Lilka & Jakar (2019) Part #1

[jabbath1987]

36 minutes ago, letsdothis said:

Part of the problem, maybe a lot of the problem, IDK, is we may have been
lulled into believing, thanks to the low quality cams in use at VH, that this
pic is sharp. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth.

 0

Certainly, it's better than some we see posted, thanks to the adequate
lighting in the room. But, compare it to the second pic and you begin to
see what sharp is. (View them at actual size, which is 2453 x 1371, and
in separate windows (not separate tabs), so you can switch back and
forth between the two. You can better see the difference that way. It's
the same pic.)

Compare things around the room, like the print on the pillows, the square
thing on the window sill, the reflections in the mirrors, her hair, etc.

 0

Here's another example. In the original, you can barely tell the redhead
has wrinkles on her forehead, or the separation between her nipple and
areola (they blend together like one, dark blob) or the pattern on the front
of her panties. It looks as though someone put a soft-focus filter over
the camera lens compared to the other two images. Also, the same pic.

 0

 0

 0

(BTW, a friend from across the pond got me thinking that possibly not
everyone knows how to view pics, GIFs, etc., at full, actual size within the
CC system. If anyone needs that info, let me know.)

I think lighting and the place itself is very important. This place is just dark hole with awful lighting conditions (both artificial and daylight) and managers should have never chosen it. 

[letsdothis]

19 hours ago, jabbath1987 said:

I think lighting and the place itself is very important. This place is just dark hole with awful lighting conditions (both artificial and daylight) and managers should have never chosen it. 

You may be right about L & J's apt, but I was only talking about the pics
I posted and the overall lack of camera quality throughout VH. Both of
the pics in my post have adequate lighting and that's why I chose them,
to show the low camera quality even with good lighting.

It could be just a matter of wiping the film off the camera lens that
accumulates over time, similar to the film that gets deposited on the
inside of your car windshield. I doubt that's the only problem, but
anything's possible.

(You might be amazed at how much clearer your windshield would be
after cleaning the inside, especially if you haven't done it in a while and
especially if you smoke in the car.)

[jabbath1987]

1 hour ago, letsdothis said:

(You might be amazed at how much clearer your windshield would be
after cleaning the inside, especially if you haven't done it in a while and
especially if you smoke in the car.)

I never smoked in my car and go to the car wash for inside and outside cleaning every Friday 😁

Good view is important to me that's why I also went for the adaptive LED lights when I specced my car 👍

About the quality I agree there is always room for improvement but in this realm it is extraordinary bad.

[Sparkles]

[letsdothis]

On 12/5/2019 at 6:20 AM, jabbath1987 said:

I never smoked in my car and go to the car wash for inside and outside cleaning every Friday 😁

Good view is important to me that's why I also went for the adaptive LED lights when I specced my car 👍

About the quality I agree there is always room for improvement but in this realm it is extraordinary bad.

Maybe a better word is "people", instead of "you". I didn't mean you
specifically. More like "you all" or "everyone".

[jjkopite]

[jjkopite]

[jjkopite]

[jjkopite]

[jjkopite]

[jjkopite]

[jjkopite]