D
Deleted member 19453
Hentai
- Joined
- May 6, 2022
- Posts
- 2,339
- Reputation
- 5,326
Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
fuckkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk broooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo they're both so hot its hard to pick
This morph fogs both.fuckkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk broooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo they're both so hot its hard to pick
morphing will be the end of meThis morph fogs both.
View attachment 2459370
jutting is law, jutting is lifeJutter frauder. View attachment 2459372
that's lima and who, btw? scotti?This morph fogs both.
View attachment 2459370
No idea who, maybe it's just her manually improved and not fused.that's lima and who, btw? scotti?
FUARRKK its insanely idealNo idea who, maybe it's just her manually improved and not fused.
Only PFL is slightly distorted, unironically fogged by original Limas facial perfection, these pictures are peak homo sapiens:FUARRKK its insanely ideal
lima yes, but eriksen is getting dangerously close to gay alien hereOnly PFL is slightly distorted, unironically fogged by original Limas facial perfection, these pictures are peak homo sapiens:
View attachment 2459376View attachment 2459377
That picture is literally 7.25 PSL and peak facial aesthetics of all time, find me ANY photo of anyone who looks better.lima yes, but eriksen is getting dangerously close to gay alien here
erikson should be replaced with gandylima yes, but eriksen is getting dangerously close to gay alien here
is that how she looks unfrauded? cuz she still looks stacy to me in this pic.Jutter frauder. View attachment 2459372
thats why he isnt human humans are fucking ugly and he aint thatThat picture is literally 7.25 PSL and peak facial aesthetics of all time, find me ANY photo of anyone who looks better.
I prefer the earlier pic actually, she looks kinda weird in this oneThis morph fogs both.
View attachment 2459370
Her PFL was distorted, went from ideal to slightly short.I prefer the earlier pic actually, she looks kinda weird in this one
chin projection and overall facial convexity is not as important for womenis that how she looks unfrauded? cuz she still looks stacy to me in this pic.
is that how she looks unfrauded? cuz she still looks stacy to me in this pic.
That picture is literally 7.25 PSL and peak facial aesthetics of all time, find me ANY photo of anyone who looks better.
Ok but post an actual picture as an example I take ratings seriously.View attachment 2459388
Me and you disagree a little bit in so far as I place a lot more value in averageness. Eriksen looks absolutely insane, but he also deviates quite a bit from the norm, a bit too much imo. My philosophy is: An ultramogger jaw + ultramogger eye area is uncanny 99% of the time. You have to pick one, e.g. Salih, Stepanov, Gandy, Cavill.
this, if squinting is allowedOk but post an actual picture as an example I take ratings seriously.
He has more tangible failos right off the bat than Eriksen did in his picture, that picture alone is not 7 PSL.
This debate, as fun as it is, won't go anywhere. We fundamentally disagree on descriptivism vs prescriptivism for aesthetics, as I'm sure you'll remember from a thread I did some time ago. When I look at that pic of Hexum, I intuitively identify it as being more ideal.He has more tangible failos right off the bat than Eriksen did in his picture, that picture alone is not 7 PSL.
I'm in the perfection business, not the good enough business.This debate, as fun as it is, won't go anywhere. We fundamentally disagree on descriptivism vs prescriptivism for aesthetics, as I'm sure you'll remember from a thread I did some time ago. When I look at that pic of Hexum, I intuitively identify it as being more ideal.
I'm in the rating business, not the failo checkbox marking business
I'm in the math business, and perfection is the limit of a function.I'm in the perfection business, not the good enough business.
Perfection means 100%, you charge your phone to 100% by just keeping on charging.I'm in the math business, and perfection is the limit of a function.
Only approachable, never achievable.
I could argue that on subatomic level the battery will never be 100% charged. But even that's not needed. Do you trule believe there is a such a thing as aesthetic perfection? Because if so, that's a pretty bold claim tbh. I don't know of many people who share this opinion, it's quite an unusual one.Perfection means 100%, you charge your phone to 100% by just keeping on charging.
I see where you're coming from, but frankly I think you're afraid of embracing the perfection because you think it's too alien when in fact it's us humans and our creations that on average do not live up to any ideals.I could argue that on subatomic level the battery will never be 100% charged. But even that's not needed. Do you trule believe there is a such a thing as aesthetic perfection? Because if so, that's a pretty bold claim tbh. I don't know of many people who share this opinion, it's quite an unusual one.
Perfection in my view, is a kind of contradiction. You can attempt to approach it through a certain direction, but if and when you arrive, you'll realize that it has become something alienating. It is not what you thought it would be, it feels empty, soulless. Then you realize, a certain level of imperfection was what made it beautiful in the first place. Just the right amount, a tiny one, if you will. This goes for music, faces, paintings.
It's like a session musician once said on a documentary about the legendary band Steely Dan. They do several takes, and when they reach their idea of a 'perfect take', they don't use it. They go beyond that, to achieve something that is beyond perfection. Backtracking to a more 'flawed', but also better version.
Sure, you could say that. But that feeling of alienation must mean something. I'm not scared to confront so called "perfection". I just don't think it's gonna be what you and I expect. It won't be enlightening, it will be like a horror. But maybe that's what you're saying, true and perfect beauty is also horrifying. That's just not the framework I operate in. To me, an ideal is merely a reference point. It's not meant to be arrived at.I see where you're coming from, but frankly I think you're afraid of embracing the perfection because you think it's too alien when in fact it's us humans and our creations that on average do not live up to any ideals.
It's meant to be arrived at just no one knows how.Sure, you could say that. But that feeling of alienation must mean something. I'm not scared to confront so called "perfection". I just don't think it's gonna be what you and I expect. It won't be enlightening, it will be like a horror. But maybe that's what you're saying, true and perfect beauty is also horrifying. That's just not the framework I operate in. To me, an ideal is merely a reference point. It's not meant to be arrived at.
I'm just gonna be frank, this is cope.I don't wish to look perfect, or to think, or to speak, perfectly. I would like to miss it by just a little bit, ideally. I think that's more poetic, and also more beautiful.
It isn't. From a practical POV, they're both unachievable for me. Being near perfect and perfect are not things I will personally achieve, probably in any front, in my lifetime. I am telling you, honestly, that if I could choose, that if I had my way, I would choose as I said. It's not a cope because neither of those scenarios are in my ballpark.I'm just gonna be frank, this is cope.
Do you really think the quest will ever stop? There will be no 'definitive' set of faces. Just like there will be no final technological advancement, no final word in the dictionary. It's a constant, never ending chase. That's why I used the limit analogy. It's a mathematical device that perfectly encapsulates this concept, imo.It's meant to be arrived at just no one knows how.
That picture is literally 7.25 PSL and peak facial aesthetics of all time, find me ANY photo of anyone who looks better.
Only like 3 people in the world even have the options.It isn't. From a practical POV, they're both unachievable for me. Being near perfect and perfect are not things I will personally achieve, probably in any front, in my lifetime. I am telling you, honestly, that if I could choose, that if I had my way, I would choose as I said. It's not a cope because neither of those scenarios are in my ballpark.
You have to reach an aesthetic limit at which any change to the faces decreases the percieved attractiveness.Do you really think the quest will ever stop? There will be no 'definitive' set of faces. Just like there will be no final technological advancement, no final word in the dictionary. It's a constant, never ending chase. That's why I used the limit analogy. It's a mathematical device that perfectly encapsulates this concept, imo.
Not as good, shorter rounded ramus and shorter PFL, also shit brown eyes.
I was about to say she looks like she's jutting her chin out at all timesJutter frauder. View attachment 2459372
The fact that all of Ramirez photos are candids is what makes it so incredible.
That pic is editedThe fact that all of Ramirez photos are candids is what makes it so incredible.
Models need editing, perfect lighting, makeup, high resolution lenses, but he... he straight up just exists and he looks majestic at all times
View attachment 2459500
Truly the most aestethic man to ever exist
I agree. I didnt discover those unfrauded photos first. But i noticed something was off with her chin, turns out i was right. When she took those candid photos, those modelling agents surely saw that and told her to be as natural as possibleI was about to say she looks like she's jutting her chin out at all times
You can notice it particularly when she's moving her lips
Show me the originalThat pic is edited
Show me the original