-  [WT]  [PS]  [Home] [Manage]

[Return] [Entire Thread] [Last 50 posts] [First 100 posts]
Posting mode: Reply
     

  1.   (reply to 7286)
  2. (for post and file deletion)
/gfx/ - Graphics Manipulation
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG, WEBM
  • Maximum file size allowed is 3000 KB.
  • Images greater than 200x200 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 774 unique user posts. View catalog

  • Blotter updated: 2018-08-24 Show/Hide Show All

We are in the process of fixing long-standing bugs with the thread reader. This will probably cause more bugs for a short period of time. Buckle up.

Movies & TV 24/7 via Channel7: Web Player, .m3u file. Music via Radio7: Web Player, .m3u file.

WebM is now available sitewide! Please check this thread for more info.

Anonymous 21/03/12(Fri)17:27 No. 7286 ID: 8db943
7286

File 161556647557.jpg - (182.14KB , 640x360 , 06.jpg )

Anyone know who did these?


138 posts omitted. Last 50 shown.
>>
Dark_182D 22/05/07(Sat)17:33 No. 7653 ID: 9904d1
7653

File 165193760394.jpg - (115.01KB , 754x548 , emma 4 (2).jpg )

Very subtle beam on the left breast, but nothing on the right even after heavy filtration.


>>
Dark_182D 22/05/07(Sat)17:37 No. 7654 ID: 9904d1
7654

File 165193784127.jpg - (335.01KB , 1294x1000 , BsswIyt8_oa.jpg )

Beams only just sowing after leaning heavily on the blues in the visible image, but clearer with O2 and Ha.


>>
Dark_182D 22/05/07(Sat)17:53 No. 7655 ID: 74829f
7655

File 165193882211.jpg - (466.88KB , 1024x1348 , Spreadend.jpg )

This last one was probably the worst one of all as I hit it with the narrowband and messed with the colours and found nothing. It wasn't until I hit 00.34 with O2 and 1.16!! with the H.a. that the beams appeared. Any other setting and they were just too faint to be seen. I think a combination of poor picture quality and the fact that Emma has extraordinarily small nipples and areolas make finding good quality images of her beams near impossible.


>>
Emma Cesari Dark_182D 22/05/24(Tue)12:16 No. 7656 ID: 7a4d88
7656

File 165338740263.jpg - (590.45KB , 2164x1510 , Initial render(2).jpg )

Sorry for the delay Tom but I've had very little time in order to be able to use the spectrometer at work as it's been used almost constantly for the last few weeks. Plus I have to use it surreptitiously if you know what I mean they aren't cheap!
Anyway, I finally got around to completing a few images this weekend including your picture of Emma. I wish I could have better news, but I've hit this image with absolutely everything and I can't see anything in it. The quality as far as I can tell isn't as bad as some of the images that I've managed to pull features from, so I can only conclude that either she wasn't active at this time, or the beams were so faint I just couldn't pull them out of the image. From what I've seen of this model not only are all of her pictures taken with much less high tech equipment than we have now, but her nipple/areola combination is probably the smallest we've seen so far also. It's a double-edged sword I guess, not helped by the fact that she had her tits messed around with later on in her career so the better images of her are ruined by the fact that she no longer produced beams after the surgery.

Sorry for that!


>>
Distortions Dark_182D 22/05/24(Tue)17:39 No. 7657 ID: d849ff
7657

File 165340678051.jpg - (321.39KB , 1444x1086 , BRKM_54rf24.jpg )

However!

On a better note, I also did more scans of Eufrat in her shoot with Luca Helios. Now for some reason, the cameras of the mid-2000s are just fantastic for producing pictures that can have the information contained within them extracted easily.
So, we have three images of her standing in a doorway the first top left is the original image, but even in this when you see it in real-time you can see very subtle distortions as the camera stabilizes the image. The second image (right) has the stabilization removed, I've not applied any filtration to it. You can CLEARLY see that the background is distorted!! I don't know what camera he is using on this particular shoot but I use a very easy algorithm to remove the stability. I've also washed it with the N2 filter to fetch out the beam as these are completely invisible otherwise. You can clearly see that the walls in the doorway are bowing slightly inwards towards Eufrat.
We've already noted this on other images but I've gone one step further with this one in that I've drawn lines on the mean "bow" axis of the doorway (yellow lines) as well as the upper doorway arch as it appears to be being pulled down. I found that all the lines cross at one spot near her navel! (white star) That discovery was something enough and I figured that the navel is sort of in the middle of your body so it would make sense that this would be a focus for something. But during lunch, I had a bit of a eureka moment when I started thinking more 3 dimensional. Returning to the image I drew lines through the beam axis of the nipples (white lines) and sure enough, they both meet EXACTLY in the white star with the other lines!!!!

It makes perfect sense because she is standing just in front of the doorway and all the distortions are behind her, as they are in all the other pictures I've shown earlier. I figure that if you look at her tits from above and either to the left or right of her so that you can see her front and back you'd see a converging line passing through her nipples, that then goes through her body and meets either on her spine or just outside of her back. This theory works when you look at the last picture (bottom right) where she is crouching down and showing us her side view. You can see again that the wall directly in line with her back is bowed outwards towards her! Of course, trying to work out why this only appears AFTER the image has been destabilised and indeed what it actually is, is yet another mystery. Any ideas I'm open to them.


>>
Dark_182D 22/05/27(Fri)16:41 No. 7658 ID: e2e5dd
7658

File 165366246533.jpg - (196.52KB , 634x787 , MBCA.jpg )

With regard to my last few posts, I found a picture of Eufrat looking from above in order to measure the angle at which her nipples point. You can see that in a normal standing position her nipples point at an angle of around 45 degrees. I've placed a white oval to represent where the limits of her torso are and then used this to calculate where the two angles from her nipples drawn backwards through her body would meet.
I estimate that the two lines would meet roughly 4 - 8 inches (10 - 20cm) outside of her back. This spot would always be moving and can vary in and out as her tits are fluid, but as a standard resting point, this is where they would align roughly on average.
This is where I've been seeing distortions after removing image stability, whether these two features are connected remains to be seen but I'd like to bet the distortions are connected in some way to everything else that I've seen.


>>
Anonymous 22/05/28(Sat)16:55 No. 7659 ID: 298297

il pourrait s’agir d’extraterrestres. J’ai toujours pensé qu’Eufrat était rayonné du ciel !!


>>
Dennis 22/05/29(Sun)15:54 No. 7660 ID: 4cf683

>>7659
Oder könnte es so etwas sein?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Zo0txTYKDo

Wir wissen so wenig über den Planeten oder unser Gefühl mit ihm, vielleicht interagieren einige Frauen (oder Männer?) mit ihm?


>>
Dark_182D 22/06/12(Sun)00:03 No. 7675 ID: f789ec

>>7659
>>7659
Hi Anonymous and Dennis! Yeah, it's an interesting idea as I've found processing her images fascinating. I didn't know who she was until I started looking at what some of the other guys before me posted. As far as I can tell she certainly is unique as you can see from some of the other women that are posted here. But she appears to possibly be the most prolific producer of these strange beams. Although I'm sure she and the other women aren't "alien" I can't rule out what Dennis suggested about their possible interaction with the Earth's magnetic field. As that video suggested, we don't know all the facts when it comes to our planet so interacting with it in some way I could easily believe. What is harder to understand is why has nobody studied this before and why are only women seemingly affected? Much as though I've not wanted to, I've actually looked at images of men too to see if we are capable of producing beams too. So far I've found absolutely NONE! From what I can tell this is only a feature of women and so I can only conclude that it's something to do with their tits as these really differentiate men from women.
However, I'm now finding that if I really push my stabilization algorithm I'm seeing distortions near the back of Eufrat while she's producing these beams. While the distortions appear to move AWAY from her body at the front, the distortions near her back are moving TOWARDS it. So it looks like whatever is going off is moving through her body! That kinda' says it's an electromagnetic type thing, with her body acting like some sort of "bar magnet" possibly? Maybe women have a chemical thing going on that reacts with the earth's magnetic field and the strange beams we've seen are some kind of aurora?? I'm working on a short clip from one of Eufrat's bondage videos and you can really see the distortion near her back when you get rid of the stabilization. I'll try and post it tomorrow but I've got about 50 frames to get through and stack.


>>
Strange distortions around Eufrat's back. Dark_182D 22/07/05(Tue)12:10 No. 7703 ID: 6001ef
7703

File 165701580697.jpg - (356.39KB , 1448x1092 , ST.jpg )

Ok, so I FINALLY managed to get some time on the SAM and look at the Eufrat bondage images. The interesting thing about these images is that there is no colour seen in any of the images. From the two examples I'm showing here it's obvious that she is producing the beams because when I get rid of the image stabilization distortions become evident in front of her body, particularly in the second image where she is tied to the front of a truck. It would appear that her tits are aimed at the steps leading up to the cab and the material leaving her right tit is spreading out all along that area. The left tit is actually aimed in the gap between the cab and the trailer and no emissions from this can be clearly identified (although the area down near her pussy may be material from this.)

However, the most interesting part about this image is what's going off at the back of her. Thanks to the straight angles of the trailer you can see that it appears to bend inwards towards her back in the de-stabilized image as do the whip and the guy's face! I've added yellow arcs to all the areas I can see bending in the image, and although they don't appear to point to any one specific spot if you draw lines through her nipples as I did in post #7658 above, they converge in an area where the arcs seem to roughly congregate. Also, the actual "bending" of the main image seems to follow the natural curve of Eufrat's back which she shows off well in both examples shown here even in the second one where she is standing more upright.

Again, in this image, no colour can be seen coming from her tits even after heavy processing, but distortions can be seen not only immediately in front of her body thanks to the horizontal bars in the fence, but what also appears to be a shadow of it in the de-stabilized version on the floor!! Again a pulling-in of the image can be seen behind Eufrat with even the path behind her appearing warped slightly even in the stabilized version! An interesting thing to note is that the rope to which her left arm is tied remains completely static and is not affected by whatever is going off behind it. This helps to verify that whatever distortion is back there, is beyond the rope and does not extend to the sides of her body.

I'm convinced that the beams and the strange distortions behind her are linked even though they sometimes appear together and sometimes not. The missing colour in the beams I have no explanation of as I've run these through SAM and really leaned heavily on the filtration. The actual quality may play a part although I've tested some of Eufrat's earlier movies such as the well-known "Lineas" and "Klaman" movies which are worse quality than these but still got good colour.

I've written to several people who might be able to help with what I've found but I think they think I'm mad even when I send them credentials of the machines and programs I'm using. Whatever, the study goes on.


>>
Strange distortions around Eufrat's back. Dark_182D 22/07/05(Tue)12:10 No. 7704 ID: 6001ef
7704

File 165701584584.jpg - (411.29KB , 1452x1096 , comb.jpg )


>>
Thomas 22/07/24(Sun)15:26 No. 7706 ID: 2f9f95

Check your emails Dark


>>
Anonymous 22/07/26(Tue)23:04 No. 7707 ID: 9022e7

i saved this thread because this sounds really really weird.

any update on all of this? or any other website to check?

this deserves a subreddit


>>
Dark_182D 22/07/31(Sun)14:53 No. 7718 ID: ec555e

>>7707
Hi Anonymous,
As far as I have seen there is NOTHING on the internet about this phenomenon. The other main contributor here Thomas (an actual now retired professional photographer)and a guy in China are the only people who have come forward to say that they have seen strange things when photographing some women.
I thought initially that these images were CGI that's why I was interested in studying them. My job entails working with equipment that can split images into different wavelengths, look for elements, add/remove stability etc. But I only get VERY brief periods where I can use them. Getting caught with porn images on government machines would see me instantly dismissed as you can imagine!!

I'm pretty sure that most porn photographers don't study their images in such detail and as we've seen Thomas said that he put most of the disturbed images he saw when photographing a model back in the 70's down to processing errors as I'm sure most photographers would. (makes sense)
But in reality, this subject is obviously so "out there" that most people are going to think you're nuts claiming that women shoot beams of light and energy out of their tits, that I'm sure this is the only place on the net you're going to see this.

At the moment, both myself and Thomas are convinced that what we are seeing with some women is an interaction between them and the planetary magnetic field. We still don't understand the planet and its interaction with the magnetosphere and for sure it HAS to interact with us on some scale. However, that's about as far as either of us is willing to comment on that at the moment.


I was going to update this week but I almost got caught processing the last lot of images and lost them panicking to clear the computer screen! So there is an update pending.
I also found the location in Derbyshire where the two models posed back in post #7347 - 7348 and took several images to see if the beams were related to the location rather than the women. I can confirm that no discrepancies were found. I also tried to contact the model involved but received no reply (I think she has retired now) But even if I had been able to contact her I doubt I would have had the balls to tell her that I have pictures of her firing beams of light out of her tits! Can you imagine how long that conversation would last???!!!


I'm continuing to speak with Tom via email and share ideas and hypotheses and if anything comes up I'll be sure to post it here.


>>
Strange distortions around Eufrat's back. Dark_182D 22/08/08(Mon)18:51 No. 7723 ID: 2d135b
7723

File 165997749410.jpg - (1.25MB , 2036x3052 , PRD_4432lli8.jpg )

So I finally got an afternoon where could use the official equipment for my own devices. I lost a load of data two weeks ago when I was nearly caught and it kinda put me off for a few weeks. Anyway, I've been trying to examine these distortions that are popping up around the back of women while they are shooting beams out the front. What I noticed is that they are present even when beams don't appear. In this first image of Eufrat (1) the usual processed image is completely devoid of anything unusual. (2) Put the image through the narrowband filter and remove the stabilization and quite surprisingly there are still no beams to be seen. I tried everything with this image and I'm pretty sure that there are absolutely no beams coming from her tits.
However, in that image, you can see blurring across the entire image (due to the removal of stabilization) but it is worse in some areas than in others. Particularly if you notice the bush in the curve created by Eufrat's back, it almost appears to be doubled in places where entire leaves appear to be replicated. That is movement in that part of the image alone. Now it could be caused by a breeze, but it only affects the bush in that area and not bushes in the general area.
You can also see some strange arcs cutting through the image, these are picked out in image (3) Unlike the arcs we've seen before which are associated with the beams, these arcs appear to be random and despite drawing lines through them to try and source them back to a single point as you can see the yellow circles (where the lines cross) don't seem to have any particular radiant. The only thing that can be assumed is that they originated from her body as all the circles are clustered around her.
In image (4) I've added pixel counts, that is the total number of misaligned pixels there are in that area. Yes, this took me days to complete but shows that although the average (which should be around 2-3) is pretty much uniform across the image there are very high numbers in the area already mentioned and strangely out in front of her tits which is strange as there are no beams there.
It might be a factor that this image and the proceeding one were the only frames that contained any activity and that Eufrat wasn't very "active" that particular day. Whatever at least it shows that the distortions behind Eufrat still show up despite a lack of activity around the front.


>>
Beautiful image Dark_182D 22/08/08(Mon)19:16 No. 7724 ID: 2d135b
7724

File 165997900093.jpg - (462.19KB , 1194x1604 , Bre_link284_1297.jpg )

I'm posting this image because although it's not really what I'm studying at the moment, it was so WOW that I had to post it.
It's taken from one of Brea Daniel's Bare Maiden picture sets. Again the image is totally unremarkable until it's passed through the narrowband filter by which time you can just start to see the faint beams of light coming out of her tits. As we've seen in earlier images Brea can send these beams out to a distance of 40ft or more where they end in plumes (#7593) However, she only produced very faint beams that do not show up using regular techniques so catching these is a big win.
You can see apart from the beams attached to her tits there are other lines and features off to her left (our right) that appear to be remnants of older beams shot at an earlier period. Now again we've seen these features before and they pose more questions rather than answers.
If they are atmospheric artefacts do they "blow away" or dissolve in the wind? Or if like I and some others feel they are magnetically driven are they held captive in the planetary magnetic field? That would explain why these lines appear to be able to remain in place even when the woman has quite obviously moved.
Whatever they are these beams are still perplexing me as to their origins and why some women appear to produce them almost continuously and others nothing.


>>
Anonymous 22/08/11(Thu)11:00 No. 7726 ID: 6aecf1

Why was my post deleted?


>>
Announcement!! Thomas 22/08/15(Mon)17:28 No. 7727 ID: 5e45fd
7727

File 166057733837.jpg - (559.97KB , 2272x994 , img_234_34.jpg )

Over the last 6 months, both Dark and myself have been looking into the possibility of hiring a model with the intention of trying to find one who produces these beams of light. I know Dark has already mentioned the model who was pictured in post #7347 but we never heard back from her. Eufrat retired a decade ago, and Brea Daniels would cost too much for us to either travel to the U.S. or have her come to us. Ideally, we wanted someone at least in Europe or better still in the U.K. who wouldn't be too much to hire. The plan was NOT to tell whoever we found (if we found someone) what the shooting scene would be for as we didn't want to look like idiots. There were also the model's privacy and personal feelings to consider if we were to disclose findings to them.
As it has turned out I put out feelers (I still have contacts in the photographic world) and was contacted by an old friend who I have discussed this subject with before. Turns out that he knows a model who very occasionally has a reputation for causing his cameras and other electrical devices to "play up" during shoots. Apparently, he has known this model for years (She's in her late 30s) and he says he will often get static shocks from her when she's naked!! This does happen from time to time with models but how many of us think anything about it? Anyway, he said she is very cool and would probably be very interested in helping us.

Several months later my friend, Dark and I arranged a meeting with this model in Birmingham as she lives both here and on the continent. We told her exactly why we wanted to photograph her (on the advice of my friend) and were quite surprised at how accepting she was. She knew nothing about herself that she would consider to be "out of the ordinary" apart from being told about her ability to screw up electrical equipment, which she took to be purely coincidental. Nothing suggested that she was anything other than a very normal, very attractive woman.
Our first shoot was on the 4th of April in a fairly remote part of Wales near a fairly famous waterfall. We wanted to ensure that we were first of all not spotted by anyone and we wanted somewhere open around rocks or water as these seem to be the best areas to see this phenomenon. It was actually quite a cool day with a stiff northwesterly breeze. Dark had bought a modified Canon 5D Mk3 that had its IR filter taken out to see what we could capture with that, while I used my R6 and had my 7D as back-up.
Our model was as they usually are very professional, posing in various poses so that we could get very clear images of her breasts. She even without prompting got herself wet from the freezing water to see if it would make her more "conductive"!
Of course, we were not expecting to see anything in our standard pictures and we were very interested in viewing the modified images from the 5D.
We had a full 8 hours with this model including travelling to and from Birmingham which didn't work out cheap. In fact, including the equipment, we bought just for this shoot as well as the model we spent around £2300!! Luckily she was over visiting friends as she actually lives now in France or it would have cost us even more!
So, that aside we were able to process our modified images almost immediately but were hugely disappointed as nothing unusual showed up on these. It was over two weeks later that Dark was able to run the first lot of images through his works machine (we took 3458 images in total!) The first five hundred turned up absolutely nothing unusual and we very much doubted that this model was nothing other than quite normal. However, last week he managed to run another 200 and despite not finding any beams, he did find something that immediately confirmed something we've seen before but have up until now not looked at very closely.
The images produced here are of our model and were the 743rd and 889th images (or roughly 45 mins apart) of her. From what Dark emailed me, neither of the normal N2 and H alpha wavelengths will show these circles as they will show beams and other structures, but if the O3 and heavy RGB levels are played around with, split and then combined these circles show up. We have seen these on many other occasions but have put them down to "lens flares". In many images, they appear very faint as they were not what Dark was looking for. But in a strange coincidence, Dark was looking at another model called "Brittany Marie" just recently and came across this phenomenon again. Unlike lens flares, these circles appear to line up perfectly with the breasts and are often seen touching the nipples. Now they still could be something quite innocent, but on the day when we took these images, it was very dull and certainly didn't have any strong sunlight to produce such flares. In fact, you'll notice that in the first image if the sun was present it would have been towards my back in the second image, we were under a considerable overhang and heavily shaded. These circles if associated with the model make no sense at all and neither I nor Dark can give any suggestions as to what they are.

Dark will this week post many of the images he has already processed and thankfully kept over the last two years for everyone's scrutiny. If anyone has ideas or thought's on these please feel free to speak up. These are the only features that have so far come out of our own investigations with our own equipment and our own model. Dark still has over 1500 images to process on this shoot so we're hoping for more discoveries, but for now, have a look at these and see what you think.

Tom.


>>
Thomas 22/08/15(Mon)17:30 No. 7728 ID: 5e45fd

>>7726
Hello annoymous, neither I or Dark would deleta a post it might have been the mods if there are any. feel free to repost if you can.
Tom.


>>
Discoveries made with our model. Dark_182D 22/08/17(Wed)13:15 No. 7729 ID: 84a7e7
7729

File 166073494584.jpg - (1.18MB , 2568x1440 , BB064.jpg )

So I guess Tom has explained everything about what we have been up to for the last six months. Firstly what an experience!! I've never worked with nude models before (Tom is an ex-fashion and nude photographer) in fact I don't get to see proper tits at all so this was a real treat for me :)
Anyway, the day went really well considering we didn't see anything, my modified 5D was basically useless, and the model didn't ruin any of our equipment.
I was amazed I could get some of the images processed almost immediately with the 5D but these turned out to be useless. It was over a week later that I finally manage to work on some of Tom's pictures. Unfortunately, despite doing everything I could to spot unusual details (I even saw things that weren't really there eventually!) I couldn't find anything wrong with any of the images aside from the fact ********* had a cracking pair of knockers!

It wasn't until the images shown in #7727 that I realized we had got something! I've processed probably over 100 images (mostly Eufrat) that appear to contain some sort of lens flaring. I showed this to Tom last year in a few of the images and we both agreed that they were obviously flaring images that were only showing up under the various light filters I was using at the time. Because these things appear almost perfectly circular and are very dim it was obvious that's that what we were looking at. I ditched loads of images like this but kept some just in case.
It wasn't until we saw these images of our model that we realized that these couldn't be lens flares. Tom is a pro photographer, believe me, he took every precaution to avoid flaring (he's got this special hood that goes on the front of the camera) and he guaranteed me that the images I sent him could not possibly be lens flares. Looking at them now it's obvious that they aren't as they appear to line up with her tits perfectly. As Tom said lens flares usually trace out from the bright light source and will often repeat the flaring across the entire image. In these images and all the pictures I'm going to post there are only TWO!
It was funny because last week I had been looking at a new model called Brittany Marie. One of her images I took from a poorly shot video shows her surrounded by what would be (if it were visible) a fine blueish mist. There are the remnants of beams, what looks like a faint blueish band that traverses the bushes behind her and more importantly two of these what I'm now calling "Bubbles" around two to three feet (1 meter) away from her! Now the thing is if I process the images like I normally do any beams, plumes, etc show up quite clearly, but these bubbles don't. They are even fainter than the things that you can't see already! I have to mess around with just about everything, particularly in the blue channel and then "Boom" you see them. Adjust up or down just a little and they disappear!

Now that we've had time to study them in more detail you can see that they are spherical in shape not flat. If you eliminate the stability you can also see that they distort whatever is behind them. They appear to look just like "soap bubbles". However, I got Tom to photograph some soap bubbles with his granddaughter so that I could run them through SAM. He took pictures of large ones, small ones, sunlit ones, dull day ones, close to the camera, and far from the camera, every type you could think of. Every single bubble you could see in a picture was visible through the entire visible spectrum, ones you couldn't see because of the background camouflaging them, again you couldn't see with any of my techniques that reveal the "bubbles" in our pictures.

Whatever these are they are there and are incredibly faint, I'm almost certain they aren't lens flares, they definitely aren't actual bubbles or any other floating object as they don't appear in any of the light images I've processed. What we do know is that there are always two of them either appearing attached to the nipples or somewhere near the model, they distort light and objects behind them, and they only show up at very specific but not always the same wavelengths. Oh while I remember, someone may suggest that they are "orbs". Now I'm not into all that ghost-hunting stuff so whatever these are I'm pretty sure that it's only the shape and the fact that they appear to float that links these two phenomena. "Orbs" in the ghost pictures I'm fairly sure are out-of-focus dust particles and/or rain drops. The fact that orbs can obviously be seen clearly in ordinary cameras rules them out to be anything to do with what we are studying here.

Strangely enough. These "bubbles" are the only things that we can say FOR CERTAIN exist because we photographed them ourselves with our own model. The beams we still cannot confirm as we haven't as yet imaged any with our real-life model, so although we're sure they are real we can't definitively say these actually exist as yet.


>>
Lens flare or something else? Dark_182D 22/08/17(Wed)13:31 No. 7730 ID: dd3b47
7730

File 166073591627.jpg - (1.40MB , 2832x1335 , BB066.jpg )

This was the image that I processed last week around the same time I processed our model's images and saw the "bubbles". The strange thing about this image and what makes trying to identify them difficult is that you can see one of the bubbles in every image here (3) Two bubbles appear in the narrowband image and all three appear in the final one.
Now I would say that the sun is in the right place (behind the model) to cause lens flares, but again two of the bubbles appear right over the model's tits. However, I've not seen one bubble in a visible or a narrowband image, and this one picture is the only one that I've so far processed that shows them.

For me, the jury is out. Brittany does produce beams and bubbles obviously from the last images, but as to whether this image shows that phenomenon I'm not sure.


>>
Skye 22/08/18(Thu)17:04 No. 7731 ID: 007c08
7731

File 166083505543.jpg - (60.06KB , 600x800 , 198072176384.jpg )

>>7728
Yes hello Tomas, my post was deleted somehow. I was wondering if you had ever considered if all these things that were happening could have something to do with ancient beliefs?
Cultures referring to the Eartj as mother nature, or mother Earth. They were signifying the importance of women and maybe they knew about the rays and the interaction between these women and the Earth you have been talking about. I believe that things like ley lines stone circles and barrows have a far more significant meaning than we give them credit for today.


>>
Welcome Skye Dark_182D 22/08/19(Fri)00:10 No. 7732 ID: 866b42
7732

File 166086061483.jpg - (2.11MB , 3840x2160 , BB043.jpg )

>>7731
Hi Skye,
Well yes, both Tom and I are coming around to the idea that there is some sort of interaction between these women and the planet itself. The idea that the ancients may have known about this interaction long before we did cannot be ruled out I guess but for now, we're still trying to understand what is actually happening. I have no formal training to use the computer and device that I use, I would probably be sacked actually if I was caught using it because I can't begin to tell you how expensive it must be. I have to be very careful and it's really very frustrating because I get to "use" it very rarely. If I knew how to use it properly and got the time I could probably make some sort of major discovery!
However, it is what it is and for now, we're just going to have to throw ideas around amongst ourselves. But I'm glad that more people are coming forward and adding their ideas (as you have) as it gives us more things to think about and consider.

So, I said that I was going to publish more of the "bubble" images that I have had for a while so here's some more. The first image I'd already posted images of back in post #7620. Those images were processed in the usual way although I was at the far red end of the spectrum (hence why the colour is so dark) while this image was taken towards the far blue, this was the reason why I disregarded all these images as they just didn't show up with the other features.
This image was captured some 3 minutes after the one already posted. I can remember seeing the bubble at the time because it was perfectly framed inside Eufrat's legs and directly over her right nipple. But because it was so faint I just thought it was a lens flare. I'd seen loads of these by now and just didn't think anything of it.
I've not been able to see anything over on her left side but I suspect that her left thigh is probably resting on her left tit so maybe that's why there's nothing there. Don't forget, these could be as suspected lens flares, we're just going on what we've seen with our model and the fact that these are appearing directly over Eufrat's tits.


>>
Dark_182D 22/08/19(Fri)00:36 No. 7733 ID: 6092cd
7733

File 166086216334.jpg - (1.61MB , 2000x1333 , BB023.jpg )

This next one is one of the Sapphic Erotica groups. Now I can remember thinking at the time that the image quality of all the Sapphic pictures was sweet, very smooth and easy to work with. I have to go back and do more studying with these because I think there is a lot more information in some of these images. Anyway, this one shows two "bubbles" only this time they appear to be not anchored over her tits but floating free. Now we do know that these spheres can break free and "float" away, we saw this with our model that's why we know for a fact that they aren't lens flares. We also know they grow in size right up until they are either destroyed by things getting in their way (hands or other objects) or they break free of the nipple. As far as we can see they do not continue to grow after release and as far as we can tell they travel with the wind. They basically look like and act very similar to large soap bubbles but as far as we can tell, they exist just out of the range that we can see.


>>
Dark_182D 22/08/19(Fri)00:46 No. 7734 ID: 54eb58
7734

File 166086277751.jpg - (1.16MB , 1333x2000 , BB27.jpg )

Another Sapphic image.

This one's interesting because in actual fact there are A LOT of things going on in this one picture. I've combined the usual image with the bubble image the result is an even fainter image of the bubble (directly at the back of the smaller model on the left) But you can also see lines and beams off camera at the back of Eufrat! Whether that was Eufrat herself and they are ghost images like we have seen before, or whether there was someone else there shooting beams around I guess we'll never know.


>>
Dark_182D 22/08/19(Fri)00:59 No. 7735 ID: 6092cd
7735

File 166086357567.jpg - (2.09MB , 2696x2000 , BB030.jpg )

The last one of the Sapphic pictures I'm posting tonight includes the original image which gives you some idea of what the actual image looks like. If you look carefully at the filtered image you can see waves and ripples in the Bubble on her right tit.
In my notes that I made about this image, I commented on the fact that there were no beams in the preceding images, none in this image, or the following images! I didn't even comment that there was a lens flare! I only noticed the fact that there was another much smaller sphere over her left nipple AFTER I came back to this image!

Frustratingly, the images that were taken before and after this one appear to be taken some time apart so anything that happened before or after this image is bound not to be caught.


>>
Anonymous 22/08/19(Fri)14:02 No. 7737 ID: f6404d

Dobrý den, uvažovali jste o něčem podobnémje? Právě se o tom dozvěděli a dokazují, že věci stále nejsou známy.

https://eos.org/features/how-did-we-miss-this-an-upper-atmospheric-discovery-named-steve


>>
Dark_182D 22/08/21(Sun)02:40 No. 7738 ID: 3a4542

>>7737
Thank's for that link Anonymous what a fascinating discovery. I think the fact that this has been known for over 20 years but the scientific community has only just taken an interest is significant. Like Skye said there is still things we don't know or have forgotten about. With regard to what we're studying, it was interesting to read that many of these STEVE phenomena exist just below what "normal" cameras can pick up.
The vast majority of images that I process are just off the ends of the visible spectrum and it explains why the poles at least appear both red and blue.
Reading about things like STEVE makes me more and more convinced that we're looking at an interaction between women and the planet's magnetic field.


>>
Dark_182D 22/08/21(Sun)17:40 No. 7739 ID: bfd1cc
7739

File 166109644216.jpg - (725.02KB , 2028x1528 , BB00230.jpg )

So this next "bubble" picture was taken from one of Eufrat's early movies called "Babe Town". The quality was really bad which I guess helped to disguise the feature I guess and make me believe that I was seeing lens flares. I had only processed picture (2) so only saw the feature on her left tit which looked just like a flare. Of course, Running them at the far end of the blue spectrum then pulls out what looks like a series of bubbles, one growing inside the other. I count at least three on her left and two on her right.

It seems that the deeper I go off the visible scale more structures appear.


>>
Dark_182D 22/08/21(Sun)18:08 No. 7740 ID: 03a3bb
7740

File 166109809310.jpg - (463.63KB , 1280x720 , BB233_01.jpg )

I'm pretty sure I've posted scenes from this movie showing her firing beams, but I remembered seeing these bubbles in a fairly inactive period in the movie. It took me a while to find it again but I did and managed to take a deeper look at it. Again if you take quarter-second screenshots you see two bubbles appear to "inflate" off the very tip of her nipples. They take around 1.5 - 2.0 seconds to form and then detach at drift away roughly along the same lines that the beams take. But then they seem to be influenced by the surroundings, air, magnetic fields, I don't know. It doesn't look like they are ejected or anything when they get to a certain size, it appears in this case that the motion of her tits (swinging) causes them to detach. In this picture, you can see one off her right tit that has a "ghost beam" going through it, one forming on her left, and another drifting off to the right.
What's really interesting in this picture is that not only are there more "ghost" images of beams but she is surrounded by what looks like a white mist. Now everything that looks white is actually blue because I've picked this colour out being the faintest. This "mist" is everywhere! It's in the grass behind her and surrounds all the features that are around her. Again I have no idea what the mist is or where it's come from. All I know is that it's most likely blue and most likely came from Eufrat.
Like I said she was firing beams prior to this the remnants of which you can see to her right, so it's probably earlier ejected material, or something still reacting with her magnetic field.


>>
Dark_182D 22/08/21(Sun)18:14 No. 7742 ID: 03a3bb
7742

File 166109849757.jpg - (881.59KB , 2572x1454 , SAM_20210922.jpg )

Looking back, I never posted those images of her producing beams earlier on so here these are.


>>
Anonymous 22/08/23(Tue)22:46 No. 7743 ID: 3d88ae

What you're describing here is an Aura its well known.
http://www.biofieldglobal.org/what-is-human-aura.html#:~:text=In%20scientific%20research%20we%20have%20found%20that%20the,to%20the%20level%20of%20health%20of%20the%20person.

The breasts are known to change during sex and seeing how many of the scenarios you've been describing here relate to sexual activity its only reasonable to assume that the beasts are going to give off large amounts of electromagnetic energy.

"Breasts get firmer- When your nervous system goes into an overdrive state, tissues swell and blood vessels dilate. This internal reaction affects the breasts the most, causing them to get up to 25% bigger than normal. This enlargement happens during arousal and also after sex. However, this size increase will not last forever: size fluctuates with arousal.
Nipple Sensitivity- When aroused, blood will flow strongly to the nipple and areola area. In addition, muscular tension will result in swelling, goosebumps, and hardness in the breasts. This process is called vasocongestion and is proven to be an important part of reaching climax. Once you start having sex, vasocongestion reprograms your muscle memory, causing your nipples to be more sensitive overall."

That's my take.


>>
Ziess 22/08/24(Wed)12:23 No. 7744 ID: 03a3bb

>>7740

Dieses Bild ist unwirklich! Sie sieht aus wie ein Geist!


>>
Ziess 22/08/25(Thu)23:18 No. 7745 ID: 2bc2cc

Werden Sie weitere der neuen Bilder produzieren, die die Blasen zeigen? Sie sind die faszinierendsten und ich würde gerne sehen, wie einige der anderen Bilder mit dieser Technik aussehen.


>>
Dark_182D 22/08/26(Fri)23:21 No. 7746 ID: 33dbff
7746

File 166154888470.jpg - (1.44MB , 4000x2564 , BB_83(Brea).jpg )

Ziess welcome!

To answer your two questions. Yes the #7740 post is quite stunning but it actually wouldn't have been if we hadn't hired our own model (as described in post #7727)
Thank's to her and our desperation to find SOMETHING of interest I tried the other end of the visible wavelength and the rest is history. Of course, this now means every single image posted here probably has more information in it than we first assumed. The images I processed of Eufrat that you commented on only showed beams (as in #7742) but I processed the one where she looks like a ghost with the new technique just randomly, and all this other stuff showed up!
So yes, there is a lot more I could re-process and publish but the problem is that I've got very little time to use our equipment so I would have to decide whether to go back and re-do all my previous work or focus on trying to find more anomalies one of which I'm currently working on and will hopefully soon be able to confirm.

But here are the rest of the batches that I did a week or so ago. This first one is quite good because I've overlayed the stabilized image and it's given it a kind of 3D effect. If you notice most movement is detected around Brea's tits and within the expanding bubbles. Again more lines and arcs can be seen heading off in various directions. I'm sure both the full picture set and the movie are full of features but again it's time and priorities.


>>
Dark_182D 22/08/26(Fri)23:33 No. 7747 ID: c25c45
7747

File 166154958431.jpg - (780.27KB , 1536x1752 , BB07.jpg )

These pair were very hard to reveal because of the background and the fact that they were extremely faint somewhere around 383nm I think. The reason why I kept the images was that these "lens flares" disappeared at every single wavelength except that specific one. Glad I kept them!


>>
Dark_182D 22/08/28(Sun)13:20 No. 7748 ID: 11b50b

Before I post these last "Bubble" images I thought I would just announce that I have found yet more VERY interesting evidence that I'm sure will support the fact that whatever is going on with these women is very likely to be electromagnetic in nature.

Back in post #7407, I explained that Bree Daniels and Eufrat Mai (two women who are known to produce beams) came into contact once during their careers but despite studying both the movie and the associated images I didn't find any kind of outburst or interaction between the two. In fact, I found absolutely NOTHING in any of the images that would suggest that they were anything other than just normal models.
Well, thanks to my new discoveries with the "Bubble" phenomenon I've taken a deeper look into some of these images and found something absolutely stunning!!

I've been in touch about it with Tom, but as yet I've not heard back from him so I feel that I cannot announce it here until I've shared it with him first. But all I will say is that this opens up a lot more possibilities and again asks more questions about what is happening to these women!!


>>
Bree "Lakeside" frame 1 Dark_182D 22/08/28(Sun)16:00 No. 7749 ID: ad5cc6
7749

File 16616952319.jpg - (436.36KB , 1920x1080 , 01.jpg )

This series of pictures comes from Bree Daniels Bare Maidens' movie "Lakeside". The first image shows Bree as she stands to go into the water. Although the growing "bubble" on her left nipple is very hard to see, the one on her right is clearer and appears to magnify the image of the small portion of cloud behind it in the sky. Bree appears completely oblivious of their presence despite the fact that in the following images they appear to grow in size and detach from her body as she walks down to the lakeshore.


>>
Bree "Lakeside" frame 2 Dark_182D 22/08/28(Sun)16:15 No. 7750 ID: ee5fc4
7750

File 166169610259.jpg - (417.98KB , 1920x1080 , 02.jpg )

.... As she walks down to the lakeshore the "bubbles" grow from golf ball size (4-5cm) up to around 15 - 20cm in diameter. The bubble closest to the camera and attached to her left nipple is almost hit by her left arm as she raises it to sweep her hair out of the way.
I couldn't process any of the images of the bubbles growing in size due to the fact that her tits were swinging about as she walked which made the faint structures disappear as they became blurred. However, in frame (2) they have now separated from her body and are free-floating away from her. Again, the initial path of these appears to be along the line that the nipples are pointing, that is upwards at around 20 to 30 degrees and to the sides by the same amount. This track takes them clear to either side of her body. . .


>>
Bree "Lakeside" frame 3 Dark_182D 22/08/28(Sun)16:33 No. 7751 ID: 20d683
7751

File 166169720956.jpg - (421.11KB , 1920x1080 , 03.jpg )

. . . By frame 3 Bree is around 8 to 12 feet away from where the bubbles are first seen as she stands to walk to the edge of the lake. However, both bubbles can be seen roughly where she initially stood some 3-4ft in the opposite direction from where they were released.
Unfortunately, the movie cuts at this point so their motions after this are not known. However, after looking at the clip you can see that the wind is blowing inshore (off the lake) and this could account for the bubbles moving in that direction.
But would an electromagnetic phenomenon do this? Would something that is electrically charged be influenced by the wind?

Although the bubbles could have been returning to the point of origin (where she was sat perhaps) I feel that their interaction with the atmosphere is more likely. Like the "plumes" described earlier in this thread, these structures appear to interact with it also.

What I am certain of though is that these are NOT lens flares. I'm finding that I'm able to process a frame a few seconds after the first and see the bubbles either growing on the nipple or floating away from the body. Lens flares don't do that.


>>
Dark_182D 22/08/28(Sun)16:34 No. 7752 ID: 20d683
7752

File 166169725061.jpg - (439.98KB , 1920x1080 , 04.jpg )

... Motion of the bubbles.


>>
Ziess 22/08/29(Mon)22:37 No. 7754 ID: 5bed0f

>>7746
Ich habe vor etwa 3 Jahren mit diesem Model auf ihrer Only Fans-Seite gesprochen. Sie erzählte mir damals, dass sie eine naturliebende Person im Freien sei und oft Tage damit verbringen würde, in den Bergen zu campen. Möglicherweise hat sie Bewegung in Richtung ihrer irdischen Seite, wie Skye vorschlägt. Das Bild ist jedoch bemerkenswert. Gut gemacht!


>>
Dark_182D 22/08/30(Tue)11:56 No. 7755 ID: f5475b

Tom, I got it thanks. If you see this you need to swap to Virgin, BT is fobbing you off mate trust me!!
Be in touch.


>>
Stracy Stone aka Bijou. Dark_182D 22/08/30(Tue)23:45 No. 7757 ID: 225557
7757

File 166189594791.jpg - (645.52KB , 3000x2000 , BijouakaStracyStone.jpg )

Ok, so I've been in touch with Tom today and shared my discovery with him. But before I post that I just wanted to show this as I believe that we have yet another woman displaying beams! This model goes by the name of "Bijou" or "Stracy Stone" and posed with Eufrat on a number of occasions.
I did a series of blue-scale passes on several images of Eufrat (who I was actually studying) and came across this one. Because I try to look at as many picture sets as possible I don't study any one particular set unless it's really interesting. I wanted to look for more images in this set but didn't have time so I need to return to this. From the image pulled here, I can only say that there wasn't any other activity (bubbles, beams, etc) in the area around her. Interestingly, nothing showed up in the narrowband pass and only revealed itself in this deeper image. Like I said I've been a little preoccupied with "Bubble" identification so I'll return to her at a later date.


>>
Evidence for electromagnetism? Dark_182D 22/08/31(Wed)21:44 No. 7758 ID: 1d76a2
7758

File 166197507410.jpg - (1.06MB , 1920x2620 , EuBreimg2.jpg )

Ok, so here is my new discovery, I didn't want to share it until I could share it with Tom first.
Back in April 2021 (post #7407) I did a brief study of a series of pictures featuring Eufrat Mai and Brea Daniels. I did this because at the time they were only 3 confirmed women who showed beams. In actual fact, they had only ever worked together once in their respective careers. So this was a perfect opportunity to see if two women who we knew shot beams would have any effect on each other.

At the time I had only got 11 minutes into the 34-minute move but didn't find anything of interest. As I remember, I only processed another 5 or 10 minutes of this before giving up. I also processed 3 of the 515 photo images as I didn't believe that anything unusual was happening here. I chose three images (0240, 0496, and 0498) because they were the only images where the two women were in close proximity (not in 0240) and their tits were completely exposed.
However, nothing was noted in these either and I entered this observation in my post before moving on.

Fast forward to my work last month in the 370-380nm range looking for "bubbles" and as a matter of course I ran the three mentioned images through at that wavelength as they were already on the card.
Now I have to say that I have messed around with the brightness and contrast in the images as I couldn't get a good balance using my usual techniques to show what I wanted to here. This resulted in me having to superimpose the processed areas back onto the original pictures. (hence the light-coloured boxes over the tits) The boxed image has been further processed through Topaz to reduce the blurring and enhance the electrical path.

What these images show is what I believe is a spark between Eufrat and Brea's nipples!! As you can see in the #7407 image (standard beam process) nothing is revealed although something is in fact there. Now I don't know if this "spark" is a normal electrical type static event or something else. I would assume that a static spark would be visible at normal wavelengths, the fact that this is not the case indicates that it is either very, very faint or it is not a "static" spark as such because it is only visible at the very limits of the blue end of the spectrum the same wavelength that shows "bubbles".
The other thing to consider is that I've NEVER seen a static spark this long between two humans! I estimate that the gap bridged here has to be at least 4cm and the only sparks I've seen between humans have been when they actually come into contact. Something else to note is that neither woman seems to acknowledge the fact that they are being zapped by what must be a huge amount of current. Again, could this be something other than a normal static shock?
The arc seems to come from the centre of Brea's nipple and enter Eufrat via the lower side part of hers. (Or vice versa) The annoying thing is image 0496 which is the image of interest was the first image after a scene change so I don't know if this image was the very end of a longer event as the proceeding (which was taken immediately after 0496) doesn't contain anything unusual.

This one image seems to provide evidence that not only women are having some sort of electromagnetic interaction with the planet (and/or objects around them) but also that they interact with each other! I can't process any new images or process the rest of the film with Eufrat and Brea for at least another four weeks which is really frustrating so for now this discovery will have to go on the back burner. I just wanted to share this important discovery because I think it could well be pivotal in our quest into finding out what is going on with some women.


>>
Dark_182D 22/09/19(Mon)08:53 No. 7759 ID: cf2baa
7759

File 166357040582.jpg - (1.57MB , 2416x2313 , SA_073.jpg )

Had three days (supervisor on holiday) to work with some images exploring the 370 - 400nm range here are the results.


>>
Dark_182D 22/09/19(Mon)08:53 No. 7760 ID: cf2baa
7760

File 166357043942.jpg - (288.05KB , 2704x754 , SA_0102.jpg )


>>
Dark_182D 22/09/19(Mon)09:00 No. 7761 ID: 84a7e7
7761

File 166357085842.jpg - (525.08KB , 850x1280 , SA_01121.jpg )

Sometimes it's near impossible to get the stabilized and destabilized images to match up. Here is the result of one of those images.
***NOTE*** The strong returns from the area in rings around Eufrat's areolas. I've seen this in quite a few of her images. In the corresponding visible image, there are small areas around her areola which relate to these brighter areas and are strongly related to the outer bluish beam which also comes from this area.


>>
Dark_182D 22/09/19(Mon)09:20 No. 7762 ID: f6404d
7762

File 166357205131.jpg - (779.13KB , 1872x1460 , SA_0103.jpg )

A result of the several different techniques that I use to reveal the apparently invisible features which are produced by and surround some women. The Narrowband, Hll, and N2 images I've used for so long usually reveal the beams that shoot out from the body and the brighter plumes. But none of these techniques shows either "Bubbles", the static discharges, or the often extensive clouds of material that surround women. Destabilizing images have also revealed strange distortions behind the women that seem to correspond with the beams. I can't even speculate as to what we are seeing here but it's all relative I guess.
In this image, you can clearly see the trees and shoreline behind Eufrat bending in towards her back which isn't apparent in the actual video!
The final image is taken down in the 390nm range and is only visible between 387-390nm. This wavelength shows much more detail in the area surrounding Eufrat. I have to superimpose a worked Oll and H alpha image into the 390 images as the original image at this wavelength shows up almost black and you would have no reference point to see where everything was.
Again, this image poses more questions than answers. Eufrat is producing beams but she also has several "shells" of material surrounding her possibly as a result of producing "bubbles" as in post #7739 however these appear less defined and seem to come from a single source (her body) rather than multiple sources (her tits) as in #7739.


>>
Dark_182D 22/09/19(Mon)09:30 No. 7763 ID: cc7caf
7763

File 166357262325.jpg - (280.32KB , 1200x800 , fga.jpg )

..... And I can confirm that Stracy Stone aka Bijou is also a beam producer. In post #7757 I showed what looked like clear beams coming from her tits and I've found another picture of her with Eufrat in which she is again producing beams. More on both of them later.


[Return] [Entire Thread] [Last 50 posts] [First 100 posts]


Delete post []
Password  
Report post
Reason