>>2042804
That's not mine, I'm not a photofag. I just found the source image. Someone already lined up the AF1 pic to a stock despite the work that went into deceiving us.
Why are the proofs blurry? Why are there stock images that align perfectly? Why did the af1 pic warp in the same way as a 2d image would if photo'd in a reflection? Why would Q go out of his way to take a photo (af1) that is nearly identical as a stock photo?
Two things can be happening here
1)Q has fooled us with these images - we should dig
2)Q has fooled us with these images as a test - we should dig