>>4158803>I love side boobs too, but the post-processing made your picture looks too waxy.now that you say it, i see it too...cranked a little bit too much blurr lol
>I would have loved to see the second one took with your digi. The whites are better with it.the closest i got and few others
>I love the fact that you are not retouching the skin too much.meh...i find them much more attractive without or less make up than usual.
but if i shoot a ig thot i sure do make her look plasticy...afterall it's free advertisement for me once they post and tag lol
>What I see : https://zupimages.net/up/23/12/4tot.jpgoh that's actually nice but why that long vertical format
>I see what you tried to do, but it does not work for me.almost everytime i give a few motion blurr a chance. i love the typical outcame of
story telling, mystical, unclear image
>She looks kind of reluctant.i just met her 20 min earlier from that shot. actually that's her "cool" way of looking and i love her late 90s appearance desu.
i was walking around with my film camera and once i saw her i knew i wanted to shoot
all the rolls i had with me on her which i did. unfortunately she had to go back to her country again.
wish i'd did more with her great looking face and super long perfect shaped legs :))
Shutter speed too low? Not enough ISO?
>we met later after that spontanious shoot and went to a bar.actually the fixer was broken i believe because every other shot was just ok except 4 shots or so.
but i like it, looks kinda like polarisation.
>Very nice, but don't cut feet, please.i know i know....i blame my nervousness
>70s vibe, like an old issue of Playboy.same gurl as above ^
>These evoke a porn flick setting. Probably due to the impersonal space and the model features.lol probably right. she reminded me on 60s stars where photographers were just invited by them into their hotel rooms and took few shots.
i like her big ass eyeleashes for some reason
