This image was scanned and processed in 2007, so my memory may be a bit fuzzy but I did pull the negatives. Three things were manipulated for the final images you see. The "after shot was flipped horizontally so that it looked more symmetrical in the final composite. I cloned out a couple pubic hairs cause you know in 1998 women had pubic hairs but it sorta messed up the overall silhouette look. Final thing was it was a not great silhouette as I hadn't done many silhouettes at that time and my shooting space was pretty limited so in Photoshop I really compressed the highs and lows to get it close to almost completely black or white pixels. I am guessing that compression may have made a few transition areas a bit odd as the pixels went one way or the other. The before butt probably suffers from that as I didn't alter anything with that and it looks the same in the negative. Is she sucking in her stomach, what women doesn't in this situation, but she didn't really have to. Whatever you see that looks manipulated really isn't, just possible artifacts of making the silhouette. Two other things I discovered, the film for the after was actually Illford HP5+, and it was actually about 10 months after the birth, not 2-3 months, so that was my bad and just poor memory, I remember it differently than my notes say and at my age I believe the notes.