Fin Fang Foom Exposes Roman Ragazzi's Fake Cock

[FinFangFoom]

Since we cannot embed hardon pictures in these posts, you bitches are going to have to cut and paste and add the www part if you want to see the comparisons.

 

Here is a picture that Roman "I'm A Fucking Idiot" Ragazzi posted to his BigMuscle profile......

 

members.aol.com/finfangfoomredux/romanbigmuscle.jpg

 

And here's a picture from Raging Stallion........

 

cartcms.ragingstallion.com/models/2759/RR3233.jpg

 

Photoshop can be a dangerous thing.

 

In the past few of years, it's become common practice for porn studios to enlarge the cocks of their models in the stills and on the box covers and this is just another example of this juvenile trend.

 

Accurately yours,

 

FFF

[+ ArVaGuy]

FFF,

 

An acquaintance of mine who did porn in the mid 1990's, and worked for Chi Chi LaRue, had this to say about cock size and porn.

 

"The camera adds two inches."

[Guest EuropTravl]

"And here's a picture from Raging Stallion........

 

cartcms.ragingstallion.com/models/2759/RR3233.jpg

 

Photoshop can be a dangerous thing."

 

It might just be me, but the strange thing about that photo to me is his head (the one on his shoulders, I mean). It looks cut and pasted on.

 

Back when I used to order Falcon Studios DVDs, and we're talking the Travis Wade - Mike Branson era, I always thought they were the worst abusers when it came to the covers not matching the product. They're still two of my all time favorites, both handsome as they come and well hung, but not packing jaw dropping steel hard missiles always pointing north like a compass that were featured on the box covers. If only!

 

Now if someone could carry the Photoshop to actual video footage, frame by frame, that'd be interesting.

 

BTW, FFF, you can have your .jpg back.

 

No hardons, please, even pretend ones.

 

I'm not buyin' it.

[Guest EuropTravl]

Who's "deej" and how did he get into my post?!

No hard-ons? (and BOY was the one I posted fake) - is that a new rule?

 

Hey-ya, deej!!!-

http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/5925/internet9gm.gif

Ruining my jokes. Good heavens.

[+ deej]

>Who's "deej" and how did he get into my post?!

 

deej is one of the admins here who could have disabled your posting privileges instead of taking the more civilized corrective steps.

 

>No hard-ons? (and BOY was the one I posted fake) - is that a

>new rule?

 

No it is not a new rule. Blame your legislators for approving changes to U.S.C. 2257 governing adult content on websites.

 

No hardons. It's not our rule but we have to live with it. You can too.

 

And if you poke me with that thing one more time, I'll bite it off.

[RM]

He looks a lot better in the Big Muscle picture. I think they pasted his head on to keep you from noticing that his cock was pasted on, too. But FFF is too smart for them.

[+ Gar1eth]

>He looks a lot better in the Big Muscle picture. I think

>they pasted his head on to keep you from noticing that his

>cock was pasted on, too. But FFF is too smart for them.

 

 

He could still eat cookies in my bed--sigh--wish he were escorting and a nice although FFF implies he has attitude problems.

 

Gman

[RockHard]

RE: FFF Exposes Ragazzi's Fake Cock? I say, prove it!

 

Ragazzi does nothing for me. I need my men to have lips, natural lips.

 

I have no doubt Photoshop played some role in the Raging Stallion Studio photo but it's not necessarily the primary cause of "big." The camera angle of the two photos is entirely different and plays a major role. The further away the camera is from the subject, the smaller the subject will appear. Lower the position of the camera in relation to the subject and the subject will look wider and taller, especially if a wide angle lens is used with maximum depth of field (which is the case in the RSS photo). Plus, judging by his hair and the size of his arms, the images were taken at two different times. Steroid use may also play a role. The body is his.

 

As for his cock, there's no discounting the possibility of Viagra. For a porn "cover" shot, Viagra is the Patricia Field of XXX.

 

I pulled the RSS photo into Photoshop and at 500%, there is no evidence of pixel distortion or manipulation around the shaft or head of his dick. Given the "busy" nature of the image background, this is not an easy (or desirable) image to increase dick size without leaving traces of Photoshop evidence.

 

And lastly, I always thought the MO of porn was to create a fantasy. Very little is real in porn. Only a silly fool would expect real.

 

Heartless size queens are never satisfied.

[Guest EuropTravl]

RE: FFF Exposes Ragazzi's Fake Cock? I say, prove it!

 

"Blame your legislators for approving changes to U.S.C. 2257 governing adult content on websites.

 

No hardons."

 

I honestly haven't any clue about that - was there a thread here that discussed this? I looked at the Message Center Rules briefly and didn't find it. I saw Respect the Site (done) Respect Yourself (done and done) and Respect Others (well, I try). I usually just flit from site to site and if "hardons" are banned on "adult" websites, boy are some of my favorite sites rule violators. Plus, I've noticed Eric "Ript4hire" hasn't been here in months and he had the most delish avatar.....

 

"And lastly, I always thought the MO of porn was to create a fantasy. Very little is real in porn. Only a silly fool would expect real."

 

Oh, please, Rockhard. When you pay $49.95 for a DVD and end up jacking off to the pics on the back of the box and not the limp DVD, there's something rotten in Smutsville.

 

 

Thread hijack from the thread hijack:

Hey, FFF, the latest BN "review" is screaming for a line by line FFF analysis if you're not too busy this weekend. I just read it scratching my head. Wonder what all that "therapy" costs? I failed to see the price tag.

[RockHard]

RE: FFF Exposes Ragazzi's Fake Cock? I say, prove it!

 

""Blame your legislators for approving changes to U.S.C. 2257 governing adult content on websites. No hardons."

 

I honestly haven't any clue about that - was there a thread here that discussed this."

 

The threads are too numerous to mention. I wasn't privy to details back in 2005 when I joined. It's amazing deej has any patience left addressing the issue. Google U.S.C. 2257 and get an instant education.

 

"Oh, please, Rockhard. When you pay $49.95 for a DVD and end up jacking off to the pics on the back of the box and not the limp DVD, there's something rotten in Smutsville."

 

I've never paid $49.95 for a DVD (and nor would I) and I've never jacked to pics on a porn box. It all sounds terribly desperate if you ask me. Smutsville is rotten? Damn right, just ask the actors. (I thought everyone already knew.)

[Guest EuropTravl]

RE: FFF Exposes Ragazzi's Fake Cock? I say, prove it!

 

"It all sounds terribly desperate if you ask me."

 

That's what I said to myself when I read BN's latest "review".

 

Will someone please wake FFF?

[Guest roadhoundnyc]

RE: FFF Exposes Ragazzi's Fake Cock? I say, prove it!

 

By a "first" time reviewer to boot. Fixing toilets sounds about right for

Mr. Nickels if you ask me.

 

>"It all sounds terribly desperate if you ask me."

>

>That's what I said to myself when I read BN's latest "review".

>

>

>Will someone please wake FFF?

[+ glutes]

RE: FFF: Expose More!!!!!!!!!

 

Uncle Fin, look at the latest BBB / BS review.

Benjamin Barry-Borowitz has outdone himself again! Assembling beds for a 'hourly rate'?? Making love like a 'animal in heat'???

[FinFangFoom]

RE: FFF Exposes Ragazzi's Fake Cock? I say, prove it!

 

>I pulled the RSS photo into Photoshop and at 500%, there is no

>evidence of pixel distortion or manipulation around the shaft

>or head of his dick.

 

 

The original photo was high res and that's where the changes were made. Once it's reduced to the size of shot on the web, all the detail you'd find in the large file will no longer be detectable.

 

 

>Given the "busy" nature of the image

>background, this is not an easy (or desirable) image to

>increase dick size without leaving traces of Photoshop

>evidence.

 

 

But, as the picture proves, it can be accomplished.

 

 

Realistically yours,

 

FFF

[RockHard]

RE: FFF Exposes Ragazzi's Fake Cock? I say, prove it!

 

"The original photo was high res and that's where the changes were made.

 

I certainly vote for such a professional application but I have no idea if this is, in fact, the case here.

 

"Once it's reduced to the size of shot on the web, all the detail you'd find in the large file will no longer be detectable.

 

Well, certainly, such an assumption/conclusion depends on many factors. As evidenced, Fin, by your amateurish examples, no two Photoshop users are alike, even among the ones who get paid. With such a complicated, "busy" background, there's quite a bit of varying pixels surrounding the erection, plenty of room to show evidence. An expert retoucher is capable of submitting perfect work. Maybe I should apply for a job at Raging Stallion Studios.

 

It's also possible Mr. Ragazzi was composited into this image, which means the retouching could have been done on the cock before his body was composited in front of the background image. Photoshop offers many workarounds.

 

The main point is marketing and advertising: how does a major porn company appropriately sell fantasy? Are there rules? Is there anyone out there who thinks that Clairol Nice-N-Easy boxes show the actual model's true hair color? Does anyone truly believe that mascara commercials show actual eyelashes? Some are so poorly done, you can actually see the baseline of false eyelashes. Do most people notice such detail? HELL NO!

 

Ka-ching, ka-ching.

 

(Edit) It's also important to note that Mr. Ragazzi probably has NO control over the art department at Raging Stallion Studios. He may have an opinion but I'm sure RSS makes ALL final art decisions. Mr. Ragazzi CANNOT be held liable for art decisions made by contract negotiations that limit his power. Much like Kate Winslet and GQ Magazine, I do not know of one porn star who gets "final approval" over images owned and paid for by another major corporation. Even if they did have final approval, I doubt any male porn star would complain about getting a bigger dick and having the retouching costs paid for by someone else.

[+ deej]

RE: FFF Exposes Ragazzi's Fake Cock? I say, prove it!

 

>I honestly haven't any clue about that

 

Clearly, and yet you feel free to draw conclusions from something you don't know anything about.

 

>"hardons" are banned on "adult" websites, boy are some of my

>favorite sites rule violators.

 

If the owners of those sites wish to risk jail time, that's up to them.

 

>Plus, I've noticed Eric

>"Ript4hire" hasn't been here in months and he had the most

>delish avatar.....

 

He tamed down his avatar on request, as have other escorts over time. Most reasonable individuals are understanding and cooperative about a situation beyond our control.

[Guest EuropTravl]

RE: FFF Exposes Ragazzi's Fake Cock? I say, prove it!

 

>>I honestly haven't any clue about that

>

>Clearly, and yet you feel free to draw conclusions from

>something you don't know anything about.

 

Clearly, you have a stick up your ass over absolutely nothing.

What conclusions were drawn again?

 

 

>He tamed down his avatar on request

 

I would have loved to have seen Eric's untamed one.

(oh, wait, I have - but I was talking about the avatar)

[+ deej]

RE: FFF Exposes Ragazzi's Fake Cock? I say, prove it!

 

>What conclusions were drawn again?

 

Here are your own words:

 

[blockquote]boy are some of my favorite sites rule violators. Plus, I've noticed Eric "Ript4hire" hasn't been here in months and he had the most delish avatar[/blockquote]

 

You admit you know nothing about it, but you seem to have arrived at some conclusions. They're your words. You posted them.

 

You're not the first troll we've had here, and you're not creative enough to be the best. Don't bother. Save everyone the effort.

[Guest EuropTravl]

RE: FFF Exposes Ragazzi's Fake Cock? I say, prove it!

 

You, madame, are loony tunes.

That's the only conclusion I've arrived at at all.

 

(PARANOIA. Like Rosie says, "Google it.")