You can add
www.vivthomas.com to that list as well.
Today it's far tougher to produce great porn. The budgets are slim, many of the shooters lack real experience, models seem a lot more bolshy and very fake plus finding a new fresh one is tough and too much is churned out on a conveyor belt system.
Better cameras, don't equal better porn.
Most of those I quoted have a DVD income as well as online. However if online is the King of porn.
Why have so few online companies employed or partnered properly with these guys. Who has a stable of shooters like Evil Angel. Who employs an in house shooter of the level of Viv Thomas, Ben Dover, etc?
My experience talking to the biggest of programs is the moment is gets to content, they don't seem so rich. Cutting corners and costs seem to be the order of the day. Lensman once told me he thought $500 a shooting day for a shooter was a good wage. I told him for $500 a day he won't get a good shooter. They could then earn far more elsewhere.
We could earn far more than $500 a day, 5 days a week, so we were outside the budget of anyone I ever spoke to. And $500 a day is only $125,000 a year. By no means a good or even great income.
Now all the trolls can jump in and tell me I didn't earn $50 a day. Not that they have a clue.
So, did it harm online porn is the question? I can think of many ways.
The problem is in the knowledge of online porn with porn itself. No one so far has answered my questions of the main income sources of a porn shop and a porn producer, prior to the Internet and even today.
And for the record, I'm no where near the level of the guys I named.