Mixed Bag

X-Ray anyone?

Leave a comment

image

More photos
Singapore Girls See Through Xray
Japanese and Korean Girl See Through Xray

Some info on the net
Experiments
Vodafone in row over ‘peeping tom’ phone cameras

(Visited 68 times, 1 visits today)

0 thoughts on “X-Ray anyone?”

  3. this won’t work in Thailand, since sometimes “what you see is NOT what you get” ..I am talking about the chicks with DI*KS …LOL

  8. Call me old and bitter, but I want to see authenitc T&A not amateur pranks by some hormonally imbalanced 15 year-old hack who stole his idea from the Paris Hilton porno!

    (excuse my three-in-a-row…)

  9. I remember seeing a special on the news warning women that they could be voyuer targets by horny guys with Sony Camcorders.

    My question is, is this actually X-RAY or is this Nightshot?

    X-Rays would give off harmful radiation wouldn’t they? Civilians can’t buy X-ray devices for recreational use without liscence.

  11. These certainly aren’t X-ray pictures, the way X-ray technology works is that it must pass through a filming device, be it film or a electronic metering device that acts as film.

    Basically X-rays like the ones you get from your doctor are shadows… sorta. The subject is set between the emitting device and the recording layer. The rays pass through the subject making the recording layer opaque, all the paces that are transparent (or more white) are areas where the tissue was too dense and the rays were absorbed.

    More than likely these are infered pictures. The reason when this works on some things and not others, is that infered has a short wave length than visable light, there fore it can actually pass through a good bit of mateiel, certainly the skimpy cloths alot of models wear, reflecting off the skin and returning to the camera. Some digital cameras and see IR, while a lot of them have IR filters because it can cuase unwanted effects.

    If you search around you’ll find some stuff about alot of video cameras (that I think you can find on Ebay of course) that were pulled from market because they had a feature that let them caputre in IR, people then noticed how the IR setting could cause a lack of privacy forcing the MFGs to pull the cameras.

  12. OK after looking at the links they probably are fakes however they do look like what most Ir photos I’ve seen.

    IR photos are real and aren’t just foer perverted uses.

    these seem fake because:
    1. They include originals and some have the person identifyable in the original and blured in the second

    2. All systems I know to capture IR or either or, either your caputre visable light or you caputre IR not booth at the same time, capturing IR shots require more shutter time because less is captured thus brining me to the point – who would stand perfectly still while you took two shots? Even if you told them too they’d move a bit or you would less you had a tri-pod, some of these shots look like they are at a party, the subjects would most likely inadvertantly moved between changing settings / filters.

  13. I read online that SONY produced a line of NIGHTSHOT cameras which were later discovered to be able to “permeate” thin clothing. Sony pulled the line and redesigned the NS so that it would only work in the dark.

    http://cooltech.iafrica.com/technews/667462.htm

    Apparently as the story claims “some pervet” found out you could put a filter over the lens and use it to peer through clothes.

    I have a sony DVD-305 and I tested the Nightshot on myself a little while ago trying to see my nipples. It didn’t work – but, I suppose this is cause of my model being post-discontinue.

    I think I wanna buy that camera model just for novelty purposes. I think it would make a hell of a video at my wedding!!!

  17. // comment edited because of lay-out problems

    And this one: http://www.imagefap.com/image.php?id=595285321 …come on!!! The pic already has some other website’s adress on it but somehow xray2u.com is claiming it’s theirs by fixing their addy to it?!?

    I can (without a shred of proof) guantee that all these pics were taken from other sources and photoshopped.

    Stuff like this is really insulting. If you are going to hoax at least do it well!!!

  18. Oh yeah, and while I’m at it….

    Here’s an “x-ray” video clip: http://www.kaya-optics.com/images/kaya_massh_gss_01.mpeg from the Kaya-Optics website (http://www.kaya-optics.com/products/voyuerism.shtml).

    Yeah….this is just awesome!

    But I’m already one step ahead of the game. I did some wicked research and found some crazy technology that makes this IR shit look so old school — if I were you I’d invest: http://www.fakecrap.com/products/xray_specs.html

    Next!

  19. KRAZY4KOBE

    I would approach your claims using the scientific methos.

    #1 I’d get the X-Ray camera
    #2 I’d test to see if it could penetrate demin pants, skirt or jackets

    HAVE YOU ALREADY DONE THIS?

    Furthermore, after actually seeing the demin skirt, to me, it looks really thin – like those cheap denim clothes made in China and sold for $5. Unless you are actually there with the girl, How can you possibly tell me the thickness of the skirt?

    I’d rather use achem’s razor since I can’t perform the test myself.

    I’d rather believe someone used an XRAY camcorder to take the pictures – rather than sitting down for hours upon hours using photoshop to produce picture after picture after picture – it would take a long time and cost manhours.

  20. Krazy4Kobe

    So the XRAY.com stole a pic from the Korean website… what does that prove?

    How do you know the Koreans didn’t produce the photo with Xray cam and then find themselves disenfranchised by Xray.com?

    And the videotap you showed us showed women at a great distance from the camera. As I’ve seen thusfar, the Xray camera require a person be close to the camera in order to permeate cloth.

    I took a look at my DVD305 cam’s NIGHTSHOT and noticed that there is a weak infrared light that comes on to see right in front of the camera in the dark. It occurs to me that if I were taking video in the dark, objects would need to be close.

    You are spouting allegations but you have no true proof.

  21. Stop calling it X-ray, tis two completely different principals and will produce two different results! Heck its even different from a floroscope!

    Another thing I find wrong with the example pics are that you can only see what we want to see. I know that IR photos are real and these don’t seem to fit. IR reflects differently than regular light, tree leafs look birght but these xray2u shots seem fake.

    only naughy bits, where are the belly buttons?

    These have to be two different photos because of the way the caputre system works, they should not line up exactly, they should have some bluring of movement if wind could be present.

    The ridicilous flim masking issue with one of the pictures.

    The purse is explainable but these things I’ve posted are now, if you can explain them then I’d budge a bit but IR photos – real, xray2u examples – fake.

  23. CLM, one picture out of many, where are they on the other ones where they should be visable? They also didn’t remember to reomve the other places mark from a picgture, they alo messed up the film mask on one picture, and neglect to mask the regular picture. That falls under the duh category and makes it less credable, perahps the make of the gallery made it to shed light on fakes.

    I can say about wind because I know taking photos. Usualy with the speed of most lenses the average speed to take shots of without any motion blur is F of about 1/60 The kay optics guide settles about 4 F Stops away at 1/4! This is a .25 seconds the camera has to expose the film as opposed to 0.016 seconds!

    As I was saying about reflection check this page:
    http://www.astrosurf.org/buil/350d/350d.htm
    Search for this text
    ” Typical comparaison between classical vegetation view (up) and IR view (350D + W87)”

    Check the two pictures just above it, notice things don’t reflect like you’d think in IR. Unfortunately this is too small to look for bluring due to wind nor do we know the informaton of the shots.

    Lastly why are you so intent on defending xray2u’s crediability, I’mnot saying IR if fake, I just doubt xray2u especialy with this gallery

  25. can i get this pic ??
    Singapore Girls See Through Xray
    Japanese and Korean Girl See Through Xray

Leave a Reply