Cheaper than Stephen Hicks for sure :winkwink:

but still not cheap enough, i cant count how many times people asked me to shoot boy/girl for $600 to $800 a scene - sorry, cant do that.

but dont worry for me Paul, i studied business management and controlling was one of the courses i had to take. therefore it didnt matter to me what "established" people charge. I only look at myself.

but now imagine this: many sites just exist because the owners did their content themselves and when they started they didnt know anything about photography. and still the sites became a success and everyone happily sent traffic

being "establised" means shit when you dont produce whats in demand

Yes they couldn't afford Steve, most couldn't afford me and Eva. :winkwink:

Yes many sites did start with the owner shooting or someone close to the owner. Met-Art maybe, Perfect Gonzo, Alsscan, Bang Bus, Viv Thomas or DVTimes. All still going.

Not everyone who started their own site and shot for themselves made it. Unseenworld was one and there have been many more who failed. Some knew all there was to know about driving traffic.Yet when the surfers hit the site, they saw the site wasn't worth buying from. So did their affiliates.

And we've seen these sites fail time after time. Would the number of successes or the number of failures be proof of the system working or not?

As someone who has studied business management did they teach you about having something better than the rest of the herd?

The only real question is this. Would many have made more money by rising above the crowd or staying where they were as just one of the crowd?

Could a site or sponsor afford to pay the top dollar others were paying and make more money?

With your business training and knowledge of the industry you will know the answer is yes. So now the question is. Why didn't they?

dont put your words in my mouth, Paul

That's what he does nowadays. It's pretty low-level skills for troll of the year to have to pretend you said something and then argue against that.

Colour me disappointed.

why not get free hosting, if it saves you on cpu resources, if you have ever had hun listing, digg listing, or even fark listing you would know what im speaking of.

but then again you havent.

OK you put your own words in here. What will a newbie shooter who admits he was learning and his content shows wasn't very good at that point, bring to the table of a sponsor. Other than a cheap price?

This is business, no one should be giving you work so you can learn how to produce the product they're selling and publishing. How would affiliates like it if it were a programmer, designer or support rep? the guy is new so we're giving him the work so he can learn. :upsidedow

Words in your moth. Well I will tell you what you should know. Porn was a far bigger business than online. A porn producer had different avenues to sell his content. Online, DVD, Cable, Hotels, Magazines. A good shooter of the level that could crack those markets, employed by a site owner, could sell the work to some of these other markets. Solo girl sites are pretty much left with Magazines, Lesbian has more appeal and BG even more. Even niches had other avenues.

By going to the avenues of income, they would of been able to fund the extra expense of a top shooter. Twistys might of had a problem getting a Viv Thomas or Steve Hicks. Still there were other shooter who could be afforded. I know for a fact they could of afforded one of the top UK Big Boob shooters. He worked for a Big Boob publisher who were into magazines and DVD. Wages, $60k+ One of his sets would of sold for $3,000 absolutely no problems. The limits of his earnings was the number of Big Boob girls he could shoot. Insatiable market.

Now either online couldn't afford to pay this guy his wage, location, model, equipment costs or the sponsors were to bad at management to look at the world around them.

The same goes for other shooters. Most were self employed because of the money, a few were not.

Would the content cost more? No, might even be less of a cost.

Was it possible? Yes, if they had sat and thought about it.

So why not, why go to a less talented shooter like so many did and give them the work?

Fris, I have had TGP galleries on those sites, paid for some. Look up my Whois and see the hosts. I think they could handle the load.

Damian, he ignored my question and will probably ignore this one. I was being nice to him and assuming he knew the answer.

Paul, word to the wise, if you're going to lie, pick a better lie than to say you've had FHGs on digg and fark.

OK some education is required here for those who only know online. In regards to content production.

Content producers were first and foremost businessmen. The costs of running a business producing porn that publishers and then consumers didn't buy, will send most bankrupt. Film, model, Make up, location, etc. All costs money. Often money we never saw till publication or acceptance plus a month. Few sent us a 50% deposit to shoot content.

So we had to not only be good, we had to run good businesses.

All it takes to get us to work for people is money. Lay the money down and we will work. Because in most cases there are a few days to spare. Also there's the "Online" license. We rarely sold outright unless it was for a very juicy sum. Few of us had cash flow problems, when you can wait 6 months to get paid, you can't be broke. That's for those who need a 50% advance to pay the models, make up, location, etc.

Approach a decent shooter and tell them "We will pay you $XYZ for a scene and we want 1-XYZ of a girl in different settings, dress, etc" and we will say yes or no. When someone offers us $1500 for five scenes, we realise that this takes us away from doing other work, or worse still. They might submit it to magazines and poach in our market.

A solo girl scene, nothing too fancy, for $500 isn't usually going to cut it. $1,000 and we are falling over each other to grab the money. It's on top of the market we had already shot for. We would make sure the license wasn't for our other markets, unless the offer was too good to turn down.

Now then to even think a newbie shooter or someone who can't sell for more can offer the same quality is absurd. A few sites prove it. The truth is 95% of the sites couldn't afford us. sounds harsh, but true. They simply didn't have the money to invest. I've met them over and over again. They want a level of quality they can't afford.

This often goes for niches as well. Great leg fetish guys were never shooting scenes for $500. she Male was a very lucrative DVD market. Online couldn't afford the top tier. It was all available to be bought, if the offer was right.

The difference is you own or are sending traffic to a site in the FTV, Met Art tier of porn. Not to site that has little more to offer than the rest in the niche. They can make money as well, if enough people send enough traffic that some converts. As much, do their affiliates earn as much?

Should do because we know how much money there is in online porn. Well there was.

You might start to doubt that when all you get offered in a deal to tie up with a sponsor is some lame deal or worse still rev share.

That might be all you need to make a conversion but if the product sucks you will have no rebills at best and major chargebacks at worst.

buying one or two sets might have been a mistake, buying hundreds of sets would have been stupid. so if you want to call Shap stupid, who retired as millionaire on the Bahamas half your age, then it's up to you.

also you are probably the only shooter then who claims that in 20 or 30 years he didnt learn the slightest bit.

but hey, you weren't shooting anyways, Eva or your makeup girl did that for you.

now let me get back to fulfilling orders and writing invoices...

:)

which actually leads me to the question: did you tell your clients that paid $3000 per set that your wife or your makeup girl was shooting it?

this is leading nowhere, Paul...

never takes long for paul's offensive personality to make it ok to hate him again.

I think his wife takes better pictures :2 cents:

I always viewed Paul more as the Edsel of the porn industry.

Absolutely the truth.

One of the things that can separate a site is the actual product. A great product leads to more sales, more retention, more repeat buying. And in porn, more traffic seeing it as a free sample, being interested, clicking the link and then the rest.

Mediocre product produced by a newbie or someone who can't produce at the better paying levels leads to less people interested, buying, stay buying and returning to buy. This goes to daily purchases like a newspaper or Jumbo Jets. Anyone who wants to argue the opposite is clearly finding excuses for the lack of funds to get a great product.

Madalton, you're now showing clear desperation and a clear lack of business knowledge, asking about if they cared who shot the set. Go away and think it through.

I don't care if I shot it, Eva Katka or Jana. The 4 shooters we had in the company. All we cared about was whether it sold. Which it did and for a lot more than your work ever sold for. :1orglaugh

And the other three were all trained by me. :thumbsup

Another fool joins in, sticks his head above the parapet and gets it blown off. :thumbsup

If that was the case more French cuisine would be sold than burgers, More Tolstoy than Dan Browne, More Solaris than Star Wars.

The little success you had was due to you being mediocre not through being original or good. Producing routine photographs for dull magazines.

There is still a market for crap, it's just they don't want your crap.

True and more people preferring my crap to your superior product.

A market you could never of got into.

Which is why I lasted so long.

French Cuisine is great, it's just for most too expensive. Tolstoy has lasted how long and Dan who? Joking but he won't be remembered. Star Wars is a great movie. Not crap in any way. It even has cuts and editing. :1orglaugh

The magazines were dull in your opinion. As someone who shoots dull porn, you wouldn't have a clue why they sold.

There's a market for good amateur, a lot bigger than you will ever reach. For crap, it still has to be good crap. You just have no idea what porn is, why people watch it and too tied up in your own ego to realise it's not about you boring the knickers off a girl telling her how clever you are. It's about getting her turned on and excited.

[QUOTE=Paul Markham;18789046]
The magazines were dull in your opinion. As someone who shoots dull porn, you wouldn't have a clue why they sold.

QUOTE]

To sell sex when there is no competition is hardly atomic physics.

The UK mags were very dull and the photography piss poor thats why the "Lads Mags" wiped them out.

All this and no biz will anyone with content email me regarding setting up a deal. I am looking for self shot type gf content.

fletchxxx @ gmail.com

[QUOTE=Cherry7;18789095]Then why didn't more of the great shooters we now have, including you, get into this market?

Your work.

http://paulmarkham.com/temp/ce1.jpg

http://paulmarkham.com/temp/ce2.jpg

http://paulmarkham.com/temp/ce3.jpg

http://paulmarkham.com/temp/ce4.jpg

http://paulmarkham.com/temp/ce5.jpg

http://paulmarkham.com/temp/ce6.jpg

http://paulmarkham.com/temp/cherry-04.jpg

http://paulmarkham.com/temp/cherry-05.jpg

http://paulmarkham.com/temp/cherry-09.jpg

http://paulmarkham.com/temp/cherry-10.jpg

I would have no beef with you if you were able and produced the work you can talk about. You clearly do not have the skills and think your crap is good. If I have to point out the mistakes in these shots and screen grabs to you, it will cost you money. Putting up this level of work shows your level of stupidity.

Welcome to my ignore list, again.

Oh well done Cherry, you got on to his totally made up ignore list!

:winkwink::thumbsup

I have not said anything about what we do but adressed the points you made.

I pointed out that quality does not out sell mass marketed junk.

I pointed out that when you made mass marketed junk for jazz mags back in the day they were not successful because of the wonderful photography but because there was no competition.

These magazines were not destroyed by the Internet but other better produced magazines with better layout and better photography. The "lads mags".

It does not matter that you do not like what we do, we are appealing to an educated audience, one that, for example, reads books.

Not tonight, had a big nap in the afternoon. :thumbsup

What happened to all the praising? Oh yeah.. back to reality.

he opened his mouth again :winkwink:

:pimp:pimp

He was attempting to bum a drink or get a kiss Roald. You never met an Englishman before?

Fletch, I have a few. If you want them you can have them for free.