>>1

ok, here you go.

>>2
holy shit, more rarze!

>>2
thank you!

>>2
Thank you so much

the current breed of crackyfags is not very observant...

>>6
It's more or less the same people, just not checking everything as obsessively as before. Why read the timestamps in either thread when one of them is closer to the top of the page?

the other one looked more believable

>>2
tits or gtfo

Flip to the flop.

>>7
I bet there are at least 3 very new souls here. Look at all the spoonfeeding, the resignation?

>>8

2/10

>>12
give me both pictures without all the photoshop processing and I'll shut up, but I aint trollin

both those "rares" are very fishy, but on top of all the filtering, the blur jobs and the oddly matching of color saturation, the perspective of her facial features on the second one just feels off, for whatever reason

in any case, I see no soul, of maybe one so artificial I dont recognise it as such

it just feels forced, either way

I havent saved either one cuz I dun know what folder to put them in

but so far its goin fer da fakes is whaddam sayin

>>13
Dude, if you are so proficient at analyzing these "rarez" i'd suggest you look at the Exif data. Maybe that tells you who shopped the photos...

>>14
dun care bout no exif data and maybes, those pics are heavily touched up, they look generally off to me, not to mention the last fact that they are rife with convenient details perfect to shut up nay-sayers

I say give me originals, or nay it is fer this Crackyfag

>>15

>those pics are heavily touched up,

There are, indeed, artifacts. But it's not like older pictures didn't have either artifacts, or even wholesale changes introduced (like 2 heads).

I understand your reluctance to see then as genuine, but on the other hand, they're not being auctioned at christies; the only thing you have to "lose" is to have made a wrong call in a thread on an anonymous image board should ever a knave reveal that he ingeniously crafted the image with the intent to fool us.

So just look at the images without bias and decide their worth to you.

I decided, that in spite of my initial doubt, I do enjoy them. And basically that's all there is to it, to either enjoy a picture as is or not.

So for me the question is: was the image with the green complexion originally like that, or done so by the poster to whet our appetite for the original, making the one with the natural colour the imposter ?

OMG ALL THE EVIDENCE POINTS TO CORKY USING PHOTOSHOPPE EOMFG OMG

>>17
http://www.opanda.com/en/pe/index.html

and it's not artifacts: it's evidence of filters, one that she never used but one I've seen a Crackyfag abuse regularly in reedits

I may be wrong and this is just an incredibly forced picture with lot of after effects

phoney just feels phoney either way

to top it all, all the maneuvering around my legitimate concerns when a simple act would have quieted my disbelief has quite convinced me this is precisely the case of a knave ingeniously crafting images with the intent to fool us

wouldnt be the first time

I dont care, those pics may be a brilliant forgery or a crapily staged Crackymon, in the end I say if you feel Cracky's soul in those, I say you never really felt it

still aint savin them

>to top it all, all the maneuvering around my legitimate concerns when a simple act would have quieted my disbelief has quite convinced me this is precisely the case of a knave ingeniously crafting images with the intent to fool us

lolwhat? you are vastly overestimating the effort people are willing to invest into this.

>>18

>in the end I say if you feel Cracky's soul in those, I say you never really felt it

An unduly harsh judgement. With just the second picture at hand you might have made a stronger case for foul play.
But combined with the first one, tampering or no, there's bound to be something of her in 't.
And as such the question's no more, soul or none, but how much of it in it.

>>19
The Mona Lia took me in excess of 8 hours to create, and I'm neither the most skilled, nor the most driven. Likewise subterfuge was not my goal.

(What someone could achieve with those three given? Maybe even to recreate her soul.)

Cracky would never camwhorize like that

/thread

>>21 lol

I think it is pretty amazing that the person who crafted these forgeries went trough the trouble of recreating the rug/cloth/curtains behind her.

Maybe he had access to other rarez with a clothed, smiling and mystic cracky, but chose to shop her into an undressed, frowning Olivia instead?

Or maybe he recreated her apartment (note that even the wall colour is matching) and used some kind of skanky model in her place.

However this troll did it, a lot of painstaking work was involved. If only he would recreate the Cracky of our collective developmentally retarded delusion. Or at least a hot sexy 20yo Olivia, fully exposed.

The photos are original, not shopped by someone. Some of them are originally red and green. For some reason the second photo lacks her emotion in her eyes but her "presence" is still there (imo). It seems like her eyes are blurred in the 2nd pic and she has a very "dead inside" look. Maybe her body is present but she isn't. These are genuine tho.

>Some of them are originally red and green.

Some? There was only one red and green photo. Did I miss something?

>>20

>An unduly harsh judgement

fair enough but you'll have to excuse me for dismissing as crap pics where the model appears to only be there in body, whether it's from post or from the shoot itself

I guess I wouldnt be the producer I am if I wasnt that harsh

>>23
with enough originals, it wouldnt be that hard, I honestly think >>19 overestimate the effort compositing all those elements would take, especially if you are going to apply a filter and blur most of it after

and we've seen elaborate trolls of all sort in here over the years

I'm not even completely convinced they are fake, I'm just convinced they feel fake and that I'm getting the run around when all I ever asked to be sure were the originals

meh

I'm bound not to communicate well with hoarders

>>24

again, fair enough

but

give me the originals or it's all talk

yeah, well, I guess I shoulda expanded the other thread huh?

so the original is the red and green one, that's what you're saying?

I still dont like them, post has ruined them or they were just under par to start with

Fact 1: Its Cracky's face.

Everything else is irrelephant

>collective developmentally retarded delusion

SHE SAID SHE WANTED THE D

SO I LOGGED ON MY DISC PRIEST

>>26

>give me the originals or it's all talk
>give me the originals
>give me

Whoa..check out the sense of entitlment on this cat.

>check out the sense of entitlment on this cat
>check out the sense of entitlment
>the sense of entitlment
>entitlment
>tit

tryin hard not to look

but

seriously

allow me sum rytum in my jeevum

oh

wait

you're a hoarder objectin to bein told what to do

fuck you

and I aint no fuckin cat either so there

you tit