I'm kind of hoping that some of the webmasters will see this survey since I'm expecting it to be mostly "looking at the camera". I am SO tired of sets where the girl never looks at the camera.
The only not-looking set I've ever enjoyed is the "peeping tom" type of set where the shoot is through curtains or a mostly closed door and the girl doesn't make eye contact until she "notices" you. That is followed by a)yelling, b)a smile and a show, c)sex, or d) all of the above. Those are kind of fun but fortunately not that common. I say fortunately because the rarity makes them more enjoyable when they do pop up.
Oh, and I suppose a really wonderful arched-back spread-eagle or similar pose where the girl's face isn't visible is fine. But again, those type of shots are rare.
Once back in the 80's there was a set in Penthouse Magazine (remember magazines?) Where, for every image, this beautiful girl was just staring into the camera with a totally pissed "What are you looming at?" expression on her face. Every image. Oh my god that was so hot that 30 years later, I still remember the set.
My point? I believe it is ALL fantasy and there is an appropriate time and place for every type of expression...as long as it is done well.
I just wrote a long note but I guess it was TOO long and my login timed out. That's a first.
Many new models plaster on a smile and it stays there for the entire set. Yuck. But some models can provide very genuine looking smiles for most shots in a set very consistently. Lorena G (Met art, Twisty's) is one of the European models that has a terrific, genuine looking smile.
The other look you sometimes get with new models is the slightly frightened look. I don't attribute that that to submission (totally different thing) but more to the sudden realization "What the FUCK am I doing here" like a cat in a bathtub. That is often the last time you see those models. Sometimes you see this with popular models but it is probably more about the photographer. Ever seen a site where there are lots of girls but only one set each? I think it is because the photographer creeped the hell out of the girls and they leave and don't return. Sets where the photographers touch the models fall into this category and I don't blame the models for getting creeped out. (I'm talking straight photo/video sets, not faux auditions or pick up videos.)
What I did not convey in the survey was that intense, "I want you NOW!" look that, hopefully, we've all experienced at one time or another. Very few models can pull off that look, but when they do it is pure gold.
Oh, and if you really want to see how genuine a model is, look for the behind the scenes videos. (Warning: do NOT do this with your favorite models unless you want to be disappointed.) If the model's expression changes for every shot or two, it's fake. If there is other stuff going on in the room or there is obvious dialogue that the model is reacting to, then it is more genuine.
So for me it is anything genuine. ...now let me copy this before clicking "add reply...."
Same here. When I see a new or interesting model, most of the time I just look on the site to see what else she has done, but once in a while there will be somebody I just have to get more of so I go out to one of the directory sites. Without those sites and the related name cross-references, I sometimes would not know that a model I like is on another site I subscribe to under a different name.
I just looked and have over 1.9 million files in my collection...wow. That is mostly images but there are a lot of videos, too. My file structure starts with a rating system, A,B,C and it is mainly broken down by site. It goes all the way to AAAA for my favorite sites and material. Within a site, I organize by the year of the subscription. (i.e. MA10, MA11, etc. within the Met-art folder, which is a AAAA site.) Then I only look back as far as my last subscription. This helps me see at a glance when I last subscribed to a site, it eliminates duplicates and it helps determine when to archive older, low resolution stuff. the better sites already tag sets and files with the model and date but for those that do not, I categorize by model (within the year of the subscription). When I find something amazing, I include OMG at the end so I can search for it later. And the best videos get copied into folders that are visible to one of my Tivos so we can watch them in my A/V room...but that is another story. So...rating, site, subscription year, set/model...and OMG as a flag.
I've been a member of this site for many years but am getting increasingly frustrated because Femjoy is not keeping up with the times when it comes to file sizes. The small and medium download sizes are microscopic by today's standards. Small files are 800x535 and medium files are 1200x800. That is about 1/5 and 1/2 of my monitor's screen resolution (1920x1080). I've complained about this before and thought I got a response that they were working on it. Apparently not. Now the LARGE files are 6000x4000 these days, which is fine, but those large zip files take a long time to download, are slow to load and use up to half a gig of disk space each. Please, please please!!! Change the file sizes so you have a 2000 or 3000 option like Met Art, Hegre Art, X-Art, W4B, MPL and the rest of the sites in your niche. The larger size is OK (although several other sites are at 10,000 now), but the site has to bump up the size of the smaller images.
This may sound odd, but I like some of these scenes because they demonstrate the challenge for the guy. Think about it this way. If you are with two girls, it should be because they are thinking that you can get them both off better than they can get themselves off. Challenge accepted. What I don't like to see is the back story where two girls just decide to jump one guy as a gift or treat. And I don't want to see a guy screwing one girl while the other one just watches or plays with his balls or herself. Sex is about satisfaction and that includes the satisfaction you get from knowing that your partner is or partners are satisfied. So the guy needs to be the best fuck they've BOTH ever had. To me, the best scenes are those where the guy is on his back, there's a girl on his dick and a girl sitting on his face and climax is nearly simultaneous for all of them. If the girls have to face each other or finger each other because they are more into each other than him, he's failed.
Philosophical stuff aside, (this is shallow-acting porn, after all) I enjoy watching the 2 on 1 scenes, but the guy has to look like he's putting in a genuine effort to satisfy them both.
Sasha. She may have been ridden hard and put away wet, but she cleaned up really nice and actually found some real acting and spokesperson jobs. I'm guessing that taught her a little about how to do things other than fuck in front of the camera. One other thing. She is the only one here, I think, that is not enhanced.
I think this may be a case of different strokes for different folks, but I do get pretty disappointed when I see a really beautiful, pristine model with a new, blatantly obvious tattoo. Example: Melena Morgan pre-tattoos? Awesomely beautiful. Malena Morgan with tattoos? Either clearly branded as a porn star or spending a lot of time on the softer sites covering them up.
A lot of these girls don't realize that they are their own canvas. It is what makes them so amazing. The minute they agree to be somebody else's canvas, it takes some, sometimes ALL, of that amazing away. Or maybe to put it more directly...when have you ever heard anyone say "That girl was hot before but that new tattoo makes her look even better!" Yup....never.
I find that the TBP reviews are a little too positive sometimes, but there are often very well written PU reviews. In the end, you have to take a leap of faith no matter how good the reviews and previews are, but it helps a lot to have both professional and PU reviews.
The Better Business Bureau and Yelp have both been proven to accept payment for a higher score. I don't really think that happens in porn site reviews....yet. A site can plant a positive user review (which you can usually see through), but for the most part, I like how honest the user reviews are.
It depends entirely on the scene and the purpose of the video. POV scenes, for example, often don't have much of a set up but sometimes, like in a few of the W4B videos, the set up adds a lot to the scene. So I had to answer "other".
Many of you remember Savannah. Those who don't should look her up. She was an amazing porn star that committed suicide in 1994. Would it not make sense to remove her images? I had a lot of pictures of her but the thought that she blew her brains out made them considerably less appealing.
In other cases, some models request to have their images removed after they retire and move on. Marketa Belonoha is probably the best example of a spectacular model who has moved out of nude modeling and has asked the sites that showcased her to take down her images. Many sites honored that request but many did not. (She had a micro-site called Marketa4U.com in the Watch4Beauty network but took that down.) These day's you can't hide your past, but I think it is respectable to try to hide it from your kids until they are old enough to understand. Cases like these are reasonable when it comes to taking models off sites. (Marketa was one of my all-time favorite models, so I already have nearly every image ever shot of her.)
Other good reasons for pulling models include that they were minors when the shoot occurred or that the model release or image sale to that particular web site was disputed/pirated. Occasionally, when a site is sold, there are disputes about who actually owns the rights to the images (i.e. the site or a past partner in the site). That happens remarkably often and the safest thing is for the sites to remove the disputed images.
All that said, I do not think that old shoots should be arbitrarily pulled unless the quality is so bad the images or models degrade the impression of a web site. I just went back and looked at some Penthouse stuff shot in the mid-90's. Great stuff, but the images are 600x400 MAX so they have been remanded to the deep archives. What do you do with that stuff? If the originals can't be re-scanned, then I have a hard time blaming the sites for removing them.
The good news is that there is a shitload of great, new, high-resolution stuff out there and in terms of disk space it is pretty much doubling every year. We all like our old favorites, but there is a new girl somewhere getting naked for us every day!
Funny thing. I think we all trust CCBill and Epoch because we have used them so much and know what to do when it comes to cross-listings and cancellations, everyone's biggest gripes. CCBill and Epoch have their own sites where you can find your subscriptions and cancel them without having to go through the web site you signed up with. Most of the other billers exist because a) they undercut the above two with lower fees to the web site, b) the web sites don't want to make it too easy for you to cancel, or c) it is the web site's own billing system, so both. Using that logic, I always have to think twice before signing up with a different biller.
I have been screwed out of a couple of hundred bucks by websites/billers that have no clear cancel process, that require you to PHONE them several days in advance to cancel, or that cross list and don't send you any kind of email that you have subscribed to something other than what you intended. CCBIll and Epoch don't do that. (And no matter how careful you are, some sites manipulate their pages in an effort to trick you into a cross-listing. The most common is the "oh, you got that wrong" trick where they show you an entry error, but FAIL to highlight that the cross-listings have quietly been rechecked.) With CCBill and Epoch, you can point this out to them immediately when you sign up and they will reverse it or you can at least see the extra subscription on the biller's site and cancel it before you are charged the big monthly fee. Good luck with other billers.
A simple analogy is that when I buy something on eBay, I expect to be able to pay for it with Paypal. If an eBay seller doesn't use Paypal, I really have to wonder why. As an eBay seller, I use Paypal to ensure that people know they can pay for it easily and that they get all the buyer guarantees that come with it. CCBill and Epoch are the Paypal of porn. Most webmasters who don't use CCBill or Epoch are at the very least, being cheap and at worst, trying to get an extra month's subscription or perhaps a cross-listing fee out of you by making it harder to cancel.
All that said, if a new biller sends me an email with my sign-up information when I sign up and has a separate site that allows me to cancel easily, I will gladly use it. I just can't think of a good one other than the CCBill or Epoch.
I have a large house with 6 wireless access points and 3 SSIDs including a guest network for my kids friends to use. It is all tied to gigabit Ethernet run into most rooms (I still prefer wired connections when possible). I have a dedicated Windows server for audio, video and Tivo file storage (about 16 Terabytes now)in an A/V closet that includes whole-house audio and a managed Cisco gigabit switch with POE. I just checked and there are 28 DHCP lease connections including A/V components (stereos, Blu-ray players, TVs and 3 Tivos), 4 game consoles, 4 iPhones, 3 iPads, a Nook and 7 computers....all connected through a Docsis 3 router to one really shitty Comcast cable connection. I guess that would make me a computer nerd. When I load Net-stumbler onto one of my laptops, I can see 18 different wireless networks from my bedroom and I live on a pretty big piece of land. Apparently, I am surrounded by nerds, too. If you live in an apartment, grab a copy of net-stumbler so you can identify the least used wireless channels and reduce interference from your neighbors.
Free sites provide an opportunity to see new things that you would not ordinarily see in your proverbial back yard. The new higher end sites like Watch 4 Beauty post on the free sites and draw a lot of customers that way. Now days the POV sites are the big deal. I will also sometimes scan free sites for interesting models, then go to one of the porn wiki sites to find out where the model is. Found some interesting sites that way.
A few of my favorite models are total stunners but have tiny scars in one place or another (i.e. leg or knee). By looking for and finding the scars, I can tell whether the images are PhotoShopped. Same with moles. No moles at all? Probably shopped.
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.
