Creating content in an overcrowded market.
 

I watched Generation Porn last week and one thing struck me, the way the industry produces content today compared to how we used to.

Back in the day a DVD was issued once a month or less with 5 scenes. That meant shooting a scene a week of slightly more. We could sort out the girls capable, arrange shoots, take time, get to know the girls and produce something of quality. If not in the image quality which today is great.

Today producing 5 scenes a month is not enough. Watching Fake Taxi it was clear it was just a conveyor belt with little to distinguish one scene from the next. Models are also use to churning out the same formatted scene they've seen online and know directors will accept.

The exception are the real Amateurs, doing it for kicks and to earn. And in that order. Doesn't matter if they're professionally shot their fun still shines through.

pollux69 made thread here. Asking what to do with his 9,000 models. He can get them all to do the same as every other model or he can get them to make some decent money.

They can be shot by a professional, boyfriend, camera on a tripod or phone the equipment doesn't matter. What matters is they do more than just act out a scene or reduce it to body parts. There are lots of ways to do this.

You tell em, Paul . . .

You are 100% correct. It's just a shame that say 5 years ago, had someone else made this exact post, you would have been the first person telling them how wrong they were, and that it needed to be done the way it was back in your day, because that's when good money was being made.

I'm really not knocking you - I'm genuinely pleased to see that you seem to have started to get it now :)

Privatamateure.com was started in 2005, it was the first site Fabian bought that then became the whole Manwin empire.

14 years ago.

I agree. When porn becomes mass produced the quality and exclusivity decreases.

I am bored to watch most of the professional scenes I find on tubes - especially those glamcore overlit scenes with modern interiors, perfect people and containing the same old "story" if any, girls moaning like robots. Just that same endless fucking with no passion and no eroticism, usually featuring a muscular dude that looks like a total imbecile.

These "actors" are nothing close to the classic French/Italian actors of the 80s / first half of 90s.

There is a reason why the most expensive cars in the world are limited series quickly sold out.

Time is fucking flying by mate... I did a quick mental grab for a date in a godaddy thread, and came up with 'about 7 years' then I checked I was really talking about 15 !

Times really speeding up these days :upsidedow

the guy who made privatamateure is already on the next big thing and it will be another billion euro bomb.

Is that good or bad? Bomb in the bad sense, or successful?

I know :winkwink:

midget scat

Why hasn't someone created an American site or English speaking site?

With modern cameras and editing software so cheap it seems a no brainer to launch a site in English with American models having fun and making money.

Instead of worrying about the competition, why not just focus on producing the BEST???

It's only overcrowded if you can't find a way to stand out.

ManyVids.com, OnlyFans.com .... It took only 10+ years but the US market has caught up.

You might say that C4S has always been a marketplace for that audience but I think it focusses more on the fetish crowd opposed to models.

Also: I'm pretty sure many Chaturbate performer make good extra money by selling clips on their profiles.

i am pretty sure it will be VERY successful

Paul doesn't understand the market or how our industry works.

A company shooting one DVD a month isn't going to make any money. At all. DVDs aren't selling like it's 2002.

When I was General Manager at ICS Playboy, we had five or six studios making porn. Each studio had four or five photographrs pumping out content. Paul seems to think it's "one studio and thus one photographer" when it's more like "one studio five photographers" which is why they pour out so much content. At Playboy, we had five video editors to make the scenes ready for websites, and then two DVD poeple to make DVDs - each DVD editor had three computers on their desk, and typically two computers would be rendering out master DVDs while they worked on a third computer. We also had graphic designers to make box covers, etc.

We turned out a huge amount of content.

Paul was small time, and never put quality anything.

you can not expect that one who is at the end of his life will admit that he have misunderstood the world and could have done so much better if he would have a clue.

paul predicted the end of the adult internet with the beginning of the tubes and believes until today that he was right.

he will believe to the grave that the piece of bread he earned in his career was the biggest piece.

he didn't understand the size and breadth of our business, neither in his active time nor in his inactive one.

if paul has a "new idea" it turns out that it has already passed the peak of its life cycle 10 years ago.

let him dream his dreams and use his advice at best as an indication of what definitely not to do.

That would make money. The problem is finding midgets willing to play with crap

Great statement :thumbsup:thumbsup

https://asifahsankhan.files.wordpres...69479_free.jpg

I'm willing to do the Robin Williams Kneeling on shoes thing, to make myself smaller if that helps me land the gig?

How much yah paying ??? :upsidedow

Did you realize that there is a lot of Past Perfect Tense in your story?

You are a smart guy, but that is just not true. He put out plenty of quality stuff.

Very true.

The problem is money and the sheer quantity required today by sites. They fall back on the model that Rochard says is great. Churning out the same scenes over and over and only changing the models doing the same thing as everyone else on that site. Join a site to get a too similar format repeated over and over again.

Not only that but restrict the budget to a level that allows them to "four or five photographers pumping out content" day in and day out. I wonder what they paid for a solo, lesbian, BG scenes. I know that what I was offered for exclusive scenes meant taking a huge pay cut. So not the best shooters, not paid the best, working under pressure, not for themselves and they ended up with????

The surfer doesn't think this is worth paying for and the stats today prove that. Tubes have 100,000 of scenes shot by 1,000s of shooters some churned out some done with care but all differently. A surfer has 1 site filling all his needs in a niche and if a scene doesn't hit the spot, he can try another scene and be sure of getting something different.

I understand enough to know what we were doing pre Tubes was wrong. Otherwise surfers would still be paying for it. The moment Tubes offered a better selection they turned to Tubes.

ManyVids.com, OnlyFans.com are a start but I don't think the design is a patch on Mydirtyhobby.com.

Can a site offer a months membership and give access to 100s or 1,000s of scenes shot by different people who aren't churning out the same format day after day?

you overestimate the quality factor.
i was running membersites long enough to know that the average view time inside a
memberarea is about 1 minute.

not even 1% of the surfers are watching a video completely and if you ask 1000 people what "quality" they prefer you will get 1000 different answers.

That is a matter of opinion.

Wake up and come into the present. Nobody is shooting DVDs any more ( maybe as a secondary add on). It is ALL about streaming. Looking at Playboy and being proud of it, is as me saying I really did well at Blockbuster. :1orglaugh

And as far as a huge volume of shit? We make 4 to 5 movies/ year and sell them to about 2,000 of our customers every year as a buy or rent at 30 and 15 bucks respectively, not huge but a decent living.

I have yet to see, after all of these years, anything that Paul produced that was decent no less anything that had a "wow" factor.

Here are some of his galleries.... Does anything make you go "wow"? No. It was very average.

https://justpicsplease.com/photos/pa...arkham%20teens

DVDs were on the decline before the Tube sites.

DVDs had their time in the industy. Men used to go to these dirty "sex shops" to get DVDSs that made them feel like dirty old men. Once porn sites came out no one needed to go to the book stores any more....

DVDs is a dead market, but people are still making DVDs.

I work at YNOT and I do the PRs there; Every time someone streets a new DVD they put out a PR..... https://www.ynot.com/adult-industry-...lt-video-news/

No it's not. It's a matter of fact.

What is quality porn is a better question to ask. Not the stuff shot on a treadmill by people working to a format, faked and superficial.

It's not about DVDs it's about the way we used to create content. The way you're creating content seems to be right. Shooting 2 to 5 scenes a day is what I'm saying is wrong. It doesn't matter the format the scenes are sold via, it matters the care and quality that goes into the production.

Then why did this average content make us far more than what your shooters at Playboy made?

Why were so many online content providers happy to shoot on treadmills for a wage, while the offline shooters were making so much more money? And still own their work.

The money online was offering for custom exclusive was laughable. Most magazine shooters were better off retiring or opening their own sites.

You missed the point of my thread. It's about what quality can be produced by people who are on a wage, producing too much, for too little, with no real care other than is it in focus and lit properly?

Once Tube sites came out there was no one needed to pay for memberships to sites that offered this type of content. Because getting a months membership to a site with a few scenes repeated over and over again only changing the model is boring.

Is porn actually the product anymore?

Porn has become so commoditised that studios announce new releases several times per week on Twitter. The release hits pay sites or streaming sites, then hits the torrent sites and tubes, then is forgotten quickly and just becomes one more of millions of videos you can watch for free.

The lifecycle of a release is very short, people usually won't remember a release from months ago, nuanced consumers of porn will follow certain models or studios or be paysite members for specific content but most consumers of porn aren't like that.

This is all measurable, search interest in a release declines rapidly from the 10 day out mark of that release unless it's something outstanding, then it might have a couple of months of traction.

Going back to my initial question, is porn the product anymore? Personally I think the eyeballs are the product and the porn is just there to attract eyeballs so you can sell them other things like cams, dating and what ever else you can get people to pull their wallet out for.

Producing good porn requires more than getting the lighting and focus right.

The model has to really be into it. Back when we shot content if a girl turned up and wasn't right in her mood, attitude or willingness to do the work our way. She was sent home, I've lost count of the girls who were clearly not putting 100% into their work who needed some guidance. If still not right, I switched off the lights and said that was it.

If only because I knew the magazine editors would reject the work or the video wasn't going to be right. It was very expensive to produce a bad product.

This is the most essential part and the rest is easy by comparison. A good model, having a great time, giving her all, can be badly shot, lit and even a bit out of focus and it's still great porn. Obviously better porn if it's all spot on, but that's the essence of porn.

This is bad porn because it's obviously posed. https://justpicsplease.com/galleries...g-a-cock-27578

This is good porn Paul Markham Teens : Nearly Nineteen Raven Haired Cuties Dildoing Each Others Tight Shaven Teen Pussies & Ass

The girls are into each other and apart from a few shots where they acknowledge the viewer, they're busy fucking each other. Video is the same. A viewer wants to watch the scene unfold and occasionally be noticed. He must know it's it's for real whatever the niche, style, quality.

Problem is, nobody searches for that porn anymore, it has expired.

I understand what you're saying.

Even if they only want to get traffic it has to be interesting to get the traffic. The great thing about Tubes is I can flick from a girl in the back of a taxi, to a girl in the back of a van, to a girl picked up on the street, to a girl in a garden in minutes. Do I really want a months membership to a site of 1,000 girls in the back of a taxi? Or a van? ETC. Most of them shot by staff shooters, most faking it and most in a hurry to get paid and get home.

Do I want McDonalds porn or do I want a sizzling prime steak for my money?

No one searches for two girls fucking each other?

You're being silly.

This is awful porn https://justpicsplease.com/galleries...hreesome-18969

It doesn't even rank as amateur, because the only amateur in the room is the guy with the camera.

Of course they do, but nobody will find that content with the search "two girls fucking each other".

Who's talking about search terms?

Stick to search engines and webmaster stuff because porn isn't your field.

:1orglaugh

Just ignore him. He always try to get involved and get attention by doing all these as usual.

Just like in the good old days, we shoot for about about 6 days ( used to do 12 days) to create ONE 90 minute movie with scripted dialogues, story, a full sound postproduction and original music. We are selling some of the movies 10 years after they were made. We of course have an ongoing fight with pirates who think these " vinatges" are free to have. Everytime we add a new movie like the locomotive the new product also pulls the older stuff.:2 cents:

hahaha...
amateur paul live - i love it !!!!

You have just pretty much explained your whole back catalogue.

You were a mag shooter, you survived because there wasn't many out there, you moved onto the the internet, yet kept shooting the same 6 frankly awkward positions, and just produced meh content.. people purchased it because it was cheap, any company I worked for I always just pushed your stuff into the archives, and purchased new stuff.

But again it's a matter of opinion.

Fair point, but I stand by my statement

As thommy points out above, quality is an opinion, but Paul was working with old equipment and was a pioneer of certain styles. You can't hold it against a Byzantine painter that he doesn't match Leonardo Da Vinci. You need to judge in context.

That's a great way to work. When I was i the UK shooting videos and sets and when shooting magazine sets in Czech we were very fussy about how, what and who we shot. We knew that was where the money was, with the internet we knew we could sell almost anything to webmasters if the price was right. What site would pay $3,000 for solo girl sets, $6,000 for lesbian sets and $10,000 for BG sets? Apart from the Met-Art level.

Today is a different time and I feel surfers are willing to pay for great porn, whatever that is in their niche/style, and we should be producing it.