup extending from the chest don't have to match the actual breasts size (for example an ex-GF with "DDD"s liked to wear one size smaller to make her cleavage even bigger) so I was mainly illustrating how ludicrous it was to insist that the 10-inch J cup bra size (not braless boobs) was what this lady is housing her pups in.

So forgive my initial lack of clarification.

But this isn't worth debating. We're essentially saying the same thing. Like I said, it's simple math.

Posted by thecrisis on Veronika Fortova2025-01-13 15:41 (edited 2025-01-13 16:22)

@ yamnaya Dude. Me having an understanding of what women's bra sizes mean (in the U.S.) says the opposite of me "needing to go outside".

And regardless of what you want to stick to, "65" is not a number represented in U.S. band sizes (where the alphabet designation is used as a measurement in inches). "65" sounds like its in centimeters (which is the measurement used in the rest of the world) so "65J" may mean something different and be accurate whereever she's from, but it doesn't auto-translate to meaning "30 inch base + J (10 inch bust)".

Hell we doubled and tripled our "D"s just to keep from calling 5 and 6 inches "E"s and "F"s. Its confusing here.

Posted by thecrisis on Veronika Fortova2025-01-13 13:10 (edited 2025-01-13 13:25)

@ mrdoctor I know exactly how it works, it is simple math.

The difference between the band size and the bust size IS the number of inches extended from the band size (which is the circumference around the torso (or rib cage, or the base chest area minus the breasts)). Each letter representing a number (A = 1, J = 10) in inches, as in the number of inches the bust adds to (or extends) the circumference beyond the "band" or "torso" or "rib cage" or "chesticle" or whatever term you wanna call it.

Posted by thecrisis on Veronika Fortova2025-01-13 12:58 (edited 2025-01-13 13:30)

Yeah those are NOT 'J's. J means her bra extends TEN (10) INCHES from the base of her rib cage. Just 2 inches short of a foot-long Sub, or a 12-inch ruler, or the width of an iPad Pro. I had changed it to 'G' being generous, but whomever is insisting that they extend like a foot from her chest either doesn't know the alphabet very well or is assigning letters like he's grading papers.

Posted by thecrisis on Veronika Fortova2025-01-13 01:15 (edited 2025-01-13 15:44)

A bit of both. Her body is authentic, but the face is using an app filter to modify features. I discovered this when I tried to upscale an image and the face came out in pristine HD, but the body was covered in compressed jpeg artifacts and digital fuzz. As if the face, and only the face, were taken in 4K resolution, but the body was stuck with the 720p from the camera.

Posted by thecrisis on Maya Singer2025-01-11 22:51

It's the opposite. Body is authentic, but the face is using an app filter to modify features.

Posted by thecrisis on Maya Singer2025-01-11 22:47

Just occurred to me that out of all of these pics not a single one of them have her nude.... well that's about to change once the next upload is approved.

Posted by thecrisis on Solomiya Maievska2025-01-10 06:18

Because it matches closely with her initials; so she HAS to have that expression resting on her face at all times. ;p

Posted by thecrisis on Rebecca Bagnol2024-12-30 13:25

According to her own Facebook, and every other place her birth year is 2003. She is 21 now. Also according to that same web search her earliest social media posting was in Sept 2016 at age 13yo.

Posted by thecrisis on Emily Feld2024-12-28 15:46 (edited 2024-12-28 15:57)

Artificial? Yes. Intelligent? Doubtful.

Posted by thecrisis on Annabella Doe2024-12-24 04:17

Her 2 and only sets are from the years 2008 and 2017. Presumably both sets were shot around the same time so 2008 was before today's AI takeover.

Posted by thecrisis on Karla S2024-12-23 09:50

Have you never seen what Ariel Winter, Abigail Breslin, Christina Ricci, Punky Brewster, Rebecca Black, or Leni Klum looked like as they hit 18? They all developed back-breaking busts early.

Posted by thecrisis on Jacklyn Roper2024-12-16 05:43

That 2nd pic from the User Uploaded pics is a fake AI generated artwork. It's not even of her body as NONE of her tattoos are present. I've flagged it many times, but I've yet to ever see that do anything.

*update: Well looks like it was finally removed.

Posted by thecrisis on Alla Berger2024-12-14 02:19 (edited 2024-12-15 01:38)