I'll tell you what, I was certain that I would prefer the before picture. I'm not a big fan of lots of glam and lots of makeup, but in this case, I really do prefer the after.

First, she has a fantastic body (we are talking exclusively about looks, I shouldn't feel shallow right? Oh, I guess I should feel shallow about this being my first comment here in months.) Second, the sport coat and collared shirt just isn't that flattering. I rarely enjoy them on women - I like a feminine looking woman. Plus, what's the deal with all the crap on her hands and wrists? Watch, rubber bracelet, thumb ring... get over it. Finally, she has a bad dye job in both pictures. Again, I prefer natural, but if you're going to dye, go all out. Her hair looks tired in the first picture.

Having said all of that, I would split the difference. Too much makeup in the after. Her features appear really hard with all the makeup and hair. I hope you sleep better tonight for my thoughts...

I was just blown away by the difference. What really struck me was the influence of the lighting and composition of the picture. In the candid, there's not a lot of thought, you can't see the whole body, nor is she posed. The lighting design can be described as "lamp is on". In the professional, we see the whole body in a bikini which allows us to see a lot more of the body movement. This along with the posed facial expression conveys a lot more attitude and emotion. I don't think I'd ever noticed the importance of intent in photos of people.

Sometimes we have to put down the cheese to get the rats to come play, Jason. Welcome back.

This has nothing to do with whether the female they're eyeing actually is innocent, but I think male tastes can be divided into preferring women who look innocent or women that don't. That's my sweeping generalization and I'm sticking to it.

I think the same instincts are in play here as in that Guess the Virgin game.
http://www.kegz.net/archives/2004/08/25/guess_the_virgin.html

i think the black thing on her wrist is a hair band- which i am guilty of wearing constantly so i can pull my hair up whenever.

I like all the crap on her wrist. I have no analysis of why that is.

i think she looks cute, friendly and approachable in the before pic. and like she could be kinda 'bitchy' in the after.

Yeah, in that Heather Locklear on Melrose Place kind of way.

big time.

Let's define superficial, shall we?

"The girl as depicted on the right looks better than the girl as depicted on the left" -- not superficial.

"I want to marry the girl on the right, but not if she looks like the girl on the left when the makeup comes off" -- SUPERFICIAL!

Okay, this may sound weird, but have you noticed with the type of lighting and make-up in the after picture that women tend to look a bit more masculine than without it? Maybe it's the way the jaw-line looks or a harder look or just that it looks airbrushed and fake-ish...maybe i'm crazy.

In the after, it's easier to describe her as sexier at first glance, but she's in a bikini instead of a suit. clothes here make a huge difference. I don't know which I like better, what is the preference choice for? hanging on my wall, dating, marriage, sex, hiring for a job, or entering a pageant?

JB, you really don't think she is cute on the left?

Steve, good question. (what is the preference choice for?). I would answer dating/marriage/sex. And if the answer differs, and it probably does, then that's what makes the topic interesting.

I agree with you, that the fake-ish look does make her look more masculine. You're not crazy.

i also agree, the after is a little on the transvestite side.

Masculine is on the other side of the neighborhood from transvestite, but whatever you think.

i'm sticking with transvestite.

I didn't think we'd end this thread with Miss Universe as a transvestite, but we got here.