help find the name of this Japanese beauty
June 8, 2006 10:36 PM Subscribe
I'm looking for who this model is... although these pics are PG-13 (a couple upskirts), they're still probably NSFW. They're not "porn" so I guess it's okay. I've tried a bunch of friends, and well, people I know who would be into this sort of stuff, but I'm still stumped. Here's a collection of the pictures I have along with their original filename as given to me.
Response by poster: Unfortunately, it's not her, Isoyama has a mole on her left cheek and this mystery girl has one above her lip on the right. Thanks for yet another beautiful Japanese girl though hah.
posted by unrequited at 10:48 PM on June 8, 2006
posted by unrequited at 10:48 PM on June 8, 2006
Well, that's certainly a strange way to acquire my IP address.
posted by evariste at 11:52 PM on June 8, 2006
posted by evariste at 11:52 PM on June 8, 2006
Response by poster: Hah, I swear I'm not in it for ip logging. Feel free to use an anonymizer if it helps me know who this model is... > )
posted by unrequited at 11:56 PM on June 8, 2006
posted by unrequited at 11:56 PM on June 8, 2006
Yeah, I was being facetious :-) Sorry I can't help about the identity of the girl. She's hot!
posted by evariste at 11:59 PM on June 8, 2006
posted by evariste at 11:59 PM on June 8, 2006
No EXIF data, or much else to figure out where they came from. Where did you find these?
posted by evariste at 12:09 AM on June 9, 2006
olivia:~$ identify -verbose t16.jpg
t16.jpg JPEG 591x739 DirectClass 73kb
Image: t16.jpg
Format: JPEG (Joint Photographic Experts Group JFIF format)
Geometry: 591x739
Class: DirectClass
Type: TrueColor
Endianess: Undefined
Colorspace: RGB
Channel depth:
Red: 8-bits
Green: 8-bits
Blue: 8-bits
Channel statistics:
Red:
Min: 0 (0)
Max: 255 (1)
Mean: 117.539 (0.460936)
Standard deviation: 84.0163 (0.329476)
Green:
Min: 0 (0)
Max: 255 (1)
Mean: 111.774 (0.438331)
Standard deviation: 78.0144 (0.305939)
Blue:
Min: 0 (0)
Max: 255 (1)
Mean: 131.56 (0.515923)
Standard deviation: 76.3417 (0.299379)
Colors: 81215
Rendering-intent: Undefined
Resolution: 72x72
Units: PixelsPerInch
Filesize: 73kb
Interlace: None
Background Color: white
Border Color: #DFDFDF
Matte Color: grey74
Dispose: Undefined
Iterations: 0
Compression: JPEG
Quality: 75
Orientation: Undefined
JPEG-Colorspace: 2
JPEG-Sampling-factors: 2x2,1x1,1x1
Signature: 789a3341e44f305c8f6dee4c9307648210621f127227ed044a01231629c7cbae
Tainted: False
Version: ImageMagick 6.2.4 02/13/06 Q16 http://www.imagemagick.org
olivia:~$ identify -format "%[EXIF:*]" t16.jpg
olivia:~$posted by evariste at 12:09 AM on June 9, 2006
Response by poster: >evariste my friend gave them to me, and he forgot where he got them from, or who it was from... so useless.
posted by unrequited at 12:13 AM on June 9, 2006
posted by unrequited at 12:13 AM on June 9, 2006
might be worth asking over at empornium.us
or finklses forums.
posted by aeighty at 12:43 AM on June 9, 2006
or finklses forums.
posted by aeighty at 12:43 AM on June 9, 2006
There's a bunch of photobooks posted up on puretna.com right now. I'd try going through those. (I'd help ya out, but I'm at work).
posted by GeekAnimator at 7:01 AM on June 9, 2006
posted by GeekAnimator at 7:01 AM on June 9, 2006
I imagine there are still active usenet groups that could probably help you with this (not that I would know anything about that *cough* *cough*).
posted by Lazlo Hollyfeld at 7:07 AM on June 9, 2006
posted by Lazlo Hollyfeld at 7:07 AM on June 9, 2006
CRC checked against the last 3 years or so of usenet, no matches.
posted by trevyn at 10:45 AM on June 9, 2006
posted by trevyn at 10:45 AM on June 9, 2006
trevyn-intriguing, but you got me all sorts of curious. Did you mime-encode before CRC'ing? Is this something that's worked for you before? I wouldn't have thought to do that, even if I had 3 years' worth of usenet sitting on a hard drive somewhere (how?!)
posted by evariste at 1:00 PM on June 9, 2006
posted by evariste at 1:00 PM on June 9, 2006
evariste, I happen to have access to CRCs et al. for decoded JPEGs (~47 million unique), which is what I checked against--so if they were posted UUencoded, MIME, or yEnc, it would come up. Obviously, this doesn't help if the image has been cropped, had a text overlay added, or the binary has otherwise been altered, but it's a data point.
You can, of course, do fancier things with fuzzy image comparison that will catch those things, but that's out of my realm.
BTW, The sheer quantities of this type of shoot that are out there lead me to believe that looking through Japanese pseudo-porn yourself will be pointless for identification purposes. ;)
posted by trevyn at 1:19 PM on June 9, 2006
You can, of course, do fancier things with fuzzy image comparison that will catch those things, but that's out of my realm.
BTW, The sheer quantities of this type of shoot that are out there lead me to believe that looking through Japanese pseudo-porn yourself will be pointless for identification purposes. ;)
posted by trevyn at 1:19 PM on June 9, 2006
trevyn-interesting, thanks. For what purpose were CRCs made of that much of the Usenet?
posted by evariste at 2:08 PM on June 9, 2006
posted by evariste at 2:08 PM on June 9, 2006
Response by poster: That makes me kind of scared trevyn... But thanks anyways.
posted by unrequited at 2:24 PM on June 9, 2006
posted by unrequited at 2:24 PM on June 9, 2006
Maybe it's just me, but when files are created by ImageMagick and start with the letter "T" aren't they likely to be thumbnails? In which case, although they're pretty big for thumbnails, aren't there somewhere some much bigger originals?
Maybe that's why you couldn't find them.
posted by AmbroseChapel at 2:33 PM on June 9, 2006
Maybe that's why you couldn't find them.
posted by AmbroseChapel at 2:33 PM on June 9, 2006
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by jgee at 10:40 PM on June 8, 2006