Ready to play "Strip a Bitch" for the next two hours.
Rules -- Post your picts; I will try to xray them in the order posted. For the most part, I will post my results, regardless of how good they are. If I don't get a result. I will explain what I think my problem was and whether I think someone else might get a better result.
No underage. I will skip any obvious underaged subjects. If no face, I will skip. I also don't do asses. If I have done the shot before (or if I recognize it as posted way too often), I will probably skip. I also don’t like cropped picts, or close-ups that are effectively crops, and may skip.
Tell me who she is to you. I may skip if you don't.
I use multiple methods. I start with color and contrast filters, rather than the normal level method. If that doesn't work, I will try curves (rather than levels) with color shift to match skintone for light or white clothes and sharpening/blending. I sometimes use an exposure/color shift method for black or dark clothes. I use unsharpen mask and highpass filtering rather than burn to bring out detail, although I do use a light burn/dodge to bring out nipple color as a finishing touch. I also use blurs, both at the start, to even out noise, and at the end as a finisher.
If my ordinary method does not work, I will use other, more advanced methods before giving up, including work with inverts and channels.
My method works better with dark clothes (especially black) then it does with white ones. Also, there are a lot of rayers who do white, and do white exclusively and very well. For that reason, I may skip white clothes just because my time is limited here.
Some rules. Shadows and light gradients are a problem. Dark clothes require brighter light (otherwise no data); and light clothes require more dim light (otherwise they are washed out). Layers and glossy fabric are serious problems. The key here is that light penetrates through clothes, to skin, and then gets reflected back. To get at this color data, first the light has to penetrate (layers and glossiness interfere with that -- and swimsuits are often both layered and glossy).
The picture is manipulated to remove color levels associated with clothes, leaving a very faint and often low quality image of bare skin, which can then be enriched through filters that duplicate and fill in pixel patterns. This is why patterned fabric, stripes, shadows, and color gradients are a problem. In such cases, you can't just remove some color levels to reach a few that show skin and not much else.
>that show skin
you never show any skin you dumbfuck
all x-ray effect techniques are just bullshit shit-tier photoshopping
dumb mother fucker is confirmed dumb
It's always eurofags that do this gay xray stuff that died out everywhere else 10 years ago as a defect in a previous version of photoshop.
Europoors need to update to 2015 and move on.
Anybody who believes you can show flesh through a 1280 2D image because some tard on /r used photoshop on it is certified moron and probably needs to read a book and get off the internet.
Here is that pict after two steps in photoshop.
2. Increase exposure.
Does it show skin? Yes. Is it shooped? No.
Idiot troll is idiot.
Jeezus, are you really that dumb?
Posting a finished photoshopped pic and claiming that "because pic, therefore xray work, hurr durr" only reinforces you are a complete idiot.
Little-brained dude: get a fucking clue. You can't even logic either.
Analogy: Look at sun up in sky, therefore hurr-durr Sun God.
Jeezus, I didn't think people around here were literally that fucking dumb. So sad.
Really. Anyone who has PS and wants to verify who is right here -- the the unxrayed picture and do the two steps I stated. If you cannot duplicate result, then I am lying and xray might be the myth the trolls claim.
I do not mind peer review.
I'm not him, but honestly this has been proven to be just pure bs over and over again. It was well-settled long ago. You must be new here.
Also, he's right. Adobe patched what caused this like 10 years ago and it was a programming mistake. Plus just use common sense as literally there IS NOT DATA in an image that small (even one pixel) that could show skin between the threads of fabric such that extrapolation (even if possible, it's not) to expose skin. Seriously, not even multimillion dollar goverment equipment at airports or NMR in the best scientific labs, or MRI in hospital equipment can show surface flesh. If that expensive equipment can't show it live on a full body, full resolution imaging system in 3D, how can a little 2D image over the internet magically reveal flesh? It makes no sense and you have to abandon common sense.
If you want to deceive yourself, that's one thing. Just keep being stupid. You'll go far in life. But to sit here and pretend to the children and feeble-minded that you are showing flesh over the internet makes you about a predator scumbag peddling snake oil to 12 year olds.
peer review was a million years ago on this
fact is this xray effect stuff is all nonsense
always has been
most grew out of this a long time ago
r u really that stupid to believe this?
OP is obviously mentally-challenged just like the pathetic anons in this thread posting their infatuation they are too afraid to even talk to in real life.
All just defects of the human race obsessed with their lil pee-pees and unable to relate to others as normal human beings.
Welcome to the asshole of the internet and arguably it's stupidest board!
Having trouble with this. Can't get anything reliable.
Too glossy and bad fabric pattern.
Too much contrast.
Can't do bw
Right looks young. Left is no go due to fabric pattern.
Bad lighting and poor pict quality. This is the best I can do.
Terrible lights and shadows.
Weird glossiness and fabric. Not able to get any clear skin image.
But I'm taking a break. May be back later. If anyone else wants to take over, feel free.
Show us what they got.
Please get the bra off the girl on the left. Hint of nipple.
I'm not disagreeing but would like your thoughts on the following two atachments. Here's the first e....
She's my best friend I have been dying to see her naked. She's a bartender
Not getting a clear image at all.
Bad angle causing a light gradation and a contrasting bra. Might be able to do middle, though.
Thick bra and light angle are serious problems. Haven't a done a workable picture of her before?
Not getting anything. I think faint pink nips and multiple layers of clothes -- that is the hardest.
Finally, a result. A quite bad result. But a result.
girl on left? i know...freaky pic..i did a theater show with her
Op that's the only one that looks that can be X-ray this is her if it helps please help me out I have been trying to get close to a win for a year now. If you can nude shop this you will be my hero but I will be fine with an X-ray at the one of her with her phone covering her face
Damn! Try this one please
That's my buddy's girl. Thanks anyway. Here's her ass for you
She's hot. I want to see her pussy.
It's my gf's mom
Those aren't real faces.
She has no bra. I can show her face if you want...
Bad pattern and bikini.
Ambitious. If you can do a legit xray I can't, I'll be very impressed.
Bad light contrast and thick bra.
Hello friend. I do xrays sometimes and saw something yesterday that was interesting. A guy did a fake that was pretty realistic looking.
Upon looking it and trying to deconstruct what his technique was, I'm pretty sure he created a second level with the original image at something like 30% opacity and laid that overtop of a nudeshop where he'd used liquefy/warp to create fake boobs on the girl.
Just saw your thread and that you're doing the often thankless work of taking requests so thought I'd share that with you in case it's of any interest .
Best i was able to do
Cant be done cause of the clothing and quaility
Yeah -- that is a standard fake-ray technique. I don't do fake-rays (or even understand fake-rays). If I want a fake, I want something more dramatic than a overlay -- so headswaps make sense. Xraying is completely different.
One, both, take your pick
Thanks in advance, OP.
can you expose this beauty
Can't do much with the pixelation.That happens with dark clothes in faint (inside) light.
Srry to dissapoint but im not tht great at black clothes
The one in the center if you don't mind, OP. Can provide proof she's in college if required.