airbrushing vs natural
 

lately ive seen a lot of perfect models. way too perfect. do most "quality" content providers airbrush their pics? i just find it amazing that so many girls have such perfect skin tone, shape, features, etc. everything about them is perfect.

i realize there is a difference in, say... playboy... and... cumfiesta... but with people who are generally known to shoot very hot, very nice, very perfect models... are the girls airbrushed or natural?

We remove the zits but that is it, I think it depends on the niche and style whether it needs to be airbrushed.

But it's very labour intensive and selling at $35 not really cost effective.

funny this should crop up as this discussion was going on on an escort site though the ladies were arguing whether it was fair to mislead their clients.

Personally I think air brushing is fine, its easy enough to find content which has not been tampered with though the better the model looks the mores sales, which for a biller is good news.

so its a thumbs up from me

ill go for natural

nothin like a puss filled yellow zit to concentrate on when i'm rubbin one out

Yeah... but too "slick" results in less approachable content series... leading to less click throughs.:2 cents:

someone should post a contest... airbrushed or not... to see if we can tell the difference...

any content providers up to it?

Check out Tootie's work. She does wonders for a few trades.
By the way...Where are you tootie?

If you look at most of the paysites out there these days they have airbrushed content in their designs and tours and then when you egt into teh memebrs area its all naturual usually unless they have purchased some sets that were already airbrushed.

Glamour Type Sites = airbrush

Pure Porn - natural

Solo Girl = natural and as amateur as you can find

It depends on what you are selling. If you are doing an amateur site then don't airbrush, if you are doing glamour models then I would.