>>938921130
oh no! did she use something like the first link that appears after you google face swaps? it somehow produces exactly the same fucking pattern of blur on the face and around it! come to think of it, no glamour filter in 2020+ does that, what the fuck is a glamour filter anyway? the original is clearly not taken with a random phone anyway, as it's a porn model photosession, same as
>>938920393, meaning the pictures have no fucking face filters and have been tampered with by you, since you found that this model has the same droopy tits as your friend and used it as base for your faceswaps, isn't it weird that you couldn't produce an image that is high quality and has her face in it? especially if it's obscured by more hair or a hand! because faceswappers can't handle that shit, unless you hide the imperfections behind shitty quality like you did
