The point few will get into their heads and people like Dean make stories up to cover the truth. Isn't that I'm better at the technical side as some are. Or better at the porn side, though against many I am. It's that I worked in a market purely as a content producer that out paid all the markets my critics worked in.
Now they were free to do what I did, shoot some rolls of film of a cute girl, take it to a magazine and earn $3,000 a set and maybe more. They were free to do both online custom and offline non exclusive. So why didn't they?
Not good enough businessmen to sell their work in other markets?
Couldn't afford to wait 6 months to get paid, like $250 for the model is going to cripple them.
Didn't know the phone number of the magazines. They couldn't pick up a magazine and get it.
They couldn't reach the standard required?
Dean would of been up against Steve Hicks and Viv Thomas, no way in the world is he going to compete with them on a consistent basis. Yes he has started to get work. How many years after he went freelance? Some would of been up against me, so why didn't they work for people who paid more than online?
I know the truth that applies to most. They couldn't find brand new cute girls, shoot 120 frames of her to the requirements magazines demanded. They got girls from agents or had worked and already been shot by magazine shooters. They never covered enough poses, missed many of the killer shots and got many poses and looks from the girl wrong. I've seen their sets in sites and in the offices of magazine editors. Any shooter with balls can put his work, the whole set, up for everyone to see. I will happily say I got it wrong if the prove me wrong.
I had to learn the hard way, by getting my work rejected. Editors knew I had some talent and sat me down to tell me how to improve. They wanted new shooters to select from.