No links, folks (but if you email me I can send you the pics ;)) Not that anyone’s going to believe me, but I wasn’t looking for 'em when I found 'em. They’re candid photos of her getting out of a small wooden boat (I’m guessing located in some place tropical) and you can see all the way up the river, if you know what I mean. Usually when things like this get out, I hear about them before I see them (if ever, and boy do I regret looking at those pics and vid of Paris Hilton. Yick!), but this time I found 'em and I’ve not heard anything about them, which leads me to believe that they’re fakes. Anybody know?
My WAG would be - YES.
actually, I’ve seen no evidence of them being faked, although the ones I saw WERE lightened with Photoshop’s Shadow filter, which might incline some to think so.
However, there ARE fake photos of her with a fake pair of panties put back on. The rumor is that it’s her publicity team who made those, trying to convince everybody that the pantyless ones are fake…however, they forgot to edit the EXIP metadata, which STILL makes a note from the paparzai who published them online about her being caught pantyless.
All I can really say is jeez she’s stretched that thing out fast…
Yeah, if it’s real, girl been rode hard 'n put away wet. :dubious:
Fleshbot:
The Superficial admitted they were fake…
NSFW
http:// s2.supload.com/image.php?get=lindsay_lohan_shows_off_undies.jpg (Pre-photoshopped)
She looks like an old lady in those photos.
sorry, those photos = that photo
You try staying up drinking all night and doing coke off a bathroom floor and see how you look.
In the words of Fark, “I’d hit it.”
M’kay, a couple of things.
First of all, I’m moving this to IMHO as, while it is about an actress, it doesn’t belong in Cafe Society.
Second, I broke the NSFW pic as it violates the “two click” rule.
Carry on.
Yup. That’s the shot (well, one of them, anyway). Improv Geek, I agree with you, I just wish she’d stop dyeing her hair and go back to her natural color.
Is the beaver shot real? I think that one of the websites providing the picture really put it best:
The no-panties version is the real one. It came out first and was the only one available for some time before the one with the panties came out. The photographer who took the picture, Daniele Venturelli, put the following comment in the EXIF data:
The thing that convinces me that the version with panties is fake is that, as fusoya said, it also has the above comment (and all the original EXIF data) embedded in it. It looks like someone took the original, shopped in panties, and didn’t remove or change the EXIF data.
If you go to wwtdd.com and search for Lindsay Lohan (I probably shouldn’t link to it directly) you can see both versions and read some more of the evidence that the one with panties is the fake one. If you download the pictures and open them in WordPad you can see the EXIF data.
You know, there’s one sure-fire way of not having pictures of you taken with your lady bits all hanging out, swinging in the breeze…
(Yes, I’m talking about wearing underwear.)
Hey, wait, is that where her “Fire-crotch” nickname comes from?
No, no, no, no…you’ve got it all wrong. We WANT lady bits hanging out.
That’s what we’re here for!
Gimme a hand here. What might a guy Google if he was looking for this?
Seriously, that looks like underwear to me.