Measured porn stars??

I'm not sure this was done correctly.

First, at least the top part of the packet is clearly not flush with the dick, it rests on her index finger which is behind the dick.

Then, the base area is very dark, which as is makes it impossible to estimate the NBP starting point. This is easily solved with a simple gamma boost though.
Counting the pixels, the cock's length ends up being 86% of the packet's.

Finally, the length of the packet has never been determined AFAIK. The new packaging is most definitely under 8", either 7.56" or 7.91" depending on sources. It looks a bit different, with maybe shorter flaps at the ends, but I don't see the old one being 1"+ longer, do you? And where did that 9" figure come from in the first place? I see no sources listed, and I couldn't find any myself.

Anyway, if the packet is actually 9", the cock would then be 7.75" with a bad side measurement.

View attachment 4402151

Old packaging:
https://www.amazon.com/Reeses-Peanu...=1513106446&sr=1-15&keywords=reeses+king+size

New packaging:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Reese-Peanut-Butter-Cups-King/dp/B00509UL3W

He's not under 7.75 no way no how
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lance Bass
you can do this for any pornstar, select a few shots where they look huge out of hundreds of shots where they look less impressive. just favorable camera angles, and maybe the aspect ratio is stretched for those top-down view photos. the last shot is most revealing, he is erect there. sorry but that isn't over 7"

hes about 7 inches, i wouldn't even put him over that. Johnny Sins looks longer than this guy., He is certainly big, but nothing special, not in the huge cock category. not knocking the guy, but he is not as impressive as the some of the bigger ones on here 8+. noway 7.5 or over. clover is a lot longer!

Yeah he's around 7 inches long. His dick looks similar to Mick Blue
 
The photo with the recess pieces is so confusing because if it is 9, it sincerely looks smaller than his penis

Have another look at the blue lines in my above post's attached pic. The packet isn't shorter than his penis, it's 16% longer.

He's not under 7.75 no way no how

Please elaborate. The packet would have to be something like 9.5" for him to possibly be 7.75" with a correct on-top measurement. That would make the girl's thumb over 3" long, it just doesn't add up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lance Bass
Have another look at the blue lines in my above post's attached pic. The packet isn't shorter than his penis, it's 16% longer.



Please elaborate. The packet would have to be something like 9.5" for him to possibly be 7.75" with a correct on-top measurement. That would make the girl's thumb over 3" long, it just doesn't add up.

The starting point where you start the blue line (his thumb is in the way but u just start after his thumb up the shaft) is robbing him of length, it is bordering on ridiculous . That is not a fair place to start even for a very conservative non bone pressed measurement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrHUGE1n
The starting point where you start the blue line (his thumb is in the way but u just start after his thumb up the shaft) is robbing him of length, it is bordering on ridiculous . That is not a fair place to start even for a very conservative non bone pressed measurement.

It think it all comes down to where we draw the imaginary line that goes from bellybutton to middle of base, to know how far to the side the thumb actually is, and it's kinda hard to tell. I believe I got it right but I might be off by a few pixels, which wouldn't make a huge difference anyway.

Maybe try to reproduce the position and the POV, I did it and my thumb didn't hide my NBP starting point, in fact it was the exact same as in my pic, the starting point was right at the edge of my thumb. Remember we want to simulate an on-top measurement, and the starting point on top will always be farther out than on the sides. I do have a big fat pad though, so there's that.

What would rob him of a little length though, is the cock's angle, but again it wouldn't make a huge difference. This is still at the very best 8" with a slanted non-flush measurement, akin to a side measurement with the ruler angled down, and you know how much this can add, so no way it would be 7.75 with a correct measurement.

Where I would "downgrade" Mann is his girth; he certainly ahem "looks like" More 5.75 than 6 in girth on close examination.

Wait a minute, are you teasing me? He "looks" under 5.5" to me, maybe even closer to 5". The guy has no girth to speak of, seriously. No wonder you can't wrap your head around him being much less than 8" if you think he's even close to 6" girth...
 
Have another look at the blue lines in my above post's attached pic. The packet isn't shorter than his penis, it's 16% longer.



Please elaborate. The packet would have to be something like 9.5" for him to possibly be 7.75" with a correct on-top measurement. That would make the girl's thumb over 3" long, it just doesn't add up.

So how big is Mann in your opinion? Or based off your theory?
 
Wait a minute, are you teasing me? He "looks" under 5.5" to me, maybe even closer to 5". The guy has no girth to speak of, seriously. No wonder you can't wrap your head around him being much less than 8" if you think he's even close to 6" girth...

Im agree hes no way 5.75 or even 6 girth lol
 
I would just like to point out for pages and pages and pages on this thread Richard Mann was accepted at 8x6. It wasn't even questioned and it was used as a talking point because apparently some swinger who said she had been with like 1 thousand men said he was the biggest she'd ever seen.

I was criticized for going on at goldzilla so now I guess I will get it from the other side. SDP you would have us believe he is what 7.25x5.25? I mean come on he has something extra on the guys in that size range in both length and girth. It was me personally who was the first to mention his girth and say it could be less than 6 but let's not go overboard. And try not get personal with the "no wonder if you think... " I think I've been very accurate and fair this whole time with both sides coming at me...

And it is not that I refused to address your specific empirical points rather that you acknowledge them and say they wouldn't make a big difference or whatever. You admit the angle is off but "doesn't make a big difference " You do the same with the starting point. These things add up. That measurement is at least a 0.5 rob overall from a proper nbp measurement in pixel count.

I am willing to consider the guy as less than 8x6...something like 7.75x5.75 at the absolute absolute minimum. Less than that is absurd.You say I'm like another user when I insist on sizes but as I said there are flaws including the starting point that are significant. He has never once even been considered at substantially less than 8x6 even unknownuserx the biggest " Downgrader" On the site seemed to have no issue with that. There is no new evidence either it was based on that same pic. Many thought the pic showed he was well over 8, near the Reese's packet size and I pointed out myself it doesn't work that way.

I don't particularly like Mann's attitude from stuff I've heard him say , apparently all the other guys at the interracial site were impressed with whitezilla/rod spunkel. But he said the whitezilla guy wasn't that impressive (about 7x6.25) and tends to foster a racial theme that I don't enjoy and seems more serious about it than most judging from his tweets . But knocking him down past 7.75x5.75 is just dishonest really. And for those who have issue with that girth (which is the lowest ever posited for him on this thread) please compare his girth to Julian Rios (the same) , Rocco Siffredi (less but not by that much etc). Come on guys...
 
I would just like to point out for pages and pages and pages on this thread Richard Mann was accepted at 8x6. It wasn't even questioned and it was used as a talking point because apparently some swinger who said she had been with like 1 thousand men said he was the biggest she'd ever seen.

I was criticized for going on at goldzilla so now I guess I will get it from the other side. SDP you would have us believe he is what 7.25x5.25? I mean come on he has something extra on the guys in that size range in both length and girth. It was me personally who was the first to mention his girth and say it could be less than 6 but let's not go overboard. And try not get personal with the "no wonder if you think... " I think I've been very accurate and fair this whole time with both sides coming at me...

And it is not that I refused to address your specific empirical points rather that you acknowledge them and say they wouldn't make a big difference or whatever. You admit the angle is off but "doesn't make a big difference " You do the same with the starting point. These things add up. That measurement is at least a 0.5 rob overall from a proper nbp measurement in pixel count.

I am willing to consider the guy as less than 8x6...something like 7.75x5.75 at the absolute absolute minimum. Less than that is absurd.You say I'm like another user when I insist on sizes but as I said there are flaws including the starting point that are significant. He has never once even been considered at substantially less than 8x6 even unknownuserx the biggest " Downgrader" On the site seemed to have no issue with that. There is no new evidence either it was based on that same pic. Many thought the pic showed he was well over 8, near the Reese's packet size and I pointed out myself it doesn't work that way.

I don't particularly like Mann's attitude from stuff I've heard him say , apparently all the other guys at the interracial site were impressed with whitezilla/rod spunkel. But he said the whitezilla guy wasn't that impressive (about 7x6.25) and tends to foster a racial theme that I don't enjoy and seems more serious about it than most judging from his tweets . But knocking him down past 7.75x5.75 is just dishonest really. And for those who have issue with that girth (which is the lowest ever posited for him on this thread) please compare his girth to Julian Rios (the same) , Rocco Siffredi (less but not by that much etc). Come on guys...

Agreed!

Mann at MINIMUM is 7.75 @sdp stop with the BS!!
 
I would hope he actually measures it as he indicated he would. That would put a lot of speculation to rest, or make it worse, since there would be those who would 'he's not measuring correctly.'

Danny D is definitely a shower, his flaccid is much bigger than other huge cock pornstars like Mandingo the biggest of them all who has a rather average flaccid (but bigger erect than Danny) or Lex Steele (also rather average flaccid).

I don't think Danny is totally flaccid there, but it's close enough that you can tell he has a very large flaccid/is a shower.
 
just under 12 inches

Richard Mann was measured in this video by Raven Black, has been cited a long time ago on this thread but not really discussed. Somebody should do an analysis on it, or try and find the full video.

yeah you cant tell from there because we cant see the numbers, hopefully someone has the full scene because I was unable to find it
 
just under 12 inches

Richard Mann was measured in this video by Raven Black, has been cited a long time ago on this thread but not really discussed. Somebody should do an analysis on it, or try and find the full video.
You can see the inches at second 00:16 on this video, if you pause at the right frame. From this you can deduct that he is AT MOST 8.5" measured from the side with a soft tape.
 

Attachments