One Click Chicks
Our forum has over 13 million
photos, videos and .ZIP files.
uploaded by our members!

Go Back   One Click Chicks Forum > Photos > Exhibitionists & Public Voyeur
Login
or
Register
Videos FAQ Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #11  
Old 07-04-2024, 03:02 AM
supersmoothy's Avatar
supersmoothy supersmoothy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 268
Thanks: 5,128
Thanked 1,587 Times in 267 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rascaldog_fan View Post
(1) Why there is no EXIF info available, for atleast cam model.

(2) How far away the cam person is located? It's clear the lady not observing, so my guess is cam person is not at visible distance.

(3) if cam person is far away, how he/she managed to take closeup shots without image shaking? I observe the lady is moving quickly but the pics are clear.

(4) The focus is only on the lady, all other objects (not umbrella) are blur. How did they do from far away distance?
*I had Kodak easyshare lens cam bought in 2006 (Thanks giving day sale ) worth 100$. I used to take similar pics but only when objects are at short distance.

(5) if that camera is very expensive, why they couldn't take more pics of her quickly (burst mode?)

(6) when I zoom the pics, I am surprised to see even water drops are clearly visible on her naked body. I wonder what type of cam it is..
(1) As already answered by others, EXIF and other related info are easily removed, if they were at all recorded in the first place

(2) Far. You can see it from the mazing artifacts in the out-of-focus regions.

(3) There seems to be a load of light in these pictures. After all, they were taken on a beach, in the middle of the day, presumably in the summer. With a large aperture (see point 4), the exposure time will be very small. Also, nothing excludes that the photographer was using a tripod or was maybe lying down or somehow supporting the camera.

(4) Large aperture. This causes the focus to be only on one plane (that of the woman, in this case). It also increases the amount of light getting in the camera, which decreases the exposure time (see point 3). Also, a good-quality entry-level (that is, very basic) lens costs about £3000. The camera body (again, entry level), is another £3000. Stuff that costs £100 is a toy.

(5) This can only be answered by the photographer. Who knows? Maybe she went away. Maybe someone noticed him and started chasing him. Maybe he didn't want to. Who knows?

(6) See point 4.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to supersmoothy For This Useful Post:
  #12  
Old 07-04-2024, 03:31 AM
TinyTeaser's Avatar
TinyTeaser TinyTeaser is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 322
Thanks: 5,149
Thanked 5,200 Times in 290 Posts
Default Photoshopped

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonnyx View Post
What makes you think they are fake? There are hundreds of photos from that source, Ive never thought that they are fake.
Contrast, colour and shades are different from the person in comparison to the beach and rock formats ... that's why.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-04-2024, 11:51 AM
speedy711 speedy711 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 100
Thanks: 71
Thanked 2,444 Times in 101 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyTeaser View Post
Contrast, colour and shades are different from the person in comparison to the beach and rock formats ... that's why.
They aren't fake and are taken by someone who has taken many many pics

I have most archived somewhere
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to speedy711 For This Useful Post:
  #14  
Old 07-04-2024, 02:33 PM
TinyTeaser's Avatar
TinyTeaser TinyTeaser is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 322
Thanks: 5,149
Thanked 5,200 Times in 290 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by speedy711 View Post
They aren't fake and are taken by someone who has taken many many pics

I have most archived somewhere
I rest my case .... I'm not the one in search of unanswered questions.

The only thing I do in a case like this is opening the file in Photoshop and do some tests ... I'm not an expert but know my way around that works for me most of the time.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-04-2024, 10:01 PM
RubberGears RubberGears is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 408
Thanks: 1
Thanked 11,386 Times in 386 Posts
Default

Long lens, guessing 400-500 mm.
Short exposure time to minimize the chance of shake. Rule of thumb is max exposure time = lens mm. eg., no slower than 1/400 for a 400 mm lens.
Could be much faster here with the bright sun.
Probably a large aperture to get enough light for the fast exposure.
Large aperture plus fast exposure = shallow depth of field = bokeh, the background blurring.
Could be a 45 or 60 MP sensor for the details even when cropped.
Could be on a mono- or tripod.
Exif is easy enough to delete in PS or LR when exporting to jpg.
__________________
All my public nudity and debauchery photos:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/fetishphotog/albums
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to RubberGears For This Useful Post:
  #16  
Old 07-04-2024, 11:43 PM
rascaldog_fan's Avatar
rascaldog_fan rascaldog_fan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 595
Thanks: 2,968
Thanked 9,201 Times in 524 Posts
Default

Looking at these formulas, it may not be possible for basic users like me to take stunning pics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RubberGears View Post
Long lens, guessing
400-500 mm.
Short exposure time to minimize the chance of shake. Rule of thumb is max exposure time = lens mm. eg., no slower than 1/400 for a 400 mm lens.
Could be much faster here with the bright sun.
Probably a large aperture to get enough light for the fast exposure.
Large aperture plus fast exposure = shallow depth of field = bokeh, the background blurring.
Could be a 45 or 60 MP sensor for the details even when cropped.
Could be on a mono- or tripod.
Exif is easy enough to delete in PS or LR when exporting to jpg.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-05-2024, 01:05 AM
supersmoothy's Avatar
supersmoothy supersmoothy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 268
Thanks: 5,128
Thanked 1,587 Times in 267 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rascaldog_fan View Post
Looking at these formulas, it may not be possible for basic users like me to take stunning pics.
By the way, as one more rule of thumb, longer lenses tend to have a smaller maximum aperture, which means that if you want a longer lens but keep a large aperture, you have to spend more, and sometimes considerably so, depending on the quality.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to supersmoothy For This Useful Post:
  #18  
Old 07-05-2024, 03:28 AM
radar100 radar100 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Posts: 108
Thanks: 679
Thanked 3,503 Times in 111 Posts
Default

I've looked back on old external drives.

I have folders, from ILTB, numbered 04 and up. These early folders have date modified data suggesting the image was created on a computer in May 2009. That, I suspect, was the date I downloaded the folders from the website. The images would be earlier than that.

Fifteen years ago i am not sure how many people had access to Photoshop. I seem to recall it was expensive and used primarily by professionals.

What we dont know is how many images were taken by EuroGuru and Cliffhanger to produce the crystal clear images we are familiar with.

It seems that the photographer was in a number of locations, sometimes on the beach, sometimes in the rocks and I think sometimes maybe on a boat.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to radar100 For This Useful Post:
  #19  
Old 07-05-2024, 02:11 PM
rascaldog_fan's Avatar
rascaldog_fan rascaldog_fan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 595
Thanks: 2,968
Thanked 9,201 Times in 524 Posts
Default

I regularly used to visit the iltb site for updates and I noticed these pics appeared in the year 2014. Now I am surprised to here the pics are taken before 2009!

Quote:
Originally Posted by radar100 View Post
I've looked back on old external drives.

I have folders, from ILTB, numbered 04 and up. These early folders have date modified data suggesting the image was created on a computer in May 2009. That, I suspect, was the date I downloaded the folders from the website. The images would be earlier than that.

Fifteen years ago i am not sure how many people had access to Photoshop. I seem to recall it was expensive and used primarily by professionals.

What we dont know is how many images were taken by EuroGuru and Cliffhanger to produce the crystal clear images we are familiar with.

It seems that the photographer was in a number of locations, sometimes on the beach, sometimes in the rocks and I think sometimes maybe on a boat.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-19-2024, 01:57 PM
rascaldog_fan's Avatar
rascaldog_fan rascaldog_fan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 595
Thanks: 2,968
Thanked 9,201 Times in 524 Posts
Default

I was in Formentera some time ago....but i couldn't find this location/place.. 😥 🤔💭 I did careful search
Attached Thumbnails
user984785_pic3051155_1654179108.jpg   user984785_pic3051156_1654179108.jpg  

Reply With Quote
The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to rascaldog_fan For This Useful Post:
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



Beaver Webcams


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.