Finally, the photo we’ve all been waiting for. Yes, yes — Harry Potter is all that! And more!
UPDATE: But is it real? See reader comments for the debate.
UPDATE: But is it real? See reader comments for the debate.
Special thanks to Nightcharm reader, Oz
©2007 Nightcharm
©2007 Nightcharm
That photo just restored my faith in youth. Thank you.
Sorry to be the bearer of sad, bad tidings…but it’s a fake.
Good news is that it’s only a matter of time til there are real frontals from the show…
Fake? Why? Because Starmale didn’t get it first? Pity, you pathetic slime
We don’t think it’s a fake.
Proportion, lighting, and photo quality (compare torso and legs) match up too precisely.
Yes, there are Photoshop masters out there, and yes we’ve been fooled before — see the Orlando Bloom photo at the bottom of Our Awful Guys piece, and the wild commentary it set off — but we’ve never seen work anywhere close to this.
If it is a fake, it is photorealism raised to the 7th power.
Attention Daniel Radcliffe. We know you’re reading this, don’t be shy. Please authorize the photo so those who came to scoff may stay to pray. And while you’re at it, send more photos like this one. Cell-phone quality? No problem!
What’s the big deal he’s built like an 11 year old girl, not to mention the 7 kinds of ugly that dick is.
the left foot is missing
I may become a Harry Potter fan after seeing the pic of him Disappointed that he is uncut. He is endowed pretty well.
>>…”not to mention the 7 kinds of ugly that dick is.”
Some of us happen to like “ugly dicks.”
Is he wearing a cock ring?
Hot, hot, hot! Dunno what’s “ugly” about his cock; I worship it! But the photo does strike me as photoshopped. At least it’s superimposed on the horse picture (shadows don’t match; and why not color as earlier photos of the boy wonder?). Also, the perspective of the left hand and the left foot don’t match. And his legs are much more developed and muscled than his torso. Just my perspective. Still, I’m loving the image.
Help us out here, Nightcharmers.
Compare this photos to the other Equus photos.
We think it is a real photo, and present it here in good faith as, believe it or not, a news item. Left hand and foot seem a match to us. And muscular legs are pretty standard on even moderately athletic teenagers.
We do wonder, we admit, how likely is it that an actor who stars in a blockbuster franchise would pose for a nude publicity shot. Still, he is English. And the English are so cool about stuff like this.
Plus, it is an “art nude,” for that matter (whatever the hell that is.) Perhaps it was seen as an edgy career move to help a child star transition into adult roles. In the U.K., the age of consent is 17, in any case, and so the model is legally an adult.
You judge, Nightcharmers. Is it real or is it Photoshop?
Enquiring editors want to know.
Disappointed that he is uncut
not to mention the 7 kinds of ugly that dick is.
Probably written by some idiot with an ugly, circumcised piece of shoe leather between his legs.
The photo is fake. If you look closely the area right above his dick, on his hips, the clarity of the skin become a little fuzzy, which is a tell tale size that the soften feature of photoshop was used to blend the added legs and cock with the skin of the existing photo. Kudos to the creator, you’ve got some talent!
It may be a fake, but for tonight it’s real. Very real.
Could be real. Photography, lighting and perhaps some PS-ing by the art director’s team. Let’s not forget that magazine covers and the like are routinely smoothed out.
Upon close inspection, I pretty much have to go with fake. It’s true that the angle and intensity of light on the legs doesn’t appear to match the torso, the legs have a gauzy look while the torso is crisp, the legs themselves are too bulky and muscular and look juxtaposed right around the hips, and the perspective of the legs doesn’t seem to precisely match the perspecitve of the torso.
A more ambitios person could take this into Photoshop and play around with the channels or the levels and determine pretty conclusively if this has been tampered with. I however, don’t have the patience tonight to even wait for PS to open.
It’s funny how a decade of internet porn has turned us all into experts in spotting digital fabrications. I’d bet lovers of tranny porn could spot a fake in a heartbeat.
Um… actually it IS a fake. The person who posted it originally on Live Journal (username = herbertvonkoln) finally admitted it’s a fake (this person specializes in manips, look at their user page) after we all called him out on it. Besides, every review I’ve read of someone who ACTUALLY SAW Equus has said Dan’s penis is of average to small size, but he has really large testicles. His legs are also skinnier. So the proportion here is all wrong. Besides, just look at the hair line on his stomach below his belly button… total shit blur job if you ask me.
thanks, rebecca. would love to see those “really large testicles”!
You’re welcome! And I will be seeing those really large testicles in person in 3 weeks!
I gotta go with fake. The lower half is far too fuzzy, and the details of the cock itself have that pencil-sketched/vaseline-lens effect going on, as opposed to the crisp sharpness of the original color photo. And why are the edges of the legs so foggy in relief against the black background? His arms and even the horse’s mane have much harder edges. I’m calling “bullshit.” Nice fantasy pic, though!
This doesn’t require a heavy-duty analysis. The cock ring is such an obvious give-away that the photoshopper had to be an idiot to leave it in.
*sigh* Wishful thinking people…just wishful thinking that this is real but alas, it’s not. Don’t you think that an actual full frontal nude photo of Daniel Radcliffe would be circulating all over the Net if this were real? I don’t think the professional photographer who took the real photo from the kid would release anything that was blurry. Anyway, for more tantalizing “Hairy” Potter pics, the following are the official Equus promotional images (images 4-6 are my faves):
Image 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Besides what’s already been said about the blurry edges, a dead giveway on the obvious Photoshop work is that whoever did it, forgot two items: The overall background behind the horse and Daniel is black but if you look at the gap of space between his fake legs, it’s gray plus you would have seen the horse’s two front legs showing through that space too and they’re missing.
This photo is a fake done by an artist who’s link is at Live Journal. I should know, I saw the original posting of this picture by her. If you lighten the photo, look at the foot on the bent knee. The foot is completely wiped away. I confronted her about this being a manip - “I must say, it is a very good manip, but you messed up on his foot.” And she said to me:
Quote:
“Thank you for your comment. :DD. Yeah, I know. But there is something I was more concerned with ;).”
End of discussion.
That uncut cock is nice! And for anybody that is surprised by him being uncut… you really need to meet some English guys!
Those thighs of his are pretty beefy, considering his upper body. Let’s not get started on how he’s standing at all, with his legs in that position. Nice try though.
I’d have to say that cock is …
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
[crash]
HELP, I’ve fallen and I can’t get up.
And now herbertvonkoln’s LiveJournal account has mysteriously been deleted after they’ve been called out! If that’s not proof it’s fake and they’re trying to cover their ass, I don’t know what is!
You have got to be kidding? Ugly dick? If it’s a real photo, it’s perfect in every way.
You’ve got to be kidding! Ugly dick? If it’s a real photo, it’s perfect in every respect!
Isn’t it just a bit odd that he has the upper-body of a 15-year-old (he’s always been very slight and slender) but the legs of an adonis?
It’s sweet.. but it’s Nutri-sweet.
Everybody should just chill out.
Wooooo, Harry Potter’s full frontal… so what! The kid might doesn’t yet realize that it might sink his career Broadway or not. And all of you with with a celebrity nudity obsession, there are plenty hotter younger guys near you… and i’m not talking about internet.
Fake. The bottom half is all wrong. No horse legs, thighs are way too meaty and that foot looks like it belongs to a giant. Nice try though.
Beautiful!!
For the moron complaining he is uncut: get real 70-80% of the world’s male population is UNCUT.
That means most of the male population in the americas, europe, India, Australia, China and more are UNCUT.
The exceptions are the jews, muslims and …the americans. Sorry, you’re in the minority.
Yeah, I pretty much have to go with fake here.
Nicely done though it may be, I find that the legs are a bit disproportionate to the body. Perhaps not in length, but when one compares the two parts of his body the legs come out looking rather…large. Not necessarily long, even, but just thick and…it doesn’t seem to fit.
This was obviously done with some wishful thinking
Besides, I have the faintest feeling that they’ve somehow made sure that pictures won’t be printed or that any pictures that do come onlin will be gone before you can say ‘Hogwarts’…or ‘Hot stuff’…your choice, really…
FAKE. this originally appeared just after the original pics and the user who created it just deleted their live journal today after this pic got spread as “real.” Just ask people who’ve actually SEEN Dan on stage - that is not him.
See original post here: (link)
P.S. if you go to the user’s pictures, which have not come down now, this is posted under the category “my manips”
(link)
sorry to post again, but it looks like either the pic was removed or we ate his bandwidth. Take a look at the screenprint here: (link)
Circumcision: Proven Strategy to Prevent HIV
(link)
This is a photo manip! Scroll through and read these comments and replies, where the creator ADMITS that this is not real. (link)
Havind seen Equus last weekend, I can say it’s defenitly NOT real.
It’s a fake.
Proof: (link)
This comment says it’s a fake, but if you want to read all the comments: (link)
Danielle Radcliffe is circumcised. Or at least he looked it in the very blurred image he sent to his friend (who is also my friend) on her mobile phone. I know that is hard to believe, and I expect a bit of a backlash of people claiming I’m making it up. Also there seems to be a wee bit of a lightening below the hip, especially on the left side (his right side), although that might be an actual tan line. I read about this picture today int eh Sun and the produces of Equus have also said that it is not real and Daniel Radcliffe would like everyone to know as much.
另外, 上回是背景, 这回是前景, 毫无保留版在这里和这里,
Looks like a real horse to me.
(Even if this is photoshopped, a girl can dream! Daniel’s tackle (or whoever it belongs to) looks just fine to me.)
It’s a beautiful photo, but it seemed wrong right away to me, regardless of the controversy. And now with all these posts it has been determined not to be real and Radcliffe apparently wants that known.
The upper part seemed ok, the light is falling strong on his shoulder and the horse’s shoulder. But everything below his waist is a mess. It was spliced together pretty high up on his waist, I’d say, with all that fuzziness.
The photoshop experts noticed the foot and gray between the legs, but anyone who is looking at anatomy and an artists point of view notice the odd angling and the heavy legs. While skin of the upper body is clinging to ribs, the lower body has excess fat and muscle. The legs do not appear juvenile either, even if a juvenile had worked them out. They are older legs, and probably with some body hair which is why they are fuzzed out. With the leg raised it should also get some of that strong light falling on Daniel. There is huge area of darkness/shadow on the abdomen above the penis which can’t be explained. The penis itself has way too much clarity and seems to be floating in space. It’s possible it doesn’t belong to the owner of either body part in this pic.
With those huge tucked-under legs, this pic reminds me of Pan, actually, the half-goat mythological creature. Here’s a pic. (Pan on the left of course, sans beard) (link)
I like him, I like the penis, but I don’t think they are attached in real life.
Does anyone else think this cock is a bit engorged? I know not all heads retreat completely when an uncut cock is soft, but this penis looks a little puffed up. And I don’t think Harry Potter would pop a mini boner for a photo shoot.
Still a fun photo to have. I hope people at work won’t mind it as my screensaver.
Whoever that cock belongs to, it’s gorgeous. A fleshy hooded cock just makes my head spin.
What was the question?
Alas …. from just below the Daniel’s navel, that belongs to someone else. Total photoshop. Where’s the horse’s right front leg? lol
here’s some clean shots from a Broadway website (link)
Hmm, I don’t think that the picture is a fake.
Nightcharm, is this a joke? All you have to do is adjust your monitor’s brightness levels and you’ll see it’s a fake. The cock is too massive.
And what’s the big deal with dear Daniel? He’d never make me hard. Even if he bounces up and down my five-inch massive cock. The one Harry Potter actor I’d fuck is the dude who played Victor in the last installment.
I don’t care if it is fake. He is still very hot!
hold on is it real? here is a link for the original pic. (link ) just search for harry potter. click the first that comes up on google.
It’s a FAKE y’all. Don’t be so StoOpid…just because you see a dick swingin in front of you doesn’t mean it’s the real deal. So to the chicken hawks out there, this is what I have to say:
Someone had some free time on their hands and was good at Photoshoping. It’s not that difficult y’all….Jeeez
Gay Men are SOOOO gullible
55 comments on a picture of an actor’s penis? Is it fake or isn’t it? This fake or real penis obsession reflects a completely missed point. I think the question should be “Does he do the role in Equus proud?” Or maybe more grossly, “Does he look good naked on stage?” Give him a break. I hope he does well. I can think of no other current actor who has been so slotted into a role that he will struggle to achieve acceptance in other realms of acting.
[...] only did I hear that the nude Daniel Radcliffe pic is fake - it is!!!! If you look at it, it just looks [...]
Fake. His mom is Jewish. That means he’s cut. Not his dick.
I find it refrshing to finally see someone who is uncut! I think it is pretty cool….a dick is sexy no matter if it’s cut or not!!!!! Nightcharm should add some more uncut cocks every once in a while!!!!
Juan Domingo - You’re right, as I keep saying there is no need for this debate. Daniel Radcliffe IS cut…I have seen a picutre of him naked on my friend’s phone. Sorry everyone but this just isn’t him. It is clearly something many of you are passionate about though…why not just go and see the play?
Haha! No one seems to have mentioned that the nice horse’s leg totally vanishes in the bottom half of the picture. And Daniel’s own legs just ‘fade’ into a convenient gray.
Nightcharm - Give up! This is not his willy!
Also, as well as the tan line and the vanishing horse’s leg, Daniel seems to have two triangles of pubic hair, as opposed to the normal; one.
i have looked at this photo very clearly now and found no inner or outer lineing that that dick has been put on to look like daniel’s dick, meaning that this picture is not a fake! and i am 98% sure of it.
I think this is fake, well not him of course, but he’s dick does, because it looks, I dont know, but it doesnt look that much real…
Even if his mother is Jewish (proof, please?), maybe she’s one of those forward-thinking, not-caught-in-a-rut women who doesn’t buy every bit of dogma her religion throws in her direction. Originally, Jewish circumcision was pretty much a “nick” of the flesh to draw blood, not a removal of a sizeable chunk of tissue. Symbolic, more than anything…perhaps some modern Jews are going in this direction.
I know this is a fake because I’ve seen Equus and i’ve seen Dan’s dick in the play.
Firstly, dan only weighs 120 pounds…. those legs are way to huge for a little guy like him
Secondly and most importantly, having already seen Equus, I can tell you that dan is very very much CIRCUMCISED!
This is a fake…. period!
As a lifelong and presently skinny-guy in the midst of an 8-month gym pilgrimage to bulk up, I will inform all of you that for a time period after you first start working out that seems like it’s going to last at least a year in my case, the legs get big and buff while your upper body stays scrawny. I think it’s just because guys like myself who lack upper-body strength just haven’t used our arms much in our lifetimes, but our legs, which have been carrying our body weight forever, have all the groundwork necessary to start adding mass right away. So the fact that Radcliffe’s legs seem disproportionately muscular here is not an idictment against the authenticity of the picture - it’s realistic to the length of time the kid’s been able to hit the gym after finding out he got this role.
And to the above commenters calling it an “ugly dick;” what’s your beef against the lack of circumcision? And what else is unusual about this penis, besides that? I’d like to see what yours looks like, in that case. For all its erotic charm, the penis isn’t exactly the most picture-perfect part of the body.
Considering that the guy is only 17, I consider Radcliffe’s upper body to be very toned and quite masculine. That’s especially true considering that he’s in the UK, where skinny guys are more popular than french fries are in America. And once again, remember, the kid is 17. He has many years to keep working out if he wants to. He’s probably not even done growing yet.
Speaking of age 17 - doesn’t Raddclif’s age mean the photo constitutes child pornography, which is illegal in the United States? I’m sure the UK’s laws are a bit more liberal - the fact that they’re letting the underaged actor stand nude on stage is testemony to that - but still, I doubt the production company would release nude photos of the kid. I think there will be special caution taken to keep penis shots from leaking to the public, which is the one thing that makes me think this photograph is probably faked.
Matt,
First thanks for your thoughtful and entertaining comments, here and elsewhere.
Little — or in this case, big — Daniel has reached the adult age of consent in the U.K., that is, he is 17. He is legally an adult and so fits the standard for display here. Also, he is appearing nude on stage, so such photos — real or even photoshopped — are appearing on the internet and in (mostly English) tabloids. The image is placed here, in good faith, as a news items, not as titillation.
Naturally, it is not our responsibility nor desire to police the reactions of our readers. People see what they what to see all too often: Michelangelo told his protégés they could find art in piss stains. The Manson family heard a call to go murder in the Beatles’White Album. We do not see anything pornographic about this picture. To us, it appears more artful than erotic.
i dont care if it is fake still very sexy!!
I can’t belive that he had a uncut cock!!!
its fake!
He’s Jewish and circumcised, and this is an obvious, obvious fake.
herry is right or fake if fact so show yours hard cock