But about Femjoy, I can only see the cover. And with MetArt set, moles are completely erased. IMO, comparing shape of teeth might be some evidence to identify. Could someone compare both sets?
The likeness is entirely convincing even without a mole test - same hair style, same false fingernails...
When there are no moles to match, one test that sometimes works is the areolar glands test. The what? Areolar glands are the small "goose bumps" around the nipple and they form a unique pattern [end of biology lesson]. You don't always get the right photos to make this test work but it certainly did in this case.
MetMonk, thanks for approval comment. Your comment (with photo) at Malena reminds me of Laura E.
BTW, I don't like the photography taste of "Presenting Yasmine". Not only erasing moles, also killing model's natural skin. IMO, she looks much better with natural photography.
Comments
Model page.
http://femjoy.com/models.php/laurae
I think new Yasmine A @ MetArt looks like her.
But about Femjoy, I can only see the cover. And with MetArt set, moles are completely erased. IMO, comparing shape of teeth might be some evidence to identify. Could someone compare both sets?
The likeness is entirely convincing even without a mole test - same hair style, same false fingernails...
When there are no moles to match, one test that sometimes works is the areolar glands test. The what? Areolar glands are the small "goose bumps" around the nipple and they form a unique pattern [end of biology lesson]. You don't always get the right photos to make this test work but it certainly did in this case.
Then MetArt model page.
http://members.met-art.com/members/model/yasmine-a/
MetMonk, thanks for approval comment. Your comment (with photo) at Malena reminds me of Laura E.
BTW, I don't like the photography taste of "Presenting Yasmine". Not only erasing moles, also killing model's natural skin. IMO, she looks much better with natural photography.
Err, guys, that's Sakura in the EA set you just indexed under Laura E.
Probably born in 1991