Forum
>
Site Discussion
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
My dude.
I know you've watched as many muscle ladies videos as I have, potentially even more.
Does that look natural and unaltered to you? Notice how her content is all still pics and strange "uncanny valley" videos?
She 100% tucks her waist (a lot!) and thickens her thighs, and she's not even that good at it.
So, do you have any actual digital artifacts to point to, or you're just assuming based on the weird proportions in her stuff?
I don’t have the technical details, but the speed and rate of that video looks off. Doesn’t it?
And my critique of her still photos is admittedly anecdotal. But like, I’ve seen hundreds of competitors and god knows how many thousands of fit women and I’ve spent my life in gyms and I’ve never once seen another physique like hers in waist to hip.
It’s possible that she has a one in 1 million physique, and she just doesn’t seem to compete or take very many videos, but far more likely that she’s just using a waist cinching app. The new ones are pretty advanced. They’ve already moved way past the whole trope of Goob zooming in to see bent vertical lines.
I'm just going off of a hunch (and a bunch of image reports, which were probably also off of a hunch) that it looks unnatural.
Yup, with you. It is unnatural for sure. Gonna get worse too, as simps are falling right now for obvious AI girls. A year from now they won’t look obvious at all.
In this video:
https://www.girlswithmuscle.com/2451209/
around :09 onwards the corner line just to the right of her seems to wiggle subtly as she moves. It is subtle enough that it could just be compression artifacts, or shadows from her arms, but combined with everything else it's a bit suspicious... and this is one of the more reasonable looking uploads of her, unlike, for example, this.
My two cents are as follows: Minor tweaks/alterations are pretty much to be expected on socials, and I think Amber really does have a great physique that she evidently works very hard for but was probably also blessed with. Maybe she just lightly tweaks her content in order to appear even more impressive and increase her wow-factor. I mean, girls with similar (real) physiques do exist. Emma Lanyi is one such example whom, unless I'm a complete idiot, most definitely does not fake her content.
Unless the morphing is particularly blatant, I'm of the opinion that it should be tolerated. Perhaps not encouraged, but tolerated nevertheless.
Edit: Moreover, if GWM starts getting particularly meticulous about this sort of thing, then I foresee a future in which people are more likely to be unhappy about the general state of things. Granted, I'm just a nobody whose opinion ought to be taken with a pinch of talc powder (:
Most of her pics are arse shots anyway, not what this site is supposed to be about yet people are all too predictable in voting it up regardless. https://www.girlswithmuscle.com/2657639/
I know having a special affinity for glutes is often seen as a bottom-tier preference in muscle communities, but what can I say? People like a good butt, and while this site isn't supposed to put extra focus on this-and-that or so-and-so, a pair developed glutes is worthy of praise and admiration just like biceps, abs, shoulders, etc.
I know having a special affinity for glutes is often seen as a bottom-tier preference in muscle communities, but what can I say? People like a good butt, and while this site isn't supposed to put extra focus on this-and-that or so-and-so, a pair developed glutes is worthy of praise and admiration just like biceps, abs, shoulders, etc.
Glutes are the muscle. When that's clearly developed that is noticeable. Just having a big butt mostly composed of fat is not glute development.
The following are strongly discouraged. The more your uploads fall into these categories, the more likely they are to be deleted:
Low quality images. Many similar images of the same person. Women showing very little visible muscularity. Images lacking femininity. Images where the focus is breasts or butt rather than muscles. High implants-to-muscle ratio. Contest pictures or pictures with contest tans. Highlight reel clips.
Yup, with you. It is unnatural for sure. Gonna get worse too, as simps are falling right now for obvious AI girls. A year from now they won’t look obvious at all.
It’s getting harder in certain cases for mods to know too. Even worse when they are being given a fictitious name. But that’s a discussion for another topic.
So as long as they're skilful at deception. ie don't make it obvious , that's somehow OK?
Unavoidable.
I mean, do you think that the big accounts like Vladi and Fafa and.. idk.. pretty much anything shot by a professional photographer.. do you think that they snap the photo and simply upload them?
They don't use the plethora of unbelievably effective and easy digital techniques to impart softer skin, smaller waist, bigger peaks, etc?
My dude. Of course they do. They've been doing it forever, and it's easier than ever nowadays.
Ultimately, it's a gray zone whose existence essentially creates an equilibrium of sorts; become too loose and people will complain. Become too strict and people will get upset as well. I believe the best course of action would be to maintain the status quo. I think the current state of GWM is quite good after all.
Unavoidable.
I mean, do you think that the big accounts like Vladi and Fafa and.. idk.. pretty much anything shot by a professional photographer.. do you think that they snap the photo and simply upload them?
They don't use the plethora of unbelievably effective and easy digital techniques to impart softer skin, smaller waist, bigger peaks, etc?
My dude. Of course they do. They've been doing it forever, and it's easier than ever nowadays.
My remark was about morphing, not standard photographic enhancements that have been made for decades in different ways. And this site, as determined by the owner, where it can, makes a distinction between the two. Do keep up,
Unless the morphing is particularly blatant, I'm of the opinion that it should be tolerated. Perhaps not encouraged, but tolerated nevertheless.
Standard photographic touch up has always been tolerated and permitted.
Morphing is different.
The “soft” blacklist, rather than a full ban, is a form of toleration.
They don't use the plethora of unbelievably effective and easy digital techniques to impart softer skin, smaller waist, bigger peaks, etc?
This isn't the first time you've said this. I really don't think that most women or their editors do the stuff in bold. I do think they (possibly over 50%):
But all of the above could be considered just ways to make their actual IRL appearance look as good on a flat screen as possible.
Actually using tools to change their body shape goes beyond that into cheating in a manner that can't be justified the same way, and I don't think most (over 50%) of women do that.
Okay, real question: have you spoken to any of these women about it?
I have. A few dozen of them. Photographers too.
Look, we have a lot of Gen X slang happening here like “morph.” People might as well be talking about downloading songs on Napster and ripping a CD. The tech for doing alterations has come along miles from those days.
The woman we’re speaking about on this thread is digitally altering her waist to a large and unbelievable degree. You can see how it thickens her legs to compensate in particular photos. That is exceptional.
But tweaking pics to make waists a bit smaller and certain muscles a bit bigger is par for the course. Look at how many people that guy Goob catches. This isn’t scaring the rest of them straight. It’s showing a small tip of a large iceberg.
That said… it doesn’t bother me because (1) the women in question undoubtedly have amazing physiques even without it and (2) no one wait that they owe us 100% authenticity.
It’s a free image to goon over. Not a precise chronicle of a woman’s honest, unaltered physique at one moment in time.
You're relying a lot on "just trust me bro" but the stuff you're talking about would, used at the scale you're alleging, would leave evidence behind, regardless of how good the tools are. Inconsistencies between videos and pictures; things looking unnatural to the naked eye; warped backgrounds; stuff like that.
Goob exposes like what, one woman every few months? Again, if this were happening at the scale you say, he'd be catching a lot more.
I'm not saying that no women do this. I don't know what the percentage is. 5%? 10%? Maybe that's feasible. I'm just saying that not the majority of women on here do it.
Well, couple things:
1) You're right that inconsistency between video and still is a problem. But most the enhancements are subtle enough not to make this an issue. I think in many cases, they're an optimized version of the model.. as if the model completely nailed her pose with as much waist suppression and as hard a flex as possible.
2) I couldn't guess at a number. I really do believe that it's most women who have a large public profile though. Certainly ones who work with dedicated photographers.
3) It's really easy to mask your work. It's hard to take a skinny girl and make her look buff. It's really easy to take a buff and lean girl and make her look larger and more aeshetic. Here's a quick edit that I made in about 3 minutes. I'm not a professional photographer or a photo editor. I imagine that someone could pixel peep this, but it would probably pass Goob's examination, despite it being a really busy background with a ton of straight lines...
And here's a link to the OG to compare. I just grabbed a pic at random that seemed challenging-ish to work with.
And here's a link to the OG to compare. I just grabbed a pic at random that seemed challenging-ish to work with.
That's pretty good. What did you use to make that? Two things that immediately jump out are the reflection in the mirror not matching her physique, and her tricep on our left (her right) looking unnatural. But if you had been more subtle, like 1/3 as much enlargement, it could be believable.
Haha thanks! I used Photoshop. Duplicated the layer. Used "Liquify" to make her arms thicker, her glutes bigger, her thighs wider, and her calves larger.
After that, I used the erase tool, tracing around the muscles edges, to get rid of the distortions caused from liquify.
Soft agree on the reflection.. I barely messed with her left arm. I pulled out the whole left side of her torso to make her a bit wider, but I think that mirror image would still be pretty accurate.
Agreed on the right side tricep, its a bit too angled to look really natural. Although I have seen some women - esp Julia Fory - who have insane arm width like that. Lots of men do. It's not really in step with the rest of her physique though.
I actually thought that I messed up when I looked at the TV screen next to her right bicep and how it's all stretched and distorted, but that's a detail in the original shot. Just a warped mirror.
Anyway, just showing that this is pretty easy to do these days, even for a total amateur like me.
I mean probably, but her waist is also tiny in her videos, and I don't see any obvious signs in them that she's doing anything other than sucking it in and playing tricks with tight clothing, but maybe I just haven't examined them in enough detail.