Do You Prefer To See All The Blemishes, Or Have Them Glossed Over?

[theone1982]

So, my question is, do you all like to see pics of T-girls in ultra HD, blemishes and all, or do you like more idealized re-touched pics? I personally love HD, I think it's really hot to see more natural elements, like, say, pubic stubble, or hints of acne, tan lines, or veins popping out on dicks and individual wrinkles on nut sacs. Something about these more up close and personal elements really turn me on. So, what say all of you?

[Ben]

Something ultra hot about Kirsty Scott. Kirsty isn't absolutely perfect. So, the imperfections, I guess, to me, are a turn on.
So, not necessarily the pics. But the person -- :)
Plus I'm into drag queens....

[MdR Dave]

I like the natural look but (like you, Ben?) I have a very strong, highly idealized standard of who I find attractive-

So everyone I would look at is already drop-dead gorgeous in my eyes.

Plus, I think I'm particularly shallow- I have the doomed relationships to prove it.

[danthepoetman]

Difficult to vote on this one, Theone... It's nice to see the "real" thing. The feeling of reality, the tangibility of it, whatever... And well, women are so lovely! I suppose you can say it's the reciprocal effect of hormones talking, but hey! it's working, isn't it? But it's also nice sometimes to have some retouched images; it carries the feeling a bit further, like fantasy does reality. In other words, to me both can be nice at times or all the times.
I think that ultimately for anyone, it's that capacity to separate fantasy from reality that's always important. No matter how much you fantasize on a girl, you must remember that she's a person, not a toy, and that reality is about meeting and exchanging among humans. Problems arise when you can't make this adjustment anymore.
I guess I'm not answering the question. If I'd have to pick only one, I suppose I'd pick nature over art, but I'm not against the latter... To me it's also part of beauty, even the daily life of women.

[danthepoetman]

I like the natural look but (like you, Ben?) I have a very strong, highly idealized standard of who I find attractive-

So everyone I would look at is already drop-dead gorgeous in my eyes.

Plus, I think I'm particularly shallow- I have the doomed relationships to prove it.

I'm sure you're joking, but you're anything but shallow, my friend. And what you're saying shows precisely that.

[MdR Dave]

I'm sure you're joking. . .

I wish I wasn't serious.

I'm working on it though.

Still not sure how to vote on this.

Damn it, TheOne- damn it all!

[runround04]

Imperfections, yes, zoomed it like a microscope on an HD screen, NO!!

I prefer to see pics of girls as I would see em in person, nobodies perfect, but no need to make that shit apparent.

[theone1982]

I think this pic illustrates my point. You can see stray hairs that she missed while shaving, little stubble specks, some acne on the legs, each vein on the package, hell, you can even see little pieces of lint on the sac! Picks like this turn me on big time.

[GroobySteven]

Ultra-HD will show up in-perfections on practically anyone without retouching. I''m known for hating over-retouched content, I just can't get into it at all but I do think some retouching needs to be done just to lift the photos to a better level, so we don't leave them completely raw.
HD photos especially when blown up on a good screen, shows more than the naked eye could see.

[Prospero]

warts and all please.....

[GroobySteven]

Pertinent.

[Tits McButts]

I prefer somewhere on the in-between. At least get rid of the zits, blackheads, cottage cheese, patchy skin discoloration, and unattractive moles. I still prefer totally natural to that plastic, over-edited look.

It's easy to assume that models who prefer sets that are over-doctored either have something to hide or are fake, but honestly - there really are admirers and models alike that like the fantasy of the style. I don't understand; I thought anime already provided cartoons for dudes to jerk to.

[Prospero]

Nice cartoon seanchai....

[AmyDaly]

I prefer somewhere on the in-between. At least get rid of the zits, blackheads, cottage cheese, patchy skin discoloration, and unattractive moles. I still prefer totally natural to that plastic, over-edited look.

It's easy to assume that models who prefer sets that are over-doctored either have something to hide or are fake, but honestly - there really are admirers and models alike that like the fantasy of the style. I don't understand; I thought anime already provided cartoons for dudes to jerk to.

This. I think you can have nice photos with out it being over done. There is a difference between natural good photos and just plain bad photography with lighting that brings out the imperfections.

[LibertyHarkness]

hehe wait till we start shooting on 4k resolution video cameras :) i have a blackmagic camera messing about with this month .. will be intersting to see the clarity difference :)

[Prospero]

well once it shows more than we can with the naked eye I might revise my view....a sort of porn version of "Through the Keyhole" (Through the bumhole?)

[shermanwt]

For me it depends on the circumstances. For porn and such, I prefer the images to be retouched and more glam--nothing too crazy, but enough to enhance the fantasy. If I'm escort shopping, I prefer to see images that are not touched up as I want to know exactly what is behind door #1.

[Ben]

I like the natural look but (like you, Ben?) I have a very strong, highly idealized standard of who I find attractive-

So everyone I would look at is already drop-dead gorgeous in my eyes.

Plus, I think I'm particularly shallow- I have the doomed relationships to prove it.

I gravitate to drag queens and CDs.... So, some "imperfections," as it were, are attractive....
And, again, Kirsty is just so sexy.
And, once again, I prefer more natural... instead of glossed over... pix.

[MdR Dave]

Wow, Ben- reading your post I realize mine could be considered snarky- no offense intended, I promise. I just get a very strong sense of what you like from what you post (and the rest of my comment was all about me.)

[Jericho]

Wow, Ben- reading your post I realize mine could be considered snarky- no offense intended, I promise.

It's alright, he was just waiting for an excuse to post up Kirsty.
If he's not on commission, he should be! :dead:

[theone1982]

But, if you were going to have sex with the woman in the pics, then you would see all the flaws. That's why I find it so hot, I think, it's the realism.

[theone1982]

Pertinent.

lol. As a side note, I've noticed that some TS DVDs are now being filmed through a camera with a lens that looks like it's been smeared with vasoline, it's hard to make out any of the details of the girl's body, and I'm pretty sure it's done because they don't want to show the flaws. Either that. or it's cum on the lens. :D

[theone1982]

hehe wait till we start shooting on 4k resolution video cameras :) i have a blackmagic camera messing about with this month .. will be intersting to see the clarity difference :)

Will this be so clear it will just show your x-ray Liberty? :dancing: