Photos are the true blackpill

[james sapphire my k]

You can cope all day in the mirror, but a photo shows your true smv. No good lighting, no perfect angle, no movement to save you. Just raw, frozen reality. That’s why so many dudes get hit with existential crises after seeing candid shots. Photos strip away all your illusions. If you can’t look good in those, you’re ngmi.

 

[idkmanimao]

You can cope all day in the mirror, but a photo shows your true smv. No good lighting, no perfect angle, no movement to save you. Just raw, frozen reality. That’s why so many dudes get hit with existential crises after seeing candid shots. Photos strip away all your illusions. If you can’t look good in those, you’re ngmi.

water, now shut the fuck up

 

[wristcel]

candid photo's need to be made illegal!

 

[RODEBLUR]

You can cope all day in the mirror, but a photo shows your true smv. No good lighting, no perfect angle, no movement to save you. Just raw, frozen reality. That’s why so many dudes get hit with existential crises after seeing candid shots. Photos strip away all your illusions. If you can’t look good in those, you’re ngmi.

True

 

[Scriggan]

true but most of the time your in motion

 

[MagicalWaves]

stole my thread pussy fuck u

 

[james sapphire my k]

stole my thread pussy fuck u

I never saw your thread sorry if I did

 

[BucketCrab]

Tell me one guy you think is a Chad and I guarantee I can find photos where he looks like shit. Lens distortion and lighting make a lot of difference

 

[LiamV]

You can cope all day in the mirror, but a photo shows your true smv. No good lighting, no perfect angle, no movement to save you. Just raw, frozen reality. That’s why so many dudes get hit with existential crises after seeing candid shots. Photos strip away all your illusions. If you can’t look good in those, you’re ngmi.

Nah reality is people won't see you frozen in time. altough looking good in photos is a sign that you're attractive it's not a must

 

[karmacita901]

ok but i've looked good in many photos, so which photos are the real cope? The ones where i look good or the ones where i look like shit

 

[james sapphire my k]

ok but i've looked good in many photos, so which photos are the real cope? The ones where i look good or the ones where i look like shit

The bad ones. Candid or random bad pics show your real baseline no angles, no posing, no perfect lighting. That’s what people see in real life when you’re not trying. The good photos are the controlled highlights. Everyone can look good in their best angles and setups. If you look like shit in random photos, that’s your true level. If you look good even in harsh lighting or unexpected shots, then you’re actually good looking. Simple as that.

 

[james sapphire my k]

Tell me one guy you think is a Chad and I guarantee I can find photos where he looks like shit. Lens distortion and lighting make a lot of difference

Sure, even top tier Chads have bad pics. But here’s the difference: when a Chad has a "bad" photo, he still looks objectively good just less polished. His bone structure, harmony, and overall shape hold up even under bad lighting or angles.

 

[james sapphire my k]

Sure, even top tier Chads have bad pics. But here’s the difference: when a Chad has a "bad" photo, he still looks objectively good just less polished. His bone structure, harmony, and overall shape hold up even under bad lighting or angles.

For average guys, bad photos expose weak jawlines, recessed chins, midface issues stuff you can’t hide without perfect conditions.
Yeah, lens distortion and lighting matter, but they don’t magically create bone structure. A real Chad can survive candids and still look above average. That’s the point.

 

[karmacita901]

The bad ones. Candid or random bad pics show your real baseline no angles, no posing, no perfect lighting. That’s what people see in real life when you’re not trying. The good photos are the controlled highlights. Everyone can look good in their best angles and setups. If you look like shit in random photos, that’s your true level. If you look good even in harsh lighting or unexpected shots, then you’re actually good looking. Simple as that.

but i've looked good in random photos too its just only about 10-20% of them. thats why i ask the question. Are random photos just that hard to look good in, or am i just in a weird position where my flaws aren't visible from all angles

 

[james sapphire my k]

but i've looked good in random photos too its just only about 10-20% of them. thats why i ask the question. Are random photos just that hard to look good in, or am i just in a weird position where my flaws aren't visible from all angles

If you only look good in 10–20% of random photos, that means your face is angle dependent you probably have decent features but weak structure or asymmetry that shows up at certain angles. Random candids are hard for everyone, but if you only hit in a small percentage, that’s a sign you’re mid or "conditional good-looking." Your flaws get exposed from certain views, and your good shots happen when those flaws are hidden by chance. Bottom line: you aren't cooked but you aren't mogging everyone

 

[BucketCrab]

Sure, even top tier Chads have bad pics. But here’s the difference: when a Chad has a "bad" photo, he still looks objectively good just less polished. His bone structure, harmony, and overall shape hold up even under bad lighting or angles.

No man.
Gandy, O'Pry, Barrett, Chico... if you look hard enough you can find dozens of photos where they just look like shit and you'd say they're plain ugly. I went for those 4 cause they're universally considered handsome around here, but that kind of applies to anyone.

Many features of male beauty translate poorly without the correct lighting, for example prominent cheekbones. Same applies to eye hooding, frontal lighting flattens everything up and gives you back a distorted version of what you'd see in natural lighting.

Lens distortion can also completely change your features. There's a reason people who are addicted to social media typically always take a photo of themselves from the exact same angle and then sift through dozens of attempts before uploading one where they look human.

 

[AlessV1]

No man.
Gandy, O'Pry, Barrett, Chico... if you look hard enough you can find dozens of photos where they just look like shit and you'd say they're plain ugly. I went for those 4 cause they're universally considered handsome around here, but that kind of applies to anyone.

Many features of male beauty translate poorly without the correct lighting, for example prominent cheekbones. Same applies to eye hooding, frontal lighting flattens everything up and gives you back a distorted version of what you'd see in natural lighting.

Lens distortion can also completely change your features. There's a reason people who are addicted to social media typically always take a photo of themselves from the exact same angle and then sift through dozens of attempts before uploading one where they look human.
View attachment 3871967

Well.. i see logic in what you're saying, but i see logic in what the thread guy is saying too, because models usually get photos taken when they're doing whatever as walking eating etc, and they mostly looking good, but for most of us, if we don't catch the camera and lock-in, we're cooked