You can not view this image.

This post was deleted or flagged for the following reasons:

  • [DELETION] Does not meet minimum quality standards. (Compression, 3rd party watermark) - Mairo -
Blacklisted
  • Comments
  • It says vaginal, and at 20s you indeed see the clitoris and urethra, but from the back shot you can't see the backdoor. Would this be a cloaca then? Even if it doesn't have the "average" cloaca appearance?

  • Reply
  • |
  • 1
  • anguirus12345 said:
    what's the problem with the file?

    Extremely severe dithering artifacting combined with video compression and pillarboxing, then huge overlay watermark for shareware software called BeeCut. I cannot see any reason why any of these should exsist in this upload, especially dithering artifacts as that's bypass of needing to limit colors to 256, which should not be a factor of modern video codecs. As for video editing, I don't see reason to use trials of shady and expensive shareware when you can use fully free tools without any of this nonsense.
    These are all clearly againts our quality guidelines: "The chosen medium (image, video, flash) needs to be of a high quality."

  • Reply
  • |
  • 0