Quote:
Originally Posted by JustDaveXxx
Paul,
1st off, i do respect you and all you have accomplished in your career as a porn shooter. You have been around for a long time and you made things happen. Much respect for that. I also share a lot of your opinions on a lot of the subjects you discuss in some of your other threads.
|
Thank you.
Quote:
|
But where i disagree with you heavily on, is how you say that the Brazzers quality of content is not good. You also state that you "were/are" a better shooter to what Brazzers currently has. You also make statements on how all the shooters today suck in comparison to what there "used to be" and as compared to yourself. This is where i have my issues with you.
|
I have seen it and compared with what I call good it's not. It's the average that most sites have or should have as a minimum. If you want to see good HC in the same niche and style talk to Shap. The HC on Twistys is good.
The problem with Brazzers HC, from the scenes I saw, is simple. It's too faked, contrived over all not a
good product. It's average and some of the scenes, like the one I posted a link to are simply bad. Have you seen it?
Brazzers HC scene
The mistakes are very basic and IMO should not be on the site.
As for being better now, no way physically. I'm 3 years out of shooting, invalid and no where near what I was physically. Does it make the wealth of knowledge I picked up in 33 years less valuable today? NO. Can I adapt my style to what is required today? Yes there's nothing that different, it's just that I won't for $500 a solo girl scene sold outright. Made enough over the years to not have to.
As for being better when I was at my height. I was either better or all the shooters shooting custom for the prices paid were fools. Because I worked in a market that out paid custom by up to a factor of 10. Now what is it, were they as good as me in 2007 or were they fools? They could of worked in both fields. They could of worked in Custom, Content Store or magazines or video.
Either a better business man or a better shooter. Or a lot of fools were shooting very cheap.
AND MORE IMPORTANTLY. What mainstream shooter of note has shot custom work, besides the little we did, or for the Internet other than his own site? The answer is none. The guy shooting for Perfect Gonzo went to Evil Angel, Vid Vicious, who was good, left the Internet. Both for more money.
No one has come back and been able to tell me who of the mainstream porn shooters moved the other way. When I saw Fabian's post about how much he paid, I emailed him to ask if he would like me to ask a few contacts about working for him. Guys whose track record includes working for the top companies in porn, all niches. He ignored the it. Because he knows these guys will not work for the money he offers. He doesn't even want to discuss it.
I'm one of many mainstream shooters who refuse to work for the prices custom pays today. Where do you see the people like Jack Harrison, Bill Wright, Kevin Maklin, Scott Ward, Viv Thomas, Steve Colby and they're just the English guys, shooting custom. All are shooters who are "guns for hire" pay them enough and they will shoot for paysites. In NO WAY AM I THE ONLY SHOOTER who refuses to work for what is paid for custom today.
In no way do I blame any custom shooter working for what is given, if that's all they can get then fine. I blame sponsors who think shooters should work for peanuts.
How ever I have seen inside a few sites, some of whom the owners post here. And pointed out the basic mistakes of their content. Especially on stills. What I saw would never ever of sold to magazines, there were far better shooters to select from.
One of the custom shooters who is praised here for anything could never of sold what I saw of his work anywhere else but on the Internet. It had many basic mistakes, the worse was a lack of landscape frames and the repeating of pictures. Other things like the lack of covering all the poses, getting some wrong and the fact that in full frame the picture was fuzzy (due to the shooter trying to shoot the ceilings lights glowing and using a wide aperture) made the whole set unusable for print.
I've seen the same mistakes over and over again. None of these site owners have said a word in this thread, they dare not.
As for videos. Shooting a girl standing for a long period on a wide screen video result in a nice scene of THE ROOM. the girl fills only a small part of the frame. The first thing I was taught was to fill the frame. Added to this the same cheesy scenario, faked acting and sex, overlong shots of the same position (on Brazzers to stretch out the length of scene) and the whole thing starts to lose a lot of it's appeal.
I was taught very early on that the reason most porn scenes are 20 minutes is that's the longest it needs for a man to jerk off. The opening minute is crucial if it doesn't grab the viewer by the balls it has little chance of getting better.
Today the customers attention is even more important to grab than it was in 2005 and before. Today paysites compete with Tubes. If a site isn't worth joining and staying for the content alone, the revenue is going to reflect that.
If you would like me to review your work give me a pass into a site with it on and I will take a look and give you a constructive appraisal of the content.