Elisha Cuthbert

From: Trevor316
Date: Sep 12, 2005 12:03 AM
Subject: Elisha Cuthbert See-though

This should go nicely with your see-through phase right now

Yeah, this pic has been floating around on the net for a while now. It’s also been widely speculated to be a fake, but i haven’t seen any conclusive evidence of it being one. And if there is, then i guess i must’ve missed it. But what the hell.

It’s kinda similar to that one Jennifer Love Hewitt pic where you can visibly see her nipples through her dress. I’ve seen two versions of it. I think it was for some magazine photoshoot. But nobody really knows which pic is real because some claim they airbrushed her nipples out of the real pic when the pic appeared in magazines and some claim that the see-thru pic is the real un-airbrushed version, which could be a fake. So who knows.

20 thoughts on “Elisha Cuthbert

  1. looks fake

    #1 | Comment by anonymo — September 12, 2005 @ 2:35 am

  2. Look genuine. I’m requesting a link or copy of Jennifer Love Hewitt’s see thru pic so that I can make a more educated and diffinative conclusion. Thank you.

    #2 | Comment by Fandango — September 12, 2005 @ 2:42 am

  3. love

    #3 | Comment by turtle — September 12, 2005 @ 3:27 am

  4. Peter Frampton.

    #4 | Comment by embus — September 12, 2005 @ 4:43 am

  5. Knee-pulls!

    #5 | Comment by JVC — September 12, 2005 @ 5:03 am

  6. JUSTIN. I updated but it’s a draft. It’s weird. Don’t know how to make it unweird. I EMAILED YOU BUT YOU DIDN’T ANSWER. meow.

    #6 | Comment by Stacia — September 12, 2005 @ 6:26 am

  7. there are also some mandy moore puffies that got airbrushed out for print which caused a little confusion as to which set of pics where the genuine ones. needless to say, the puffy ones were the real ones. as for the JLH pic, i say it’s fake (and so does everybody else evidently). but the elisha pic? nobody knows for 100% sure.

    i’m leaning towards fake though. which is why i never posted it up before.

    #6, i emailed back!

    #7 | Comment by Justin — September 12, 2005 @ 9:35 am

  8. ps: elisha cuthbert is ugly

    #8 | Comment by Justin — September 12, 2005 @ 9:40 am

  9. if that is real, she has huge friggin nipples.

    #9 | Comment by Wulf — September 12, 2005 @ 9:46 am

  10. I’d love to see those Mandy shots (non-airbrushed)…

    #10 | Comment by Paperboy — September 12, 2005 @ 10:38 am

  11. those mandy puffies, which subsequently got airbrushed out for print

    #11 | Comment by Justin — September 12, 2005 @ 10:54 am

  12. i say it’s a fake. the crease under her left (our right) breast goes waaaaaaaay over into the center of her chest.

    bad editing job.

    i rule.

    #12 | Comment by lizzy — September 12, 2005 @ 11:02 am

  13. You can almost see the vagina.

    #13 | Comment by kiko — September 12, 2005 @ 11:36 am

  14. #12 is right, the nipple is in a really weird place
    bad editing job*
    deformed nipples**

    *most likely
    **i really hope not

    #14 | Comment by Jacked — September 12, 2005 @ 11:47 am

  15. Mandy’s real nipples are better than Elisha’s editor additions.

    #15 | Comment by Elder Young — September 12, 2005 @ 1:09 pm

  16. I never used to like Mandy Moore. I like Mandy Moore now.

    Well, her pokies anyway.

    #16 | Comment by Jenesis — September 12, 2005 @ 1:40 pm

  17. JLH is a fake, here is the original.

    Elisha is HALF fake (someone Photoshopped the pokey darker), here is the original.

    #17 | Comment by angel — September 12, 2005 @ 9:51 pm

  18. I saw The Girl Next Door over the weekend. Elish Cuthbert was surprisingly not annoying and pretty hot.

    The film was the most boring pile of shit I have ever seen. Way to take a comedy concept and make it into a regular romance movie Mr Fucking Director.

    If you’ve seen the trailer you have seen ALL the funny parts of the movie. Literally.

    Nipples are great.

    #18 | Comment by DisconcertedGeorge — September 12, 2005 @ 10:17 pm

  19. #17 – The point is that photographers are taking risque pics and then the magazine reverse-fakes them. They make the clothes opaque, add panties, whatever.
    Since the fake is actually the one on the magazine cover it makes it near impossible to determine if a pic is a fake or if the magazine is faked. Add to that the problem that magazines are faking by removing clothes, photoshopping poses and clothing styles, etc, and we end up completely fucked for being able to determine “fakeness”.
    The pic in question does make her appear to have some meet-in-the-middle boobie flaps as well as giant nipples. That doesn’t necessarily make it fake though. Fake Detective didn’t have anything on this one as far as I could tell.

    #19 | Comment by SpankMonkey — September 13, 2005 @ 9:38 am

  20. Why would the photographer submit a different photograph to his agency than the one that is given to GQ publishers? Because of that I am assuming JLH on GQ is doctored.

    #20 | Comment by angel — September 13, 2005 @ 10:51 am

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *