VidPro Strikes Again!

[docdude316]

Originally Posted by msnevil

Sorry, Docdude we don't enhance watermarked Collage's.

I just noticed I altered a "kreuk" fake. (Edit: 15 minute, Can't delete pic.)

Sorry about that I didn't even notice the watermarks. I'm trying to find a version of the red carpet pic without the watermark.

[docdude316]

After a little bit of searching I found these two images of Alexis Bledel at the Matrix Revolutions premiere. As far as I can tell they don't have any watermarks. They're too large to upload as is and I don't know how to reduce the file size so I zipped them. If you can't work on these just let me know. Sorry for any trouble.

[vidpro]

Originally Posted by knoxville182

maybe?

As always, no guesswork or painted-on nipples from me. Just contrast and brightness enhancement for accurate see thru depiction.

I could only see through one side, but it turned out pretty good for a somewhat blury picture.

[Lump]

Who can do this one?

[vidpro]

See thru enhancement...

[vidpro]

Originally Posted by Lump

Who can do this one?

I can...

I'll do it right now.

[vidpro]

Originally Posted by Lump

Who can do this one?

I got rid of some of the censorship... the quality was low, so it was tricky to get rid of all of the censorship. However, I also did some photo resotration on the image.

[Fritzyy]

Those boobs look familiar. Good work men!

[knoxville182]

i found these in a webshots folder, they all seem to meet the criteria.
thanks for all the good work.

[msnevil]

Originally Posted by vidpro

As always, no guesswork or painted-on nipples from me. Just contrast and brightness enhancement for accurate see thru depiction.

I could only see through one side, but it turned out pretty good for a somewhat blury picture.

Respectfully, Vidpro.

The only time guess work is not involved. Is when you can see the Visible see through with your own eye. (Which is why a lot of Photoshop people will only do Photoshop’s on "visible" aspects of the body.)

You see Photoshop is not 100% effective in illuminating what is underneath. (Contrary to what I have seen on this forum, and other's.) There is never 100% certainty. Unless you see it with your visible eye. We use different techniques to Increase our chances of noting what is not "seen". For exp. Vidpro stated contrast\brightness.

Also, I have thought about posting this in the past. But Have decided to avoid the subject. Now is the time. Some see a "nipple slip". Others "don't". The same goes with Photoshop’s. It is in the eye of the beholder. (Unless it's plainly visible. It's always guess work. )

For exp. I think Vidpro is wrong on his "guess". (Now we see how he reacts to a friendly challenge.

I posted my saved "contrast". Let others see what I work with. (And as always, I welcome a civilized challenge, and constructive criticism. I have been wrong in the past, and learn from my mistake’s. Lets see if others can state the same. )

What I did:
Magic wand tool>auto-leveled>local area contrast Radius 150, local area 1> manual levels, darkened highlights 50%, underlined my probable guess 50%.