^ Yes, but i think that was in reference to the performers themselves selling content to their OF subscribers that they were giving away for free elsewhere.
Thanks for the reply. People were repeatedly villifying models for posting bad quality videos. From what you're saying, it's about the OF platform. If people can watch the same videos in better quality by downloading them and changing the platform in which they view them, then the models' video quality must not be so bad. Of course, this can vary from one model to another, but just kindly pointing out it's a good idea to keep this in mind before making judgements about the models overall.
Yes, of course it was because certain people seem to be against the models or perhaps women overall considering the gendered language used in the villifying overgeneralizations while holding viewers responsible for nothing. Sorry not sorry if anybody's triggered by me calling this out. There's no reason you should be if you're not participating in this behavior. Not going to pretend like I don't notice. This is one of the issues I was protesting with my somewhat sarcastic use of the term "thrilled."
If it's such a problem for OF models to post free content elsewhere, why is it not as much of a problem if not more so for viewers to do this? Why are the complaints not also in reference to that? How is that any more ethical? It seems like what's unethical is this villification of the models while holding viewers responsible for nothing and acting like they're nothing more than victims. No, I'm not referring to viewers who are genuinely scammed or ripped off. Just saying this goes both ways.
Also, if a model has say 200 plus photos and videos in their paid subscription area and posts 1 or 2 of these for free online as previews so viewers can have a sense of what they're getting before subscribing, why is this a problem? As a live cam performer, I lost count of how many viewers asked for previews even though free cam is a preview. Or, do the complaints just refer to OF models posting many videos and pictures free online? If the latter is more the issue, then what's an acceptable percentage for them to post free as previews?
Edited by - Tessa on 5/2/2023 8:02:25 AM
[Link]
Lezzyist Deactivated User
Make Porn Erotic Again 1736 Posts 9/19
Posted - May 3 2023 : 12:31PM
Tessa, I am pro-performer, and even I wouldn't want to pay for a scene then turn around and see that same scene in full for free elsewhere. Performers are entirely within their right to do that, but it's still a bit of a nuisance, and I say that as someone who can pretty much afford it anytime I want to buy porn. It's just like when you buy something at Wal-Mart for $20 and then you find out it's $15 on Amazon. You realize you should have done your Googling before buying.
Yes, I know. Your comments were supportive of performers from what I noticed. Thus, the misogynistic behaviors I was referring to weren't geared toward you or toward anybody providing constructive critiques of specific content. Though I don't wish to single anybody out, some of the comments weren't even about OF or specific content. If you read my message, I wasn't saying people should want to pay for content that's posted free elsewhere (though I asked if the objections still persist with previews). I was taking issue with the comment that this complaint was in reference just to the models and why it wouldn't also be a problem if viewers do it. I didn't know how to make that any more clear in my comment.
Though people may have different perspectives, I assert it's even more unethical for viewers to post models' content elsewhere without their consent than it is for models to post their own elsewhere. At least when the model posts it themselves, it's their content that they took the time to create rather than posting content they aren't in without the models' consent that they don't have legal rights to. When viewers do this, it's not only detrimental to models for obvious reasons, but also to fans. Such pirvacy can make models less motivated to create content, so they may create less or stop creating. I'm also thinking of a major pornstar who said piracy was one of the reasons she stopped doing porn. She mentioned disliking how her hardwork was being posted online for free.
This discussion also reminds me of somebody who posted on a cam models' forum saying that she set up an OF page a couple of months ago and only has one subcriber, so she's considering taking it down. Two other models suggested that she post videos on the free tube sites at first to get her name out there and reach her potential client based.
A larger point needs to be made about Onlyfans and similar platforms. The product the emanates from the larger accounts (i.e. established performers) should never be talked about in the same breath as filmed studio content. People can sit here and ruminate about 'creator freedom' and revenue streams but from a consumer standpoint, the product (the amounts that happen to be video content) that is being 'sold' by creators is lightyears away from the quality of studio porn. Throw in all the sketchy OFs management agencies pretending to be someone else in order to extract $$$ from PPV messaging, none of this is remotely connected to a porn viewing experience. Is Anthony Hopkins sitting on his toilet, reading lines going to try to convince me that it's the same thing as a cinematic experience? No.
Throw away all the pretense. The OFs structure isn't really about porn. It's a tiered scuffed paywall system meant to extract dollars by whatever means necessary. Do I subscribe to Netflix, so I can PPV message with the producer of a TV show? No. There are some big performers who have produced scenes which resemble traditional porn scenes (i.e. Angela White) but for the vast majority, the accounts are a layered bait and switch. The game is the game. But stop with the obnoxious propaganda.
Regarding all these unknown women supposedly earning tens of thousands of dollars a month on OF...
In the same way companies selling weight loss products will pay people hundreds of thousands of dollars to lose huge amounts of weight and then say it was all due their wonder weight loss product*, is OF artificially boosting the income of a range of women on their platform and then publicly releasing quotes from the women saying they made it all from subscribers on OF?
They would see it as an investment. It's all online, so with new performers the additional overheads would be minimal. I mean, if OF makes a hundred dollars a month from ten thousand new performers, that's a million dollars a month.
*"Over its four-decade history, Jenny Craig was known to pay celebrities hundreds of thousands of dollars to lose weight and later be publicised as a brand success story, with Rebel Wilson, Magda Szubanski and Mel B all fronting Jenny Craig campaigns ...
Mariah Carey and the late actor Kirstie Alley did the same" (source)
^The numbers are never verifiable. And really, who actually benefits from a transparent, accurate accounting of subscriptions? Why wouldn't you embellish the figures. It's a privately held company. Discovery in a single court case could blow this whole thing up. Just imagine the Nigerian Prince Scam run on a paywall platform.
Edited by - Symbiotic on 5/4/2023 4:09:59 PM
[Link]
Lezzyist Deactivated User
Make Porn Erotic Again 1736 Posts 9/19
Posted - May 4 2023 : 4:35PM
There is no number goosing. Some people make 100K a month on OF, some make 100 dollars or 20 dollars. No one's reporting that 100K a month is the mode or average. Some people just have strong branding. There are infinite Mia Malkova-looking chicks selling pussy pictures on the internet, but she's got the branding. She's going to have some really stupid numbers that sound interesting in an article, but no one's saying that is normal.
OF doesn't even want to sell porn; they just have to lol. They aren't proud of it or routinely promoting it. I'm sure their advertising is out there, and I am sure it's about mainstream celebrities doing stuff on the platform.
^ "OF doesn't even want to sell porn ... They aren't proud of it or routinely promoting it"
So what are all those stories of unknown women making tens of thousands of dollars a month selling pornographic images on it? Aren't they paid advertising by OF?
And I'm asking if those tens of thousands of dollars a month are actually surreptitiously coming from OF themselves.
^^No one knows exactly what anyone is making or what OFs themselves are doing/spending to maintain this image of a gigantic revenue snowball. That's the point. Where's the quarterly earnings reports showing subscription numbers and detailed financials? Oh, that's right there aren't any because it's a private company.
We're in a world of Elizabeth Holmes and Bernie Maddoffs. You can believe that OFs is the most transparent spotless company out there (whose whole business model is based on a tiered paywall system that's like a 21st century parlour trick)...and you can also be slightly naïve.
Something that often gets swept under the rug is that many OF and amateur content sold in general will have copyrighted music playing the background for the entire video or for the promo/preview/trailer.
Sure there's fair use, but to an extent and I imagine some musical creators wouldn't be happy about their songs be associated with porn and not being compensated.
Does OnlyFans remove these videos? Doubtful. Do they care? Probably not unless there's a massive lawsuit and ironically ends up being their downfall.
You read stories about fans paying for content but then the girl deletes the videos. OF customer support unofficially doesn't exist so they aren't going to help the fan get their money back and some girls are genuine scammers who will then block or ignore the user when asked to resend the content. If the fan downloaded copies for personal use it avoids this type of disaster situation.
OnlyFans is a rent to view platform but nobody paying money chooses to accept these conditions willingly. If Blockbuster still existed (except that last location) it would be just as stupid to only be allowed to view movies inside the store and not view them in your own home.
OnlyFans could make previews/thumbnails mandatory. But no they won't.
OnlyFans could improve their crappy video player and servers. But no they won't.
Making DRM a choice by creators gets them off the hook for on-site display complaints and can just point fingers at the creator(s) assuming no personal responsibility.
If OnlyFans randomly increases their cut to 25% or 30% (compensation for the DRM security) do creators roll over and accept it or do they turn on the platform too?
Statistics obviously aren't shared but would be interesting if in another month or 2 you start to read public complaints from creators about decreasing subscribers and spenders. Anyone watching leaked content for free was probably never going to pay for it anyway. DRM is punishing legit customers who simply want a personal copy for their own use and aren't stupid enough to trust a platform that's unreliable and some creators who are con artists and receive no consequences for their behavior.
Edited by - Big_Tits_Addict on 5/7/2023 9:46:43 AM
^ "Statistics obviously aren't shared but would be interesting if in another month or 2 you start to read public complaints from creators about decreasing subscribers and spenders. Anyone watching leaked content for free was probably never going to pay for it anyway. DRM is punishing legit customers who simply want a personal copy for their own use and aren't stupid enough to trust a platform that's unreliable and some creators who are con artists and receive no consequences for their behavior."
Perhaps the consequence is in your first sentence above, losing viewers and not building up a repeat clientele, so not not maximizing their income potential. Sure, there can always be some people who will subcribe not knowing, but this won't maximize their income potential. What will is being legit, following through on what they say they'll do, providing high quality content, and a desire to be great at what they do. This way, they maintain a repeat clientele plus bring in new customers and get rave reviews. Any great business person knows this.
With the internet being so global and annoymous, that's little to no accountability- not just OF models but across the board. In a live cam model forum, somebody asked about whether they should get an agent to help them build their OF subscriber base. Nobody in the discussion recommended any and another OF model mentioned that she hired an agent, but only got one subscriber from them. She said they dropped out of sight and she hasn't been able to follow up or get in communication with them.
The biggest problem with OnlyFans is the paywall preventing you even seeing what you might receive for your money.
I saw someone posting in Avery Cristy's thread, in response to someone asking why she's not appearing regularly on professional sites, that she releases regular B/G and custom content on Onlyfans. Well, I don't see it. Where are the previews? Who's she filming with? How long are the videos? What's the resolution? How much are custom videos? All of this is hidden from the consumer.
And there are literally thousands of OnlyFans accounts out there that offer jack shit for your subscription - just some blurry selfies and 5 second mirror selfie videos.
It's consumer unfriendly and until that changes I feel it should always be viewed as an illegitimate competitor to the mainstream.
If you're offering legit content then why can't the customer see a readily available preview before stumping up their cash.
Perhaps someone will launch a class action at some point, to force them to provide proper previews of what the customer is supposed to receive and quality guarantees, because as things stand it feels like a complete racket from which performers and OnlyFans can rake in a fortune for a lower quality product than the mainstream, at the expense of the consumer.
Edited by - MUrf99 on 5/9/2023 12:12:33 AM
[Link]
ao606 Deactivated User
1035 Posts 11/20
Posted - May 9 2023 : 12:31AM
uh, if you subbed to her OF (she has 2, a pay-to-sub VIP and a free-to-sub one), then you'll see she has previews for all her BG videos on her wall. some are pixelated or blurred for whatever reason (but they're legit), while others aren't. Her new videos are DRM-protected so idk the resolution, but all her older content is 1080p. And length wise, OF only displays the video length if it's simply the video they're sending as a PPV, so you can always see how long the video is. Sometimes she'll even include the length of the video in the description. Custom content is again a matter of you specifying what you want from her. I asked her to film in 4k 60fps and she obliged.
Like really, just giving credit where it's due, she isn't scammy at all compared to so many other OF girls.
Though I'm not familiar with this person, thanks for clarifying. Perhaps, before people post comments complaining about her based on what another person said (hersay) without seeing if she actually posts previews, check for yourself to be fair to her. If she takes the time to create and post materials, that's the least you can do. If models don't provide previews, some people complain and understandably so (though that's their decision and you also have the right not to subscribe). Yet, if they do provide some free videos online that can serve as previews, some people complain because they're posting for free what they charge for in their OF subscription. This brings back a question I previously asked. What percentage of materials in their subscription area is acceptable to show for free as previews? Or, is it only acceptable to show clips or parts of videos for free as previews like with regular movies? If so, how long should the preview be at most before people start complaining about giving away for free what they charge for in OF?Edited by - Tessa on 5/9/2023 8:15:48 AM
This isn't about Avery. I wasn't implying she was "scammy". She was just a random example of the seemingly inexorable shift in focus from the mainstream to Onlyfans, because I'd coincidentally seen someone extolling the virtues of her content.
The issue is OnlyFans' consumer unfriendliness which, actually, the responses have further illustrated.
Why do you need a second, free OF profile to post previews?
Why aren't people certain of the length and resolution of content? It should be available for consumers to see, not guesswork based on previously purchased content.
And nobody's complaining about previews being available for all the mainstream sites, because nobody's had to pay up front to see what's behind the paywall. Any entitlement to complete ownership of the content on someone's OF comes from it being hidden entirely behind the paywall. Those who took the gamble and shelled out for a peek behind the curtain presumably feel hard done by if other people get a sneek preview.
As long as consumers don't have clear guarantees of what they're going to receive for their subscription, OnlyFans will retain an air of illegitimacy in my view.
[Link]
ao606 Deactivated User
1035 Posts 11/20
Posted - May 9 2023 : 8:00PM
I know, I wasn't implying that you said that, but rather a lot of complaints about OF is about girls scamming.It's not to post previews. In Avery's case, while they're both PPV accounts, the VIP subs would have more discounts, more free nudes, etc. and if messaging is a priority, then that too. The free-to-sub account is mainly if all you want is content and don't want to pay a monthly sub price. The content may also be priced a bit higher and any new content will be released a week after it gets released on the VIP account.
With some other creators, the VIP account will contain all the videos straight on the wall/feed with almost no or very few PPV videos sent to your DM, while the free account would be PPV only. This is the business model of someone like Aidra Foxx.
This is OF's fault obviously and this is what many scammy creators take advantage of by locking multiple videos together so you have no idea what the length is. As far as the resolution goes, this is again a OF UI issue where the only quality options it shows is 240p, 720p and Original. Now, in this case, Original could be 720p, 1080p or even 4k as I've seen in some rare cases. However, if the upload and OF processing fucked up for whatever reason, all you might see is 240p and Original in which case Original is basically 240p.
^ When I first saw those, I thought it was a joke. Why would any man want a lady who's probably been with some of the biggest men in porn rating their dick?
Not a joke, I've gotten multiple requests for that lol.
[Link]
Lezzyist Deactivated User
Make Porn Erotic Again 1736 Posts 9/19
Posted - May 15 2023 : 1:43AM
There was talk in here about performers' OF money.
[Tweet is no longer available]
This is from a thread about a douchebag (female) performer inviting violators in the industry to a big sex party.
The industry really needs to clean up. If I were the girls, I'd pool money to hire a security firm to whoop ass when needed. Fuck all the worrying about losing clout for exposing creeps. Just send a professional to beat their ass. I'm only 25% kidding.
Stage 1: curious, found some original content creators with reasonable sub prices and enjoyed their content.
Stage 2: let's see some mainstream girls content... oh, you have to pay to sub and like $20 and up for a single scene that's like 4 minutes long lol... nope
Stage 3: "oh x is back and on onlyfans, always loved her. Let's check it out!"... same, sub and $20 or more for crappy shot vids... no thanks
Right now, I am completely and 100% off OF due to it just not being worth it in nearly every single instance. When you compare what say a Brazzers sub gets you, there is just no comparison and I'm not going to fuel a platform that encourages sub quality products at sky high prices.
There is ofcourse a market for OF and girls are raking in huge sums of money, good for them and good for the people who enjoy it and find it worth their money. I'm just not engaging in that crap anymore until the entire platform is overhauled like I can pay $70 or whatever a month to have access to all content creators or they start producing quality stuff and not badly lit 4 minute "scenes"
here's what annoys me now - content that has been bought/unlocked is removed regularly and OnlyFans themselves say it's up to the performers to delete/restore content, and performers say it's not their responsibility, its for OF to do it
so whilst you've paid your money to access something, there's no guarantee that content will remain accessible for you (conveniently the models will offer to send it again for another purchase...) so it's not even worth investing in a model's catalogue any more, as you may lose access at any point
The HeavenPov drama makes me realize that sex-workers are even less safe on OF than they were shooting for mainstream porn companies. Performers seem to be highly susceptible with the fomo that OF with its (fake?) success stories brings. It is the ideal platform for predators. Also in terms of community it seems almost non-existent. Right now we read about abuse but I wonder what happens in a few years when everything is even more diluted with more obscure performers.
It can go either way. In somes ways, sites such as OF give performers more autonomy to create their own content on their terms in their territory- making them safer. On the other hand, such sites can also-even if not the stated goal- provide a platform for predators.
If it were like a normal porn site where all the content comes with the subscription price so you couodnt get ripped off it would be a much better site. There are some creators who dont charge extra for everything but unfortunately too many do. Paying $20 or more for a single video when you could get an endless supply of content for less per month is a rip off. Hopefully Onlyfans will fix these issues by eliminating PPV on the platform.
[Link]
Lezzyist Deactivated User
Make Porn Erotic Again 1736 Posts 9/19
Posted - May 19 2023 : 12:59AM
The studios seem to condone abuse pretty regularly and then there is the added bonus of the performers making less money, just to shoot with awful dudes who fake STD tests.
I listened to Elsa Jean's interview with Holly Randall. She said she got the cue she needed to quit studios because a major studio let a guy participate in a gangbang when he was STD-positive.
^ yeah wasn't there a whole thing last year how he had some faked std test? Got a whole lot of drama on twitter, and nothing changed. He gets booked as usual, and we have performers fawning over him.
Nothing ever changes in porn, besides maybe the names.
I like porn and the Golden Age of Porn 1947 Posts 9/21
Posted - May 20 2023 : 12:01AM
You're right OnlyFans really isn't any better and you're starting to hear just as many stories of abuse and shadiness as you do from studios. With the last STI outbreak in the industry, most performers believe it started from people working with Onlyfan content creators. Also, most OnlyFan content creators work on a trading system, so you're not even getting paid for your work. Also, for Onlyfan content creators that do POV, the female performer is there alone with the male performer. OnlyFans just sounds more risky
[Link]
Lezzyist Deactivated User
Make Porn Erotic Again 1736 Posts 9/19
Posted - May 20 2023 : 1:06AM
There are dangers with independent content in that the women still need to try to figure out if the guy is safe, but once they shoot, they get content that they can sell over and over in perpetuity. So, if they have built there fanbase and marketing strategy, that's renewable money instead of a one-time 700-1000 dollar check. There's no guarantees the guy a studio sticks them with will be safe either.
I listen in their Twitter spaces, and they are slowly, very slowly, learning things like bringing a friend to the independent content shoots. Eventually, a performer will come out with a performer-focused social site where they can trade information about who is safe to work with and whatnot faster and easier. If something like that is out there and active, that should make life a little safer/easier for the women, and word will spread about shitty people faster. Kylie Quinn may have already built such a platform. I am super curious as to what her site looks like, assuming she has followed through on getting it built. She is talking like she has.
Definitely can happen. A year ago subscribed to a well known OF performer suddenly 80% content gone mostly amateur shot which by far was the best content. As was later performing more professional shoots model didn't want the amateur content there.
There are good content creators but it costs time and money to find them. In my experience around 2-3% of the content on OF is worth it. The whole can't see content till pay and over rely on PPV is the issue with OF.
Your comment seems sarcastic, but on a serious note, at the time I worked some women didn't get half that amount. It depends on how big a star they are, how much star potential producers see in in them if they're new, and what type of a scene it is. Though it may seem like a lot, if it's just a one time thing and no stable or steady income, it won't last forever and can go fast. Even if the amount Lezzyist mentioned is accurate, that's way less than one month's rent on an apartment in LA, NY, or various other places.
^ Wasn't sarcastic. I don't see many pornstars who have more frequent shoots than once a week. And I imagine that one shoot is a full day of work. With travel and a night at a hotel basically 2-3 days gone.
I like porn and the Golden Age of Porn 1947 Posts 9/21
Posted - May 20 2023 : 7:19PM
I believe big-name stars make a lot more than that and smaller or amateur performers make around that or less. Basically, if you're somebody like Angela White you can ask for more but if you're a no-name.
You use the term "pornstar" with "star" being the keyword here. Many porn performers aren't at star status so they likely don't get as many shoots or as much $. If they're not major stars, they may need another job or income source to sustain them.
Sorry if I misinterpreted. If they have to pay for travel and hotel, that can cost at least a few hundred. Plus, they pay for testing every 14 days on top of that.
Click to expand
Edited by - Tessa on 5/20/2023 9:46:37 PM
[Link]
Lezzyist Deactivated User
Make Porn Erotic Again 1736 Posts 9/19
Posted - May 21 2023 : 2:30AM
And the smarter women are asking for more frequent testing than every two weeks. And there are newer things to test for and more places on the body to be tested (anal swabs????) than were recommended in the past, so testing costs have escalated. Outside looking in, it seems like a total shitshow to work porn until you get a level of popularity.
^ That can be said about practically every "entertainment" business as they all share the same core issue: Way more people wanting to be successful in it than the industry can reasonably accommodate. Few winners, lots of losers, and plenty of opportunity for people to be taken advantage of. (And OnlyFans won't be any different either - the stories of failure will just be significantly less visible.)
"Hayley Vernon revealed last year she earned up to $1.3 million on OnlyFans and went on to win Best Newcomer Female Porn Star at the Adult Industry Choice Awards."
"Ryan [Gallagher said] he has been making "... between $1 and $50,000 month,""
Has anyone heard of a man making 50k a month on OF?
^ Those articles on unknown women saying they make tens of thousands a month on OF sound like they come straight out of the get rich quick scammers handbook.
Introducing Natasha Carter
Posted - May 2 2023 : 12:00AM