|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » Niche To Meet You |
| 1-29 of 29 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 08-01-10 06:45pm - 5257 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User  Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
Niche To Meet You This should probably be called something like Rodent Rant. It may fall short of one of Wittyguy's polemics but it is still a long ramble. First of all, sad though it may be, I spend hours doing a review. I do actually view the material and sample the site that I review, which is why I only do 3 or 4 a year. If it's a good site I hope the review brings customers to the site. It is clear that regular members also put in the same effort. Admittedly it is just for fun. Then along comes the 3 line newbie review consisting of great girls, great videos, great pics, what more can you ask, 100. This then becomes the front page review, which in all honesty, can't be that good for business. I already have a solution to the menace of the 3 line newbie review, but it will offend everyone, so I wont repeat it again here. However, the reviews section would be easier to navigate without having to negotiate those minimum requirement reviews. I believe business would also be better as it would generate more links. I regard them as a bloody nuisance that gets in the way of my browsing. Secondly, members here already know there is a limited style of porn available. The companies churn it out, it sells so they churn more of it out. When someone starts slapping the ass of the girl or shouting "you're a whore, what are you, you're a whore" while pulling the girls mouth so hard her eyes pop out, and it sells, everyone does the same, and you have everything looking the same. Occasionally someone tries something different and if it sells, everyone copies it. Most of us here hate what mainstream porn is doing. Anything outside that is niche. Messmer wants a site where he can watch women strip fom clothed to totally naked, with some lingerie involved, and there's nothing out there. I would like to see hardcore pics and videos with the same style and quality that you see on good softcore sites, but it's hard to find. I love to see the ass but for the most part I like to see the whole body, whether it is softcore or hardcore. I was discussing this with Drooler in another section, but I think we have both come to the conclusion that softcore has higher standards than hardcore. This may be perverse but I think some of the best hardcore photos come from the real cheapo sites. For instance, Jaw Dropping Asses has some great photos. You get to see the whole girl with the accent on the ass. It's another niche site of course, for big butt fans, but the photos are to my taste. Is this because they spend less money, so all they do is just take the photos of the girl having sex? No need to spend time and money on those close ups which would have even a gynaecologist throwing up in his corn flakes. I just can't work out why the can't do a Metart or Torrid Art job for hardcore. Fact is they can't, or maybe they wont. I wont touch the Brazzers Naughty America Reality Kings blow up dolls sites. Sounds silly but I don't want the girls to look like porn stars. I like the natural look. Somewhere along the line someone decided that the best look was the porn stars hookers clothes, the breast jobs, and the baked tan. It's mainstream porn and it sells. Suppose I can't argue with that. But why has it evolved in this way? Why would what Messmer wants or what I want or what you lot want be relatively rare? Most of the members here have already said what they think about the irritating male, the tats, the fake breasts, slapping the ass, the usual 20 or so irritating things that everyone here hates. Wonder why this is, and why our tastes are different to mainstream? I know it isn't that everyone here has identical taste. It's just we all seem to have the same top 20 annoying things or turn offs. Not all pervs are the same, but it appears most of what mainstream puts out is hated by us. Has it evolved like this? Is it easier to make? Is that what most people really want? Do they consume it like a porn McDonalds? It's easy and everyone consumes it so it must be okay. It's nice to see some genuine small sites still producing good quality material. We are still spoilt for choice. But the mainstream stuff doesn't even seem like mainstream. Go back 10 years and anyone looking at mainstream material now would be highly surprised at the content of the modern production. What is the best site for seeing the whole girl or the whole body rather than some gynaecologists nightmare? I know some of this has all been gone into before. The recession is biting. Standards seem to have fallen. Fewer updates and some dirty tricks are still around. Old material recycled as new. That means companies will play safe and do more of the same. I'm not jaded. I just want to see females looking like females. Strange thing is, on a lot of these sites they don't. So if I want a site where females look like females, real ones, where you get to see the whole girl/woman, it's a niche. Whereas what is now mainstream seems so far way from what used to be considered porn, it seems more like niche material. Edited on Aug 01, 2010, 06:51pm | |
|
||
| 08-01-10 06:57pm - 5257 days | #2 | |
|
Goldfish (0)
Active User  Posts: 265 Registered: Jan 19, '08 Location: Boston, MA |
Hasn't PU already handled the weight of the newbie user reviews? My understanding is they are weighted lower and flagged as newbies until they have a certain # of reviews under their belt. I agree with you there are trends in porn and they don't always go the way we want them to. I will say though that I enjoy natural looking girls in hardcore and don't have much trouble at all in finding them. Right now I'm a member of Teen Mega World and they have hundreds of videos with beautiful models. You can also take a look at Young Legal Porn, Only Cuties or Little Mutt. To be honest, even Reality Kings seems to be going in that direction these days. | |
|
||
| 08-01-10 11:22pm - 5256 days | #3 | |
|
slutty (0)
Active User Posts: 475 Registered: Mar 02, '09 Location: Pennsylvania |
Hey man, good rant, I think like Goldfish said, there are some pretty decent hardcore sites out there. I am also not a fan of the Brazzers-type of porn, but apparently there are many that are. In addition, I think that perhaps the naturally attractive girls on sites like Met for the most part aren't willing to do hardcore, although I guess I have seen a few. I think it is a lot easier to get a girl to pose nude, than to get a girl to do hardcore material on film, and thus the "stuttier" tattooed ladies are more common in the hardcore. I also think there is some one-upsmanship that goes on in porn production - look at what I got this chick to do! And further that a lot of porn is produced in the niche that the producers find hot assuming that their tastes fit those of the population at large. I remember seeing a barely legal DVD like 10 years ago where the chick took a piss on the dude's floor, and I was like what the fuck is this shit? And pissing was in every scene on the DVD - certainly not why I bought it, nor was it what I was looking for. I do also wish there was more hardcore material without all the damn closeups. Bunny Lebowski: I'll suck your cock for a thousand dollars. Brandt: Ah hahahahaha! Wonderful woman. We're all, we're all very fond of her. Very free-spirited. | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 03:33am - 5256 days | #4 | |
|
hodayathink (0)
Active User Posts: 312 Registered: Mar 27, '09 Location: Illinois |
And I believe they kept that up for like the first 20-30 DVDs in that series (at least), and I believe they're up to 110 or so now. Damn time flies. But to the original point, I think the biggest reasons you haven't seen the mainstream change as much as you may want is because of the recession. As much as I see comments around here all the time about how anyone with a camera can basically start shooting porn, it takes a good deal of money to start up a porn site. And it takes a lot of money to start one up with any sort of production values to it and a decent amount of consistent updates. So were really not seeing very much in the way of new sites out there producing high production value hardcore boy/girl scenes (which is basically the most expensive porn to shoot if you leave out multiple partners and anal). When I look at the world of mainstream porn as it is right now, natural girls have honestly been making a comeback for the past 2-3 years. If you look at the recent recipients of AVN awards, no girl with implants has won Female Performer of the Year since 2007, and even most of the scenes that win the big awards (best girl/girl, best boy/girl (known as best couples), best anal) feature natural women. Unfortunately, that ended up coinciding with the economic downturn, which had 2 effects. The first was that not that many people had enough money to start a site. The second was that porn spending went down, so it became much harder for sites to get new members, especially brand new sites that didn't fit into some sort of niche. Which is why most new sites that have stayed alive are either niche sites or girl's own websites (where shooting content is really cheap). And, like the OP said, with bigger sites, you become afraid to change (or don't want to change) because what you're doing is what's selling for you right now. And in an extreme case such as Brazzers, for example, if they honestly went and featured natural girls to the point where it was even 50-50, they'd probably lose members in the short run, because many of the members they already have would become upset at the transformation, and they probably wouldn't gain that many members from the change. And honestly, most of you don't really consider a difference between a site that goes 50/50 real-to-fake and a site that goes 70/30 or 90/10. As to why big fake tits became popular, part of the reason is that it is what was marketed. Can't deny that. But another part of it is the fact that porn is all about fantasy. Tons and tons of people watch porn to see (and vicariously do) things that they never get to do or see (or do very rarely) in real life. Which is why, for example, anal is so popular. And while natural girls are great, most of us see natural girls all around us every day. You know what we don't see? Girls with big tits in slutty outfits (unless we work in or very close to a strip club). And as much as you or me or most of the people here may care whether they're real or fake, I've found that there are a ton of people out there that don't (and for the record, I'm usually one of those people). There are other reasons, of course, but that's the most logical one that I've seen repeated. I think too often we get trapped in this mindset that "I don't like it, and most of my friends don't like it, so it can't be that popular", ignoring the facts that: a.) There's a lot of people out there that are neither you nor your friends, and b.) Your friends tend to be your friends because they have the same tastes as you, so they aren't the greatest starting point when it comes to statistical samples about opinions. And to end this semi-coherent rambling, I'm going to touch on something that's annoying the crap out of me lately that's right probably right down your alley. Mainstream American porn is in trouble. At this point, there's almost no question of that. And no, it's not because they aren't shooting what people want. Because of that, companies (especially DVD companies) are either shutting down or shooting less movies. Which means there are less scenes around for girls to shoot. Which means unless you're one of the top 20-40 girls, you're getting paid less. Which has led to a lot of girls that have been around a long time as natural girls finally taking the plunge and getting implants. Why? Because new boobs mean more scenes to shoot for at least a 4-6 month period, if not longer. I personally have nothing against implants when they don't go overboard (which, honestly, a lot of them do, but not all). I just wish that some of these girls could have stayed natural, because while they still look good, they looked great before (Rebeca Linares, I'm looking directly at you). | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 07:01am - 5256 days | #5 | |
|
Khan (0)
Suspended  Posts: 1,737 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: USA |
Not to sidetrack the rest of your rant, but I feel this part needed a reply ... I'd be curious where you see those 3 line reviews here at PU. While I know we do get them sometimes, they rarely make it past the approval process. Usually they're disapproved/deleted w/in a few hours of being submitted. I'd say it's *very* rare for a review to be approved if it's under 50 words. Admittedly, some relatively brief reviews are approved. Still, I'd bring to your attention that many of the regulars here started off submitting pretty short reviews. Through their own initiative and coaching from me and fellow users, they eventually came to submit thorough reviews that are a benefit to all. Also, as Goldfish mentioned, until the reviewer has earned 5 points, their reviews don't factor into a site's overall rating score. Anyway, just wanted to set the record straight about the "3 line newbie reviews". Former PornUsers Senior Administrator Now at: MyPorn.com "To get your ideas across use small words, big ideas, and short sentences."-John Henry Patterson | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 07:55am - 5256 days | #6 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Porn is a business, and the idea is to make as much money as possible. That means you don't waste time and resources on trying to make the "best" possible product, but the cheapest product that will sell the most. And since gonzo hardcore is cheap to produce and sells to a wide audience, that is what is made. There is also a large market for quality softcore, and there are many sites that serve that market: both megasites and smaller sites that hope to grow and be profitable. But the market for quality hardcore seems to be much smaller than the market for quality softcore. And I would guess the reason is that if hardcore crap sells, why bother to spend the extra time and effort and money trying to produce quality hardcore when the real profit comes from the lower quality product? I'm not in the porn business, and I'm not a business expert, but that is my guess on why there is so much hardcore crap out there. But, there is also the fact that what you or I might consider crap, could be considered exciting or stimulating to someone else. Personal tastes do vary widely. Edited on Aug 02, 2010, 08:01am | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 07:57am - 5256 days | #7 | |
|
Denner (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,217 Registered: Mar 03, '07 Location: Denmark |
I sense frustration in that Squirrel input - and I understand it very well... When TheSquirrel mentions 3-line-reviews, I feel he means it in an overall idea about some of those short and very quick reviews - NOT only, but in a lot of cases made by so called newbies. And generally they are useless compared to thorough, well founded reviews some - ok, more experienced pornusers - make here at PU. AND....I KNOW we've been through these discussions before - but I sincerely sense some strange - and maybe not so strange - kind of inflation... About the "Secondly" in that same input - I'll get back later....  "I don't drink anymore - I freeze it, and eat it like a popcicle" | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 09:16am - 5256 days | #8 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
Reading between the lines I think what frustrates the squirrel is the fact that he just got finished submitting an extensive and thorough review that not only required a great deal of time on his part but would also be helpful to the site he reviewed and this review is being quickly replaced (and therefore most likely ignored) by some very short newbie review on the home page of PU. People tend to click on the first site review listed. Maybe if two or more reviews are being listed on the home page on the same day the most valuable one could stay on top and not be replaced by a very short and inadequate review??? | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 09:17am - 5256 days | #9 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
Hey Khan, any badges for making a 1000 posts to the forum?  | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 09:52am - 5256 days | #10 | |
|
Capn (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,740 Registered: Sep 05, '09 Location: Near the Beer! |
Well, as a fellow sufferer from this cloned mainstream ennui dominance, I can only sympathise at the lack of consistant material available for your chosen niche. To paraphrase what has been said earlier, creatively it requires no cerebral input other than to clone what has already been done, but give people more of the same for the same or less money. There are corollaries to that in many spheres of business. That is why so many bland average cars are sold, for instance. The trick is to latch onto somebody who is being more creative & listens more closely to customer input. They are out there, but they really take some finding.  Cap'n.  Admiral of the PU Hindenburg. 2009 PU AwardHilarious Post of the Year 2010 PU Award ( I would have preferred it to be Helpful Post of the Year for Guys who Hate 'Retail Therapy' ) :0/ Sanity is in the eye of the Beholder! Edited on Aug 02, 2010, 09:57am | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 10:02am - 5256 days | #11 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
Nice one messmer congrats on the 1000. Your contributions have always been highly readable and entertaining. I thought Toadsith would be first to 1000 but it appears they buried him with Patrick McGoohan. Very astute comment too. I do generally want to drum up some customers for the site I review. Can't complain with my last review. It was replaced after 8 minutes, but by a very capable newbie. I have already left a trust vote for him. As GCode has pointed out we do get some really good newbie reviews. Khan, Denner, and yourself are right in suggesting I'm exaggerating. Some of the newbies are good, what really annoys me is the poor ones getting in the way. Yes I'm lazy, I just want to flick through all the good reviews without having to navigate around the poor ones. I just read another thorough informative review by Ik2fireone who really put his finger on a trend I have noticed recently, particularly in the teens category. It's a site with very attractive girls, who end up looking unattractive, so I'm ranting again on this thread later concerning sites who get it wrong compared to those who get it right. For a start, poor bloody American Vice and Reg Berkeley got it right, and they're out of business. There are those who make the absolute most of their niche and resources, while others just piss it all away. Oh yeah I almost forgot. Some very good replies, and hodayathink is spot on. Good well thought out post. Edited on Aug 02, 2010, 10:08am | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 10:29am - 5256 days | #12 | |
|
Khan (0)
Suspended Posts: 1,737 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: USA |
Nope, sorry. But you do get my hearty congratulations.  Former PornUsers Senior AdministratorNow at: MyPorn.com "To get your ideas across use small words, big ideas, and short sentences."-John Henry Patterson | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 10:37am - 5256 days | #13 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
I agree! I thought Toadsith would be the first. He was so far ahead of us all I didn't think we'd ever catch up with him. I wasn't after a record, though ... I just like to gab and have the time to do it!  | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 12:17pm - 5256 days | #14 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
...and another thing. Maybe I should write a letter to The Times, but why do some sites get it all horribly wrong? Maybe they don't, and make a mint while sites who are customer oriented struggle. Ik2fireone was right about the site he reviewed recently. They have attractive young girls and yet they somehow manage to make them look unattractive. So many of those teen sites make beautiful young girls look like meat hanging in a butchers shop. The camera alters reality. I used to visit Mary Millington's shop where she quite often served behind the counter. This was when you could get years in prison for selling hardcore porn. The strain of the court cases was showing towards the end. That aside, you could see she was Mary Milington, yet you would just walk past her in the street without looking twice. She was attaractive but not stunning. The camera made her look stunning. I went out with a girl like that many years ago. She was attractive, but put her in front of the camera and she looked like a film star. The camera loved her. Look at some older women, and their flesh is still great and sexually attractive. In front of a camera they can look like something from those readers wives things in old softcore mags. Yechh. I always thought if you see a girl in front of you naked it is so totally different to on stage or on film. Quite a few of them look sensational with their clothes off, with all their faults, but put them in front of a camera and some look like dog meat, some the same, and some sensational. Often the camera alters reality to make women look better or worse, sometimes it doesn't, but I don't know why this is. Being able to harness that look seems beyond some sites. Then there are sites who have fatal flaws, or don't make the best of their resources. I thought the Torbe Network was exceptional for the girls but some of the camerawork was awful. Shaky close ups which were amateurish. Other times there was a brilliant shot of the whole girl having sex, which I personally love. It was awful for pictures too. Either no pics, pics which didn't download, or just a few you could capture. But it had great girls, was very original and different, and I wanted to bring them some customers through my review. Then poor old Ace Of Aces somehow pressed the wrong button and got signed up for something he didn't want, and I felt horribly responsible. Drooler and messmer seemed to put their fingers on what is lacking in the Karups organisation. They are right in talking about the pussy fixation on that site. Not enough ass and whole body shots. There is also a sameness about the lighting and settings which doesn't do the girls any favours. It's still good but they could do so much more. Porn.com for me had the best value on the net and I was going to do a review. I was a memeber of Lethal 18 and decided to cancel that to sign up for a month on porn.com which is the same site, just a different home page. I thought it would be easier navigation. I was going to review it as the best bargain on the net imo. As I cancelled there was a pre ticked cross sell to join a network for a discount. The network was porn.com under a different name and was offered at a discount of $34.95. So they were trying to trick me into joining a site that I was cancelling membership to, at a price of $34.95 instead of the $9.95 I was paying. I was so disgusted I did not sign up for another month and did not do a review, although I did make a comment under "This dirty trick should be stopped." Teen Core Club has for me some of the most sensational girls in porn. They have a completely non existent cutomer service. I have never received any reply to any email sent. I was going to renew for another month but cancelled rather than be treated by contempt when I asked them did the discount price for the second month still apply for the third month. I felt about them the same way they felt about me - f**k em. Their navigation is awful. Everything about them suggests they have total contempt for customers. No zips, no update list, lousy log in etc etc. I gave them an 82 but they should be scoring 92 if they were more customer oriented. Take a look at Dracken's latest review of one of their sites. Still the same crap. They just don't care. But they probably make good money. Maybe they all get things right. It's about money so maybe they make more money by doing things the way they do. Okay, they can continue to do things their way, but I am going to continue to complain about them. Who makes the best of their resources? American Vice would have got my vote. They were only a dvd site but they did everything you could possibly ask for within the limitations of that category. They had the best customer service on the planet. They're gone and complete assholes like TeenCoreClub remain. Life's a bitch. Edited on Aug 02, 2010, 12:22pm | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 04:39pm - 5256 days | #15 | |
|
anyonebutme (0)
Active User  Posts: 294 Registered: Aug 23, '09 |
This sums up the whole wall of text. You hate mainstream porn but can't get away from the most mainstream site in existence, because it is just so damn cheap. Niche costs money. I last bought an 18min fetish clip priced at $1/min ($18 total). Fucking amazingly great scene. But how many of you would buy it, even if it were your favorite fetish starring your favorite girl? No one? Rather sign up to Videobox and set your download manager to grab 100 random gonzo dvds to sort through? Yea, ain't that how it always goes  Edited on Aug 02, 2010, 04:45pm | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 04:43pm - 5256 days | #16 | |
|
anyonebutme (0)
Active User Posts: 294 Registered: Aug 23, '09 |
This here is a good site to suit your fancy, though they focus more on g/g scenes than b/g scenes: https://www.pornusers.com/replies_view.html?id=51179 We all know what we like, but we simply do not want to pay for it. Edited on Aug 02, 2010, 04:54pm | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 04:46pm - 5256 days | #17 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
I gave my reasons why I liked porn.com on another thread. I hate Videobox but some of the sites on porn.com have pics close to what I like. They show the whole girl rather than gynaecological close ups. It doesn't have to be expensive to be good, or even in high definition, which is one of the points I also made on the other thread. It is though sometimes just taking the pictures or video recording two people having sex is better than what currently passes for mainstream. Sometimes expensive is good. But just doing porn the old fashioned way sometimes looks remarkably good compared to what we see now. Edited on Aug 02, 2010, 04:50pm | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 04:58pm - 5256 days | #18 | |
|
anyonebutme (0)
Active User Posts: 294 Registered: Aug 23, '09 |
Just kind of randomly talking to everyone, not necessarily you in particular. It's all good  People like cheap. And honestly, I think most people watch porn less frequently than those here, which I have to imagine allows one to easily tolerate the things that many here have grown to hate... fake tits, tattoos, idiot males, etc. | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 05:04pm - 5256 days | #19 | |
|
Drooler (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 1,831 Registered: Mar 11, '07 Location: USA |
I think "3-line review" isn't necessarily meant to be taken literally. It's like saying that someone is a few cards short of a deck. And suffice it to say it means a review that isn't a review at all. 6-8 bullet-pointed generalities and 3-4 sentences of vague and overly general "bottom line" sentence fragments can't possibly qualify as a review, if the term really means anything. You read it and still don't have nearly enough of an idea as to whether you'd join the site yourself. It's just a fucking waste of time. For everyone. Including the putz who wrote it. It can never be only about quantity (e.g., word count), of course, but that's how some of these piss-ant poor excuses for reviews cross the threshold and make it to press here. So yeah, I'm bothered by them, though I figure that they'll just be noticed, glanced at, and from that point on permanently ignored by those who bothered with them that much. We don't want to scare off newbies, nor do we want to make it seem like a graduate class in English, but so long as reviews are accepted or rejected as they are now, we'll keep getting the occasional "what the fuck was that about?" review of the atmosphere at the top of Mt. McKinley. I can live with it. Hey, I think I'll go get the junk mail from my front step now and toss it in the recycling bin ... I feel, y'know, inspired ... I wanted something new, so I left England for New England. Edited on Aug 02, 2010, 05:15pm | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 06:04pm - 5256 days | #20 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
LOL - Drooler said it better than me. Justme - I didn't want to bring money and cost into it, because cheap porn can look good. One of the reasons is they just shoot people having sex rather than trying to be the Jean-Luc Godard or Steven Spielberg of porn, or trying to get gynaecological close ups that make you want to watch Bugs Bunny instead. But you bring up an important point. It's how many people are willing to pay for quality over quantity. Then it all depends on what you call quality. If they spend shitloads of money on body makeup and special effects to make the girl look like some glossy blow up doll I'll pass. Give me the natural look with natural skin. It's how they spend their money that counts. Whereas for them what counts is how many people are willing to pay a premium for that particular quality or niche. Would I pay a premium for a site with my taste? I should say tastes because I have lots of them, but one of them is seeing the whole girl have sex, not just a part of her. I hate close ups. Others prefer close ups. Yes is the answer. One of the reasons is I think porn is dirt cheap. Apologies to older members for repeating myself yet again, but for all the newer members, the first porn video I bought was for 60 pounds (that's $100 for ONE video) in a time when it would get you 2 years inside if you were caught selling that sort of thing. To me cost is almost irrelevant. It does come into it but not a lot. I'll take my sort of quality over quantity any day. Sometimes that quality comes dirt cheap because people can still produce dirt cheap quality porn. It doesn't always have to be high production cost to be good in my opinion. To get that high quality softcore look in hardcore may cost more. I would be willing to pay but how many others would? I also hate a type of over made up softcore look. Give me the natural skin look but well photographed. I am not sure how many find cost is almost irrelevant. To me it is clear that you can produce good looking porn with a sensible attitude, without those top 20 hates we all have. That's a pretty good start. Shame they don't have that printed in a manual. If junior in his back to front baseball cap can learn to read, maybe he can use that as a guideline when shooting his next masterpiece. Edited on Aug 02, 2010, 07:41pm | |
|
||
| 08-02-10 10:59pm - 5255 days | #21 | |
|
graymane (0)
Suspended  Posts: 1,411 Registered: Feb 20, '10 Location: Virginia |
Can't do much for squirrel's overall dilemma, but I will say I agree strongly with him concerning the garbage now being thrown out there by the porn industry. The word "smut" has now taken on new meaning and dimension, as it applies to the appalling number of porn sites that's adopted this idea that "raw shock" sells...even if they have to go into the toilet to get it. Slapping women around, shouting insults, grabbing them by the hair, throat,tits, or any other appendage the guy can get his ratty hands on to get the desired attention from the weird creeps out there who digs that crap, is seemingly what the porn-peddlers thinks everybody wants. Another welcome reminder by Squirrel comes in his disenchantment for lingering closeups, a view I support and have posted unequivocally in distaste on this forum. He also gets thumbs-up on his admirable comments about more concern going into getting quality softcore on the net. It's woefully scarce. I might have to politely take a differen stand, however, on squirrel's beef about reviews. A wordy review, though more favored by seasoned PU members, can be effectively condensed if the writer tells me basically what I want to know.... it's how the review is worded that matters. If the reviewer can make a positive and comprehensive impact on both his PU readers and the site he's reviewing, then I feel a contribution is made. I'll add a final thought: If a fair share of the porn sites out there would just peruse our forum, and take seriously what has been written by our members... and incorporate most of what they find into their site's operation and content, I haven't a miniscule of doubt the whole lot would experience a positive result in popularity, and certainly reputation. A hardy and deserving applause is certainly in order for the time and effort squirrel put into this eye-opener.  Edited on Aug 03, 2010, 05:50pm | |
|
||
| 08-03-10 02:24pm - 5255 days | #22 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
I am inclined to say it's along the line of McDonalds--"Billions Served!"--and every other fast food eatery in that they (the porn makers) keep pushing the envelope and we the consumers, though we never really ask for it explicitly, we never really say no to it either. "Big tits? Tattoos? Closeups I didn't even begin to think were possible? Plus choking, slapping, and spitting all in one video? Sure! Sounds like a hell of a deal, and it's all in good fun as long as no one's being killed, right? (And if they are, then whatever you do don't tell me about it!) This sure ain't Playboy anymore so I guess just go fuckin' nuts as long as the camera's on. Oh, and how 'bout you super-size the whole thing while you're at it, buddy, seeing how I'm the paying customer and all." And like McDonalds and company with the ever expanding waistlines of their many, many, many customers, we now have a glut of cookie cutter wham-bam-no-thank-you-ma'am porn that pretty much looks and tastes the same and has many, even us depraved and dedicated fans, wondering if things have gone too far. If we haven't fallen over the precipice of envelope-pushing culture and consumption in a drunken haze of instant gratification then we are certainly are very near it. I mean the way things have been going in the last ten years where will we be in the next ten?  I would like to think that the porn industry is a self-correcting mechanism and in time it will bring real quality to all niches and tastes, starting with the big mainstream American companies, but then again that would realistically take years and would likely leave quite a few innocent victims in its wake (including us as consumers and fans). (Now how's that for some ranting?  ) "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove Edited on Aug 03, 2010, 02:41pm | |
|
||
| 08-03-10 02:55pm - 5255 days | #23 | |
|
Capn (0)
Active User Posts: 1,740 Registered: Sep 05, '09 Location: Near the Beer! |
It was gathering momentum quite nicely there.  You stopped when you were just getting on a roll though!  Promising start. You'll get the hang of it.  Cap'n. Admiral of the PU Hindenburg. 2009 PU AwardHilarious Post of the Year 2010 PU Award ( I would have preferred it to be Helpful Post of the Year for Guys who Hate 'Retail Therapy' ) :0/ Sanity is in the eye of the Beholder! | |
|
||
| 08-03-10 03:02pm - 5255 days | #24 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Thanks for the encouragement, Cap'n, but I'm trying to not snap.  "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 08-03-10 03:06pm - 5255 days | #25 | |
|
Capn (0)
Active User Posts: 1,740 Registered: Sep 05, '09 Location: Near the Beer! |
The art of the rant is to go with the snap & use it for fuel. If done properly though you should quickly regain composure having entertained & vented. I love rants...... For me it doesn't matter whether I am the Ranter or Rantee. Cap'n. Admiral of the PU Hindenburg. 2009 PU AwardHilarious Post of the Year 2010 PU Award ( I would have preferred it to be Helpful Post of the Year for Guys who Hate 'Retail Therapy' ) :0/ Sanity is in the eye of the Beholder! | |
|
||
| 08-03-10 03:18pm - 5255 days | #26 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
You should be on the look out for RagingBuddhist's posts then; he's one of the top ranters here at PU, or at least one of our most bitter and ill-tempered members (I say all this with love of course!), but in a good and funny way. I don't know how he does it but his posts almost always make me laugh. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 08-03-10 03:21pm - 5255 days | #27 | |
|
Capn (0)
Active User Posts: 1,740 Registered: Sep 05, '09 Location: Near the Beer! |
I always appreciate RB's work.... He goes with it. That is secret of a good rant. Holding back can prolong it, at the risk of fizzling the rant.  Cap'n Admiral of the PU Hindenburg. 2009 PU AwardHilarious Post of the Year 2010 PU Award ( I would have preferred it to be Helpful Post of the Year for Guys who Hate 'Retail Therapy' ) :0/ Sanity is in the eye of the Beholder! | |
|
||
| 08-03-10 04:35pm - 5255 days | #28 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
Nice one turbo. Hope you remembered to foam at the mouth while ranting. But the important thing is what you say is accurate. Where will it all go in ten years? Some think it will go the other way, and there was a prediction on a porn documentary that it would become softer. That was about two years ago. Another irritation is the sites that have that fatal flaw. Yes it seems no no one can do anything right, at least not where I'm concerned. They have great girls but awful customer service, great customer service, great girls, but lousy camerawork, they have great camerawork and customer service, but fake breasted tattooed godzilla monsters for girls, great girls, great camerawork, great customer service, but lousy spec videos, no pics, and download limits. PS - thanks graymane, yes would be nice if they followed the PU manual, but I don't think anyone knows if those porn burgers sell because of all that crap or despite it. Here's the really frightening Twilight Zone type thought - what if they sell because of it? doo doo doo doo doo doo... Edited on Aug 03, 2010, 07:09pm | |
|
||
| 08-04-10 01:47am - 5254 days | #29 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
 "Godzilla monsters for girls"? Hmm, sounds...interesting. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 1-29 of 29 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
