There is no way THAT is in the UK!
It got finished on time and to budget
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:12,
archived)
Or Janine Tappleflaff, the second woman to invent the cement mixer.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:17,
archived)
O_O
back in 5 minutes
she would so get it, as would Debra Stephenson who does the impressions of her with Jon Culshaw
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:03,
archived)
she would so get it, as would Debra Stephenson who does the impressions of her with Jon Culshaw
yes
as would Ronni Ancona
cor *imagines Debra Stephenson and Ronni Ancona both doing FB impressions together in sexy undies and getting all lezzy and then the real Fiona Bruce walking in and dropping her raincoat*
back in 10 minutes
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:06,
archived)
cor *imagines Debra Stephenson and Ronni Ancona both doing FB impressions together in sexy undies and getting all lezzy and then the real Fiona Bruce walking in and dropping her raincoat*
back in 10 minutes
*waves hand in front of those eyes*
Barry....
Barry..........
Nope - he's gone very far away this time
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:10,
archived)
Barry..........
Nope - he's gone very far away this time
Given his source material over the last couple of hours I would say yes.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:09,
archived)
Somebody posted a link to
this and I haven't looked back since!
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:09,
archived)
I was in M&S at the weekend while Mrs S went for a fitting
it was hard work hanging around in that department with the 15 foot posters of Noemi Lenoir
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:12,
archived)
i had a similar problem with this
www.pandoraschoice.com/index.asp
much harder to download though
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:12,
archived)
much harder to download though
bollox
Access Denied
You have attempted to access the following web page:
www.pandoraschoice.com/index.asp
Access has been blocked because:
Prohibited by URL database (Pornography & Adult Material)
Management have deemed that access to this web page is inappropriate at this time. Please contact your supervisor if you feel that this is incorrect.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:13,
archived)
You have attempted to access the following web page:
www.pandoraschoice.com/index.asp
Access has been blocked because:
Prohibited by URL database (Pornography & Adult Material)
Management have deemed that access to this web page is inappropriate at this time. Please contact your supervisor if you feel that this is incorrect.
hahahaha!
it's a retro lady pants site, nothing too naughty at all.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:15,
archived)
Hahahah denied!
Ask them how the hell you're supposed to buy any retro lingerie for Mrs S?
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:15,
archived)
I had to get a site unblocked today just to look at CDs
I might be pushing it a bit with this!
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:16,
archived)
and I think Freebs really has popped off for a bit of 'me-time'
DIRTY FREEBS!
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:17,
archived)
Sorry for the TJ
I had a new Tattoo done
I know this isn't flicker so I added Jebus, Please note jebus is not part of the tattoo.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:03,
archived)
I know this isn't flicker so I added Jebus, Please note jebus is not part of the tattoo.
But, but, but.
I can make the fish last a reeeeeeeaaaaaaaalllllllllllllyyyyyy long time before you have to get some more.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:13,
archived)
I've had, once or twice, something that is 90% batter
with a tiny bit of fish about smaller than a fish finger inside.
There's a guy works down the chip shop, I swear he's Jesus.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:22,
archived)
There's a guy works down the chip shop, I swear he's Jesus.
The background is Birmingham *
* may not actually be Birmingham
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 15:44,
archived)
* may not actually be Birmingham
Pthhhhhht :P
crucifixion - death - burial - reroute to alternative power supply - blast stone from cave mouth
There you are, someone good at animating. Some free inspiration.
EDIT cursed html mucking up my arrows.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 15:49,
archived)
There you are, someone good at animating. Some free inspiration.
EDIT cursed html mucking up my arrows.
Hahaha Ronni Ancona impressions ftw!
Good evening. I'm Fiona Bruce. I'm getting on a bit, but you still would, wouldn't you?
Classic.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:02,
archived)
Classic.
Well that's my afternoon sorted...
EDIT: Does anyone mind awfully if I make a new thread? It's been half an hour, and I've got a new picture lined up... :(
EDIT2: Don't get excited though, it's not very good :¬/
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 15:02,
archived)
EDIT: Does anyone mind awfully if I make a new thread? It's been half an hour, and I've got a new picture lined up... :(
EDIT2: Don't get excited though, it's not very good :¬/
by pure coincidence, I just got emailed this:
"My request: I’m producing a Radio 1 documentary entitled ‘Talk to the
hand: Masturbation Nation’ for the Sunday Surgery slot. The feature’s
looking at masturbation, and will be uncovering the myths and
realities surrounding one of the few remaining taboo subjects."
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 15:06,
archived)
hand: Masturbation Nation’ for the Sunday Surgery slot. The feature’s
looking at masturbation, and will be uncovering the myths and
realities surrounding one of the few remaining taboo subjects."
I'm seeing a woman who looks like Kirsty Allsop
As relationship lookalikes go it's not a bad one I think... sure beats that Vicky Pollard lookalike I was dating!
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 15:08,
archived)
....
Well that's cured me of any "needs" inspired by the first pic.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 15:18,
archived)
Sorry mate. Things have been stupidly hectic.
I haven't got to send you your chutney fund and other goodies. As soon as Iget a chance
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 17:13,
archived)
Oh shuddup
One paper bag and you'd be rutting like a monkey!
or is plastic bag more your thing?
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 15:36,
archived)
or is plastic bag more your thing?
Well it's His fault for making night in the first place then!
woo
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:51,
archived)
because i found this on fukung...
...poor introduction for a poor repost.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 15:50,
archived)
lol
but "The Jesus" and "The Pleaser" look suspiciously the same
( ,
Fri 4 Dec 2009, 9:38,
archived)
Gee up!
Edit: I know the horse doesn't move, I couldn't be arsed :)
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:44,
archived)
Edit: I know the horse doesn't move, I couldn't be arsed :)
It would be like some deep political metaphor
Brown riding a deeply unpopular set of policies and refuses to budge, kicking up a lot of dirt etc. etc.
*hires Ninj as political cartoonist*
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:56,
archived)
*hires Ninj as political cartoonist*
Maybe the horse used to be Blair.
Go on without me.
Run! Run like the wind!
:p
[insert deserved woo here]
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:54,
archived)
Run! Run like the wind!
:p
[insert deserved woo here]
I know what I'd do if I was jesus
Win me the World Series of Poker in Vegas BABY!!
Click for bigger (77 kb)
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:37,
archived)
Click for bigger (77 kb)
I blame the lack of decent source images
... And lack of decent ideas in my brain :(
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:50,
archived)
So far someone has only made a babby b3tard there to my knowledge.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 15:00,
archived)
Damn
Make it London then! other people broke the rules!
P.S How're the Blackadders doing? Been a while since I logged in.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:46,
archived)
P.S How're the Blackadders doing? Been a while since I logged in.
At least he's on tour somewhere
We're already at the "Photoshop Jesus" stage of compo evolution...
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:49,
archived)
If he wants an initial stake
Just nip over the pond and get a million dollar cheque from James Randi.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:56,
archived)
I knew there was a reason why Sir Stephen of Fry did the ads.
woo
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:29,
archived)
I'm hoplding out for the source pic.
*coughs* source pic linky please.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:42,
archived)
right
She'd get it in this order:
mouth
fanny
arse
fanny
arse
mouth
finish on face
cheers
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:59,
archived)
mouth
fanny
arse
fanny
arse
mouth
finish on face
cheers
I done gone made an old-skool stop motion fer y'all
*Geek Info* Nikon D70, Interfit EX150 lighting (Softbox and White Umbrella) and Digital Photography Table
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:16,
archived)
*Geek Info* Nikon D70, Interfit EX150 lighting (Softbox and White Umbrella) and Digital Photography Table
gaaaah I REALLY don't like those things
I think it's the blank face....I just imagine that head turning round to look at me, and then jerkily twitching into life every time I have my back turned *shudder*
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:18,
archived)
He's racing over to where you live right now to do a Ceiling Cat on you :D
But if you don't like the blank face stick a Jesus head on it ;)
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:22,
archived)
Nice.
Geek request - looking to invest in a digital SLR thinly disguised as a christmas pressie for Mrs. H. Want kind of top end of entry-level stuff and am torn between Pentax K-X and Canon 500D. Any thoughts?
EDIT - Thank you all. I'm not sure it's clarified my decision much but some fruitful lines of enquiry opened up. Ta.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:24,
archived)
EDIT - Thank you all. I'm not sure it's clarified my decision much but some fruitful lines of enquiry opened up. Ta.
I'd say go with the Canon it's a better camera by far
plus the range of lenses for the Canon is way way bigger. Pentax has some problems although they might have ironed them out, but the two brands you will find are the best investment are Canon and Nikon.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:28,
archived)
Ooo controversial...
I was leaning towards the Pentax...
From what I gather, Pentax/Nikon/Canon are the three makes to look at - anyone else is a johnny-come-lately to the proper photography game. Beyond that there is a lot of brand loyalty involved. I had heard that some of the early Pentax DSLRs were a bit ropey but thaT THEY'D LARGELY WORKED THOSE SORTS OF THINGS OUT AAAARGH CAPS LOCK!
Also I think a few of my folks had old Pentax cameras and I might be able to swipe some lenses off them.
Dunno - going to go down to the camera shop tomorrow and have a play with a few. And then probably shaft the poor shopkeeper and buy it online...
Cheers for the advice.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:34,
archived)
From what I gather, Pentax/Nikon/Canon are the three makes to look at - anyone else is a johnny-come-lately to the proper photography game. Beyond that there is a lot of brand loyalty involved. I had heard that some of the early Pentax DSLRs were a bit ropey but thaT THEY'D LARGELY WORKED THOSE SORTS OF THINGS OUT AAAARGH CAPS LOCK!
Also I think a few of my folks had old Pentax cameras and I might be able to swipe some lenses off them.
Dunno - going to go down to the camera shop tomorrow and have a play with a few. And then probably shaft the poor shopkeeper and buy it online...
Cheers for the advice.
I wouldn't bank on being able to use the old Pentax lenses
especially if they are designed for a film camera as a true Digital Lens has to be far more precise than the old film lenses and the focal point is far more critical on a digital lens. At best you will get a lens that you would have to use manually and even then you will get alsorts of image problems. Pentax is pretty much a johnny come lately but the brand loyalty is pretty much for a good reason. I own a Nikon and I love them but I would say Canon are as good if not better at some things that the Nikon isn't and vice versa.
I own a Canon HF100 HD-Camcorder and I love it. The two best of the best are Canon and Nikon by miles.
if the cost of Lenses are a problem use Sigma lenses they are excellent quality and a fraction of the price of a branded lens.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:42,
archived)
I own a Canon HF100 HD-Camcorder and I love it. The two best of the best are Canon and Nikon by miles.
if the cost of Lenses are a problem use Sigma lenses they are excellent quality and a fraction of the price of a branded lens.
you can use the older pentax lenses and quite often get better results
than using cheap lenses on film cameras, When shooting on film you use the entire image circle and can have issues with definition and fringing in the corners, as you use crop sensors with the pentax kit it cuts out the corners and only uses the centre of the lens.
As far as I am aware there is no PK mount lens that cannot be used on the current crop of kit.
As always, with cameras this is always going to come down to personal choice. :-)
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:47,
archived)
As far as I am aware there is no PK mount lens that cannot be used on the current crop of kit.
As always, with cameras this is always going to come down to personal choice. :-)
Yes I have discovered an awesome amount of brand loyalty in this field!
My main advisor is a dyed in the wool Pentax man who has converted to digital relatively recently. My bro is a Canon fan.
It may yet come down to the fact that the Pentax is available with a white body which looks absolutely mint!
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:52,
archived)
It may yet come down to the fact that the Pentax is available with a white body which looks absolutely mint!
The white ones do look good but bear in mind the amount of lenses
That AREN'T available in white :-)
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 15:40,
archived)
^this
also, the image stabilisation features of newer lenses help a great deal when shooting freehand
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:54,
archived)
Actually the image stabilisation kit on the Pentax is meant to be the bees knees - that and the higher ISO range are 2 of the things that are drawing me to it...
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:56,
archived)
I got my Dad a dSLR for his sixtieth...
... I think it was a canon, but can't remember. I'll gaz you the details and his feedback.
I got given a Pentax SLR for my 18th, and decided to upgrade to dSLR when it dies. And it turns out to be utterly indestructible: 15 years on, it's still going strong, with its 35mm film and its manual wind. So if the durability of that is anything to go by, the Pentax ought to be pretty good.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:42,
archived)
I got given a Pentax SLR for my 18th, and decided to upgrade to dSLR when it dies. And it turns out to be utterly indestructible: 15 years on, it's still going strong, with its 35mm film and its manual wind. So if the durability of that is anything to go by, the Pentax ought to be pretty good.
I think the Pentax has nice weather-proofing on it's DSLR bodies
My Nikon D70 is pretty dated now being only 6 megapixels but it's got great build quality.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:48,
archived)
I'd always go for the Canon
for futher reviews of cameras and lenses I recommend visiting www.dpreview.com
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:32,
archived)
Cheers
I have a lovely Canon compact, but can't seem to swing myself away from a long-held belief that Pentax are a bit of a benchmark for SLR quality.
In a Dannii/Kylie type scenario, I'd probably give the Canon a whirl, but I'd forever be thinking of the Pentax...
Also, the K-X isn't on that site...
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:39,
archived)
In a Dannii/Kylie type scenario, I'd probably give the Canon a whirl, but I'd forever be thinking of the Pentax...
Also, the K-X isn't on that site...
Pentax made damn fine Film SLRs but so-so Digital ones
the bench-mark really are Canon and Nikon because they compete so hard against each other.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:46,
archived)
Having worked with both companies I'd say both are as good as one another.
Even the cameras termed "entry level" these days are well in advance of kit I paid obscene amounts for juts two years ago.
Pentax has some amzing lenses and you will be able to use ANY Pk mount lens, meaning you can pick up some really good fast prime lenses for dirt cheap second hand, the prices of their current kit took a massive jump in recent times though so swings and roundabouts.
Canon kit is fine but I've always found it a bit overpriced when compared to other peoples kit.
just out of interest why have you not gone for the Olympus stuff? The 520 and 450 are some of the best "entry" cameras I've ever used, if you don;t need monster size image files then they will get stunning results.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:43,
archived)
Pentax has some amzing lenses and you will be able to use ANY Pk mount lens, meaning you can pick up some really good fast prime lenses for dirt cheap second hand, the prices of their current kit took a massive jump in recent times though so swings and roundabouts.
Canon kit is fine but I've always found it a bit overpriced when compared to other peoples kit.
just out of interest why have you not gone for the Olympus stuff? The 520 and 450 are some of the best "entry" cameras I've ever used, if you don;t need monster size image files then they will get stunning results.
tbh from my limited research to date, Olympus hasn't even been a blip on the radar.
I will have a look at those models forthwith.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:47,
archived)
I would, the guys down at Olympus have excellent customer service aswell.
Whereabouts are you based? The single best piece of advice I can give is to go to an INDIE shop (never touch Jessops) and have a chat with them in there.
Most cameras these days will give you excellent results for personal usage and its only when you start getting into using the kit for jobbing work that you need to specialise.
As a result, most of the decision comes down to which one feels right in the hands, If a camera doesn't feel right it becomes a chore to use and you will find yourself not using it as much, if it feels right then you will take it everywhere with you and end up on a very slippery slope which can lead to getting up far far too early on a Sunday to drive 100 miles to take photos of something bizzare!
Hope that helps!
:-)
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:52,
archived)
Most cameras these days will give you excellent results for personal usage and its only when you start getting into using the kit for jobbing work that you need to specialise.
As a result, most of the decision comes down to which one feels right in the hands, If a camera doesn't feel right it becomes a chore to use and you will find yourself not using it as much, if it feels right then you will take it everywhere with you and end up on a very slippery slope which can lead to getting up far far too early on a Sunday to drive 100 miles to take photos of something bizzare!
Hope that helps!
:-)
I'm in Manchester, and there's the fantastic London Camera Exchange right in Piccadilly Gardens.
I must have walked past it every day for the best part of a decade without knowing it was there, but I got some pretty decent advice from the guy there - the Pentax wasn't actually in stock so he is going to call me when it's in and I'll go down and have a play with a bunch of stuff.
Whatever the outcome I really hope he can do me something competitive on price - I'd hate to have to screw him and buy it online - decent customer service is such a rare commodity these days.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:55,
archived)
Whatever the outcome I really hope he can do me something competitive on price - I'd hate to have to screw him and buy it online - decent customer service is such a rare commodity these days.
Like you say there is a lot of brand loyalty
at the end of the day we are splitting hairs here - whichever you buy it will be fantastic. At first I thought Digital was a fad that could never beat film photography but I was proven wrong. Don't forget also to check out the latest Sony DSLRs price wise they are amazing value for money.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:59,
archived)
Exaclty this ^^^^^^
As i said somewhere else in this mess of relpies and me going on more than people probably asked for, even a basic camera these days will have higher spec than things we paid crazy money for even two years ago.
Also as much as I hate recomending Sony, the cameras aren't bad............
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 15:24,
archived)
Also as much as I hate recomending Sony, the cameras aren't bad............
Just be honest with them, we always helped people who were honest.
At the end of the day buying a camera is not like buying any other piece of electronics, You don;t just set it up and let it run, The knowledge you get from camera shop staff is often underated (again, avoid Jessops)
If someone bought from us we always helped them out afterwards, Aftercare is life to an indie shop and we sure as hell didnlt work there for the money (though the second hand kit was nice!) you sound like the kind of guy who would anyway but if the price difference is only 20 odd quid then buy from a store!!!!! We used to have people on college courses who came back to us and would spend half hour just asking how to do their current assingment without buying at the time, we were happy to do that as regulars are the lifeblood of photography and something that is somewhat lacking from a lot of shops today.
LCE are good lads overall and I would trust them.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 15:22,
archived)
If someone bought from us we always helped them out afterwards, Aftercare is life to an indie shop and we sure as hell didnlt work there for the money (though the second hand kit was nice!) you sound like the kind of guy who would anyway but if the price difference is only 20 odd quid then buy from a store!!!!! We used to have people on college courses who came back to us and would spend half hour just asking how to do their current assingment without buying at the time, we were happy to do that as regulars are the lifeblood of photography and something that is somewhat lacking from a lot of shops today.
LCE are good lads overall and I would trust them.
Yeah if they can even come close I'd rather give the money to them.
I appreciate that they probably won't be able to compete on price against the camera itself (it's £50 cheaper on Pixmania!), but if they can do a deal with a carry bag and a memory card or something, maybe some cheap extended warranty, then I'd as soon deal with them. Customer service is so outmoded these days that I feel a duty to reward it where I find it.
And I was straight with him about the likelihood of going back and buying it online...
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 15:30,
archived)
And I was straight with him about the likelihood of going back and buying it online...
Olympus use the 4/5th system
and they are far more costly to produce simply because they require far more precision in the lens elements than the other systems.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:51,
archived)
so is that why they are the some of the cheapest bodies on the market?
:-)
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 15:15,
archived)
As an owner of several Canon compacts, and three Canon DSLRs, I don't think I'm the one to answer this.
but I'd go for Canon ;)
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 15:01,
archived)
Seconded
I nearly sang H I V out loud in the office. SO not appropriate.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 16:27,
archived)
Hahah
Oh lordy...
Excellent work, your anti-spang-hazmat suit must have been tested to its limits.
Spazmat? No... I'll go now.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:15,
archived)
Excellent work, your anti-spang-hazmat suit must have been tested to its limits.
Spazmat? No... I'll go now.
The marriage at Cana would have been a very different affair...
( , Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:11, archived)
( , Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:11, archived)
*growing sense that this will drop off the board un-remarked upon*
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:27,
archived)
Heheh!
I had a similar idea with White Lightning cider but I couldn't get it to work.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:38,
archived)
Damn! I knew I was missing an obvious one on the cider fron - plumped for Merrydown in the end.
This is one of these inexplicable posts where I am pretty happy with both the concept and execution, but for some reason has attracted virtually no comment, when some garbage I threw together in 5 minutes the other day got loads :o/
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:45,
archived)
Ha! I find the same.
That Jesus/Dino pic I did a couple of years ago was just a quickie, and I very nearly didn't post it but it went mental.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 15:15,
archived)
I can't remember the last time that I felt
"Belittled & abused"...sigh
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 14:02,
archived)
The Holy Triathlonity
Is he made of chocolate?
mmmmmh whole milk easter jesus
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 13:40,
archived)
mmmmmh whole milk easter jesus
Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
crashes
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 13:34,
archived)
Woo to handgliding Jeebus
Quick question... what's b3ta image board's view on Photoshop X-Rays?
NSFW?
I just made a rather good one of Rachel Riley from Countdown!
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 13:45,
archived)
NSFW?
I just made a rather good one of Rachel Riley from Countdown!
Sounds hawt!
Just link it if necessary, or do a SFW version linked to the NSFW version...
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 13:47,
archived)
"I'm not sure if my picture is NSFW or not, how do I tell?
Just ask yourself, "Could this be mistaken for porn?" A suggestive picture of a lady in her underwear is probably NSFW even though there is no nudity, but a badly drawn picture of a spunking cock isn't NSFW (unless there is a fetish site for badly drawn, spunking cocks that nobody told us about)."
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 13:48,
archived)
Just ask yourself, "Could this be mistaken for porn?" A suggestive picture of a lady in her underwear is probably NSFW even though there is no nudity, but a badly drawn picture of a spunking cock isn't NSFW (unless there is a fetish site for badly drawn, spunking cocks that nobody told us about)."
oh. i thought that b3ta was
a fetish site for badly drawn, spunking cocks...
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 13:50,
archived)
haha sorry it's the photoshop x-ray technique...
...not a real x-ray, that'd be a weird fetish eh?
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 13:53,
archived)
Every time I see a tight fitting top I wanna snap it and xray it!
( , Thu 3 Dec 2009, 13:52, archived)
( , Thu 3 Dec 2009, 13:52, archived)
it's funny
"Bring on the wall!" is in Dale Winton's voice in my head.
( ,
Thu 3 Dec 2009, 15:02,
archived)
« Older messages | Newer messages »