An image similar to this one was previously posted but not this one. This is a seriously-underexposed frame with poor lighting from that PlusX Archive of Olde, circa late 70s.
She’d look good in any lighting. Beautiful gal.
She’d look good in any lighting. Beautiful gal.
Jim,
you continue to outdo yourself. You sure did know some beautiful girls. Very nicely photographed.
Thank you.
Jim Tonne wrote:
An image similar to this one was previously posted but not this one. This is a seriously-underexposed frame with poor lighting from that PlusX Archive of Olde, circa late 70s.
Wow perfectly perfect and beautiful especially her breasts and lovely face.
You’ve had a charmed life for sure.
Bruce
Rich2236
Loc: E. Hampstead, New Hampshire
Jim Tonne wrote:
An image similar to this one was previously posted but not this one. This is a seriously-underexposed frame with poor lighting from that PlusX Archive of Olde, circa late 70s.
This may be as you say, underexposed, but it still does not take away the sheer beauty of her body. Your images are the most beautiful I have seen!
Great looking young lady!
Jim Tonne wrote:
An image similar to this one was previously posted but not this one. This is a seriously-underexposed frame with poor lighting from that PlusX Archive of Olde, circa late 70s.
Shows you what I know, I thought you were going for that 'hi-key' thing.
Yes, she was a beautiful girl. Yes, I like the light against the dark of the cave walls. As for the exposure, ya know, I like that too.
Will she get colourized? If you do, I'm hoping you leave the A.I. out of it and do it manually.
That is just a very, very pretty lady. Nice job Jim. Keep posting all your "unobtainable" body type images of normal women from the past.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.