Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!

E-MAIL   PASS  

Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
  
Forum Thread A note about the site and any replies from other users.
Porn Users Forum » photoshoping/altering images
1-30 of 30 Posts Page 1
 
Thread Nav :  Refresh Page  |   First Post  |   Last Post  |   Porn Forum Home

12-19-09  09:32am - 5444 days Original Post - #1
pat362 (0)
Active User



Posts: 3,575
Registered: Jan 23, '07
Location: canada
photoshoping/altering images

We had a poll on December 16 about sites that photoshop some of their images and the results were 48% against and 30% for small alterations. In a strage coincidence, I was visiting a celebrity site and they had some of Tara Reid's recent Playboy shoot. These images are possibly the best argument as to why I cannot stand photoshoping. If it weren't for the fact that they said these were Tara's pictures then I wouldn't have been sure. The girl does resemble her but I'm almost certain that you could get the same images with CGI. Long live the Brown Coats.

12-19-09  10:06am - 5444 days #2
Jeffrey99 (0)
Active User



Posts: 106
Registered: Nov 04, '08
Location: Good Ole Midwest USA
Yep I agree. The last few celebs they had in Playboy look 20x worse in the photoshoots then they do in real life. The editing is overboard in Playboy. Main reason why I've canceled the magazine and all online sites.

Other sites I think are harder to tell. Unless it's something completely stupid like the Chloe18 site, where they edit out her 3 stars tattoo just under her panty line in the pics but of course it's clearly visible in the videos. Stuff like that is just very stupid.

12-19-09  10:29am - 5444 days #3
Drooler (0)
Disabled User



Posts: 1,831
Registered: Mar 11, '07
Location: USA
Originally Posted by pat362:


We had a poll on December 16 about sites that photoshop some of their images and the results were 48% against and 30% for small alterations. In a strage coincidence, I was visiting a celebrity site and they had some of Tara Reid's recent Playboy shoot. These images are possibly the best argument as to why I cannot stand photoshoping. If it weren't for the fact that they said these were Tara's pictures then I wouldn't have been sure. The girl does resemble her but I'm almost certain that you could get the same images with CGI.


Small alterations don't make the model look as though she were a CGI creation. I know you didn't exactly say that, but you did link the Tara Reid photos to small alterations as a "coincidence." But they don't coincide.

I don't understand why some people here are on some kind of "mission" to stamp out photoshopping of any kind. It's unwarranted, zero-tolerance extremism.

Ever used a photo editor to get out red eye? Or actually make skin color look more, not less, natural? In skillful hands, it does improve the quality of an image.

And if photoshopping is that repugnant, then why not all plastic surgery, all cosmetics, and all skin care? And why not throw in vitamins and fitness training? It wouldn't be any less extreme.

Somehow I'm reminded of someone I knew in high school who was adamant in his opinion that any sounds produced by electric or electronic instruments wasn't music. I wanted something new, so I left England for New England.

12-19-09  12:34pm - 5444 days #4
lk2fireone (0)
Active User



Posts: 3,618
Registered: Nov 14, '08
Location: CA
Fanaticism or extremism can take many forms. I recently had a conversation with a relative who told me, in no uncertain terms, that I should never take a pain pill. I told her that if I'm in pain, and a pain pill will sometimes help reduce the pain, I was going to take the pain pill. My relative got angry and told me I was wrong, that I should just get through the pain without the pills.

I figure it's easier for her to deal with my pain since she isn't the one who's feeling it. And why she was getting angry because she believes pain pills are worthless, is a sign of intolerance or stupidity, as far as I'm concerned. I wasn't telling her I was overdosing on the pain pills; instead, I told her that I sometimes took pills because my body has physical problems, which is a problem common to many people as they get older.

Anyway, back on the topic of photoshopping, if it's done right, it can improve a picture. But there are many times when the photoshopping is overdone. Partially it's a matter of personal taste. But some photographers and some magazines/sites go in for strong use of photoshopping and that reduces the attractiveness/eroticism of the photos. Playboy tends to overuse photoshop/airbrush/whatever. But there are many other magazines/sites that overuse photoshop as well.

There is also the use of photoshopping to give an unreal appearance to the model/photo in a deliberate manner, as an expression of art or fashion. Maybe a little bit of that might be OK or interesting, but I much prefer a more natural-appearing female model instead of one with stylized, weird-appearing skin tones.

12-19-09  02:48pm - 5444 days #5
Drooler (0)
Disabled User



Posts: 1,831
Registered: Mar 11, '07
Location: USA
Originally Posted by lk2fireone:


Fanaticism or extremism can take many forms. I recently had a conversation with a relative who told me, in no uncertain terms, that I should never take a pain pill. I told her that if I'm in pain, and a pain pill will sometimes help reduce the pain, I was going to take the pain pill. My relative got angry and told me I was wrong, that I should just get through the pain without the pills.

I figure it's easier for her to deal with my pain since she isn't the one who's feeling it. And why she was getting angry because she believes pain pills are worthless, is a sign of intolerance or stupidity, as far as I'm concerned. I wasn't telling her I was overdosing on the pain pills; instead, I told her that I sometimes took pills because my body has physical problems, which is a problem common to many people as they get older.

Anyway, back on the topic of photoshopping, if it's done right, it can improve a picture. But there are many times when the photoshopping is overdone. Partially it's a matter of personal taste. But some photographers and some magazines/sites go in for strong use of photoshopping and that reduces the attractiveness/eroticism of the photos. Playboy tends to overuse photoshop/airbrush/whatever. But there are many other magazines/sites that overuse photoshop as well.

There is also the use of photoshopping to give an unreal appearance to the model/photo in a deliberate manner, as an expression of art or fashion. Maybe a little bit of that might be OK or interesting, but I much prefer a more natural-appearing female model instead of one with stylized, weird-appearing skin tones.


I don't like it when photoshop is used in such a way that it makes the model look unnatural. I've seen plenty of that, too, and I've complained (my favorite pastime) about it here at PU a number of times. Hey, I'm the one who came up with the term "Master Shellacker."

But it's not some evil force like fluoridated water. ;) Or pain killers. Or the Fender Stratocaster. Used properly, it doesn't change things any more than moving the slider on an adjustable light up or down a bit, or snapping a fly off a girl's ass with a well-aimed towel.

It kills me how people get MAD when you don't accept their shoving their "opinions" down your throat. When that happens, I feel like saying to the pissed-off one, "You all of those people who say that they DO agree with you? I'm sure some of them don't, but they just don't want to waste their time with your narrow-minded bullshit."

But they're not opinions. Opinions require some reasoning and weighing of pro's and con's. I wanted something new, so I left England for New England.

12-19-09  03:15pm - 5444 days #6
PinkPanther (0)
Active User



Posts: 1,136
Registered: Jan 08, '07
Location: Oakland, CA
Originally Posted by Jeffrey99:


Yep I agree. The last few celebs they had in Playboy look 20x worse in the photoshoots then they do in real life. The editing is overboard in Playboy. Main reason why I've canceled the magazine and all online sites.

Other sites I think are harder to tell. Unless it's something completely stupid like the Chloe18 site, where they edit out her 3 stars tattoo just under her panty line in the pics but of course it's clearly visible in the videos. Stuff like that is just very stupid.


Actually, Cyberclub recently had a fantastic set of pics of Sasha Grey taken by Richard Kern - very edgy for Playboy - one of the best photo sets I've seen anywhere of Sasha.

12-19-09  05:50pm - 5444 days #7
pat362 (0)
Active User



Posts: 3,575
Registered: Jan 23, '07
Location: canada
Originally Posted by Drooler:


Small alterations don't make the model look as though she were a CGI creation. I know you didn't exactly say that, but you did link the Tara Reid photos to small alterations as a "coincidence." But they don't coincide.

I don't understand why some people here are on some kind of "mission" to stamp out photoshopping of any kind. It's unwarranted, zero-tolerance extremism.

Ever used a photo editor to get out red eye? Or actually make skin color look more, not less, natural? In skillful hands, it does improve the quality of an image.

And if photoshopping is that repugnant, then why not all plastic surgery, all cosmetics, and all skin care? And why not throw in vitamins and fitness training? It wouldn't be any less extreme.



My issue with photoshoping is that it's now used to make major alterations to the images and not to fix small blemishes, skin tones or red eye. I think Tara's photos are more phtoshop editor than actual photographer. I highly recommend you take a look at them if you haven't yet.

I don't know if any of you remember a fashion magasine with Michelle Pfeiffer on the cover and the headline was in her all natural. Well, I know the person who did the 25,000$ worth of photoshoping.

I'll be honest with you and say that I find most plastic surgery performed today to be repugnant. There was a time where it was used to fix a birth or accident defect of somekind but today a 16 yrs old can get breast implants. WTF do you think that is if not sick and repugnant? I consider skin care and cosmetic more like someone doing some minor photoshoping since you are mostly trying to change skin tone or hide blemishes. I think that fitness is just a smart thing. We are a fairly obese society and excercise is a good thing. Long live the Brown Coats.

12-19-09  07:43pm - 5444 days #8
RagingBuddhist (0)
Disabled User



Posts: 893
Registered: Jan 23, '07
But I like orange skin-toned women with plastic-smooth pubic areas! Sarcasm is a body's natural defense against stupidity.

12-20-09  05:39am - 5443 days #9
Denner (0)
Active User



Posts: 1,217
Registered: Mar 03, '07
Location: Denmark
Can anyone explain how Pier 999 makes their photos look the way they do??? Is that photoshop?
Take a look at the 'newer' material - a lot is from older east-eurosites - BUT still those old photos suddenly got Pier 999-style/quality... "I don't drink anymore - I freeze it, and eat it like a popcicle" Edited on Dec 20, 2009, 06:15am

12-20-09  10:43am - 5443 days #10
pat362 (0)
Active User



Posts: 3,575
Registered: Jan 23, '07
Location: canada
Originally Posted by Denner:


Can anyone explain how Pier 999 makes their photos look the way they do??? Is that photoshop?
Take a look at the 'newer' material - a lot is from older east-eurosites - BUT still those old photos suddenly got Pier 999-style/quality...


My first guess is that it's pure photographer talent.
I just visited the site and they have 3 photos of Nella from 2000 and each one is amazing looking. You can count the number of beauty spots she has or the number lashes in her eyes. If they use any photoshoping then I can't see it. If they do use photoshoping and this is the results they get than they can teach it to veverybody else and then I will gladly change my mind about photoshoping. Long live the Brown Coats.

12-20-09  11:22am - 5443 days #11
Drooler (0)
Disabled User



Posts: 1,831
Registered: Mar 11, '07
Location: USA
Originally Posted by pat362:


My first guess is that it's pure photographer talent.
I just visited the site and they have 3 photos of Nella from 2000 and each one is amazing looking. You can count the number of beauty spots she has or the number lashes in her eyes. If they use any photoshoping then I can't see it. If they do use photoshoping and this is the results they get than they can teach it to veverybody else and then I will gladly change my mind about photoshoping.


Over the years, they've used it a lot. Sometimes the results have been pleasing (like Bambi's gallery #6 in a kitchen), and sometimes not (Lenka Horokova as Mariana #4, which makes her skin plastic-smooth, to use the words of the Raging Buddhist). Generally, I'd say that that site was overdoing it, but I've lost interest anyway since they stopped doing all-exclusive stuff, while claiming -- well, flat-out LYING -- that they still were. I wanted something new, so I left England for New England.

12-20-09  07:12pm - 5443 days #12
turboshaft (0)
Active User

Posts: 1,958
Registered: Apr 01, '08
Some of the sample photos on Pier look well done, like the ones of Nella. Of course she is super hot anyways, but you can still see lots of freckles, some tiny pockmarks on her cheeks, even a weird stray vein in her right eye (they really should have Photoshopped that though). Others, not so great, such as the sample of Eve Angel; perfectly flawless skin tone, even hues. It looks almost like computer generated art, which it pretty much is at this point... The secret (beyond Adobe software) is good makeup, and lots of it, proper lighting, as well as interesting outfits and sets. "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

12-20-09  07:42pm - 5443 days #13
PinkPanther (0)
Active User



Posts: 1,136
Registered: Jan 08, '07
Location: Oakland, CA
Originally Posted by pat362:


My first guess is that it's pure photographer talent.
I just visited the site and they have 3 photos of Nella from 2000 and each one is amazing looking. You can count the number of beauty spots she has or the number lashes in her eyes. If they use any photoshoping then I can't see it. If they do use photoshoping and this is the results they get than they can teach it to veverybody else and then I will gladly change my mind about photoshoping.


Are you kidding me? I've stayed away from Pier999 due to their painting of pics - that do it more artfully than many sites but I don't much care for their stuff - I would find a month of looking at their stuff painful.

Different tastes.

12-20-09  08:03pm - 5443 days #14
PinkPanther (0)
Active User



Posts: 1,136
Registered: Jan 08, '07
Location: Oakland, CA
Since it's hard to have a conversation about a particular site's style, I'll beg PU's pardon and post a link to a sample pic of Nella from Pier999 that shows the kind of all-over lacqering that I really can't stand about their material:

http://www.pier999.com/at-the-port/get-o...le/nella-s01-035.jpg

Hopefully I won't be accused of posting free porn. I'll see, I guess.

12-20-09  11:24pm - 5443 days #15
turboshaft (0)
Active User

Posts: 1,958
Registered: Apr 01, '08
Originally Posted by PinkPanther:


Since it's hard to have a conversation about a particular site's style, I'll beg PU's pardon and post a link to a sample pic of Nella from Pier999 that shows the kind of all-over lacqering that I really can't stand about their material:

http://www.pier999.com/at-the-port/get-o...le/nella-s01-035.jpg

Hopefully I won't be accused of posting free porn. I'll see, I guess.


That photo looks pretty mild compared to some of the other ones--you can actually make out the details of her skin. The other models look very heavily altered. "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

12-20-09  11:41pm - 5443 days #16
WeeWillyWinky (0)
Active User



Posts: 243
Registered: Jun 03, '07
Location: Havasu City, AZ USA
Originally Posted by turboshaft:


That photo looks pretty mild compared to some of the other ones--you can actually make out the details of her skin. The other models look very heavily altered.


I'm getting a "This image is copyright protected" page. You know what I hate the most about selfish people? It's that they don't think enough about MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!

12-21-09  12:16am - 5443 days #17
lk2fireone (0)
Active User



Posts: 3,618
Registered: Nov 14, '08
Location: CA
Originally Posted by PinkPanther:


Since it's hard to have a conversation about a particular site's style, I'll beg PU's pardon and post a link to a sample pic of Nella from Pier999 that shows the kind of all-over lacqering that I really can't stand about their material:

http://www.pier999.com/at-the-port/get-o...le/nella-s01-035.jpg


I'm also getting a "This image is copyright Protected
www.pier999.com"

If this is the type of image that you're getting from a paysite, I can understand your frustration. :)

12-21-09  01:46am - 5443 days #18
Drooler (0)
Disabled User



Posts: 1,831
Registered: Mar 11, '07
Location: USA
Originally Posted by lk2fireone:


I'm also getting a "This image is copyright Protected
www.pier999.com"

If this is the type of image that you're getting from a paysite, I can understand your frustration. :)


Glossed-up copyright notices -- now that's really over the top! I wanted something new, so I left England for New England.

12-21-09  06:25am - 5442 days #19
PinkPanther (0)
Active User



Posts: 1,136
Registered: Jan 08, '07
Location: Oakland, CA
http://www.pier999.com/at-the-port/get-on-board/index.html

The Nella pic is on the top right of this page.

12-21-09  06:40am - 5442 days #20
Denner (0)
Active User



Posts: 1,217
Registered: Mar 03, '07
Location: Denmark
I'm not too much into photosets - but even for these eyes it's obvious, that things have been 'mingeled' at Pier 999.... do not know how, not an expert.
But what's really annoying, too - is the fact that they now (or for some time) have placed sets/videos stated as 'exclusive' - even if a lot are older material from countless easteuro-sites.
Yes - they are obviously lying, Drooler.

Too bad with this change, because some of the 2008-videos at Pier 999 are just top, in quality, editing, model-performance, model-appearence ect..... "I don't drink anymore - I freeze it, and eat it like a popcicle"

12-21-09  06:55am - 5442 days #21
lk2fireone (0)
Active User



Posts: 3,618
Registered: Nov 14, '08
Location: CA
Originally Posted by PinkPanther:


http://www.pier999.com/at-the-port/get-on-board/index.html

The Nella pic is on the top right of this page.


Nella, a very pretty model who has been around a while. I certainly don't care for the photoshopping in the pic. I've seen other photosets where the photoshopping is less intrusive and she looks more attractive, more enticing, more erotic, at least for my personal taste.

Playboy uses the same glossy/varnished style that detracts from the appeal of the photos. It's not a style I really appreciate, but it's been around at least since the 1960s, which is when I first started looking at Playboy magazine.

12-21-09  09:44am - 5442 days #22
Drooler (0)
Disabled User



Posts: 1,831
Registered: Mar 11, '07
Location: USA
Originally Posted by PinkPanther:


http://www.pier999.com/at-the-port/get-on-board/index.html

The Nella pic is on the top right of this page.


Oh, but have you seen that set? It's got some lovely booty shots of Nella, s01-039 asspecially. It's just the kind of pose I wish I could see in every gallery I view of every babe everywhere. Sure, it's kinda glossy, but she hardly looks like she's made out of polymethyl methacrylate. Ya know?

I'm starting to wonder if our monitors have something to do with all of this controversy. Me, I'm still using a CRT (non-flat screen) 17" monitor -- the one that came with the PC I bought 10 (that's right, TEN) years ago. Any thoughts, anyone? I wanted something new, so I left England for New England.

12-21-09  12:52pm - 5442 days #23
Wittyguy (0)
Active User



Posts: 1,138
Registered: Feb 04, '08
Location: Left Coast, USA
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 01:43pm

12-21-09  01:16pm - 5442 days #24
Drooler (0)
Disabled User



Posts: 1,831
Registered: Mar 11, '07
Location: USA
Originally Posted by Wittyguy:


My x-mas gift to all here is my two cents on the subject.

First, too many people think that Photoshop unleashed the barbaric hoarde's of bad photo editing when it's been around since the invention of the camera. In terms of basic editing (lightness/darkness, contrast, color saturation, tint, "airbrushing", etc.) all existed and were used on many pics before the digital revolution. Ansel Adams would spend days making rough prints of his pictures before deciding on the final version which often looked very different from the "original" (standard developer chemical baths). Today, even many basic point and shoot digital cameras let you add all sorts of funky effects right into the initial shot. All this means is that what once required the hand of skilled technician can now be done by a monkey randomly beating on a keyboard.

The whole "glossy feel" is done in several ways. First, some of these shots like the Nella one were most likely done using a medium format digital camera (something that probably takes 40 mb pictures). That, along with the photographer knowing what they're doing, contributes to being able to count every skin pore on the model. Then comes some of the bullshit that most of us don't like: the large scale colorshift and lighting "enhancements" that give us that canuba oil handwaxed look.

For some reason the "glossy" look has often been considered artistic when it comes to models. I think this has been around ever since the spread of color photography after WWII. If you've ever seen glamor shots from the 50's, most of those have a certain high gloss feel to them as well. For some reason people still seem to think that glossy = sexy or glossy = special when in fact anyone can make a picture of some cat's upchucked hairball super glossy and poster sized.

I will note that it seems to me anyway that some of the flat screen monitors, especially the cheapies, tend to add to the glossy look or seem to make the colors appear less natural. I have an old CRT (if it ain't broke, don't fix it) with good natural color. The higher end monitors do a better job as one would expect but I think the choice of monitor can have an effect on your viewing results.

Too many photographers feel that they have to spruce things up on the final photo in order to distinguish their work from the standard point and shoot / video still frame captures that most sites post. If you're trying to do better than the than the rest of the herd, apparently that also means you can't leave well enough alone: it ain't "art" until you fuck with it.


Thanks, Wittyguy, for your input, with its concise history of "shopping" and touching on the points of monitor effect and the "artistic impulses" of photographers.

And it's too bad that some photographers "paint" themselves into "artistic corners" by going overboard with the editing effects. It is the stuff of tragedy, in a classic sense. There must be some fable or myth that I can't remember that tells this grandly arching cautionary tale. But I'm too culturally illiterate for that.

Anyway, if you've ever seen any of the Ultra-Shopped crap by Magoo, for instance, such as the ruinous rendering of Hungarian super-cutie Cayenne into a virtual alien apparition, well, that's tragedy for sure. I wanted something new, so I left England for New England. Edited on Dec 21, 2009, 01:20pm

12-21-09  01:18pm - 5442 days #25
turboshaft (0)
Active User

Posts: 1,958
Registered: Apr 01, '08
Originally Posted by Wittyguy:


...All this means is that what once required the hand of skilled technician can now be done by a monkey randomly beating on a keyboard.


Hey, that's my method for organizing my hard drives! "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

12-21-09  01:35pm - 5442 days #26
Capn (0)
Active User



Posts: 1,740
Registered: Sep 05, '09
Location: Near the Beer!
Originally Posted by PinkPanther:


http://www.pier999.com/at-the-port/get-on-board/index.html

The Nella pic is on the top right of this page.


That website is far too 'Glam' for my liking, I'm afraid.

Cap'n. :0( Admiral of the PU Hindenburg. 2009 PU Award
Hilarious 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!

12-21-09  01:39pm - 5442 days #27
Drooler (0)
Disabled User



Posts: 1,831
Registered: Mar 11, '07
Location: USA
Originally Posted by Denner:


I'm not too much into photosets - but even for these eyes it's obvious, that things have been 'mingeled' at Pier 999.... do not know how, not an expert.
But what's really annoying, too - is the fact that they now (or for some time) have placed sets/videos stated as 'exclusive' - even if a lot are older material from countless easteuro-sites.
Yes - they are obviously lying, Drooler.

Too bad with this change, because some of the 2008-videos at Pier 999 are just top, in quality, editing, model-performance, model-appearence ect.....


Here's their join page, freshly linked. Just read the first paragraph. That's what I call bullshit piled high on a platter.

Months ago, I'd emailed them about this, and I gave them hell. I got a very apologetic response. But nothing has changed!

You know how some people count on just their apologies to make things OK? Reminds me of such people. They really don't fucking care. I wanted something new, so I left England for New England.

12-21-09  01:57pm - 5442 days #28
Capn (0)
Active User



Posts: 1,740
Registered: Sep 05, '09
Location: Near the Beer!
Sorry to go OT, but I just had to say D's 'Opportunity' quote always raises a smile here!

Cap'n. :0) Admiral of the PU Hindenburg. 2009 PU Award
Hilarious 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!

12-21-09  05:03pm - 5442 days #29
PinkPanther (0)
Active User



Posts: 1,136
Registered: Jan 08, '07
Location: Oakland, CA
Where does this "count every skin pore" come from with the Pier 999 pics? There aren't any skin pores! There's no natural skin tone!!!

That's my whole problem with their stuff - and with anybody else that does there models that way. Yeah, they get hot models. Yeah, they put them in hot poses.

Then the fucking assholes treat their pics so there's no skin pores, no natural skin tone and it looks like plastic-girl for my tastes - I'm sorry, but I hate what they do.

12-22-09  12:08am - 5442 days #30
Drooler (0)
Disabled User



Posts: 1,831
Registered: Mar 11, '07
Location: USA
Originally Posted by Capn:


Sorry to go OT, but I just had to say D's 'Opportunity' quote always raises a smile here!

Cap'n. :0)


Thanks. And it's an original, one of those things that pops into one's head while doing something else. I was staring into the refrigerator.

If you ever see it on a T-shirt, you'll know I didn't cop from the shirt. It's the other way around. I wanted something new, so I left England for New England.

1-30 of 30 Posts Page 1
 
Thread Nav :  Refresh Page  |   First Post  |   Last Post  |   Porn Forum Home


Home - Sites - Users - Reviews - Comments - Categories - Forum

Contact Us - Announcements - FAQ's - Terms & Rules - Cookies - DMCA - 2257 - Porn Review - Webmasters

Protecting Minors
We are strong supporters of RTA and ICRA, two of the most recognized self labeling organizations. Our site is properly labeled to assist in the protection of minors accessing inappopriate content. For information about filtering tools, check this site.

DISCLAIMER: ALL MODELS APPEARING ON THIS WEBSITE ARE 18 YEARS OR OLDER.

To report child pornography, go directly to ASACP!  We're proud to be a corporate sponsor.
Have concerns or questions about porn addiction?  We recommend this helpful resource.

All Rights Reserved © 2003-2024 PornUsers.com.


Loaded in 0.02 seconds.