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.

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.