>>104479185>>104479196Whoever edited it did a good job (though it helps that I've never seen the original). I guess that goes to show the value of subtlety, though.
Image related; a lot of people think the panel on the left is real, because it's plausible she'd be talking about Dick Grayson. By the same token, it's plausible a woman would try on clothes (especially very form-fitting clothes) completely nude, to avoid panty lines. A light touch can make these edits so plausible that people can actually believe they're real.
