Reviewers Recommend
Naughty Office 102Naughty Office 102 - review by Captain Jack
Starring: Reagan Foxx, Jewelz Blu, April Olsen, Kay Lovely, Charli Phoenix. Read review
All Forums > The Porn Pool > The Porn Pool Forum Page 202 > Women Photograhers
AuthorPost
PIVlover
Member

202 Posts
3/15
Posted - Jun 9 2015 : 3:49PM
I think women photographers are horrible at couples porn. They seem to hate penetration shots, they always do a lousy job with focus and angle. And I think they are ruining porn.
Mister Fahrenheit All-Star Supporter
All-Star Member

Meh
4655 Posts
10/13
Posted - Jun 9 2015 : 4:15PM
Gore Gore Girl All-Star Supporter
Doctor of the Erotic Arts

7238 Posts
1/09
Posted - Jun 9 2015 : 5:18PM
Pffft. Sure, women photographers are "ruining porn." As noted above, one of the shining lights in porn for some time now has been Mason/Sam No. You do, however, specify "couples porn" - perhaps Mason is not what you mean? (even though presumably couples watch her stuff). I am interested to know what "couples porn" you refer to (within etiquette guidelines of course).
Mister Fahrenheit All-Star Supporter
All-Star Member

Meh
4655 Posts
10/13
Posted - Jun 9 2015 : 5:38PM
charn
fubar

2880 Posts
12/09
Posted - Jun 9 2015 : 9:17PM
Whiny bitches are ruining the internet.
 
StarGrek
Deactivated User

Under the moonlight.
1763 Posts
10/11
Posted - Jun 10 2015 : 8:51AM
With all due respect PIV I will have to disagree.
Mason is one of the best directors right now in the industry and her photographic skills are undisputed. She can find a perfect frame out of a keyhole and she is much more competent than many of her male colleagues. She can shoot easily both close up and wider shots.
Princess Donna despite her "eccentric" directional tastes, has a very good sense of photography especially in penetration shots.
Suze Randall was a famous female adult photographer who was exceptionally good also.
There are many others skillful directors in many erotic sites.
I would like though to know PIV why you say that.. What is your example?
PIVlover
Member

202 Posts
3/15
Posted - Jun 10 2015 : 3:47PM
For every woman you point to that does a "good" job, I can point to many who don't. I love Kelly Madison for example, and I would love to pay for more of her and Ryan's films. But she does such a horrendous job with the camera, I want to throw away her films. It's all face, all the time. You can go through 99% percent of the films without ever seeing a good penetration shot. And then she doesn't hold most of them, it's right back to the face. It's supposed to be pornography! Not face porn. When I say couple I mean boy/girl fucking. I know when the porn companies say "couples" they can mean porn for couples. That's such bullshit. But when porn companies say "straight guy" they really mean gay guy, so who knows what couple means. They call it Gonzo, too. Or hardcore, or fucking or whatever. I'm a member of two sites right now that use women photographers. Just horrible. It's a waste of money.
PIVlover
Member

202 Posts
3/15
Posted - Jun 10 2015 : 4:09PM
With all due respect, Mister Fahrenheit, that's pretty much what I'm talking about when I say bad. The frame is not filled with flesh. It's too far away. It's more about face.
Aya
Senior Member

All The Cool Girls Are Lesbians
7439 Posts
6/14
Posted - Jun 10 2015 : 5:58PM
The small number of women photographers in porn are ruining porn? Are you serious? How about the tons of horrible male photographers working currently in porn, are they ruining it too, or is that not possible because they are men, even though they outnumber the women drastically?
Jackie Treehorn
Member

It'll knock both your eyes out!
311 Posts
3/04
Posted - Jun 10 2015 : 6:03PM
I think the OP is one of those people who feels if something doesn't fit their very specific niche tastes, then it must be objectively bad. The notion that woman photographers are ruining porn is breathtakingly ridiculous.
StarGrek
Deactivated User

Under the moonlight.
1763 Posts
10/11
Posted - Jun 11 2015 : 8:40AM
Well PIV I have to admit that you have a point on what you are saying, but at the same time I do not think is fair to generalize the issue in the gender of the photographer.
Porn Photography is a very serious matter. For me is the most important skill of a hardcore director. It is the element that actually defines if someone has a talent or future in the industry. And when we say hardcore we mean a scene where we can easily distinguish that the certain performers are having sex and not pretending, like in mainstream movies.
Personally, I am in favor of the perfect balance between the proper exposure of the bodily assets of the performers, the visual confirmation of the committed sexual act, the proper capture of the choreography (the visual harmony and beauty which comes from the body placement and the motion of the sexual activities) and finally the radiated eroticism which is expressed in certain sensual practices and gestures. If a photographer could fit all these in one frame it would be ideal, otherwise it is essential to keep the analogies in the proper levels in order not to spoil the recipe.
It would be a terrible pornographic crime, for example, not to find the proper angle in order to expose the female performers natural gems, which ever she has (Ass, Tits, pussy, legs, face...). But the scene will lose its pornographic value if you don't provide clear visual clues that the girl participates in a porn movie. (She is getting her holes violated). On the other hand, too much close up shots it would make the scene boring and monotonous and sometimes even dangerous (trust me i know what I am saying). By showing beautiful positions and body complexes you make your scene visually attractive, but if you don't show any hardcore element at the same time, you risk to make the scene too lame or too artistic. If you don't show any erotic happening at all, you might create cold, dry and distant atmosphere, if you stay too much on them you might lose totally hardcore fan's support. So in order to satisfy all tastes, besides your talent, you have to be clever, creative and work a lot on your techniques.
Now the truth is that most women see porn in different perspective than men, but that doesn't mean that is bad. Personally I love women directors because they might potentially give that distinctive realistic or erotic touch which make a scene more interesting. Mason, Belladonna, Dana Vespoli, Tanya Hyde, Suze Randall, Ovidie are some of the female directors I admire. Being honest PIV, I am not very familiar with Kelly Madison's work so I don't have opinion but from what I see she does have awesome rack!
Meanwhile... Explore Sexuality!
PIVlover
Member

202 Posts
3/15
Posted - Jun 11 2015 : 9:39AM
I started watching 8mm loops back Ron Jeremy got his start. Probably before anyone here was born. Back then, we didn't have hundreds of genres. Trying to please every taste is fine. But for shit sake, why is it so damn hard to find films where penetration is the star. That used to be the norm. And if you like anal, wow, penetration and close-up through most of the movie. Even DPs for example. They used to do them the correct way which is up-and-over. Not from the side. And don't get me started on what a bad job they do filming doggie. Missionary should not be that difficult. But for some reason, the guy is always leaning over and blocking the shot. It's always reverse cowgirl. All I want is for these companies to step up their games and stop being so damn unskilled. I want to pay them money, but not if it's for nothing but face!
P.S. I bet I've spent enough on porn to buy a house!



Jump To: