Moore’s bush in the demi3.jpg shot is a fake, I concur. If you want to talk about escessive bush, I’d say it was the French woman in “Romance.” She did nude scenes, but what the hell, everything between her bellybutton and her ass crack was covered in thick black hair. She woujld have been nuder shaved and wearing a bikini.
Ah, they’re 1920’s style “Death Rays”.
No, it isn’t a Photoshop exercise.
It’s Demi Moore’s actual unshaven bush.
I can recall seeing the very magazine that the photos appeared in and marveling that “Hey!! You can actually see her naughty bits even through her bush.” Back when those photos were taken OUI was a notch below Playboy, in that they would show a woman with her legs sporead wide, as in the Moore photo, but wouldn’t go in for the gyno-type stuff that Hustler dealt in.
And astro, what praytell, is your evidence that the photo is question is a Photoshop job, and an obvious one at that?
Revtim’s law: Whenever a photo’s authenticity is questioned, phrases such as “that’s the worst/most obvious Photoshopping I’ve ever seen” will be used, even when the photo in question is 100 percent authentic.
Practical issues:
1: Generally when a celeb or or even a B level starlet does a nudie mag photo shoot, it’s usually artsy or coy with some limited bush and typically a lot of breast shots. An “in your face” spread legged beaver shot like the one referenced is practically unheard of in these circumstances.
Art issues:
1: Her mons is insanely hairy. So hairy it looks fake. It looks like someone stole Ron Popeil’s can of spray on hair and went to town. Most aspiring actresses would not have bush like this, even 25 years ago.
If it’s actually her, God bless her hirsute little soul! 
But in 1981 she was neither of those things.
Looks to me like she had that misguided thought of “doing porn will lead to mainstream success.”
But for her, it did, sort of.
I don’t think that’s her soul…
This argument makes no sense. Since most fakes are made by pasting the famous person’s face on another body, then even if it’s fake it’s still a genuine hairy crotch. Now why would it be less likely for Demi to have a hairy crotch than the body used? Because she’s an “aspiring actress”? Unless she was aspiring to do porn, why would she shave down there?
I checked the photo out in photoshop. I initially thought it was faked because the pubic hair looked wrong – the strands of hair in her bush were way too thick – they looked more like carpet fibers than human hair. this could be an artifact of the scan or something, but it does look all wrong.
Also, if you’ll look carefully at her face, the part that’s resting against the pillow is a lot thicker than the part that’s not. And the edge of her face looks abnormally straight. I think the faker used the outline of the original model’s face. The color matching, however is excellent, but I’ve seen other excellent jobs of color matching.
On the side of authenticity, I note that even though Moore’s legs are spread wide, you can’t see a bit of pubes in there because her hair is too thick. I wonder if she wasn’t the beneficiary of an airbrush artist when the pic was published in Oui, which might also explain her pubic hair’s strange appearance.