There's not enough pics of the girls wearing clothes! Seriously, it's so much nicer to have a variety of clothed and unclothed pics than just a load of completely nude pics. I actually find entirely nude pictorials are often the most boring.
What do you guys think?
What porn mags lack these days
-
marcusallen
Re: What porn mags lack these days
Could not agree more.
Great snappers like The Prof, John Mason,Bob Tanner, John Graham,Trevor Watson, etc. etc. would love to sell erotic pix, but the very tight circle of mag owners will not buy. They control the market and only want the hardest shots they can get away with publishing in the UK.
My personal opinion is that they are a bunch of multimillionaire wankers(how's that for a contradiction in terms)!
Should I ever hit the Lottery, I'll publish a mag that caters to people like yourself and many others.
"Ah, to dream...."
What's the rest JJ
Great snappers like The Prof, John Mason,Bob Tanner, John Graham,Trevor Watson, etc. etc. would love to sell erotic pix, but the very tight circle of mag owners will not buy. They control the market and only want the hardest shots they can get away with publishing in the UK.
My personal opinion is that they are a bunch of multimillionaire wankers(how's that for a contradiction in terms)!
Should I ever hit the Lottery, I'll publish a mag that caters to people like yourself and many others.
"Ah, to dream...."
What's the rest JJ
-
buttsie
o/t Re: What porn mags lack these days
I think it works both ways
If all sets are the same they become mundane
I just recently came across 1972 Older Mayfair mag scans and can say it was quite a treat but after the first 1000 scans it became a little boring possibly because they were all softcore erotic with the same theme ie stockings,suspenders and high heels
Variety is the key IMPO
That means everything from softcore erotic to full on hardcore
cheers
B...OZ
If all sets are the same they become mundane
I just recently came across 1972 Older Mayfair mag scans and can say it was quite a treat but after the first 1000 scans it became a little boring possibly because they were all softcore erotic with the same theme ie stockings,suspenders and high heels
Variety is the key IMPO
That means everything from softcore erotic to full on hardcore
cheers
B...OZ
-
Ace
Re: What porn mags lack these days
Too many pages of classified ads for phone sex ISN'T lacking, thats for sure!!!
-
buttsie
o/t Re: What porn mags lack these days
Yeah but thats where some of the best talent can be found
cheers
B...OZ
cheers
B...OZ
-
One Eyed Jack
Re: o/t Re: What porn mags lack these days
Maybe the ladies underwear section in the Littlewoods catalogue may appeal perhaps. Just yanking your chain chaps. Har-de-har har har.
Seriously though, what mags are we talking about. I still like perusing the brit skin mags. If you are talking about the hardcore mags, I'm sure they have a lot of partially clothed pics too. A very valid point all the same. I hate the kit off straight away stuff too. Once in a while maybe but yes, variety is the key. What I can't stand is pretty/ appealing women with manky feet in high heels. This should be outlawed.
Seriously though, what mags are we talking about. I still like perusing the brit skin mags. If you are talking about the hardcore mags, I'm sure they have a lot of partially clothed pics too. A very valid point all the same. I hate the kit off straight away stuff too. Once in a while maybe but yes, variety is the key. What I can't stand is pretty/ appealing women with manky feet in high heels. This should be outlawed.
-
Officer Dibble
Re: o/t Re: What porn mags lack these days
Well, actually Tel, I remember as a lad I couldn't wait for my mum to go to the shops so I could get the old 'Kay's Catalogue' out. ! They always had a pretty groovy lingerie section and I guess that must've been my first foray into the world of erotica. I still have fond memories of those lusty ladies in the black stocking and Playtex girdles - Wheyhey!
Haven't looked at recent top shelf mag for a while now, but I did notice them going downhill in the mid 90's with the kind of tiresome, unimaginative photosets and really BLAND girls who all seemed to look the same - a phenomena that A A Gill highlighted in a Sunday Times article just before Crimbo. He called them "Burka Blondes" And the quintessential Burka Blonde would be, say, Tasmin Outhwaite. Have you noticed that every other bird now has a lacklustre blonde Tasmin Outhwaite hairstyle? And they all wear jeans and a shapeless, style-free crop top, vest thingy? Have a gander at this selection of current birds at the bottom of this page to see what I mean -
I?m not criticizing the site by the way (I approve of it) I just referenced it as it struck me the other day as I browsed it that most of the girls at the bottom of this page seemed to look the same. Not offensive in anyway ? just bland, with basically the same hairstyle.
However, it?s not all doom and gloom. I came across this yesterday -
A British online magazine, apparently featuring the highest calibre girls and imaginative photography. It?s a nice site as well. I was suitably impressed and it took me back to the heydays of Playboy, Penthouse, Mayfair, and Club etc? It?s also heartening that someone is spending some dough to do the job right and maintain the standards set in the 70?s and 80?s in the face of naysayers ? who are generally skint by the way ? saying ?Nahhh, everybody wants amateur nowadays? Fuck that, I was doing amateur back in the early nineties when most of my colleagues assumed that a porn star had to be a glamourpuss. But enough already! I?m sick of it. ?Traci from the chippie? stopped doing it for me a while back, I want to get away from all that tiresome, grey, depressing mundane stuff, I want this!
Nothing else will do. Accept no substitutes!
Whoever is behind the Unzipped project I?d like to shake his hand. He?s obviously a man of style, taste and vision.
Officer Dibble.
Haven't looked at recent top shelf mag for a while now, but I did notice them going downhill in the mid 90's with the kind of tiresome, unimaginative photosets and really BLAND girls who all seemed to look the same - a phenomena that A A Gill highlighted in a Sunday Times article just before Crimbo. He called them "Burka Blondes" And the quintessential Burka Blonde would be, say, Tasmin Outhwaite. Have you noticed that every other bird now has a lacklustre blonde Tasmin Outhwaite hairstyle? And they all wear jeans and a shapeless, style-free crop top, vest thingy? Have a gander at this selection of current birds at the bottom of this page to see what I mean -
I?m not criticizing the site by the way (I approve of it) I just referenced it as it struck me the other day as I browsed it that most of the girls at the bottom of this page seemed to look the same. Not offensive in anyway ? just bland, with basically the same hairstyle.
However, it?s not all doom and gloom. I came across this yesterday -
A British online magazine, apparently featuring the highest calibre girls and imaginative photography. It?s a nice site as well. I was suitably impressed and it took me back to the heydays of Playboy, Penthouse, Mayfair, and Club etc? It?s also heartening that someone is spending some dough to do the job right and maintain the standards set in the 70?s and 80?s in the face of naysayers ? who are generally skint by the way ? saying ?Nahhh, everybody wants amateur nowadays? Fuck that, I was doing amateur back in the early nineties when most of my colleagues assumed that a porn star had to be a glamourpuss. But enough already! I?m sick of it. ?Traci from the chippie? stopped doing it for me a while back, I want to get away from all that tiresome, grey, depressing mundane stuff, I want this!
Nothing else will do. Accept no substitutes!
Whoever is behind the Unzipped project I?d like to shake his hand. He?s obviously a man of style, taste and vision.
Officer Dibble.
-
Dave Wells
Re: What porn mags lack these days
It's not that surprising if you analyse some of the facts:-
1). The last time an English mag raised it's money to photographers was (if I am correct) 1989. So to put it another way we are getting the same money we got 14 years ago when all our costs to produce have probably gone up ten times.
2). You can probably blame Deric Botham for the 'Amatuerness' of all these mags these days. He talked N&S into producing N. Talent and Real Wives thinking that Joe Public wanted to see Mavis from next door, in next door, in her next door clothes. Well he may of been right in part but it killed the "Fantasy Girl" Playboyesk image of girls. And probably worse of all it and the invention of idiot proof camera's led to.
3). There are just to many photographers these days. In 1989 there were maybe 20-30 regularly published photogs. Now there are hundreds who submit work. Editors will always have their favourites but they have so much material to choose from. They will probably see 20 sets of a new girl within 3 months of her being on the scene. So she becomes more and more unsellable the more she gets shot and published. And.......
4). The Internet is killing magazine sales dead. So they're not selling and therefore they can't raise the money to a level where we can make a decent living. So the cheap sets with no imagination and boring girls will continue.
Now isn't this just sour grapes by me - well maybe but I just wonder where it will end. The money in porn is ONLY for the Distributors.
1). The last time an English mag raised it's money to photographers was (if I am correct) 1989. So to put it another way we are getting the same money we got 14 years ago when all our costs to produce have probably gone up ten times.
2). You can probably blame Deric Botham for the 'Amatuerness' of all these mags these days. He talked N&S into producing N. Talent and Real Wives thinking that Joe Public wanted to see Mavis from next door, in next door, in her next door clothes. Well he may of been right in part but it killed the "Fantasy Girl" Playboyesk image of girls. And probably worse of all it and the invention of idiot proof camera's led to.
3). There are just to many photographers these days. In 1989 there were maybe 20-30 regularly published photogs. Now there are hundreds who submit work. Editors will always have their favourites but they have so much material to choose from. They will probably see 20 sets of a new girl within 3 months of her being on the scene. So she becomes more and more unsellable the more she gets shot and published. And.......
4). The Internet is killing magazine sales dead. So they're not selling and therefore they can't raise the money to a level where we can make a decent living. So the cheap sets with no imagination and boring girls will continue.
Now isn't this just sour grapes by me - well maybe but I just wonder where it will end. The money in porn is ONLY for the Distributors.
-
Officer Dibble
Re: What porn mags lack these days
Nothing like a bit of sour grapes Dave, in fact it's like a breath of fresh air! God, I hate it when folks happily twitter on as though everything and eveyone is wonderful. It has me ripping my barnet out and bagging my head aginst the wall so it does.
Keep up the good work.
Dibble.
Keep up the good work.
Dibble.
-
buttsie
o/t Re: What porn mags lack these days
Sad but true Dave
Until the internet is regualted like every other facet of the business the mag side will slowly dwindle
This crap that punters have that everything on the internet should be free is just typical of customer stupidity
Who pays for the new pictures/videos?
With that thought in mind they post pictures they assume they own because they bought the magazine or paysite subscription
to Yahoo,Msn,Lycos,newsgroups etc or worse set up their own websites generating income.
Until a real crackdown happens where people who infringe on copyright lets say lose their computer nothing will ever change
The bottom line is that the unregulated internet needs to be dealt some severe legal punishment.That means both webmasters and punters who use pics,vids or whatever that they aren't entitled too
cheers
B...OZ All Ranted Out
Until the internet is regualted like every other facet of the business the mag side will slowly dwindle
This crap that punters have that everything on the internet should be free is just typical of customer stupidity
Who pays for the new pictures/videos?
With that thought in mind they post pictures they assume they own because they bought the magazine or paysite subscription
to Yahoo,Msn,Lycos,newsgroups etc or worse set up their own websites generating income.
Until a real crackdown happens where people who infringe on copyright lets say lose their computer nothing will ever change
The bottom line is that the unregulated internet needs to be dealt some severe legal punishment.That means both webmasters and punters who use pics,vids or whatever that they aren't entitled too
cheers
B...OZ All Ranted Out