>>51739044actually i suspect that the first person to edit (the one who left the panty hole) upscaled the image for some reason, which left it blurry compared to the base version
and they cut the sides of the image for some obscure reason
when i said bigger, i meant in the sense of being 3840px vs the 2048px of the base image
>>51653936im slamming my face at not seeing how much that first editor messed up the image. i thougth them removing the panties and just leaving that little hole was a good first step but they messed so much
