vegas promo photo leaks unretouched!

[CJMCH]

53 minutes ago, TheEndOfAnEra said:

Why do they feel the need to photoshop her. Look how beautiful she looks here

original:

retouched:

Do you know where it came from?

We have just posted the retouched one on the site so it's cool that someone posted the unretouched for comparison.

[blackingouthenegativity]

9 minutes ago, jordeezy said:

The lighting is horrible. 

That was my thoughts. They only needed to re-touch it because the lighting was terrible. 

[JordanMiller is Fggt]

52 minutes ago, TheEndOfAnEra said:

Oh gosh they white washed Britney's melanin right off, smh

[Alio]

I personally never liked the heavily photoshopped pale skin they love giving to, not only Britney, but almost everyone.

Britney is very pretty in the original pic. (the make up on the lips though, looks like she frenchkissed someone for 3 hours before the shoot.  ) 

[GaSt]

Photoshopped or not, that’s an awful pose, her head doesn’t match her body

[PoisonParadise90]

She still looks snatched. I get toning down the shine but someone took it 10 steps too far 🥴

[IStandByWhatISaid]

51 minutes ago, brightchildremix said:

The retouched version is too white, but the original version needs polish for sure, her face looked too greasy and no celebrity wants to look greasy on a poster. 

That's how skin looks usually... Between ads and social media looks like people forgot what a natural skin and a natural body looks like

[super.nova]

1 hour ago, britney_rocks said:

 

Was she working out before taking this pic?

probably her cheap team rented the space without AC to save some coins for them to steal. allegedly.

[Rex]

22 minutes ago, 3IsACharm33 said:

Side note: are those coffee beans behind her 

Those are feathers.

[super.nova]

11 minutes ago, Alio said:

I personally never liked the heavily photoshopped pale skin they love giving to, not only Britney, but almost everyone.

Britney is very pretty in the original pic. (the make up on the lips though, looks like she frenchkissed someone for 3 hours before the shoot.  ) 

after good s** look.

[Rex]

The original pic is stunning! Brit looks like a mermaid that's just come up from the water. 

[Stefani]

Queen doesn't even need airbrushing or Photoshop. Unlike some other girls.

[TheEndOfAnEra]

40 minutes ago, leviathan said:

probably her cheap team rented the space without AC to save some coins for them to steal. allegedly.

[BanMeBoop]

3 minutes ago, TheEndOfAnEra said:

Did you make this?  

[DollyParton]

1 hour ago, 3IsACharm33 said:

Why did they make her literally white in all the retouchings

One word: Randee.

 

[Mr. AmericanDream]

I hated this photo anyways, hair looked photoshopped but now I def hate it cuz the untouched photo is better 

[hallucinate]

Wow this is actually a great pic.

No professional retoucher would have made her look like that on purpose - Team Con probably told them to make her literally white. Gross.

[Catalin]

Frankly, both pictures look awful. 

[DignifiedLove]

She looks like Derrick Berry meets present-day Pamela Anderson in the first one.  The second one is far more “professional” but of course leave it to Exhale to find drama and conspiracy over an airbrushed photo. Literally every celebrity has their photos airbrushed. Britney stans are so painfully loud and overdramatic for no reason.
I should also clarify — never been a fan of both pictures with that noisy hair. That photoshoot is simply awful and lacks any substance.

[DignifiedLove]

2 hours ago, brightchildremix said:

The retouched version is too white, but the original version needs polish for sure, her face looked too greasy and no celebrity wants to look greasy on a poster. 

Literally this