2024-04-26

Wow, tough grader. She has an arch and perfect shape, size, and symmetry in my book. I tend to focus on all the positives.

2023-04-20

Super nice 🌹🥰

2015-04-16

I once said something similar about tattoos, and @Pixxxie landed on me with both Iron Fist pumps about 'Freedome of Self-Expression.' I get that, in principle, but not in practice when it looks like this, or other weird body mods like beer cans in your stretched ear lobes.

2015-04-16

I sooooo AGREE tattoos and piercings never been my cup of tea but hey I guess to each their own:)

2015-04-16

@tweety- We're just old, and old-school man. In our day, only sailors & bikers had tats. This next generation grew up with piercings and tats as 'normal' just like iPhones and living their lives publicly online. But I always wonder what they think when they see people having laser treatments or plastic surgery to undo some of that mess!

2015-04-16

Well said @BiB60 tattoo removal is a growing industry:)

2015-04-16

"tattoos and piercings never been my cup of tea but hey I guess to each their own:)" 2nd this.

2015-04-18

I'm with @laddishot on this one....not into the tattoos and piercings but sorry @reesie87, for Aimee, starting from her DELICIOUS toes, going north is DEFINITELY in the plan.....

2015-08-08

I do think I'll stop at the nose ring though....

2021-05-20

A septum? People have been wearing those for well over 35 years at this point. There are even stranger piercings these days that'll make a septum look like a diamond studded earring by comparison. Lol

2018-09-29

Pretty perfect here!

2018-09-29

wonderful toes

2017-10-07

Oh yes indeed!!

2017-10-07

And when they come in colours

2017-03-31

Well, I'm always partial to nuts

2017-03-31

¿light salt o bold nuts?

2017-04-03

I mean, would you say either are the best tasting items in this picture?

2015-11-19

Dani Song

2015-11-19

http://www.wikifeet.com/Dani_Song

2015-09-13

Yupper...that's Aimee's sister Dani. Sadly she has no IMDB page so I can't add the photos I have of her. She has perfect, smooth thighs, and calves and her feet and toes are to just die for. Imagine Aimee's face and Dani's legs and feet on the same body...talk about perfection.

2015-09-12

Yes delicious.

2015-08-08

Gorgeous feet

2014-11-18

My grammar was absolutely terrible in that last post lol, but I hope this gets fixed in the future.

2014-11-18

As always, I have to be a contrarian. Since I have no interest whatsoever in this girl, I almost didn't post, but I *absolutely* disagree with both of you (and @Mr Hate). In the spirit of the Site Guidelines quotation o When deciding whether or not to report a picture as "Poor Quality", keep in mind that sometimes a poor quality picture is better than no picture at all. That goes especially for galleries with very few pictures, or rare finds. Now, I usually apply that to a gallery with less than a full page of pictures, not exactly the case here. *But* for galleries where I'm a *true fan* of the celeb, especially if they're somewhat obscure like this one (only a couple pages of photos), I'd *still* rather have *some* picture than *none* as long as it's not truly *bad* like blurry/motion, out of focus, or subject so far in the distance you can barely tell there are feet or who she is. That's not the case *at all* with about half of what someone just reported here, and if I were the uploader, *I'd* consider your reports false or even 'malicious.' Maybe I'm in the minority (as usual), but I don't *have* to be able to zoom in close enough to make out hair stubble on her pinky toe. Sometimes a pic is more enjoyable if you *can't* see those imperfections. There's even a Murphy's Law corollary about that: "Anything that looks good at a distance will look worse up-close, and vice-versa." Often, any *new* material is welcome if it's half-way decent MQ (as these are) and shows something new, unique or special not seen in the other gallery photos. Of course, the *hope* is that, as often happens, having such an image here will inspire someone to go find the same image in higher resolution. I often post unique MQ's for just that reason, that one of the picky bastards like Mr Hate or Pinchy will go *find* a better one, best me and wreck my stats! LOL. But if they can't *see* the MQ original, they don't know that image exists and will never look for an upgrade. I think too many of 'you people,' you young turks, are spoiled rotten by billboard sized UHQ wallpapers on a 60" HDTV/monitor. If you'd been around on a dial-up modem in the early 90s you'd have been *damn grateful* to get an image this size & clarity of Cindy Crawford or Cindy Margolis (and only have to wait about 10 minutes for it to download). You pussies! </rant>

2014-11-18

@BiB60 I agree been through a few of these reported pics and some I unreported this gallery is NOT like a Jen Aniston with a ton of pics and some of these pics reported as PQ are not that bad @ALL look before accepting reports here in this gallery some are indeed PQ some really are not that bad heck even one was reported AC where there was no AC unreported that one as well.

2014-11-18

Thanks for the support tweety. I figured I'd be *all alone* on this one, but about half or 2/3 of those reported pics there was *nothing* wrong with in a gallery of this size or for fans of this girl. Yep, if they were in Selena's gallery, probably throw 'em overboard without any objection, with *thousands* of HQ pics to choose from.

2014-11-18

@BiB60 Definitely not alone on this one as I said one pic was reported AC where it was just toes I think whoever reported these just went stupid and reported "willy nilly" :)

2014-11-18

As I said, if I were the uploader, I'd be *pissed.* I just unreported some more where *even* in the 'toenail' pic without enlarging it I could *clearly* see a close-up of both feet almost bare, and I'm half-blind. I think whoever reported all those was in a bad mood or wants only UHQ. That just does *not* happen with social media pics, part of my rant I left out! They're typically about 600x600 and not available *anywhere* else, so you either take 'em as is or do without new & unique material, often more intimate candids & selfies of interest to fans.

2014-11-19

Strongly disagree with you backinblack60 and tweety. @ConstanceOMG is right, there's is NO point to have a picture that isnt even worth being in the gallery, forget how many pictures shes has. People come to this site to SEE a celebs feet, I'n sorry you made couple valid points. But lets focus on why were on this site to begin with.

2014-11-19

@EbonyToe$- Maybe you didn't *see* which ones were reported earlier, but you could *clearly* and *easily* see her *entire* both feet in them. Someone was just pissed because they were 'social media' size and not 'wallpaper' size. AND, it's not just our *opinion* but it's the SITE RULE that PQ not be reported if it's a smaller gallery and/or older, obscure, rare celebs or finds. I've seen assholes report the *only* few photos in a 50-year-old vintage gallery, before HQ digital photos even existed. It's easy... SOME picture is better than NO picture.

2014-11-19

lol @backinblack stop trying to sound like you're intellectually over us my friend. Calm down, your wrong anyway. I came to this site to see celebs feet, why would I possibly want pictures of celebs feet I can't even see...

2014-11-19

@Ebony "lets focus on why were on this site to begin with" some celebs don't have HQ pics of their feet so some while PQ pics may bother you at least you have something IT is better than "hum I wonder what her feet look like?" and sometimes others will find HQ pics:)

2014-11-19

@Gas-Ass- So you and these other n00bs from 2013 are trying to tell us you can't *see* and enjoy any feet that aren't life-sized and Hi-Def? That's ridiculous, and you're arguing with two guys who have been here almost since the site was started. And the site *owner* says that I'm correct. We don't care why *you* came here, we care what most users *want* to see and what the *rule* says.

2014-11-19

@BiB60 Now I know why @Hate barely even talks on the walls LOL:)

2014-11-19

@tweety- Exactly. You'll notice *even* the ones we *didn't* unreport are still here and not justified or removed, which ought to tell those guys something if other users won't justify the reports.

2014-11-19

@tweety I would imagine it could get frustrating for people like Mr. Hate who try to explain things to certain people. Kinda like teaching the Chinese alphabet to a blind person (and not in Braille).

2014-11-19

@G.ASS - @BiB is not wrong and has the site rules to back him up. All you have is, "I came to this site to see celebs feet". If you don't want to see some rare pics because they're blurred, don't click on the thumbprint. It's that easy! When I said @C.OMG is correct, I was only referring to the decisions an uploader needs to make including the size of the gallery and the rarity of certain pics.

2014-11-19

@54- And yet, as in Plato's allegory of the cave, some of us feel obligated to keep going back into the cave and trying.

2014-11-26

@BinB...Now I know why I came back to WF...I missed that highly opinionated, contrarian viewpoint you excel at...BTW..I agree...while this one has nice feet...OVERRATED!

2014-12-02

lol its just a website, I do agree with not having so many poor quality pictures though. @warpedmind not sure how you can find these overrated, but hey everyone has their own opinion. And I love how the somewhat *moderators* of this site treat their guests haha.

2014-12-02

@Warpy>"I missed that highly opinionated, contrarian viewpoint you excel at..." Yeah, I hear that a lot. People don't have to agree with me and usually don't. But I hope I at least make them wonder why and think about it some.

2014-11-10

Rocsi Diaz, she's on the site. Also rated gorgeous, and is a top favorite of mine.

2014-11-10

U sure about the spelling on that? I can't find her

2014-11-10

http://www.wikifeet.com/Rocsi