The Breast Enhancement Archive

The set was posted on PhotoClubs on 2-1-2013 and contains 50 images, 5 of which I posted in the Gallery on 4-6-2013, #1123-1127, pages 125-126.

Is the gallery deleted? ... I can't see any image ...

The gallery is being recreated.

Good news everyone! "The Gallery is being recreated!"

A very nice tweet from Chelsea:
[b][i]Chelsea Charms ‏@chelseacharmsx 4h
@freefalldoom Well I've reached 15 to 15.5K so I guess 16 or 17 or 20Kcc would be possible. I haven't found a limit yet[/b][/i]
[hr]
Such an inspiring pose... [attachment=968]

Quote:Nice Tweet from her talking about her growth!

@chelseacharmsx: they can grow around 100-300cc per day depending on how big the latest drain is

Taken from the other site

Hi Chelsea lovers,

I am unable to access Chelsea's gallery. When I try the gallery I get an Oops page, it asks me for username and password, which when I give it says it's wrong. Is it me or the gallery? It's making me a little nuts!

Thanks to whoever can answer my question.

Sierra36

The gallery is down ATM. Working on it.

New Chelsea Charms update... here are two samples. We really need to take up a collection and buy her a new hairbrush. LOL (Sorry Chels, just joking!)

[attachment=969][attachment=970]

lol, well i like the projection of the pic on the left

I like em both and I like her hair he he he.

AD

That top is being stretched to within an inch of its life!

(07-05-2013, 07:07 AM)Articdonkey Wrote: [ -> ]That top is being stretched to within an inch of its life!

Chelsea Charms: straining tops since 1999

AD

Here is a picture of Chels from 1999. She was stretching tops waaay before that, it seems.

Also, her gallery is back up. Chels Gallery

That's enough to make any straight man or gay woman as horny as all get out!

She was supposedly a natural D cup, but there's no unequivocal evidence from that era (the only possible evidence is a possible morph where 'she's' 100% nude, honestly i think it was just a head swap)

You mean the b&w photo supposedly of her pre-implanted self? That's a total head swap.

yes that one

now i wonder one thing, if she made full nude like that posted by JustSomeone, why she stopped doing them as she grew? :S

When she first started out was she not part of Kayla Kleevage's production group? She may have been advised that full nudity was the way to go, after all the world had never witnessed boobs as big as hers. As she became familiar with industry she realised that she could make money without full nudity as people would pay to see her just doing topless shots. She may not have been comfortable doing full nudity. I do find it a shame that she doesn't show quite as much flesh as the old days, normally it's just her in jeans lifting up her shirt. I'm not saying she should do nude but some bikini and underwear shots would be good.

I was a subscriber to Kayla's Kleevco site in 1999 when she introduced the outstanding new talent known as Chelsea Charms...I was fuckin' blown away...it was love at first sight! I joined both ChelseaCharms.com and PhotoClubs as they came on the market and have cherished those early photosets ever since. Without doing a lot of research, I can say that she was still posing bottomless in 2001, maybe later.
One can see her snatch at any live show. I saw her at three different venues recently and she danced bottomless each time. However, when I was having Polaroids shot (15 for $150) I asked for some bottomless shots and she said she never does bottomless photography. I almost said, "Well, maybe not anymore" but I didn't want to get slapped or knocked over with her tits (Letha Weapons had the right idea but Chelsea perfected it).
I can hardly wait until September when Chelsea will be back in Lansing (only an hour away from me).

(07-10-2013, 01:30 PM)titzling319 Wrote: [ -> ]I was a subscriber to Kayla's Kleevco site in 1999 when she introduced the outstanding new talent known as Chelsea Charms...I was fuckin' blown away...it was love at first sight! I joined both ChelseaCharms.com and PhotoClubs as they came on the market and have cherished those early photosets ever since. Without doing a lot of research, I can say that she was still posing bottomless in 2001, maybe later.
One can see her snatch at any live show. I saw her a three different venues recently and she danced bottomless each time. However, when I was having Polaroids shot (15 for $150) I asked for some bottomless shots and she said she never does bottomless photography. I almost said, "Well, maybe not anymore" but I didn't want to get slapped or knocked over with her tits (Letha Weapons had the right idea but Chelsea perfected it).
I can hardly wait until September when Chelsea will be back in Lansing (only an hour away from me).

That's great verbiage Titzling...truly made my day and harkened me back about 4 years ago when I was lucky enuff to enjoy a private Chels session. Her bottom was very much available, LOL! I didn't even think of asking for pics however.

Those were gr8 memories as well as gr8 MAMMARIES!

Maybe she only goes topless in photos now due to the increased scrutiny that is available with still photography? And you know, she's not in the shape she once was like during the "Changing Chelsea" era. But then again, most of us aren't!

Comparing Chelsea's waistline in current photos to older sets, it certainly appears that she is significantly thicker around the middle now. Sooo, I was pleasantly surprised, while seeing her in person for the first time, what great shape she was in (NOTE: great shape for a 36 year old, obviously not the same great shape as the 25, or so, year old in "Changing Chelsea"). As I have previously reported, I seem to remember that for a couple of years she didn't perform at all but only gave Private Dances, at least according to her schedule posted in ChelseaCharms.com which I checked on a regular basis (always hoping that she'd appear somewhere in Michigan). I had assumed that she didn't want to perform in this "heavy" condition.
At any rate, I tried to compliment her on getting back into such great shape and she didn't appear to understand what I was referring to. She claimed that she'd never, ever been out of shape.
I can't explain it but she continues to look bigger around the middle in recent photosets than she does in person. Also, not only does she look great but she seems to be in great condition since she does a great deal of climbing on tables and other physically demanding maneuvers while on stage.

(07-11-2013, 05:56 PM)titzling319 Wrote: [ -> ](NOTE: great shape for a 36 year old, obviously not the same great shape as the 25, or so, year old in "Changing Chelsea")

Hmm I have to say a big but here, some fitness women get at their peak shape after the 30's even after having children, so your argument can't be valid in many instances...not complaining just saying!

I think Titzling is stating the obvious. She has definitely appeared "thick" for some time now. A constant complaint of mine, I know, especially in the post-drain photos. But would I be content with her in my life day after day, night after night? Hells to the Y E S. She's a goddess through and through and we mere mortal men merely hold the standard high for our queen!