I've seen at least 2 ads somewhat humorously asserting that the pictures are 95 or 97% accurate in representing the girl.

the inaccurate 3-5% is most likely her face.  

ivory skin.  

I am also dead serious when I say I would run to see a girl with 93 to 97% accurate pictures. I also believe it when ad says real pictures or 100% accurate or 100% natural, unless it is from a booker having no established track record with me. Sometimes booker shows pics that do not match the description and I would have to ask booker to clear up any uncertainties.
 
Currently I am not sure if the inaccuracy is in the breasts, or tummy, or butt? Should I expect to see a Kfatty or the usual K-ho(ney)? Can someone TOFTT on this new girl and let us know?
 
It's still a great mystery to me why some good new girls have few or no reviews while the girls that are here longer keep getting reviews. For example, Lora is a great new girl but she only has 2 reviews.
 
CDL already gave 2 possible reasons (because the girls asked for review or it is easier to write fake review for girls with many reviews already) but I think most established reviewers or posters here are too smart to TOFTT.

Yes, for some girls it is strange that they never get any or only a few reviews.   There are some girls right now that I am waiting for a review before I commit.  They are (I think) from a booker who has a low reputation with me for the accuracy of the photos.

Perhaps if you name them here then someone may opine. Some people may not be motivated to write review but may know something. If photos accuracy are really important, then waiting for a trusted reviewer is smart.
 
And if you like to go where few men have gone before in LA, there are some girls waiting for a gentleman to heed the call of the wild: Tyra, Mina, Nicole, Lovely, Yocco, Clara, Bada, Gucci, Cho Rong.

For those here who weren't born yet. Lol