Production and promotion standards in the TS niche

[BellaBellucci]

OK. I understand that quantity is the name of the game in the TS porn biz and I know a lot of you guys complain when there are less than 100 photos or so per set. I also understand that many TS girls, myself included, have a few more unflattering angles than most GG's and that most shots, even the bad ones, need to be used. I mean, in my case I've been shot in questionable lighting, from a hard side profile, up my nose (yes, really), in shadows, etc. And that's fine. Every shot can't be 100%, but seriously, what I don't understand is why the worst photos seem to always get used as promotional material for new sets. What's up with that? I'm at the point where I feel my best shots are taken with my own point and shoot camera!

More specifically, I feel that two of the shoots I did were VERY poorly marketed and I've talked to plenty of other girls who feel the same way about some of theirs. So what's the deal? Do these producers think that the photos are actually good or do they use good or bad photos in very particular ways in order to make or break the model in question? If it's the latter I'd say that's pretty messed up. Moreover, why do GG porn stars get professional makeup and wardrobe and we're forced into DIY status (excepting Shemale Club - they're uber-professional)? What gives?!

Guys, girls, what say you?

~BB~

[GroobySteven]

Well this is probably aimed at us, as I don't think you've done that many other shoots past SMC and Strokers?

Maybe it's because what YOU think is good an representation of what we're selling, is different from what actually sells. We've been doing this a long time and not all our marketing is spot on but most of it is (the proof is in the pudding, we have awesome sales and possibly more members than other sites, so something must be right.

The "uber-professional" Shemale Club, whose site's I like a lot, take an approach where they retouch the content very heavily, in my opinion and are going for a more Playboy look. This works well for their target audience but not so well for ours. However, the girls tend to love how they look in those shoots, because they are so glamouress and their skins smoothed out, wrinkles removed, etc.

I don't know anywhere which would "make or break" a girl or have any reason to do that. The photos/videos should be representative of that model. Different models, may have different assets that you want to promote (or not so good ones you may wish to hide) so their marketing may differ.

seanchai

[slinky]

If you look at some of the reactions to photos posted on this site alone, you'll see a lot of guys with very positive reactions to bricks with big cocks. So obviously there is a market segment who is looking for that. While I'm not saying the people you are talking about know exactly what they are doing, but they may simply be reacting to some of their fan mail and trying to give their paying customers what they think they want.

So, in this case, is it possible that the shots you don't like are the one's which make you look the least feminine, so you really don't like them, but it is exactly the look that the producers think some of their customers want?

Also, there are a bunch of sites in all of adult (not just TS) which TRY to look "amateur" because their customers think it's more real, so that may be why they are using those "poorly lit up the nose" shots.

But also, don't think that TG's are always second class and GG's always get first class treatment. Yes, there are higher end productions where there is hair, make-up, etc. But there are plenty of GG shoots where there are girls getting a lot WORSE treatment than most TG American talent would tolerate. Take a look at a site like ghettogaggers.com and tell me how you think they treat the talent?

[slinky]

heh,

funny that although there's a lot of stuff in the adult biz that we disagree on, we were busy essentially having the same response to this issue simultaneously.

S just types faster than I do.

[BellaBellucci]

Well this is probably aimed at us, as I don't think you've done that many other shoots past SMC and Strokers?

Maybe it's because what YOU think is good an representation of what we're selling, is different from what actually sells. We've been doing this a long time and not all our marketing is spot on but most of it is (the proof is in the pudding, we have awesome sales and possibly more members than other sites, so something must be right.

The "uber-professional" Shemale Club, whose site's I like a lot, take an approach where they retouch the content very heavily, in my opinion and are going for a more Playboy look. This works well for their target audience but not so well for ours. However, the girls tend to love how they look in those shoots, because they are so glamouress and their skins smoothed out, wrinkles removed, etc.

I don't know anywhere which would "make or break" a girl or have any reason to do that. The photos/videos should be representative of that model. Different models, may have different assets that you want to promote (or not so good ones you may wish to hide) so their marketing may differ.

seanchai

When I came into this business I thought that self promotion would put me in the favor of some others in the game, but I quickly learned that it wouldn't do squat for me other than wear me out so I don't really do it nearly as much as I used to. That said, I don't think that one can really conclude that I'm talking about Grooby since I've done other shoots besides those that you know about.

As far as SMC, there's a lot more to them than Photoshop. When I first came onto HA I trumpeted the merits of the natural look versus manipulation, but since I shot with them I realized that even without Photoshop, just basic production values in getting the raw shots are really important and post-production is just that - post, secondary. They do your hair, they do your makeup. When you do a shoot with them you learn a thing or two. I said it before and I'll say it again - personal issues aside, Danielle Foxx is an incredible production talent. I'm also seeing and hearing incredible things from Jasmine Jewels and the Chicago girls - many of whom may USE Photoshop, but are not dependent upon it to look gorgeous.

But this thread isn't even about that. It's about the fact that a lot of girls have been subjected to studios promoting their WORST assets instead of their best. I appreciate your response, but it doesn't answer my question which was: WHY does that happen? Clearly these photos are NOT 'representative of the model.' Sure, Yum has great numbers and is arguably #1 in the niche, but that fact doesn't necessarily reflect on quality as much as quantity, which is actually the very first point that I made here. Furthermore, a couple of girls being promoted with questionable shots are not going to bring down the site as a whole especially considering the field of models who DON'T have that problem.

~BB~

[CaptainGeech]

Yeah. I've noticed this also. It seems that most sites favor the numbers game. I will admit it seems like a better deal when they offer 150 pictures per set. As apposed to 80 decent pictures or 35 good shots. Its literally laughable to me at times though when they include pictures that aren't even in focus. Makes the photographers look like incompetent fools and the site owners like used car salesmen. But I can't really judge them or their practices. Whatever they are doing seems to be working for them. :shrug

As for using bad shots for promotional purposes... I don't really know. Maybe they feel that style of promotion doesn't bring that many new memberships so they offer the least valuable (bad shots) since they are giving them away for free. Its just a shame the sites don't work with the girls and choose there favorites shots.

[caliuncut]

Bella,

From an outsiders perspective, I think he did answer your question and gave you the perspective from the other side. May not be what you wanted to hear, but his take on things sounds reasonable.

Bottom line is these things are subjective and while mistakes happen and some people may have better taste than others, why would a producer or photographer want to intentionally put out the worst a photo set has to offer? Wouldnt seem to make sense for them financially.

Just my take

[BellaBellucci]

Bottom line is these things are subjective and while mistakes happen and some people may have better taste than others, why would a producer or photographer want to intentionally put out the worst a photo set has to offer? Wouldnt seem to make sense for them financially.

Right. So are they mistakes or are they intentional? I believe that was my question. One photo in particular to which I'm referring (and Seanchai knows which one it is) was an awful closeup headshot highlighting some features that would universally be considered unattractive and there are plenty of others like it that aren't covered under the 'well there's a big cock in the shot' explanation. So why are they used? I'm at a loss. *shrug*

I mean look how people use Nicole Dupre's old photos in attacks against her. If that doesn't underscore the importance of the question, I don't know what does. You don't see GG porn stars doing that kind of thing to each other, and in fact most questionable photos in that aspect of the biz would never even see the light of day, so why are these practices acceptable when it comes to TS girls?

~BB~

[tsmandy]

I'm constantly amazed at the images that my company chooses from a photo set (or any company for that matter) to promote me, because I don't necessarily feel comfortable with their choices. But that doesn't mean that someone else won't be really turned on by those images. So I try to not sweat it when I see a pic that I think is not flattering, because what I think is most attractive isn't necessarily gonna give someone else a boner.

[TempestTS]

Well this is probably aimed at us, as I don't think you've done that many other shoots past SMC and Strokers?

Maybe it's because what YOU think is good an representation of what we're selling, is different from what actually sells. We've been doing this a long time and not all our marketing is spot on but most of it is (the proof is in the pudding, we have awesome sales and possibly more members than other sites, so something must be right.

The "uber-professional" Shemale Club, whose site's I like a lot, take an approach where they retouch the content very heavily, in my opinion and are going for a more Playboy look. This works well for their target audience but not so well for ours. However, the girls tend to love how they look in those shoots, because they are so glamouress and their skins smoothed out, wrinkles removed, etc.

I don't know anywhere which would "make or break" a girl or have any reason to do that. The photos/videos should be representative of that model. Different models, may have different assets that you want to promote (or not so good ones you may wish to hide) so their marketing may differ.

seanchai


I gotta say Im with Seanchai on this one.

First off lets face it we are a niche market especially for content that somone is brave enough to spend money on in this day and age of too many free sites/collections and pirated content. This means less sales and profits to justify production costs no matter what they are.

Next as a TS most of us tend to be fairly self critical we often do not see ourselves the same way our fans do. Ive had fans tell me that they love this or that photo or film that I have done only for me to inwardly grown because how I looked didnt match MY perception of how I Should look. The thing is I am not the customer and thats really who this is about pleasing. Its really hard to step away from your own self perceptions for ANY Model, take the whole TS self image thing and you should double how hard it is to be objective when looking at ourselves at very least.

I see an every rising trend in production values in TS content. Some of that is driven by the market and the fans demanding higher quality content but some of it is driven by lower costs for higher grade equipment such as Digital camera's and HiDef video. You can produce a lot better content today than you could 10 years ago for the same budget no doubt about that. Now toss in advances in editing and post production software and publishing and you have another trend thats pushing things to higher values.

There is a Market for everything. Just because one of us TS dont like a certain style or look or think that it lacks production values dosent mean squat if there are a good number of *Paying* customers who find that style or look attractive, and there might also be a number of potential customers who cant stand it and complain. The content Producer/Publisher is really the one to decide what to market and what not to based on what they see in their demographics and market trends.

Which brings me to the last of my major points. the Producer/Publisher is also taking all the risk . Sure it might have some impact on our future as models but we have been bought and paid for which is all we really signed up for. So while I would LOVE it if a company were to Push me or a shoot I did for them I have no right to expect that unless it was in the contract. If they promote wrong they get to eat the cost and every last company has done that more than a few times.

Im just trying to be practical about all this.

Do I think that production values could stand to increase?
YES
But I would also say that any other product out there could be improved as well no matter what it is.

Do I think that there are a number of models that have been under utilized, poorly promoted or not given the treatment they deserve.
YES
But I dont have the data to show if my guess is right or wrong only the publisher can be the judge of that.

Do I think that Publishers make mistakes, blunders and otherwise cause their own market harm.
YES
But I wont ever be the one to say that Im always gong to be right either... this is a money and profits game it has very little to do with Artistry.

Really the only choice for us as TS models have to be pushed. produced and represented is for us to do it ourselves Via Solo sites, blogs, or any other way we can. Then we become the publisher and have our shot to prove anyone else wrong but only if we really are correct about ourselves. So we can either ask that it be included in whatever agreement we enter into for a shoot or we put ourselves on the line and do it ourselves, unless we ask for it and they offer it we have no right to complain at best we can make requests or suggestions but demands are best left for things were iron clad in contract.

If we want certain things we should ask for them and then decide based on the answer if we really want to work with company XYZ. We are not forced to work with anyone in the adult industry, we can simply say no. Or we decide that we value the cash more and let them decide our fate which is really our decision to let them have that power or not.

Im sorry to say but I think its really all on us

Whew I just wrote that at almost 6:30 AM... why the hell am I up??? and of course, I have to wonder how bad this is going to read after I try out this new thing called Sleep that Ive been hearing about... not to mention Spelling... oh god what I might have done to the english language with this keyboard...

Love ya Bella but this time I gotta disagree
If we want to control our own destiny we need to seize it or live with letting others direct the flow.

[BellaBellucci]

There is a Market for everything.

Really now? Sure, beauty is the eye of the beholder, blah blah blah, but sometimes ugly is just ugly. Is there a market for this?

http://howuglyami.com/ugly001.jpg

Oh wait. That's me. Damn! :P

~BB~

[TempestTS]

There is a Market for everything.

Really now? Sure, beauty is the eye of the beholder, blah blah blah, but sometimes ugly is just ugly. Is there a market for this?

I think not. I think we can all agree that this girl is fugly and that nobody would pay to see her get naked or gods forbid fuck. I'm just saying - beauty isn't always subjective. Sometimes it just is... or in some cases, like this one, isn't. ;)

~BB~

Actually I would guess that there is somebody out there somewhere that for whater reason is completely turned on by someone like her and would pay good money to see her in a movie or pics.

Go over to the Clibs4Sale site and just take a look at all the strange categories you can buy content for...

Toothbrushing

Sweat Fetish

Ugly

Spinal Brace Fetish

Sneezing

Hiccups

coughing fetish

Nose Pinching


Seriously... I cant even concieve of thinking how anyone would be able to get off on a fetish for Hiccups or Nose Pinching but apparently there is a market for it otherwise why bother filming it and having a category for it...
Sneezing fetish??? WTF, somebody is paying 7.99 for an 11 minute clip of somone Sneezing and wiping snot off their face? I dont get it but I guess thats at least one persons idea of a hot fantasy.

And yes there is a category for UGLY... If you have a twisted kink there is someone out there who will film it and sell it to you I guess.

So the answer if there is a market for That?

YES!! but I cant begin to explain why.

[slinky]

I'm constantly amazed at the images that my company chooses from a photo set (or any company for that matter) to promote me, because I don't necessarily feel comfortable with their choices. But that doesn't mean that someone else won't be really turned on by those images. So I try to not sweat it when I see a pic that I think is not flattering, because what I think is most attractive isn't necessarily gonna give someone else a boner.

Exactly. Talent gets paid for being talent. Producers get paid to deliver the product THEIR CLIENT wants (whether they are in house producers like at Grooby and others, our outside contractors). And site owners/publishers pay for it all, take the financial risks and choose what they want to try to sell.

Now, if some girl was told she was posing for glamor shots for Playboy and ended up in some local rag looking like a crack ho, she'd have something to complain about. But 95% of the time if the girl bothered to spend 5 minutes and looked at the site they were posing for, they would know what to expect their shoot was going to look like. If you go look at the site and there's 10 years worth of photo sets up of girls "bad side" being shown, you can't be too surprised when you do a shoot for them and your set ends up looking like the same style that 100's of other photo sets look like. If you don't want pics like that up, don't go shoot with that company and don't collect the money.

Or if you want TOTAL control over everything, do what Tara Emory, Jennifer Paris and other girls do and produce/publish your own stuff.

I'm sure you signed a Model Release before the shoot. I can't tell you how many times we've had girls call us months or even years after doing shoots for us and demanding we take their pics down that WE OWN and have had on our sites for years. We paid them, we paid for studios, equipment, editing, etc.,etc, etc. If you are going to do porn, it's going to be around FOREVER. If you can't think about the consequences of having EVERYTHING that got shot at your gig possbily showing up at ANY time in the future... DON'T DO IT.

And I'll give away one of the biggest secrets in the Adult business (sorry to all my peers for letting this cat out of the bag in public). There's only 2 reasons to do porn as flat rate/day rate/scene rate talent:
1) You're an attention starved exhibitionist who is looking for their 15 minutes of fame at ANY cost, or
2) So you can raise your escorting rates for being a "porn star".
(and reason 2 is WAYYYYYYYY better than reason 1; so much so that I really only mean reason 2, but throw in reason 1 for people who point out the 1 in 1,000 girls who go into it for that reason and get what they think they want).

[Odelay]

I think Bella has a point. For me, both Shemale Club and Ladyboy69 stand out as sites who consistently put some thought into pre-production and the actual shoot. The lighting is excellent. They think about the background colors... walls, sheets, furniture, etc., that contrast against a girl's skin color. It's just easier to watch these videos.

[phobun]

I'm constantly amazed at the images that my company chooses from a photo set (or any company for that matter) to promote me, because I don't necessarily feel comfortable with their choices. But that doesn't mean that someone else won't be really turned on by those images. So I try to not sweat it when I see a pic that I think is not flattering, because what I think is most attractive isn't necessarily gonna give someone else a boner.

Exactly. Talent gets paid for being talent. Producers get paid to deliver the product THEIR CLIENT wants (whether they are in house producers like at Grooby and others, our outside contractors). And site owners/publishers pay for it all, take the financial risks and choose what they want to try to sell.

Now, if some girl was told she was posing for glamor shots for Playboy and ended up in some local rag looking like a crack ho, she'd have something to complain about. But 95% of the time if the girl bothered to spend 5 minutes and looked at the site they were posing for, they would know what to expect their shoot was going to look like. If you go look at the site and there's 10 years worth of photo sets up of girls "bad side" being shown, you can't be too surprised when you do a shoot for them and your set ends up looking like the same style that 100's of other photo sets look like. If you don't want pics like that up, don't go shoot with that company and don't collect the money.

Or if you want TOTAL control over everything, do what Tara Emory, Jennifer Paris and other girls do and produce/publish your own stuff.

I'm sure you signed a Model Release before the shoot. I can't tell you how many times we've had girls call us months or even years after doing shoots for us and demanding we take their pics down that WE OWN and have had on our sites for years. We paid them, we paid for studios, equipment, editing, etc.,etc, etc. If you are going to do porn, it's going to be around FOREVER. If you can't think about the consequences of having EVERYTHING that got shot at your gig possbily showing up at ANY time in the future... DON'T DO IT.

And I'll give away one of the biggest secrets in the Adult business (sorry to all my peers for letting this cat out of the bag in public). There's only 2 reasons to do porn as flat rate/day rate/scene rate talent:
1) You're an attention starved exhibitionist who is looking for their 15 minutes of fame at ANY cost, or
2) So you can raise your escorting rates for being a "porn star".
(and reason 2 is WAYYYYYYYY better than reason 1; so much so that I really only mean reason 2, but throw in reason 1 for people who point out the 1 in 1,000 girls who go into it for that reason and get what they think they want).
Good points

[slinky]

Shit.... beat out again by slow typing.

TempestTST you hit the nail squarely on the head.

[slinky]

Oh, and by the end of the day today some guy, somewhere, will be jerking off to the first post on this page.

[TempestTS]

Or if you want TOTAL control over everything, do what Tara Emory, Jennifer Paris and other girls do and produce/publish your own stuff.


Tara is a great example. She always wanted to do things more artful than just naked sex so she decided to see if she could do that and find a market for it. Spends lots of time and money on her shoots and I think they look great but I am pretty certain that Grooby and Shemale Club have more site members. The real question is if she is happy with the returns for what she is doing.

My solo site just opened this year... Im losing buckets of cash vs income but I really like what Im doing and I think there is a market for it if I can push the word out but I like what Im doing enough that even if I lost every dime I spent I would say I was happy to do it because a large part of that is artistic self expression which I value more than money. Some would say Im an idiot for tossing money away like that... I would say Im happy so it dosent matter.

I would be hard pressed to find a single person in this world that has always been given the credit and due that they deserve but I would find it quite easy to find a few people that I think got quite a bit more than they are worth or deserve. (Hmmm George W. Bush.... oh I digress)

[phobun]

I think Bella has a point. For me, both Shemale Club and Ladyboy69 stand out as sites who consistently put some thought into pre-production and the actual shoot. The lighting is excellent. They think about the background colors... walls, sheets, furniture, etc., that contrast against a girl's skin color. It's just easier to watch these videos.
I have to hand it to the Grooby people though. They have something for everyone including myself focused on a particular niche. Sometimes the girls can seem so far away or larger than life, but Grooby has a way of presenting them like the real people they are who could even be the girl next door. Too much airbrushing or shooting under obviously contrived circumstances can sure make a girl seem artificial or plastic.

[slinky]

There is a Market for everything.

Really now? Sure, beauty is the eye of the beholder, blah blah blah, but sometimes ugly is just ugly. Is there a market for this?

http://howuglyami.com/ugly001.jpg

Oh wait. That's me. Damn! :P

~BB~

And BTW, I have to try to be delicate about this, but there's a girl on the NYC party circuit....... well .... those who know, know what I'm talking about.

[BellaBellucci]

Actually I would guess that there is somebody out there somewhere that for whater reason is completely turned on by someone like her and would pay good money to see her in a movie or pics.

Cletus the slack-jawed yokel maybe?



Go over to the Clibs4Sale site and just take a look at all the strange categories you can buy content for...

Toothbrushing

Sweat Fetish

Ugly

Spinal Brace Fetish

Sneezing

Hiccups

coughing fetish

Nose Pinching


And you think OUR niche is small? I mean you're talking about amateur stuff on Clips4Sale, not Playboy, Hustler, or even Yum. Ok fine, there IS an audience for everything, but three guys living in a trailer sandwiched between a prison and a landfill drinking moonshine don't qualify as a demographic. The only reason Clips4Sale has those categories is because they don't have to produce content so it doesn't cost them anything to offer them. They're not a production site dishing out money for shoots and expecting to make a profit. Therefore, you aren't presenting any evidence beyond the anecdotal to justify marketing in a manner that is not beneficial to the model and only questionably beneficial to the studio.

~BB~

[Richctdude]

porn in general has no quality control.... only a few sites do

[slinky]

I have to hand it to the Grooby people though. They have something for everyone including myself focused on a particular niche. Sometimes the girls can seem so far away or larger than life, but Grooby has a way of presenting them like the real people they are who could even be the girl next door. Too much airbrushing or shooting under obviously contrived circumstances can sure make a girl seem artificial or plastic.

This is one of the pieces of advice I give to my clients about putting ads on Eros and the like but want to use glamor/art shots: there's one thing the guy knows when he sees them: whoever opens the door when he gets to the appointment, it's not going to be the girl in the photograph, because NO ONE LOOKS LIKE THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS. I had several discussions with girls this week about it because more and more photographers are so overly heavy handed in photoshopping the living shit out of stuff that you might as well just paint it instead. Because it would be equally realistic looking.

[phobun]

Therefore, you aren't presenting any evidence beyond the anecdotal to justify marketing in a manner that is not beneficial to the model and only questionably beneficial to the studio.

~BB~
A studio in business a long time with a good track record probably knows what is beneficial to the studio.

You lean libertarian/free market, right? Wasn't it the legendary Adam Smith himself who wrote: "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own neccessities but of their advantages."

I think the studio will naturally always operate with the studio's interest first, but that said, photographers like Buddy Wood sure appear to be gentlemen and first class in how they treat the girls.

[slinky]

And you think OUR niche is small? I mean you're talking about amateur stuff on Clips4Sale, not Playboy, Hustler, or even Yum. Ok fine, there IS an audience for everything, but three guys living in a trailer sandwiched between a prison and a landfill drinking moonshine don't qualify as a demographic. The only reason Clips4Sale has those categories is because they don't have to produce content so it doesn't cost them anything to offer them. They're not a production site dishing out money for shoots and expecting to make a profit. Therefore, you aren't presenting any evidence beyond the anecdotal to justify marketing in a manner that is not beneficial to the model and only questionably beneficial to the studio.

~BB~

1) We had a German client who for 2 years had us shooting 1 or 2 scenes a week of girls with the ugliest feet we could find (corns, bunyons, hammer toes) painting their toenails. And their checks came in like clockwork. Sometimes it was so hard to find girls with ugly enough feet we picked up women at the local homeless shelter as "foot doubles" and shot other girls for the beginning and cut to them for the foot shots.

2) www.2girls1cup.com. www.1guy1jar.com , www.kids-in-sandbox.com , www.oldslippers.com (http://whoresblog.com/dtr/galls/150817/) , www.crackwhoreconfessions.com , www.anorexicporn.net , www.chubbypokers.com (http://bbwlady.net/at_49lo/chp_sell.html) I could go on and on

[BellaBellucci]

Therefore, you aren't presenting any evidence beyond the anecdotal to justify marketing in a manner that is not beneficial to the model and only questionably beneficial to the studio.

~BB~
A studio in business a long time with a good track record probably knows what is beneficial to the studio.

You lean libertarian/free market, right? Wasn't it the legendary Adam Smith himself who wrote: "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own neccessities but of their advantages."

I think the studio will naturally always operate with the studio's interest first, but that said, photographers like Buddy Wood sure appear to be gentlemen and first class in how they treat the girls.

Excellent point. Except that you neglect to mention that there's too much politicking that goes on in our niche so sometimes the best thing for a studio to do is to make a short-term sacrifice in order to neutralize a long-term threat.

In my case, I tend to challenge the major players in this game in an effort to improve the situation for both myself and the younger models who dare not speak up. Is it really that far fetched to believe that there are some who wish that I would just shut up and go away and who want to keep me and others like me from getting any more modeling work by marketing us improperly? It seems like a pretty simple solution to the problem of those who would question the authority of the supposed hierarchy.

Girls tell me all the time that porn and activism don't mix and I argue to the contrary because what they are saying is only true if one cares about their modeling career more than they do about making a difference. I don't.

~BB~

[BellaBellucci]

And you think OUR niche is small? I mean you're talking about amateur stuff on Clips4Sale, not Playboy, Hustler, or even Yum. Ok fine, there IS an audience for everything, but three guys living in a trailer sandwiched between a prison and a landfill drinking moonshine don't qualify as a demographic. The only reason Clips4Sale has those categories is because they don't have to produce content so it doesn't cost them anything to offer them. They're not a production site dishing out money for shoots and expecting to make a profit. Therefore, you aren't presenting any evidence beyond the anecdotal to justify marketing in a manner that is not beneficial to the model and only questionably beneficial to the studio.

~BB~

1) We had a German client who for 2 years had us shooting 1 or 2 scenes a week of girls with the ugliest feet we could find (corns, bunyons, hammer toes) painting their toenails. And their checks came in like clockwork. Sometimes it was so hard to find girls with ugly enough feet we picked up women at the local homeless shelter as "foot doubles" and shot other girls for the beginning and cut to them for the foot shots.

2) 2girls1cup.com. 1guy1jar.com, www.kids-in-sandbox.com, http://whoresblog.com/dtr/galls/150817/ , crackwhoreconfessions.com I could go on and on

One or two scenes a week? Well of course you were making money. You were limiting the content. What's more is that all of the fetishes you can list are part of the broader 'fetish niche.' So if a TS girl has ugly ears, that means she should be marketed under the fetish niche instead of the TS niche? That's certainly not what I signed up for. Sure, we all sign away our rights to our photos but that's because we presumably trust those who would control the content. We should be able to reasonably assume that our photos will be used in the most flattering way possible. I for one would not sign a model release if I thought for a second that that wouldn't be the case - and I didn't. Sure, it's all legal, but for many of us models, it's still a betrayal of our trust in the producer.

~BB~

[BellaBellucci]

I have to hand it to the Grooby people though. They have something for everyone including myself focused on a particular niche. Sometimes the girls can seem so far away or larger than life, but Grooby has a way of presenting them like the real people they are who could even be the girl next door. Too much airbrushing or shooting under obviously contrived circumstances can sure make a girl seem artificial or plastic.

This is one of the pieces of advice I give to my clients about putting ads on Eros and the like but want to use glamor/art shots: there's one thing the guy knows when he sees them: whoever opens the door when he gets to the appointment, it's not going to be the girl in the photograph, because NO ONE LOOKS LIKE THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS. I had several discussions with girls this week about it because more and more photographers are so overly heavy handed in photoshopping the living shit out of stuff that you might as well just paint it instead. Because it would be equally realistic looking.

I gotta co-sign this. I always get a kick out of girls who shop their pics to death but the truth in the escorting biz is that the most important thing to do is just to get guys to call and work the rest out later! lol

~BB~

[slinky]

So if a TS girl has ugly ears, that means she should be marketed under the fetish niche instead of the TS niche?

ok.

www.oldtransexuals.com

[GroobySteven]

Well if you don't mean Grooby, then why don't you point the finger at the site's you mean, Bella instead of being an "activist" against nothing.

I totally disagree that Shemale Yum goes on quantity and not quality, that's absolute rubbish. What we do go for, is a wider range of transgenders than most websites. Model's like yourself who don't fit into the typical "shemale pornstar" category are given an opportunity and I doubt many of the models that we feature, would have been given an opportunity by other companies until they'd seen how they'd photographed.

As far as the number of photos in a set goes, we roughly delete about 25% of them as they're unusable. We then retouch each image individually, generally trying to take out unwanted pimples, blemishes of other problems (mostly skin) including sometimes nipple scars. We don't usually touch other scars or do too much face work other than above. Other companies, use the same feature on photoshop to blanket the whole set, giving them the conformity that works for them and their members. It might be easier on the eye but it looks false and takes a lot away from people looking for the real models, in my opinion. Each approach has it's own place in the market.

As far as some companies working with makeup artists and hair stylist, then good for them, I'm happy that they can work that into their budget. We generally do this only on one site, http://www.shemalepornstar.com which has a higher budget per shoot. It wouldn't work on our other sites and frankly, I don't want to see over made-up/styled shoots either. If a transgender model can't at least get her makeup and/or hair right, then she's probably not worth working with. (yeah, yeah, I know, we've some models with bad makeup and hair, but they don't get reshoots).

I don't know who politics you are thinking about in this niche. I can tell you what Grooby politics are exactly.

a) To work with any models who can perform within our guidelines whom I think would fit the sites well. I get the photos of every model before we shoot.
b) To reshoot models who've had great feedback, either in our ratings, our comments or on our forums.

That's all. No other subterfuge. Sometimes we get models who are unhappy as we can't work with them as much as they'd wish but we go off what keeps our members happy and what will bring in new members.

As another poster mentioned, why on earth would a site want to promote photos that weren't complimentary to the model or her assets? I can't imagine one site doing this as it wouldn't make any business or economic sense whatsover. Often models have an self-awareness that is very different from how they actually present themselves. It's up to us to find the most marketable shots to get interested people, into the site.

seanchai

[slinky]

Excellent point. Except that you neglect to mention that there's too much politicking that goes on in our niche so sometimes the best thing for a studio to do is to make a short-term sacrifice in order to neutralize a long-term threat.

In my case, I tend to challenge the major players in this game in an effort to improve the situation for both myself and the younger models who dare not speak up. Is it really that far fetched to believe that there are some who wish that I would just shut up and go away and who want to keep me and others like me from getting any more modeling work by marketing us improperly? It seems like a pretty simple solution to the problem of those who would question the authority of the supposed hierarchy.

Girls tell me all the time that porn and activism don't mix and I argue to the contrary because what they are saying is only true if one cares about their modeling career more than they do about making a difference. I don't.

~BB~



Sure, we all sign away our rights to our photos but that's because we presumably trust those who would control the content. We should be able to reasonably assume that our photos will be used in the most flattering way possible. I for one would not sign a model release if I thought for a second that that wouldn't be the case - and I didn't. Sure, it's all legal, but for many of us models, it's still a betrayal of our trust in the producer.

~BB~

OK, so you like to go and upset the applecart and piss in producer's cornflakes and be an activist, and at the same time think that in return you should be able to trust those same producers to make you look the best you can possibly look even if it's against their own economic interest/business model, and seem to think that rather than them posting these pics to bring in business there is a "huge right wing conspiracy" to keep TS models in their places by posting ugly pics of any girls who "dare" to speak out against the posting of "ugly pics"? And that you also go do shoots for companies who use these tactics to "control the system in the long term" who you speak out against because they do such things, so that you can go and speak out about them doing it?

[LibertyHarkness]

best bet to make good money and a name in modelling ... launch your own website , hire your own models etc ... then as and when you pick model shoots for other sites its just basically paid marketing ... bonus to draw people to your own site ...

with your own site you can produce to what ever level you wish .... there is simply not enough work about in the ts niche to base a modelling career just living off earning from paid shoots .... no one shoots 5 days a week month after month for multisites do they :)

of course some sites will market or put more time in shooting certain models that get the ratings in for them , that makes them money ... but take a look at yum as an example, each model has a bio page that will have a link to your ownwebsite ....you can also use some of the pics in youv set to use to promote as well....

fortune favours the bold as they say :) self promote ...

i didnt like some of hte pics used from sites by me to promote me ,,, but all i did was pic some pics i did like and market them instead along side ...

my 2 pence :) i could go on alot more ...

[shemale-411]

Unbelievable! I have to word this carefully so as not to be accused of attacking the OP. First let me state I have worked for 3 production companies in the past 12 years, I've been in front of the camera, behind it, done web design, edited film, been in shipping, customer service etc.

I have seen producers put up with some flaky ass models and some crazy shit, if their sets got alot of positive feedback, or their videos flew off the shelf. I've seen producers willing to try something new, for example, I set up my old boss with Olivia Love for his first TS shoot.

Some models just didnt sell. And alot of times it would surprise the hell out of us. The guys loved the girl we didnt think they would, and the glamour babe they could do without, you never knew.

We are in a RECESSION. A model could be the biggest pain in the ass in the world, and if she sold, they would bring her back. Again and again. Sometimes a model just doesnt sell, and to blame the producers, who are in business to make money, isnt fair.

[TempestTS]

Actually I would guess that there is somebody out there somewhere that for whater reason is completely turned on by someone like her and would pay good money to see her in a movie or pics.

Cletus the slack-jawed yokel maybe?



Go over to the Clibs4Sale site and just take a look at all the strange categories you can buy content for...

Toothbrushing

Sweat Fetish

Ugly

Spinal Brace Fetish

Sneezing

Hiccups

coughing fetish

Nose Pinching


And you think OUR niche is small? I mean you're talking about amateur stuff on Clips4Sale, not Playboy, Hustler, or even Yum. Ok fine, there IS an audience for everything, but three guys living in a trailer sandwiched between a prison and a landfill drinking moonshine don't qualify as a demographic. The only reason Clips4Sale has those categories is because they don't have to produce content so it doesn't cost them anything to offer them. They're not a production site dishing out money for shoots and expecting to make a profit. Therefore, you aren't presenting any evidence beyond the anecdotal to justify marketing in a manner that is not beneficial to the model and only questionably beneficial to the studio.

~BB~

Well if we go up against Straight porn or even Gay/lesbian porn yes our niche is much smaller but its also much bigger than it was 10 years ago which says a couple things about its growth but you also have to factor in carrying capacity of the market. If your niche is rare you can make a lot of money but as some people jump in once they see the money the fanbase will only grow to a certain level then it becomes hard to make money and several companies might close because they run into the red, or they might up the production quality or spend money on promotion to see if they can push the market wider. It might work, It might not... its not a easy yes or no answer there are way too many things to take into account.

Clips4Sale has a great concept. They host content in their system for anyone who wants to provide it and they take a cut of the profit. Largely they leave it up to the content providers to market for them. Im guessing that they dont have a huge marketing budget but might spend a little to continue to attract more producers so they have more content and more sub companies who will push their site for them. BRILLIANT!

They have all those different Fetish niche categories not only because its easy, its because "Somebody" is producing and "somebody" is buying and when you have millions of clips and photos in all those sub niche offerings it adds up to a lot in the end even if the Guy stuck in Siberia Russia with the toothbrush and sneezing fetish only buys one clip a month. As long as he keeps buying money is money right?

Not to mention that Clips4Sale also has content for several large studios. They already own the content, prices on individual clips are so high that only a couple of them sold are similar to a one month trial on a lot of sites. And of course you cant leave out the advertising value of just being on a site with lots of traffic who might see their studio while browsing for amateur toe-nail clipping porn and stop in to buy something or at least remember they saw it and visit the producers main site later.

Yes there is a market for everything... if your a very small niche your fanbase will be very dedicated since its hard to find anyone else producing it... as long as no other sellers enter the market youll probably do well.

One guy is a landfill with a jug of moonshine is a demographic as long as he is buying what your selling, if he's buying a lot you might want to advertise in other landfills who knows what untapped market youll find :lol:

How do you measure success?

Is it dollars or enjoyment of what you do
Or is it both.

Can a choice of content, style of work, or advertising always going to pay off based on the data you make your decisions on?
Of Course Not... R ember the Sony Beta-max VCR system? Better in just about every way but flopped.

Could producers change the way they do things and improve the market?
YES... but I have no idea what would work and what would not. if I had the answers Id already be rich. And some shit just never makes sense no matter what "Yoko Ono anyone?"

Do I feel that I was marked correctly by every company I worked for.
No. But its not personal and its just what they viewed as best for their marketing budget at the time... I have no beef there.
Am I sure about that?
Hell no but Id like to at least believe I have something more to offer so Im going to give it a shot. I might prove them right and fall on my ass or I might prove them wrong and do quite well but either way I will have learned from the attempt and I believe in trying to follow my dreams so its ok either way at least Ill be doing what i want to be doing.

Do I feel that you Bella have not hit your true potential as an adult model.
YES. I still want to bring you up here to shoot for TS-Rockdolls.

Do I know it will be worth my investment. Is it "For Sure"
No but I think I see more in you than I have yet to see on any shoot youve done so Im willing to risk money I barely have just to find out.

HEY THATS A DUMB IDEA! Im risking money that I can hardly spare on someone that I dont really know based on no hard data but only because I have a hunch?
Yes Its probably not the best thing to spend my money on but its what I want to do so Im going to do it simply because I believe you have a lot more potential, but I dont believe for a second that my little indi site can give you a push even in 10 years of the best promo and production that I can offer than you would get in 10 days as just being in a Grooby YUM December gallery. Lets face it Grooby is a traffic monster for model visibility even if they dont formally do promotion on you.

There is certainly room for improvement and change in any business model. There always will be but change always comes with some risk because its too complex to predict no matter how much or what data you collect.

You look at your cards and place your bet on not only what you can see but what you feel but youll never know for sure. So dont become too personally invested in the game or let it tear you apart if you lose. If your only in it for the win you shouldnt even play, you need to be in it because you enjoy the game not because you are looking for a specific outcome. Its hard not to take things personal when its you up there in that photograph or in that video but its not "YOU" that they are seeing, its just a bunch of pixels on a screen that might or might not have some additional data that indicates how that group of pixels would be best used by company XYZ.

No guarantees on anything in life but I hope you stick around in this adult industry to show your true potential and do your best to enjoy the ride getting there.

Even though Im in disagreement with you Bella on this issue its just a debate of opinions. I think your a fantastic gal and really do hope that we do get the chance to work together some day soon ;)

[slinky]

TempestTS you are one smart cookie. If you ever get to NYC i'd love to chat with you. In the meanwhile if there's anything i can do to help you with Adult marketing advice, I would be glad to.

[GroobySteven]

TempestTS you are one smart cookie.

Not only smart but from all dealings I've had with her, eloquent and very cool.
If anyone hasn't checked out her site, please do. We're about to start some promotions on it. It's great to see models like Tempest and Mandy producing content on their own terms and very different to the more mainstream TS porn.

[DeliaTS]

Having a solo amateur site and working with only one other person here are a few of my observations.

Production value: We try to mix this up a bit - we have the equipment and know how to do high end glamorous shoots but don't have the budget to pull it off on a weekly basis (I update my site every week). Plus members enjoy some variety so I'll do casual shoots or outdoor shoots (which are more tricky because you have less control over the lighting and environment) or shoots with a specific theme. Of course we try to do the best we can on every shoot but still like to keep some of the amateur charm. But there are times as both a model and as a photographer that I do miss the mark or fall short. We all have good days and bad days on both sides of the lens.

Modeling is tricky. Even working with the same photographer for the last 6 years I still find myself a little surprised (sometimes in a good way and sometimes not so much) looking at pictures after a shoot. Like I was giving you all THIS and you shot THAT???

I edit all of my pictures and video. For photos I generally go through the whole raw set and toss out all of the obvious duds. Then go through again and find which ones are repeats or blurry. Then I generally go through the photoshopping process. I resize, flip pics around where needed, make any lighting adjustments, then touch up where needed. I try not to be too heavy handed but that gets tougher and tougher as I get older. Then, depending on the size of the set, I'll pare it down even further.

When I'm deciding which pics to keep and which to toss out I can't have my partner in the same room with me. Sometimes she'll look over my shoulder and say "You're getting rid of that shot!?! That's one of my favorites!" And then the debate begins on what I dislike about it VS what she likes. "You're ass looks so hot there." "Yeah, but look at the face I'm making." And on and on. So I find it best to make sure the door is closed when I going through this process.

Trixie creates most of the promotional galleries for my site so she chooses which pics are included there. I swear if we were to pick 15 pictures out of a set there might be one or two that were actually the same. Obviously we try not to give away the 15 best shots out of a set, I mean you want to leave people wanting more and don't want them to be disappointed when they do join. Ultimately I get the final say in what goes out for promo but I've come to realize that with any shot that I don't like, she obviously has seen something she does like. So I'll usually just let it slide.

I'm still amazed at which pics from a set that a member will pick out as a favorite. I haven't found any rhyme or reason in it. Totally subjective and varies from individual. I try to keep that in mind when I'm thinning out a set and if I question whether to keep or get rid of a shot I'll usually keep it.

[BellaBellucci]

OK, so you like to go and upset the applecart and piss in producer's cornflakes and be an activist, and at the same time think that in return you should be able to trust those same producers to make you look the best you can possibly look even if it's against their own economic interest/business model, and seem to think that rather than them posting these pics to bring in business there is a "huge right wing conspiracy" to keep TS models in their places by posting ugly pics of any girls who "dare" to speak out against the posting of "ugly pics"? And that you also go do shoots for companies who use these tactics to "control the system in the long term" who you speak out against because they do such things, so that you can go and speak out about them doing it?

I'm not pissing in anyone's anything. If I wanted to do that I would start tossing out crude personal insults and such. I'm just looking for a dialog. As far as the activism thing goes, I sum it up to this: it's a dirty job but somebody's got to do it. It might as well be me. Can you see Kimber or Kelly Shore or Yasmine Lee doing it? I didn't think so. lol

And I'm not alleging that there's a conspiracy. It's not that complicated. Again, what's so far fetched about someone who has control over someone's else career exercising that control for the 'greater good.' If I'm willing to make sacrifices so that other models can have better benefits, what makes people think others wouldn't do so to protect their larger interests? Frankly, those who accuse others of being conspiracy theorists tend to be guilty parties or those quick to defend the status quo. No tin foil hats or reptilian overlords necessary!

I may be wrong, but I'm not paranoid. It's just a theory.

~BB~

[BellaBellucci]

One guy is a landfill with a jug of moonshine is a demographic as long as he is buying what your selling, if he's buying a lot you might want to advertise in other landfills who knows what untapped market youll find :lol:

Right, but the models that cater to that 'demographic' know who their audience is and accept the degrading role they've been offered. In our niche we all try to look our best and expect to be promoted accordingly. It's not about law, technical prowess, content rights, etc. It's about expectations. We expect to be promoted as sexy, beautiful, and desirable, not by bunions, crooked fingers, drug use (crack whores), body fat, etc. That's all I'm saying.

~BB~

[tsmandy]

Thanks for the shout out Seanchai.

I'd just like to chime in here . There are many different ways to focus on production. Lighting gear and makeup are only a few. I spend the bulk of my production costs on hiring phenomenally talented videographers, photographers, rope bondage experts, and video editors, even though I could shoot with SMC in LA for free. I don't look nearly as glamorous in my shoots that I produce as I do in my LA shoots. So why do I do it? I do it like this because I'm an action girl. I love the action. I don't give a shit about looking like Barbie, I wanna make hot and filthy pornography. I've found a crew of people that I click really well with, and I'm willing to shift my focus from hyper control of my appearance to hyper control of my content.

GG's in porn don't face the nearly constant self loathing and doubt that TS do in regards to our appearances. Look at nearly all straight/girl-girl hardcore and those bitches get fucked up. Makeup all over the face, hair a mess, and guys go crazy for it. But we TS constantly have to worry about our own self loathing and other people possibly thinking we are not looking passable.

I'm at a point in my career where I want to make porn that goes beyond this. If my hair gets messed up, and I have makeup running that doesn't make me less passable, it just means I'm having a good time like any other women would. I think this attitude has actually been integral to my success in this industry.

[BellaBellucci]

GG's in porn don't face the nearly constant self loathing and doubt that TS do in regards to our appearances.

Ohhh, yes they do! Most women are extremely insecure, but it's that very self doubt that keeps a GG from talking about it in the first place. I think in general they just hide it better than we do.

~BB~

[tsmandy]

GG's in porn don't face the nearly constant self loathing and doubt that TS do in regards to our appearances.

Ohhh, yes they do! Most women are extremely insecure, but it's that very self doubt that keeps a GG from talking about it in the first place. I think in general they just hide it better than we do.

~BB~

No, I mean GG's don't have to worry about not being passable. Guys like to see girls get messy, they will pay a fortune to watch it (go look at Kink sometime, girls only start out looking good). As a TS I don't worry about not looking my prettiest, I worry about my viewers seeing something manly in a picture. That is what I mean by constant doubt and self-loathing that is particular to TS women in the porn industry.

[slinky]

Again, what's so far fetched about someone who has control over someone's else career exercising that control for the 'greater good.' If I'm willing to make sacrifices so that other models can have better benefits, what makes people think others wouldn't do so to protect their larger interests?

We are talking about pornographers, porn talent/hookers, adult webmasters, etc. Now, I'm certainly not advocating that just because the business is "seedy" that people shouldn't have business ethics. But what I am saying is that I think it is Pollyannaish to expect it from this group of people (and trust me, I've spent the last 30 years getting yelled at by almost every partner I've ever had for doing the same thing, so I'm not saying it to belittle you, I'm saying it because I'm recognizing one of my own personal faults in someone else).

Also, at this point I'm not quite sure exactly what "sacrifices" you are refering to? Would you care to enlighten me?

[slinky]

Right, but the models that cater to that 'demographic' know who their audience is and accept the degrading role they've been offered.

Actually, you could make that exact same claim about any TS who knowingly does a shoot for any known site that you are complaining about in the OP, can't you? I mean, as I said in a prior post: you know the type of things the site posts, what their production values are, etc.: they are not a secret. So if you accept a gig from them, what makes you any different than the models in these other niches? unless you are saying that the producers make promises as to what they will do and then break them, but so far that is not what I think am seeing. What I'm seeing is Grooby et al being very up front about what they plan on putting out there. It seems to me like it's more of a problem of girls not paying attention to what they should be, taking gigs without doing the proper research into who they are doing business with, and them being surprised when the production company does what they have always done, but the girl didn't pay enough attention to realize what she was getting herself into.

[Jericho]

I don't understand this discussion.

Is it aimed at the photographer or the end user?

[slinky]

I don't understand this discussion.

Is it aimed at the photographer or the end user?

From what I can see, it's calling out the producers, but it is actually aimed in reality at the site owners.

But for today's irony: someone just posted a partial set of pics of Vanity from the "uber-professional" shop (and as an aside, a mod here asked me a hypothetical question the other day of "if you could be with ANY TS in the world, who would it be"" and my answer was her) and I'm looking at the pics and thinking that she's looking at them and thinking some of the same thoughts about those pics as are being complained about in the OP (while OBVIOUSLY not to the same degree. I'm looking at shots and seeing things that if I was trying to do my best to make Vanity look her absolute best on a "glamor shoot", I never would have let go through (like a pic where she looks like she has a gut, another with an obvious facial blemish or make-up blunder which easily could have been corrected, etc.).

[tsmandy]

I don't understand this discussion.

Is it aimed at the photographer or the end user?

From what I can see, it's calling out the producers, but it is actually aimed in reality at the site owners.

But for today's irony: someone just posted a partial set of pics of Vanity from the "uber-professional" shop (and as an aside, a mod here asked me a hypothetical question the other day of "if you could be with ANY TS in the world, who would it be"" and my answer was her) and I'm looking at the pics and thinking that she's looking at them and thinking some of the same thoughts about those pics as are being complained about in the OP (while OBVIOUSLY not to the same degree. I'm looking at shots and seeing things that if I was trying to do my best to make Vanity look her absolute best on a "glamor shoot", I never would have let go through (like a pic where she looks like she has a gut, another with an obvious facial blemish or make-up blunder which easily could have been corrected, etc.).

I just looked at the photos in question and see none of what you are talking about.

[GroobySteven]

As far as the activism thing goes, I sum it up to this: it's a dirty job but somebody's got to do it. It might as well be me. Can you see Kimber or Kelly Shore or Yasmine Lee doing it? I didn't think so. lol

Well what's the job, you've not stated any facts about from having a bit of a whine. I really can't see Kimber, Kelly or Yasmine doing something about nothing. Why do you think it's your job - you've barely scratched the surface of the industry in the what, 2 months since you've been appearing on websites? :roll:




And I'm not alleging that there's a conspiracy. It's not that complicated. Again, what's so far fetched about someone who has control over someone's else career exercising that control for the 'greater good.' If I'm willing to make sacrifices so that other models can have better benefits, what makes people think others wouldn't do so to protect their larger interests?

What is the "greater good"? What sacrifices have you made? You obviously are alleging a conspiracy yet you've made no points or stated any facts.




I may be wrong, but I'm not paranoid. It's just a theory.

~BB~

You may be wrong, your certainly paranoid. You have no theory or substantiated facts. Your spouting a bunch of inneundos that nobody else seems to support?

[zocco]

after reading through all this i can understand both sides
i have over time joined many sites and one of the things i have noticed is content for contents sake

i can understand some producers not wanting to use the best shots from a set for promotion and also their experience in knowing what will sell or not sell
i know that girls i have shot have always told me they didn't like that pose or that face ezpression (i don't shoot porn) yet they are some of the shots that i have liked the best
most of this all comes down to a matter of personal opinion and they are all going to differ widely
in the business you are all in it comes down to what sells that is important

[GroobySteven]

Excellent point. Except that you neglect to mention that there's too much politicking that goes on in our niche so sometimes the best thing for a studio to do is to make a short-term sacrifice in order to neutralize a long-term threat.

Huh? More gibberish. Whose a threat to whom?





In my case, I tend to challenge the major players in this game in an effort to improve the situation for both myself and the younger models who dare not speak up.
I've never heard you challenge anyone? What have I missed? Maybe I'm just not a major player...
What younger models dare not speak up?



Is it really that far fetched to believe that there are some who wish that I would just shut up and go away and who want to keep me and others like me from getting any more modeling work by marketing us improperly? It seems like a pretty simple solution to the problem of those who would question the authority of the supposed hierarchy.

Frankly, I think it's far fetched that anyone has heard of anything you've said. This is the most entertaining posts I've seen in a while. What is the "supposed hierarchy" and where does everyone rank.
Your talking absolute bollocks, love.




Girls tell me all the time that porn and activism don't mix and I argue to the contrary because what they are saying is only true if one cares about their modeling career more than they do about making a difference. I don't.

~BB~
Do you have a modeling career? What is your activism for? Better health checks? Fairer pay? More control.
Your not stating anything whatsoever.

Entertaining though ...

[tslvrnyc]

Are there people in this thread actually calling for more retouching in the transsexual porn space? Brazilian sites abuse the smudge tool to the extent that it should be illegal to ship Adobe products to Brazil.

[slinky]

I just looked at the photos in question and see none of what you are talking about.

http://www.hungangels.com/board/files/06_938.jpg
http://www.hungangels.com/board/files/08_447.jpg

[mbf]

Are there people in this thread actually calling for more retouching in the transsexual porn space? Brazilian sites abuse the smudge tool to the extent that it should be illegal to ship Adobe products to Brazil.

which sites are you referring to? I have been a member of brazilian shemalesclub.com, brazilain-transsexuals.com and shemales-from-hell.com, and none of those sites does obvious photoshopping.

Which, btw, I don't like at all. Photoshop that is. :lol:

[slinky]

which sites are you referring to? I have been a member of brazilian shemalesclub.com, brazilain-transsexuals.com and shemales-from-hell.com, and none of those sites does photoshopping.

Which, btw, I don't like at all. Photoshop that is.

EVERY SITE DOES PHOTOSHOPPING (or the equivalent like lightroom). It's only a matter of extent and what features they use.

[BellaBellucci]

GG's in porn don't face the nearly constant self loathing and doubt that TS do in regards to our appearances.

Ohhh, yes they do! Most women are extremely insecure, but it's that very self doubt that keeps a GG from talking about it in the first place. I think in general they just hide it better than we do.

~BB~

No, I mean GG's don't have to worry about not being passable. Guys like to see girls get messy, they will pay a fortune to watch it (go look at Kink sometime, girls only start out looking good). As a TS I don't worry about not looking my prettiest, I worry about my viewers seeing something manly in a picture. That is what I mean by constant doubt and self-loathing that is particular to TS women in the porn industry.

You worry too much. You're a pretty girl and the makeup doesn't make the woman. This is more about the fact the certain camera angles, lighting, etc can make even the prettiest GG look harsh or even masculine. I may not always agree with you but I do appreciate your femininity and your talent. You're a lot more valuable as a person and a performer as your insecurities would lead you to believe.

~BB~

[BellaBellucci]

Again, what's so far fetched about someone who has control over someone's else career exercising that control for the 'greater good.' If I'm willing to make sacrifices so that other models can have better benefits, what makes people think others wouldn't do so to protect their larger interests?

We are talking about pornographers, porn talent/hookers, adult webmasters, etc. Now, I'm certainly not advocating that just because the business is "seedy" that people shouldn't have business ethics. But what I am saying is that I think it is Pollyannaish to expect it from this group of people (and trust me, I've spent the last 30 years getting yelled at by almost every partner I've ever had for doing the same thing, so I'm not saying it to belittle you, I'm saying it because I'm recognizing one of my own personal faults in someone else).

Also, at this point I'm not quite sure exactly what "sacrifices" you are refering to? Would you care to enlighten me?

You don't think that just starting this conversation could piss people off and make it harder for me to get shoots? Hmm. Ok then. Wanna shoot me or direct me to someone who does? lol

Maybe I'm wrong. Who knows? The point is that I'm willing to make sacrifices if it serves the greater good and I don't think a lot of people can honestly say that in this business. To me it seems like everyone is dependent on the status quo. But like I said, that's just me.

~BB~

[BellaBellucci]

As far as the activism thing goes, I sum it up to this: it's a dirty job but somebody's got to do it. It might as well be me. Can you see Kimber or Kelly Shore or Yasmine Lee doing it? I didn't think so. lol

Well what's the job, you've not stated any facts about from having a bit of a whine. I really can't see Kimber, Kelly or Yasmine doing something about nothing. Why do you think it's your job - you've barely scratched the surface of the industry in the what, 2 months since you've been appearing on websites? :roll:




And I'm not alleging that there's a conspiracy. It's not that complicated. Again, what's so far fetched about someone who has control over someone's else career exercising that control for the 'greater good.' If I'm willing to make sacrifices so that other models can have better benefits, what makes people think others wouldn't do so to protect their larger interests?

What is the "greater good"? What sacrifices have you made? You obviously are alleging a conspiracy yet you've made no points or stated any facts.




I may be wrong, but I'm not paranoid. It's just a theory.

~BB~

You may be wrong, your certainly paranoid. You have no theory or substantiated facts. Your spouting a bunch of inneundos that nobody else seems to support?

Nobody else seems to support me? Actually a few people did until the bigger fish came in an squashed my dissent. Check the first couple of pages. As far as what I stand for, I think it's been pretty obvious from day one that I think the girls in this biz should be marketed more as the beautiful women that they are instead of the freaks some people seem to want us to be. Some may say that I should get out of the biz if I have a problem with it - but I don't have a problem with it - I just think we can do better. That's all. Not to mention that how long I've been involved in it is irrelevant. It's not like you have to be a model or producer to have an opinion on this since anybody can see the final product regardless of the way it was produced.

And I haven't stated any 'facts' because I intended this to be a hypothetical discussion and I don't want to call anybody out. I'm sure those in question know who they are.

~BB~

[BellaBellucci]

I just looked at the photos in question and see none of what you are talking about.

So wait. Everyone is calling out the evils of Photoshop, but a few minor blemishes are left in a few photos to achieve a higher level of realism and someone complains about that too? I don't get it. Doesn't anyone else think that there should/could be a happy medium on this?

~BB~

[slinky]

[
You don't think that just starting this conversation could piss people off and make it harder for me to get shoots? Hmm. Ok then. Wanna shoot me or direct me to someone who does? lol

Maybe I'm wrong. Who knows? The point is that I'm willing to make sacrifices if it serves the greater good and I don't think a lot of people can honestly say that in this business. To me it seems like everyone is dependent on the status quo. But like I said, that's just me.

~BB~

a) There really aren't all that many people who independently shoot/produce TS porn (i.e. as outside production companies for sites/distributors) in the US.

b) I'm not saying that what you have said in this thread won't piss anyone off or cost you jobs, but I think it's much less because of any sort of "activism" than not wanting to work with someone who a producer or website owner/distributor is going to think is going to complain about how they choose to do their business, what shots to use, etc.

c) I don't currently shoot any TS porn personally. I found it to be WAY to much of a PITA to do in the US and gave up after VERY few attempts at it. Give me a couple of my home girls who trust me and fear me at the same time (lol) and I'll do what many have told me I was full of shit when I said I did it (but then proved it to them): shoot 22 hardcore scenes in one day; twice and bang out enough scenes to start5 a new site with).

d) With the industry in the shitter (no matter what anyone tells you), the odds of finding someone who's going to fly you in and pay you enough money to make it worth your while are slim at best.

[BellaBellucci]

Excellent point. Except that you neglect to mention that there's too much politicking that goes on in our niche so sometimes the best thing for a studio to do is to make a short-term sacrifice in order to neutralize a long-term threat.

Huh? More gibberish. Whose a threat to whom?






In my case, I tend to challenge the major players in this game in an effort to improve the situation for both myself and the younger models who dare not speak up.

I've never heard you challenge anyone? What have I missed? Maybe I'm just not a major player...
What younger models dare not speak up? ...

I'm pretty sure that there was a bit of conflict over the summer the last time I brought up this topic so this post is not the extent of my protest of the way trans porn is produced and promoted. If you remember I objected to the use of the word 'shemale' and that's when I had the activist label pinned on me. I didn't just proclaim myself as such. Don't you think you're taking this a bit personally anyway?

~BB~

[GroobySteven]

Don't you think you're taking this a bit personally anyway?

~BB~

How many sites have you worked on?

[GroobySteven]

Nobody else seems to support me? Actually a few people did until the bigger fish came in an squashed my dissent. Check the first couple of pages. As far as what I stand for, I think it's been pretty obvious from day one that I think the girls in this biz should be marketed more as the beautiful women that they are instead of the freaks some people seem to want us to be. Some may say that I should get out of the biz if I have a problem with it - but I don't have a problem with it - I just think we can do better. That's all. Not to mention that how long I've been involved in it is irrelevant. It's not like you have to be a model or producer to have an opinion on this since anybody can see the final product regardless of the way it was produced.

And I haven't stated any 'facts' because I intended this to be a hypothetical discussion and I don't want to call anybody out. I'm sure those in question know who they are.

~BB~

What dissent? What big fishes? You do have paranoia!
You're changing the argument or (supposed) point now. So this isn't about the fact that some companies are allegedly putting up poor images of girls on purpose for the "good of the greater cause" ... it's about marketing the models as beautiful women and not freaks. There isn't any argument there with the exception, that we're going to market them as beautiful women with penises.

Your twisting your original post. It's not hypothetical as you did allude to
companies in your original post.

The whole thing stinks of sour grapes to me.

[BellaBellucci]

Don't you think you're taking this a bit personally anyway?

~BB~

How many sites have you worked on?

4 sites, but I've done shoots for my own personal use as well. Maybe it's an unfair comparison because I had creative control over my own shoots, but my reasons for my opinion are just that - my reasons. That's why I'm using this thread to solicit opinions from others and start a dialog. I hardly intended to imply that mine is the final word on the subject.

Frankly, if I'm so completely wrong and nobody supports me then why is this thread stirring up so much controversy? I think there's a little bit of truth to what everyone's saying and I think we'd be remiss to not re-explore this topic on occasion especially considering the state of the current economy business and how it pertains to the industry in general.

~BB~

[BellaBellucci]

So this isn't about the fact that some companies are allegedly putting up poor images of girls on purpose for the "good of the greater cause" ... it's about marketing the models as beautiful women and not freaks.

It's both. My initial question was whether or not it's likely that a company would attempt to derail the long-term career prospects of a girl simply because they find their politics threatening. If it's not, then prove me wrong and have me in for another shoot. :lol:



Your twisting your original post. It's not hypothetical as you did allude to
companies in your original post.

I 'alluded,' yes, as in I didn't mention names. I merely used my experience in the biz thus far as an example to spark discussion on the topic. I think people around here know me well enough to know that if my goal was simply to slam soneone in particular I'd just do it outright instead of beating around the bush.

~BB~

[GroobySteven]

Don't you think you're taking this a bit personally anyway?

~BB~

How many sites have you worked on?

4 sites, but I've done shoots for my own personal use as well. Maybe it's an unfair comparison because I had creative control over my own shoots, but my reasons for my opinion are just that - my reasons. That's why I'm using this thread to solicit opinions from others and start a dialog. I hardly intended to imply that mine is the final word on the subject.

Frankly, if I'm so completely wrong and nobody supports me then why is this thread stirring up so much controversy? I think there's a little bit of truth to what everyone's saying and I think we'd be remiss to not re-explore this topic on occasion especially considering the state of the current economy business and how it pertains to the industry in general.

~BB~

I think everyone is enjoying reading your drivel personally, I know it's been entertaining me for the last few hours. You've stated absolutely nothing but seem to think that your some sort of crusader.
It's the other models going off on a tangent which have made it a good post.

Just out of curiosity, do you think the photo in your avatar <======
is a good photo of you?

[BellaBellucci]

Just out of curiosity, do you think the photo in your avatar <======
is a good photo of you?

It's good for a snapshot yes. I mean it's not Yum quality, but then what else is?

~BB~

[GroobySteven]

If it's not, then prove me wrong and have me in for another shoot. :lol:
You don't have any politics that I've noticed. We wouldn't use you for another shoot as there wasn't enough positive feedback, rating or requests for more of you. Simple business economics but thanks for the offer and thank you for working with us previously.



I think people around here know me well enough to know that if my goal was simply to slam soneone in particular I'd just do it outright instead of beating around the bush.


Obviously not.

[BellaBellucci]

You've stated absolutely nothing but seem to think that your some sort of crusader.

You keep trying to limit my so-called activism to this thread alone. I guess you weren't around for the Danielle Foxx incident where I objected to the use of the word 'shemale' to the point that Danielle doesn't even post here anymore so it's not what I think; it's also what a lot of other people seen to think from what I've seen and been told.

Why does this bother you so much? If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. I can deal with that. I just think we're all entitled to our opinion and that this has been a fairly productive discussion. *shrug*

~BB~

[slinky]

Nobody else seems to support me? Actually a few people did until the bigger fish came in an squashed my dissent. Check the first couple of pages. As far as what I stand for, I think it's been pretty obvious from day one that I think the girls in this biz should be marketed more as the beautiful women that they are instead of the freaks some people seems to want us to be. Some may say that I should get out of the biz if I have a problem with it - but I don't have a problem with it - I just think we can do better. That's all. Not to mention that how long I've been involved in it is irrelevant. It's not like you have to be a model or producer to have an opinion on this since anybody can see the final product regardless of the way it was produced.

And I haven't stated any 'facts' because I intended this to be a hypothetical discussion and I don't want to call anybody out. I'm sure those in question know who they are.

~BB~

a) "Nobody else seems to support me? Actually a few people did until the bigger fish came in an squashed my dissent. "

Considering the first three responses were by senashai and myself, and then the rest of the first page you had both tsmandy and TempestTS came in and supported "the establishment position", and the two outsiders posts on teh page were relatively neutral, I think you are "arguing facts not in evidence".

b) "Some may say that I should get out of the biz if I have a problem with it - but I don't have a problem with it - I just think we can do better."

I don't think anyone told you to "get out of the business" anywhere in the thread. What I know I did was tell you that if you are going to work for companies, you shouldn't be surprised that they represent you in the same way that they have been representing every other girl for YEARS, or not work WITH THOSE COMPANIES.

c) " Not to mention that how long I've been involved in it is irrelevant. It's not like you have to be a model or producer to have an opinion on this since anybody can see the final product regardless of the way it was produced."

Again I disagree: industry experience is TOTALLY relevant. If what you would like to be the way the business is run is contrary to the way it is capable of being run and being viable financially, and others know it because of their experience and you don't because of your lack of it, how is that not relevant?

I think a lot of the problem here is that what you are talking about what you (and probably a lot of other talent) want the way the world to operate. And people who have enough experience to know the way the world actually has operated and is currently operating are telling you that if you want for things to operate in the way you want to, then there is a way to do it. But you can't expect OTHER PEOPLE to run their businesses the way you think they should because it's what's good for you and/or other talent. How about if I told you I'd shoot you and represent you exactly the way you want to be, but as a result you'd have to pay all your own expenses and get half your usual fee? Would you accept that? I don't think so.

What I see here is plenty of people with plenty of experience telling you that if you want thigs the way you want them, then you have to take your own actions, take your own risks, etc. JUST LIKE A NUMBER OF OTHER GIRLS HAVE DONE who wanted that. but it seems like what you want is to have other people act in your best interest and against theirs because of some "greater good" which is not only undefined, but as far as i can tell, only greater good for one side, while the other side is the one footing the bills for it. You are talking about 'sacrifice", but at the same time arguing with those who are the one's who have the experience of actually making sacrifices and lving with the consequences.

It's not that I don't understand WHY you would want what you want. but it actually seems like what you want is "more and better" without making the sacrifices which others are making, except for the possible sacrifice of not getting more work because the people who you have done work for in the past and may have in the future may see you as being unreasonable.

[BellaBellucci]

If it's not, then prove me wrong and have me in for another shoot. :lol:
You don't have any politics that I've noticed. We wouldn't use you for another shoot as there wasn't enough positive feedback, rating or requests for more of you. Simple business economics but thanks for the offer and thank you for working with us previously.


You're hysterical! I spent a month on the Top 10 board, peaking at #6. My first set, of which I wasn't particularly fond, had over 8500 views at last count which rivals many other more established models in the industry. But you go ahead and spin it any way you like.

Paranoia? Yeah, OK. That's why you're trying to run away from me as fast as you can now that you've clearly taken my criticism all upon yourself. Thanks for proving me correct. I pretty much knew you'd never call me in again. I'm not stupid, ya know?! :lol:

This is precisely why I actually feel comfortable in the 'activist' role in which I've seemed to land. Thank you for helping me find my place. :)

~BB~

[BellaBellucci]

How about if I told you I'd shoot you and represent you exactly the way you want to be, but as a result you'd have to pay all your own expenses and get half your usual fee? Would you accept that? I don't think so.

To be honest, if I had creative control I would gladly work on a profit-sharing basis or commission of some sort. Remember that the studios make a profit in perpetuity on the content they shoot. I would gladly forgo the stipend I receive for a shoot for a chance to change things. So would I put my money where my mouth is? You bet your ass I would!


What I see here is plenty of people with plenty of experience telling you that if you want thigs the way you want them, then you have to take your own actions, take your own risks, etc. JUST LIKE A NUMBER OF OTHER GIRLS HAVE DONE

The only thing stopping me is a lack of start-up capital. Like I just said, given the opportunity I would gladly take the risks necessary to help the industry become what I envision it could be. I'm anything but a hypocrite.



It's not that I don't understand WHY you would want what you want. but it actually seems like what you want is "more and better" without making the sacrifices which others are making, except for the possible sacrifice of not getting more work because the people who you have done work for in the past and may have in the future may see you as being unreasonable.

Thank for your enlightened understanding. I Agree 100%. In fact the proof is in this thread. Essentially I was just publicly 'fired' so to speak by Seanchai. So yeah, you have a point here. :lol:

~BB~

[GroobySteven]

You're hysterical! I spent a month on the Top 10 board, peaking at #6. My first set, of which I wasn't particularly fond, had over 8500 views at last count which rivals many other more established models in the industry. But you go ahead and spin it any way you like.

Paranoia? Yeah, OK. That's why you're trying to run away from me as fast as you can now that you've clearly taken my criticism all upon yourself. Thanks for proving me correct. I pretty much knew you'd never call me in again. I'm not stupid, ya know?! :lol:

This is precisely why I actually feel comfortable in the 'activist' role in which I've seemed to land. Thank you for helping me find my place. :)

~BB~

Not as hysterical as you Bella.
You were on the Top 10 board as the database/rating system was brand new so every new model updated, no matter what the rating, ended up on it before it "shook out" with enough votes across enough models to give a fair rating. Your sets rate 3.10 which is pretty low. The top 50 models have a spread of only 0.49 so you can guess where you'd lie in the actual ratings. We've had no member requests for reshoots.
Page views is fairly irrelevant. We have 1000's of members and most will look at every models pages.

What do you mean "run away"? :roll:

Thanks for proving ME correct that this has nothing to do with activism or "helping younger girls" (as if they needed it from you?) and everything to do with sour grapes because your not getting called in for reshoots.

Your not an activist, your a whiner.

[GroobySteven]

In fact the proof is in this thread. Essentially I was just publicly 'fired' so to speak by Seanchai. So yeah, you have a point here. :lol:

~BB~

You weren't fired because you were never hired. You weren't a particularly good model. Some are natural, others aren't. It's not cut out for everyone, don't take it personally.

You've completely failed in this thread to prove anything or make any valid point or "activism" other than the above point.

You asked earlier, why do I take it personally? Because I care about my industry, I care about the product and I don't like to see somebody take exception to it, out of personal and selfish reasons.

[tsmandy]

You worry too much. You're a pretty girl and the makeup doesn't make the woman. This is more about the fact the certain camera angles, lighting, etc can make even the prettiest GG look harsh or even masculine. I may not always agree with you but I do appreciate your femininity and your talent. You're a lot more valuable as a person and a performer as your insecurities would lead you to believe.

~BB~

I do not think I am insecure, in fact far from it. I've taken many more chances with how I let myself get represented than most girls in the industry ever will. That said, I still don't like it when I read guys making comments about how I look masculine in a certain photo, and that is not something that female porn performers worry about. That is not insecurity, that is a reality of being a TS porn star.

I am very intentional with my work and who I am in the world, and I'm anything but insecure. Ambitious maybe, but not insecure.

[tsmandy]

What I see here is plenty of people with plenty of experience telling you that if you want thigs the way you want them, then you have to take your own actions, take your own risks, etc. JUST LIKE A NUMBER OF OTHER GIRLS HAVE DONE who wanted that.

This is very true to my experience in the industry. I've pitched ideas that I've been interested in many times over the years to many different companies, and ultimately I have been best served by coming up with the money to do it myself and not relying on other people to take chances on my vision.

[BrendaQG]

Perhaps you should not worry so much about any of this. Many ladies have had worse pictures taken, had someone dredge up "before" pictures, etc. They all are doing just fine.

Try to enjoy the look on peoples faces when they see the real you in person.

[BellaBellucci]

You're hysterical! I spent a month on the Top 10 board, peaking at #6. My first set, of which I wasn't particularly fond, had over 8500 views at last count which rivals many other more established models in the industry. But you go ahead and spin it any way you like.

Paranoia? Yeah, OK. That's why you're trying to run away from me as fast as you can now that you've clearly taken my criticism all upon yourself. Thanks for proving me correct. I pretty much knew you'd never call me in again. I'm not stupid, ya know?! :lol:

This is precisely why I actually feel comfortable in the 'activist' role in which I've seemed to land. Thank you for helping me find my place. :)

~BB~

Not as hysterical as you Bella.
You were on the Top 10 board as the database/rating system was brand new so every new model updated, no matter what the rating, ended up on it before it "shook out" with enough votes across enough models to give a fair rating. Your sets rate 3.10 which is pretty low. The top 50 models have a spread of only 0.49 so you can guess where you'd lie in the actual ratings. We've had no member requests for reshoots.
Page views is fairly irrelevant. We have 1000's of members and most will look at every models pages.

You say I have no proof of that which I speak. Neither do you. If the rating system is private then you hold all the cards, don't you? And you don't have to divulge anything you don't want to, do you?

Furthermore, I spent nearly the ENTIRE month I was eligible on the Top 10 so your allegation that it had something to with the supposed newness of the ratings system is a claim that I would also dispute due to lack of evidence. Not to mention that my first set was rated around 3.8 for the entire month in question and then some before it began to drop a bit.

Your allegation that nobody requested a reshoot is also false. There were plenty of positive comments on my sets and profile and a thread on the Yum message board about me. I'm also fairly popular here and on HD.

Plus, I checked out the page views for many of the other girls and some barely cracked a quarter of what I did while some others still haven't even done that. I mean really, are you going to be truthful or do you have an agenda? Oh wait, you're right. You don't. I'm just paranoid, remember?

Oh, and you're forgetting that we're talking about my first ever shoot for a website.

Even further, that first shoot that I didn't like garnered more views and votes than my second which I did and in which I looked infinitely softer and prettier. It's not my fault so many of your viewers like a girl to look more masculine than they are but if that's the case I don't want to shoot with you guys again anyway.



What do you mean "run away"? :roll:

Thanks for proving ME correct that this has nothing to do with activism or "helping younger girls" (as if they needed it from you?) and everything to do with sour grapes because your not getting called in for reshoots.

Your not an activist, your a whiner.

You say that about every girl that dares to question you. Plenty of girls who shall remain nameless consider you an egomaniac and this little spat seals it for me. Like I said, as you continue to type you continue to prove that my worst impressions about you are true. You and Buddy were always patronizing to me and I always felt that you had decided you'd never shoot me again even as you shot me the first time so really I'm not surprised by any of this.

I never mentioned you in this thread by name, but here you are, making up stories with which to 'prove' I'm not a worthy model. I've seen some of the girls on your site and you've shot some of the ugliest girls I've ever seen repeatedly so don't try to play this off as something that it isn't.

~BB~

[BellaBellucci]

In fact the proof is in this thread. Essentially I was just publicly 'fired' so to speak by Seanchai. So yeah, you have a point here. :lol:

~BB~

You weren't fired because you were never hired. You weren't a particularly good model. Some are natural, others aren't. It's not cut out for everyone, don't take it personally.

You've completely failed in this thread to prove anything or make any valid point or "activism" other than the above point.

You asked earlier, why do I take it personally? Because I care about my industry, I care about the product and I don't like to see somebody take exception to it, out of personal and selfish reasons.

No, I certainly was not a great model, but that was my first shoot and I've been getting better.

Personal and selfish? Really? Yeah, because no other girl has ever felt the way I do. :roll:

Well since I can't shoot with you anymore and my 'crusade' persists I guess I'm not being selfish, am I? Sacrifice? I just made one Boss. Now I have nothing to lose. Nice strategy you got there Hannibal! :lol:

~BB~

PS: My model rating is 3.1. My set ratings were higher and you know it. In fact at Bob's Labor Day party I asked Buddy about why that might be and he had no explanation.

[GroobySteven]

You say I have no proof of that which I speak. Neither do you. If the rating system is private then you hold all the cards, don't you? And you don't have to divulge anything you don't want to, do you?
I posted your rating. Get over it.



Not to mention that my first set was rated around 3.8 for the entire month in question and then some before it began to drop a bit.
As more people voted, the spread became wider. It's simple.




Your allegation that nobody requested a reshoot is also false. There were plenty of positive comments on my sets and profile and a thread on the Yum message board about me. I'm also fairly popular here and on HD.
There were postive comments, I never denied that but the feedback wasn't good enough to warrant an immediate reshoot. You seem to think there is some other motive beyond us simply, not wanting a reshoot of you at that/this time.




Plus, I checked out the page views for many of the other girls and some barely cracked a quarter of what I did while some others still haven't even done that. I mean really, are you going to be truthful or do you have an agenda? Oh wait, you're right. You don't. I'm just paranoid, remember?

We have 1145 models. Many would have scored below you. It's unlikely we'd be reshooting them either unless we saw a reason to (ie; they'd changed) some of our most popular models started off, not very good but they returned new and improved. We never rule out reshoots completely until we see a model.





Even further, that first shoot that I didn't like garnered more views and votes than my second which I did and in which I looked infinitely softer and prettier. It's not my fault so many of your viewers like a girl to look more masculine than they are but if that's the case I don't want to shoot with you guys again anyway.
Harley Quinn, Chrissy, Ashley George, Hazel Tucker, Melanie, Brittany Banks, Celeste, Khloe Hart, Alexis and Simone are out Top 10. Masculine girls indeed !?! :roll:



Plenty of girls who shall remain nameless consider you an egomaniac and this little spat seals it for me. Like I said, as you continue to type you continue to prove that my worst impressions about you are true. You and Buddy were always patronizing to me and I always felt that you had decided you'd never shoot me again even as you shot me the first time so really I'm not surprised by any of this.
Egomaniac? Jeez, not that old one again ... "plenty of girls ..." I'll live with it, your really reaching now? Buddy doesn't call the shots, I do, and I base them on how well a model has sold for us.



I never mentioned you in this thread by name, but here you are, making up stories with which to 'prove' I'm not a worthy model.
I never said you weren't a worthy model. You were worthy and I'm happy to have you on our site. What I said was you weren't a particularly good model. You just didn't look comfortable as a model, your sets didn't rate high. I've seen more recent sets of you and they appear the same. I've no reasons to make up stories, I've nothing personal against you other than the attacks in this thread and in your original post, the obvious aim was at our company, which you've since confirmed. It's purely business, don't read more into it, than that.



I've seen some of the girls on your site and you've shot some of the ugliest girls I've ever seen repeatedly...


Bella Bellucci, "activist ...friend of younger girls" and now insulting other models. Shame on you. Your a hypocrite and obviously full of crap.

[BellaBellucci]

Not to mention that my first set was rated around 3.8 for the entire month in question and then some before it began to drop a bit.
As more people voted, the spread became wider. It's simple.

Actually, no it didn't. I thought it did but it's still sitting at 3.8, isn't it?



There were postive comments, I never denied that but the feedback wasn't good enough to warrant an immediate reshoot. You seem to think there is some other motive beyond us simply, not wanting a reshoot of you at that/this time.

At this time? You just told me you'll never shoot me again. Revisionist history, much?



Harley Quinn, Chrissy, Ashley George, Hazel Tucker, Melanie, Brittany Banks, Celeste, Khloe Hart, Alexis and Simone are out Top 10. Masculine girls indeed !?! :roll:

Yes, you have some hot talent, but you also have your share of monsters. You'd be outright lying if you said that wasn't true.



Egomaniac? Jeez, not that old one again ...

... if the label fits. Obviously it does if it's being used to describe you 'again.' We can't all be wrong.



I never said you weren't a worthy model. You were worthy and I'm happy to have you on our site. What I said was you weren't a particularly good model. You just didn't look comfortable as a model, your sets didn't rate high. I've seen more recent sets of you and they appear the same.

I never disagreed with your assessment of my modeling skills. As to my 'recent' sets, they were all shot within the same month - back in July - so they're hardly more recent than the shoot I did for you.




I've seen some of the girls on your site and you've shot some of the ugliest girls I've ever seen repeatedly...


Bella Bellucci, "activist ...friend of younger girls" and now insulting other models. Shame on you. Your a hypocrite and obviously full of crap.

Yes I may have insulted those that are not worthy models (also not by name) but it's yet another criticism that has been leveled against Yum repeatedly by plenty of viewers. I didn't just make it up. Also, my wanting to make the industry better is about protecting the niche as a whole, not necessarily all of the girls within it.

The fact is that some girls have no business in front of a camera and you guys shoot them anyway. Saying so doesn't make me a hypocrite; it makes me honest. As far as I, and indeed many others are concerned, there are men in dresses on your site that make the entire niche look cheap and desperate. I never claimed to be an activist for transvestites and I never will be and you won't get any apologies from me over it. Shame on me? Shame on you for putting these 'girls' on the same site with real transsexuals and implying that it's all the same. It's not.

~BB~

[slinky]

I'm fond of saying "when you have found that you have dug yourself into a hole, the solution is rarely 'more digging' ".

[BellaBellucci]

I'm fond of saying "when you have found that you have dug yourself into a hole, the solution is rarely 'more digging' ".

I hope you're not referring to me. Seanchai already told be he won't shoot me again so I'm hardly digging. If anything, he's digging since he's fighting someone who has nothing left to lose in regards to him. I've already suffered the consequences so why would he continue to argue with me unless I had a point or two that he cared to refute? Well, at least he takes me seriously. I'll respect him for that.

~BB~

[GroobySteven]

At this time? You just told me you'll never shoot me again. Revisionist history, much?

Prior to this shoot but based on your comments below, you'd certainly go into the "never work with again" pile. It's nothing political, your just a little shit.




Yes, you have some hot talent, but you also have your share of monsters. You'd be outright lying if you said that wasn't true.
What a horrible thing to say. We don't have any "monsters" on our site. We have some models in various states of transition, and some not as attractive as others but in over 12 yrs running this site, I'll give many girls a first shot and see how they do. Some of the ones YOU might call monsters turned out to be beautiful tgirls and if with discouragement and nasty comments from your ilk, they might never have had that opportunity.





... if the label fits. Obviously it does if it's being used to describe you 'again.' We can't all be wrong.
I never said it was wrong. I said it was dull and shows how little you know, and how far your reaching to starting bringing up what other people might think of me. I didn't have to comment on what I've heard about you and your social skills.







Yes I may have insulted those that are not worthy models (also not by name) but it's yet another criticism that has been leveled against Yum repeatedly by plenty of viewers. I didn't just make it up. Also, my wanting to make the industry better is about protecting the industry as whole, not necessarily all of the girls within it.
Huh !?!?!
a) who the fuck appointed you the chief witch hunter? So now you have the say on which models are "worthy". You insidiuous, nasty little shit.
b) "another criticism of Yum" hmmm ... yeah, it's such a failure of a website. The fact it, like it or not, the site and it's ethos works. It doesn't need to be validated by you.
c) YOU are not protecting the industry Bella. Your just putting across your personal opinions and trying to enforce them.

Talk about egomaniac. Your out of control.



The fact is that some girls have no business in front of a camera and you guys shoot them anyway. Saying so doesn't make me a hypocrite; it makes me honest. As far as I, and indeed many others are concerned, there are men in dresses on your site that make the entire niche look cheap and desperate. I never claimed to be an activist for transvestites and I never will be and you won't get any apologies from me over it. Shame on me? Shame on you for putting these 'girls' on the same site with real transsexuals and implying that it's all the same. It's not.


It does make you a hypocrite because until many of those models have done a shoot, we don't know how they willbe received. In your Nazi standards, we'd only shoot girls that you deem worthy. Why is anyone whose not a member concerned about "my site" and how does it make the niche look cheap, have you seriously seen what's out there making sites look cheap. Many girls who started off as part-time dressers on our site were given the encouragement to take the leap to full time but of course you don't give a shit about them because they again, don't fit your standard.
"Shemales" doesn't just mean "transsexuals" - CD and TV can fit in there, if appropriate.

Wow, I can't believe just how nasty one individual can turn and show her true colours so fast. I've also never heard a tgirl turn on so many other girls like you have. Your a disgrace to transsexuals who work in this industry.

[GroobySteven]

Well, at least he takes me seriously. I'll respect him for that.

~BB~

Trust me, the last thing I want is your respect, as for you, after your previous statement, I have none.
I do take you seriously and my comment above that I think your an absolute disgrace to transsexuals in this industry, an insidious little shit and that no self-respecting transgender model would want you as an "activist" :roll: or an associate.

[BellaBellucci]

Blah, blah, blah, blah. 'Shemale.' Blah, blah, blah.

So even as you attempt to defend everyone within the so-called transgender umbrella you continue to use the slur 'shemale.' It's barely acceptable as an industry term and wholly unnecessary here, but you just go ahead and use it anyway, don't you? So as you portend to be the savior of all things trans, you slur the very people you claim to protect. Nice!

Plus you're resorting to word-warping now which is something people do when they're backed up against a wall by truth and logic. I didn't intend to pick a personal fight with you so I'm done. Thanks for providing me with the productive discussion that I was seeking. :roll:

I'm done.

~BB~

[GroobySteven]

I'm done.


Yes you are.

[tslvrnyc]

Blah, blah, blah, blah. 'Shemale.' Blah, blah, blah.

So even as you attempt to defend everyone within the so-called transgender umbrella you continue to use the slur 'shemale.' It's barely acceptable as an industry term and wholly unnecessary here, but you just go ahead and use it anyway, don't you? So as you portend to be the savior of all things trans, you slur the very people you claim to protect. Nice!

Plus you're resorting to word-warping now which is something people do when they're backed up against a wall by truth and logic. I didn't intend to pick a personal fight with you so I'm done. Thanks for providing me with the productive discussion that I was seeking. :roll:

I'm done.

~BB~

I don't get it. You'll shoot under the banner of Shemale* and then regard it as a slur after you don't receive a photoshoot that you like? If you were so against it in the first place why wouldn't you save your photoshoots for another company without the said slur in the name?

You seem to have a case of sour grapes. Deal.

[slinky]

Bella,
Don't you think it's at least a tiny little bit hypocritical to first complain that a site isn't making the girls look the best they possibly can and then turn around and call some of the models monsters?

[BellaBellucci]

Blah, blah, blah, blah. 'Shemale.' Blah, blah, blah.

So even as you attempt to defend everyone within the so-called transgender umbrella you continue to use the slur 'shemale.' It's barely acceptable as an industry term and wholly unnecessary here, but you just go ahead and use it anyway, don't you? So as you portend to be the savior of all things trans, you slur the very people you claim to protect. Nice!

Plus you're resorting to word-warping now which is something people do when they're backed up against a wall by truth and logic. I didn't intend to pick a personal fight with you so I'm done. Thanks for providing me with the productive discussion that I was seeking. :roll:

I'm done.

~BB~

I don't get it. You'll shoot under the banner of Shemale* and then regard it as a slur after you don't receive a photoshoot that you like? If you were so against it in the first place why wouldn't you save your photoshoots for another company without the said slur in the name?

You seem to have a case of sour grapes. Deal.

Here we go again with this. DO I really have to explain it again? I don't NAME the sites. I can only try to help change the way the business operates incrementally and I certainly can't do so unless I get involved in it, now can I? Geez.

~BB~

[BellaBellucci]

Bella,
Don't you think it's at least a tiny little bit hypocritical to first complain that a site isn't making the girls look the best they possibly can and then turn around and call some of the models monsters?

No, not at all. In fact it's exactly what I'm talking about. Some girls have no business modeling on a site that primarily focuses on transsexuals as they are clearly transvestites, and some could just use a little bit of help, which they would likely appreciate, but don't receive. The models are left entirely to their own devices which only highlights their hair and makeup skills, not their inner beauty. I don't think that's right and it's certainly not good for business in my estimation. Would it really break the bank to provide them with a makeup artist and a little direction? I mean look at Tempest and other independent producers - they put their heart and soul into their work at a loss. Now I'm hardly advocating that the major studios should follow suit, but girls shouldn't have to do everything themselves especially when they have to pick up makeup and wardrobe costs as well.

I appreciate that Yum gives new models a chance to shoot, but they don't really give them a chance to succeed. Transsexual models don't just grow on trees you know and the niche is dependent upon the assumption that every TS defines their femininity solely by an oversexualized appearance even before they begin their careers and if they don't, well, the hell with them. Let 'em fail! I mean, a lot of GG porn stars are just regular girls next door when they start and are then developed as talent. There's very little development of TS models IMHO.

And yes, everything I've written here is JUST my opinion - which is something I've made clear from the beginning. If anybody takes personal offense it says much more about then than it does me.

~BB~

[Peacetalks]

I don't get it. You'll shoot under the banner of Shemale* and then regard it as a slur after you don't receive a photoshoot that you like? If you were so against it in the first place why wouldn't you save your photoshoots for another company without the said slur in the name?

You seem to have a case of sour grapes. Deal.

Here we go again with this. DO I really have to explain it again? I don't NAME the sites. I can only try to help change the way the business operates incrementally and I certainly can't do so unless I get involved in it, now can I? Geez.

~BB~

You might want to stop, while you're already behind.

[shemale-411]

Please please please dont anyone else respond. I bartend and honestly this is like arguing with a drunk. At the beginning of this alot of people were very kind and very professional. The gist was your sets don't sell but maybe later. Now it has gotten ridiculous.

She'll take a check from Shemale...fill in the blank...Yum, Strokers, Club but these are companies that degrade transexuals, she isn't a hypocrite.

She's not only a worthy model but one that should be shot again, by these same vile degrading companies, much better than the, in her words, "monsters" they normally shoot.

Let it go, the choices to end this are let her rip me the next post and just let it go, lock the thread, or drop the hammer, which is what she is shooting for anyways.

[BellaBellucci]

I don't get it. You'll shoot under the banner of Shemale* and then regard it as a slur after you don't receive a photoshoot that you like? If you were so against it in the first place why wouldn't you save your photoshoots for another company without the said slur in the name?

You seem to have a case of sour grapes. Deal.

Here we go again with this. DO I really have to explain it again? I don't NAME the sites. I can only try to help change the way the business operates incrementally and I certainly can't do so unless I get involved in it, now can I? Geez.

~BB~

You might want to stop, while you're already behind.

This from the guy who just as righteously as he claims I am proclaimed that he would make peace between Hara and Nicole. I mean GODS, just look at your screen name. YOU'RE one to talk. :roll:

~BB~

[BellaBellucci]

Let it go, the choices to end this are let her rip me the next post and just let it go, lock the thread, or drop the hammer, which is what she is shooting for anyways.

So you speak for me now? Interesting. I didn't realize I had a spokeperson to divulge my intentions. Hmm.

Well I hate to burst your bubble but I don't intend on ripping on anyone and I never did. In fact I've been nothing but professional this entire time. No name calling, no yelling and screaming. I intended to have a productive discussion and that intention hasn't changed.

~BB~

[Peacetalks]

What shemale-411 said.

[tslvrnyc]

Blah, blah, blah, blah. 'Shemale.' Blah, blah, blah.

So even as you attempt to defend everyone within the so-called transgender umbrella you continue to use the slur 'shemale.' It's barely acceptable as an industry term and wholly unnecessary here, but you just go ahead and use it anyway, don't you? So as you portend to be the savior of all things trans, you slur the very people you claim to protect. Nice!

Plus you're resorting to word-warping now which is something people do when they're backed up against a wall by truth and logic. I didn't intend to pick a personal fight with you so I'm done. Thanks for providing me with the productive discussion that I was seeking. :roll:

I'm done.

~BB~

I don't get it. You'll shoot under the banner of Shemale* and then regard it as a slur after you don't receive a photoshoot that you like? If you were so against it in the first place why wouldn't you save your photoshoots for another company without the said slur in the name?

You seem to have a case of sour grapes. Deal.

Here we go again with this. DO I really have to explain it again? I don't NAME the sites. I can only try to help change the way the business operates incrementally and I certainly can't do so unless I get involved in it, now can I? Geez.

~BB~

The problem exists where I don't understand your aversion to the term "shemale" while you model for sites with that in the name. Please tell me how you reconcile your loathing for the name with your desire to pose for such sites. It makes no sense.

[BellaBellucci]

The problem exists where I don't understand your aversion to the term "shemale" while you model for sites with that in the name. Please tell me how you reconcile your loathing for the name with your desire to pose for such sites. It makes no sense.

Repeatedly asking the question isn't going to change my answer. But thanks for playing.

~BB~

[Peacetalks]

The problem exists where I don't understand your aversion to the term "shemale" while you model for sites with that in the name. Please tell me how you reconcile your loathing for the name with your desire to pose for such sites. It makes no sense.

A few hundred bucks will turn most transsexual porn activists into money-hungry, butt spreading, shemales!

http://www.freefoto.com/images/04/28/04_28_50---US-Dollar-Bills_web.jpg

[BellaBellucci]

The problem exists where I don't understand your aversion to the term "shemale" while you model for sites with that in the name. Please tell me how you reconcile your loathing for the name with your desire to pose for such sites. It makes no sense.

A few hundred bucks will turn most transsexual porn activists into money-hungry, butt spreading, shemales!

Actually, you have it backwards. :lol:

~BB~

[Felicia Katt]

And yes, everything I've written here is JUST my opinion - which is something I've made clear from the beginning. If anybody takes personal offense it says much more about then than it does me.

~BB~
I personally take great offense to some of the things you have said here. Considering you have told me how much you respect me and how I express myself here, what more does that say about me than it emphasizes about you?

FK

[BellaBellucci]

And yes, everything I've written here is JUST my opinion - which is something I've made clear from the beginning. If anybody takes personal offense it says much more about then than it does me.

~BB~
I personally take great offense to some of the things you have said here. Considering you have told me how much you respect me and how I express myself here, what more does that say about me than it emphasizes about you?

FK

I'm sorry if that's the case, but since you already know I respect you it should be clear that I'm not referring to you. How could you possibly be insulted? Because I didn't specifically exclude you from a blanket statement?

~BB~

[Peacetalks]

The problem exists where I don't understand your aversion to the term "shemale" while you model for sites with that in the name. Please tell me how you reconcile your loathing for the name with your desire to pose for such sites. It makes no sense.

A few hundred bucks will turn most transsexual porn activists into money-hungry, butt spreading, shemales!

Actually, you have it backwards. :lol:

~BB~

Maybe so, but you have antagonized the people you want to influence. GG Sharon Mitchell founded AIM Healthcare. TG Meghan Chavalier created Stop the Hate website. Tell us about your activism.

Seanchai has been more of an activist than you: http://www.stoppingthehate.com/News-Article5000_Exclusive_Interview_Steven_Gallon_Groo by_Productions_Interviewed_By_Meghan_Chavalier.htm

[BellaBellucci]

The problem exists where I don't understand your aversion to the term "shemale" while you model for sites with that in the name. Please tell me how you reconcile your loathing for the name with your desire to pose for such sites. It makes no sense.

A few hundred bucks will turn most transsexual porn activists into money-hungry, butt spreading, shemales!

Actually, you have it backwards. :lol:

~BB~

Maybe so, but you have antagonized the people you want to influence. GG Sharon Mitchell founded AIM Healthcare. TG Meghan Chavalier created Stop the Hate website. Tell us about your activism.

Seanchai has been more of an activist than you: http://www.stoppingthehate.com/News-Article5000_Exclusive_Interview_Steven_Gallon_Groo by_Productions_Interviewed_By_Meghan_Chavalier.htm

Oh yeah, so all of the political work I've done since I was 12 means nothing because it wasn't trans related? I think at last count I was involved with 7, maybe 8 campaigns for social liberals from the local to national level, increasing in importance with each. Come on with that.

Just because I don't brag about my altruism doesn't mean I don't have any. People don't get to be as headstrong as I am by doing nothing in the face of adversity.

But oh, that's right, you feel my anger comes from a place of personal pride. Please. I think WAY bigger than that.

~BB~

[AmyDaly]

I mean, a lot of GG porn stars are just regular girls next door when they start and are then developed as talent. There's very little development of TS models IMHO.


I don't think I agree with this. You can't really depend on the producers to tell you what to do all the time or how to look better or how to model.

There are many great examples of development with TS models. Just to name a few...Holly Sweet, Celeste, Danielle Foxx, and even myself. There are tons more. Just look at their old photos on yum and how they have evolved. You can do that on yum by the way because they are one of the few sites that does shoot a girl who is evolving and starting out.

Speaking for myself, I can tell you that after I did my first shoot with yum and it came out bad, I went back to the drawing board all by myself and came back and have had success since then and continue to work with Grooby who started me out and even gave me a second chance.

[GullyFoyle]

But oh, that's right, you feel my anger comes from a place of personal pride.

Interestingly enough, the two most destructive deadly sins.

[phobun]

This is like a trainwreck in slow motion.

[Nicole Dupre]

Vicki Richter's advice to me was (paraphrasing, mostly), "Don't trust your webmaster to retouch your photos. Do it yourself. They'll never have the emotional investment in those photos that you do." That sums up what I'm about to say.

Bella, find a good shooter who will work for... whatever. Use your imagination here, if you're short on petty cash. lol ... and build your own site. This is all about content/product, not politics/morals. If the average shemale porn lover isn't ready to call this niche, "transgender porn", there's nothing any of us can do. The phenomenon simply isn't ripe on the vine.

Sure, if you want to be a martyr, no one here will stop you. We may suggest that you back off, and stop wasting your time. We aren't happy to see you fail at porn or crusading. But you're getting pretty valuable advice and solid wisdom on this thread, and you seem against taking it. But you're just like lots of people. I've noticed that most people are actually pretty bad about taking advice. They always do what they want, even when they nod their heads. I know I do. And it keeps life interesting. ;)

For instance, who in their right mind would've thought that photographs of women with penises would have made $? Not my parents, I can assure you. lol Back then? Gay people were getting EST and lobotomies. But when the time was right, and the social climate allowed for it, it happened. But you could've never forced a thing like that on people, or you would've been... Well, "dead", actually. lol

But it's an exciting time to be alive and chicks with dicks are not only pulling up the rear, but they're fucking it cross-eyed too. However, if you get too far ahead, and step too far out of pace? If foresight and altruism fail you? Don't be pissed at anyone. It won't like we were hoping you'd waste your time. But by the same token, you can't expect us to waste too much time pointing out that you're wasting too much of your time.

Baby girl, the fans', subscribers', or porn buyers' hard dicks don't do much thinking. And Seanchai has no emotional investment in who succeeds or fails in this industry. Don't for a hot red second think he does. I know he's not that dumb. He puts ALL of us out on Main St, and some of us werk it out and some don't.

Get a shooter, get your content together, get a site, make some mistakes, learn from them, move forward, enjoy your life, and carve a NEW niche with a NEW name. And I'll even, secretly, be routing for you. ;)

Ok. Rant over. Night night.

[TSMissJasmine]

Producers don't have the time to sit there and photoshop every photo set they shoot, let alone go through each 100-200 photo set to intentionally pick out the bad ones. Personally I don't retouch any of the work I shoot for Shemale-club, nor do I retouch my own content on my own solo site. Fuck em if they don't like my look on any particular scene. I fuck for the sport of it, not for the glamor. And, fuck photoshop. Ask my chicago girls morgan bailey, kelly shore and many others...

Take Buddy Wood for example. He's one of the most creative film makers and a darn productive producer. He probably barely has time to shoot the hot models he has available to him in LA. So his work likely gets sent to an editor who then does whatever they do with the content. You are a brand and there's a team of people following a business model to put out the best work that business model allows. Strokers and Grooby sites seem to be successful site, they probably have a good idea of what sells and what doesnt.

When I shoot a set of a model for shemale-club for example, sometimes ill let the model go through the set and ill delete the ones she really hates. However that becomes tricky since most models focus on what they see as flaws, and not what sells. So its a pain in the ass for a producer to give that creative control to the model. They'll be making money off your set for years. You just got paid several hundered dollars and you're done making money on that one.

You want to control your image? Stop whining like a victim and start producing your own content your way. You will either sell or you won't. If you look at girls like the Shemale-club solo site girls or girls like grooby's hazel tucker and amy daly and whoever else I do not know but, they control part of their image. Their content, their way with the help of a very talented producer (buddy wood)

Producers and models (in the porn industry) arguing over stupid shit like genetic female women (the bleeding type). It's as interesting as a donkeys ass

[BellaBellucci]

Thanks for the advice girls. I always kind of knew the score so I already had ideas with which to hatch a new career plan and I'm already starting to put it together with some new people who I trust.

'Trust' - maybe the biggest 5-letter word in the entire dictionary! :lol:

~BB~

[Nicole Dupre]

Thanks for the advice girls. I always kind of knew the score so I already had ideas with which to hatch a new career plan and I'm already starting to put it together with some new people who I trust.

'Trust' - maybe the biggest 5-letter word in the entire dictionary! :lol:

~BB~Trust your heart. Trust yourself. You can't trust hard dicks. They have no conscience and never have, and they're the mother and father of all businesses, and always have been. And they, ultimately, make the rules everywhere you look.

But I still think that's kinda sad; you giving up because you wanna "hatch a new career plan" now. Why not shoot your own content while you're doing that? What could it hurt? If anything, maybe the people you'd like to sway to your way of seeing things will trust you more. All it takes is a barter with a decent shooter, and the content will "hatch"; YOUR content. You already escort, so what wrong with a trade?

Anyway...

[Bella Lay]

First off, let me say that I'm new here, so I apologize in advance if I'm speaking out of turn...

Secondly, I have not read all the posts in this thread, but did skim over them...again, I apologize if I'm breaching etiquitte. I don't mean to skip the double-dog-dare and go straight for the throat with the dreaded triple-dog-dare.

I work as a writer and photographer. When I shoot an image set for a client, or write an article for sale in the marketplace, it's nearly impossible to know what the outcome of content production will be. If I'm hired to shoot/write, then I shoot/write what the client wants, turn it over, and deposit my check. If I shoot/write content to sell, I shoot/write the content (at my cost), find a buyer or buyers for the content, and hope like a mother it sells. Then I take my check to the bank.

The first lesson I learned long ago is that few things remain as they began after being in the hands of editors.

Editors exist for a reason. They know (or should know) their marketplace. Like an art gallery director, they know what will and will not sell in their space. In my days of gallery exhibitions, work that I thought was stellar would routinely be passed over in favor of work I thought was blah - showable, but still blah. More often than not, when I pushed to hang my stellar work, it was almost always outsold by the blah work.

The second lesson I learned long ago: editors are always right.

Those lessons apply whether the content is pictures, text, or both.

I'm sure we can all agree it can't be ignored that some sets, particulary in porn, (without regard to niche), are simply poorly planned and executed. We've all seen shots in which the model's eyes are at half-blink; shots that are too dark or too bright; we've even seen shots that are very badly out of focus or just simply bad. Looking at some of these sets, I've often had the impression the photographer turned over the CF card to the webmaster and everything from the card was publsihed without second thought.

I understand that customers demand sites publish sets numbering 100 images or more. I know for a fact the number of images shot for an average web content set is in the high hundreds. I also understand post work can be time consuming, but it should be a relatively simple matter to eliminate the 'non-keepers'; the worst of the worst. Post tools in current versions of PhotoShop and/or Lightroom or Aperture really streamline workflows, especially when factors such as lighting and exposure are a constant - as they would be with a set shot in studio. Well, more or less.

As for my own work, I would never shoot content without doing it professionally. Being an established freelancer, it's a simple matter for me to call in a make-up and style team. Whether the client is willing to pay for it or not - that's another matter.

Clearly, as has been mentioned, being uber-professional gets you noticed.

[BellaBellucci]

But I still think that's kinda sad; you giving up because you wanna "hatch a new career plan" now. Why not shoot your own content while you're doing that? What could it hurt?

Who said I'm giving up? When I say 'new career plan,' it doesn't mean a career change.

Thanks for the vote of confidence though! lol

~BB~

[vorga]

i can't stand when the girls and photographers claim that their pictures are not photoshopped or shot with some type of lens or flash which hides imperfections .

[R. Himmeter]

I'm also a pro-photographer, and I can say with great confidence that there is no "un-suck" filter or device, either real or in PhotoShop. I wish there was, but such a thing doesn't exist.

Good lighting, make-up, styling, and careful attention to detail are required to make the best picture. A good photographer, and especially a good photographer with a good team will do all of this. Even so, every photograph requires some post shoot manipulation and clean up. Models that think their pictures aren't retouched to some degree are fooling themselves.

Doing everything possible to get the shot right in camera saves time and money, and always makes the picture the best it can be.

[BellaBellucci]

Stop whining like a victim and start producing your own content your way.

I just re-read this and something bugs me. I don't recall whining. I recall asking a rhetorical question and having one person in particular internalize it when neither his name nor company was mentioned and then having that person resort to personal attacks. Had he never spoken up, nobody would have had a clue who I was talking about. I didn't even leave a hint about to whom I was talking and I most certainly did not whine, even after being insulted.

And as I said. I got my answers and I have a new plan.

~BB~