The Celebrity X-Ray Thread

have just tried to delete it,maybe to needs to process first

 

Wow, cthrough, the guy didn't know and he's being nice about it. chill..

 

I'm not berating him, just helping him out by showing that it is a fake. I'm sure he doesn't want the thread littered with fake images either. Selecting your images from a reputable source where you can see multiple images from a series (like on Phun) is best to avoid these situations, as not all sites will keep the fakes separated or labeled that way. It's also nice to not clog up the thread with non-picture posts, so I prefer to clean up after myself.

 

whats the difference between "enhanced" and a fake ray except that you use a light touch?

 

A FakeRay is a fake that merges two images while trying to replicate a see-through effect.

An x-ray (enhanced) is a image that the pixels are adjusted to reveal detail that we can't see in the original version.

 

yeah so fakerays are "enhanced" but done sloppily by people who are too lazy to use Burn and Dodge and Despeckle and other tools. Enhanced images have clearly been edited and smoothed and such.

I guess the problem is fakerays look like crap most of the time because they're fast to make. Hadn't seen the term "fakeray" before I came here anyway. should I delete these two posts c-through?

 

I guess you haven't visited my FakeRay thread. Some of my early stuff was't all that great but I think my recent work is pretty damn good. But I agree that there are quite a few fakers that are too lazy to strive for quality.

 

A good fakeray like Kaleidoscope is turning out is hard to spot the fakery - choosing underlying body sections that are proportional, and the right angle is not an easy task, and when done right is very realistic, but it's still not the same since you're using another image layered underneath the one you really want to see naked.

Unfortunately "lazy" often makes images look bad whether you're talking x-ray or fakeray. Sometimes it's not just laziness, but just a poor eye for detail, but either way it makes for bad images. That's one of the reasons I always post my original image along with any modified versions. I'd love to be able to do an animated .gif of each image (as I've done a couple times in the past) to show that the enhanced details I bring out are present, but I just don't have that kind of time very often. If you flip through the images or open each one in their own tab and you can get the same basic idea. My enhanced images are the details brought out through basic image manipulation (brightness, contrast, saturation, and sometimes hue adjustment), which are improved by bringing back the colors to match skintones & shading that would be present if the fabric was more transparent. This is done through lightening/darkening areas, and/or colorizing similar to how B&W films are made to look more pleasing by adding appropriate colors to the images without changing the original content.

 

you could do a better version of something like this
my software is terrible it indexes the colors so I have to crop the shit out of everything to get any detail.
I hope the crediting is fine with you.
I just put the xray layer on the original.
Then made a 90% transparent layer, and created a new layer from visible.
Then repeated down to 80%, 70%, and so on down to 0% and then back up. I added an extra 100% visible xray layer so you can see that part better.
Hope that made sense. IDK what software you use but this method only took me a few minutes. I guess it's like I said - faster results, lower quality. Ha.

 

Just click on the Jennifer Aniston link in my signature, and that's one of the images you'll see I did already. I think you're over thinking how to do it - just use basic brightness & contrast adjustments to start with. You can do this with just about any image software, and even old version of Photoshop can do everything you need for very little money.

 

i've used the free photoshop i found on google (pixlr or something like that i think) just to try out a few of my own pics and pics i've found, i can get a little out of that, but nothing like cthrough does

 

Jennifer Aniston, for several decades now, seems to have some sort of affliction where her nipples are constantly erect. I'm not complaining, because that's awesome. It's just....unusual.

 

Let's have less talking and more PIXs!!!!! Everyone is here for one reason and one reason only and that is to SEEEEEEEEE-THRU FEMALE CELEBRITIES TATAs and WOOHOOS!!!!!!

 

c-through is a master! It would take time and practice to reach his level. Keep on trying.

 

Thanks c-through... it means a lot coming from an artist like yourself!

 

Found images that had DATA ... even the stain on her gown became visible

Originals are here ... http://forum.phun.org/showthread.php?t=894120&page=2

opo: Check-out 'swiftadds23' ... it was my second choice to process.

moustachestrength: Kaleidoscope's 'fakerays' are the best I've seen ... I agree with c-through ... sifting through images that will match the underlying body then matching the angle, pose and color is no joke ... may actually try one with the recent Sandra Bullock pics

 

Erin Andrews - looks like a good possibility... This was from the 2011 White House Correspondents Dinner if anyone has a better angle...

 

Yeah I was talking about how to make an animated gif out of the images that you did, because your gifs were 3 frames or something and didn't look very smooth. That gif I showed you is something I made in 5 seconds using your work.

I've spent way too many hours (thousands?) xraying. People I know irl though Oh well I guess I wasn't clear in the first post that I was talking about YOU making gifs from YOUR image. getting out of thread now