In article
<Part1of2.60CF4600E0C44E4084050E4751F50D30@1420112408.local>, Tam
O'Shanter <tos@erins.greensod> wrote:
> =ybegin part=1 line=128 size=554570 name=IMG_5202.JPG
You know what's amusing (and should be of interest to the photographer)
Pictures like this (and many others of course) probably offend against
US law even though the girl is not naked. (Note I am not complaining,
I often used to wonder why a photographer would risk his liberty by
making such a picture yet stop short of making it a "money shot" by
doing it naked, which probably is what almost everyone really wants and
which would not get him into water that was any hotter if he did.
Does anyone know who the photographer was? He surely would not like to
disclose his identity in here but I would like to converse with him at
some point.
|
|
![Favorite](javascript:myfavor('http://www.nzbot.com/article/alt.binaries.pictures.totty.repost/1394', 'Re: Lolly Outdoors set 94 - 57 files - "IMG_5202.JPG" yEnc (1/2)')){kind=link}