Porn Chicks Too Ugly For HDTV - GoFuckYourself.com

Mutt · 07-12-2003, 03:53 AM

and the man is right. there are a handful of porn girls who are legitimately pretty, i'm sure Matrix Content and Suze Randall have worn out plenty of trowels with the amount of makeup they apply.

************************************************

Playboy in HDTV: Not Looking Good

Company president Jim English says he's not ready to launch
an HD channel. However, Playboy may license some films
to Mark Cuban's HDNet, TVPredictions.com has learned.

By Phillip Swann

Santa Monica, CA (July 8) -- Playboy TV President Jim English
says his company is not planning to launch a High-Definition channel anytime soon.

Why?

English says that some adult film stars would not look very attractive through the naked lens of HDTV. The technology delivers a picture so clear that many have compared it to looking through a window.

"A lot of the girls are not that pretty. You can only do so much with hair and make-up," English said in an interview today with TVPredictions.com. "HDTV is perfect for National Geographic and the National Football League where you don't expect people to be pretty. But adult films are all about the close-up. With surgeries and implants, I don't know if you want to see everything in HDTV."

Of course, that doesn't mean that Playboy is ignoring HDTV. The company recently finished a new studio that can produce films in high-def. In addition, English said that Playboy is negotiating to license some of its films to air in HDTV on another channel.

English refused to name the channel. However, TVPredictions.com has learned that it's HDNet, owned by Mark Cuban. The Dallas Mavericks owner has said in the past that he might add some adult HDTV fare to his late night lineup.

English said that Playboy would have to find a solution for the
'pretty problem' before it launches its own HD network.

"It's not a barrier, but we would have to figure it out," he said.

The problem is not new in Hollywood. TVPredictions.com reported last month that make-up artists are searching for new techniques to cover up the facial imperfections of celebrities when they appear in high-def.

bigdog · 07-12-2003, 04:24 AM

thats why my ugly ass is never going to be a tv star hehe

Mutt · 07-12-2003, 04:34 AM

me neither. ever taken a look at yourself in one of those magnifying makeup mirror things? SCARY!!!

afrocreep · 07-12-2003, 10:24 AM

is it not possible that a majority might be even more turned on being able to see more clearer, i don't think they care about stupid shit.. i mean its porn, not sports illustrated

BradShaw · 07-12-2003, 10:27 AM

98% of these girls are terrible looking up close, or in person. Porn companies have some of the best make up artists (we use one for fresh photos). Throw a pussy on me and they could make me look good!

fear · 07-12-2003, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BradShaw
98% of these girls are terrible looking up close, or in person. Porn companies have some of the best make up artists (we use one for fresh photos). Throw a pussy on me and they could make me look good!

Not if it landed on your face...

liquidmoe · 07-12-2003, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by fear

Not if it landed on your face...

Gives new meaning to the phrase face fucking though doesnt it ?

detoxed · 07-12-2003, 11:18 AM

Peter Romero · 07-12-2003, 11:26 AM

Give me six months to change that.

grogan · 07-12-2003, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by liquidmoe
Gives new meaning to the phrase face fucking though doesnt it ?

no...

BlackCrayon · 07-12-2003, 01:15 PM

i'd rather see natural girls who might not look perfect rather than fake make up drenched floozies. playboy has gotten too used to air brushing and shit like that, if their aim is to show the beauty of women...why cover it up?

07-12-2003, 03:53 AM	#1
Mutt Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 34,431	Porn Chicks Too Ugly For HDTV and the man is right. there are a handful of porn girls who are legitimately pretty, i'm sure Matrix Content and Suze Randall have worn out plenty of trowels with the amount of makeup they apply. ************************************************ <b>Playboy in HDTV: Not Looking Good</b> <b>Company president Jim English says he's not ready to launch an HD channel. However, Playboy may license some films to Mark Cuban's HDNet, TVPredictions.com has learned.</b> <i>By Phillip Swann Santa Monica, CA (July 8)</i> -- Playboy TV President Jim English says his company is not planning to launch a High-Definition channel anytime soon. Why? English says that some adult film stars would not look very attractive through the naked lens of HDTV. The technology delivers a picture so clear that many have compared it to looking through a window. "A lot of the girls are not that pretty. You can only do so much with hair and make-up," English said in an interview today with TVPredictions.com. "HDTV is perfect for National Geographic and the National Football League where you don't expect people to be pretty. But adult films are all about the close-up. With surgeries and implants, I don't know if you want to see everything in HDTV." Of course, that doesn't mean that Playboy is ignoring HDTV. The company recently finished a new studio that can produce films in high-def. In addition, English said that Playboy is negotiating to license some of its films to air in HDTV on another channel. English refused to name the channel. However, TVPredictions.com has learned that it's HDNet, owned by Mark Cuban. The Dallas Mavericks owner has said in the past that he might add some adult HDTV fare to his late night lineup. English said that Playboy would have to find a solution for the 'pretty problem' before it launches its own HD network. "It's not a barrier, but we would have to figure it out," he said. The problem is not new in Hollywood. TVPredictions.com reported last month that make-up artists are searching for new techniques to cover up the facial imperfections of celebrities when they appear in high-def. __________________ I moved my sites to Vacares Hosting. I've saved money, my hair is thicker, lost some weight too! Thanks Sly!

07-12-2003, 04:34 AM	#3
Mutt Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 34,431	me neither. ever taken a look at yourself in one of those magnifying makeup mirror things? SCARY!!! __________________ I moved my sites to Vacares Hosting. I've saved money, my hair is thicker, lost some weight too! Thanks Sly!

07-12-2003, 10:27 AM	#5
BradShaw Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: KB's trailer Posts: 7,840	98% of these girls are terrible looking up close, or in person. Porn companies have some of the best make up artists (we use one for fresh photos). Throw a pussy on me and they could make me look good! __________________ Sig too big http://www.gofuckyourself.com/gfy_faqs.html Want to use a large banner in your sig??? Contact Eric about getting on as an advertiser - eric AT adult.com

07-12-2003, 11:18 AM	#8
detoxed vip member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 17,798	lol

07-12-2003, 11:26 AM	#9
Peter Romero Long time no happy ending Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: San Diego CA Posts: 10,578	Give me six months to change that. __________________ POVCash [email protected] See them all here: http://www.Petergirls.com

07-12-2003, 04:24 AM	#2
bigdog Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 6,964	thats why my ugly ass is never going to be a tv star hehe

07-12-2003, 10:24 AM	#4
afrocreep Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: ON, Canada Posts: 1,074	is it not possible that a majority might be even more turned on being able to see more clearer, i don't think they care about stupid shit.. i mean its porn, not sports illustrated

07-12-2003, 01:15 PM	#11
BlackCrayon Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Ottawa Posts: 19,631	i'd rather see natural girls who might not look perfect rather than fake make up drenched floozies. playboy has gotten too used to air brushing and shit like that, if their aim is to show the beauty of women...why cover it up?