Spot on except it went on till the 2005 and needed a little editing. :winkwink:

I only got really going in 1988, before then I was only part time.

The competition to sell sets was high because the returns were high. Editors knew that if they paid shit money they would get shit sets, have a shit product and customers would turn away.

Sponsors thought if they pay a shit price, the customers who turned away would be replaced by new ones. Didn't work for very long did it?

I don't blame people like Bradly, JustDave, Jim Gunn, etc. They are forced to work for sponsors who under value the worth of content.

I was lucky, got in before the Internet, honed the little skills I have and came to a place where great new girls popped up every week. Otherwise I suppose I would be in the same boat as they are.

I was about to go to bed.

Can't now. I'm scared this pic will give me nightmares. :1orglaugh

key phrase from your reply: 'I shot...' mags are dead Charley, buy a fucking vowel for G_D's sake. you have no idea how much I make. you don't seem to understand how the 'custom' content business works, or the pay structure. and to tell you the truth about it... I'm defiantly the most serious guy you ever had the occasion to correspond with. :2 cents:

BTW you're "I swam the Pacific Ocean in an Iron Suit and walked both ways uphill to school 60 miles in the fucking snow is a bit tried and hardly relevant. :2 cents:

i am not sure what you are trying to say here, but that woman is ugly, the angle sucks and the light too :2 cents:

Your sentence above "got in before the Internet, honed the little skills I have and came to a place where great new girls popped up every week" could have just as easily come from my keyboard Paul. I don't feel that the lucky part applies however. I put in my time, formed a lot of great relationships and worked hard at improving a lot of different skills as well. I'm not forced to do anything, of course, and the difference is I am still in the game in a big way. One might even say that I'm in the same place you were twenty years ago but using my own style and today's modern technology to shoot porn that sells, make money and build up my own content library for my own eventual retirement. Not anytime soon though. :-)

you're not a photographer :2 cents:

I am heading to Czech to shoot with you!

Yes "I Shot". During 2005 "I shot".

When most of you guys were scrambling for work from anyone who would pay a few bucks I was able to sit back and watch you while taking money from my work for the last 15 years. And shoot a bit for mags. Yes magazines are definitely going down, not dead yet and still a few buy. At far more than you'll ever get for Internet content.

AND they buy non exclusive. Which means we can still take money.

Here

http://www.paulmarkham.com/all-adult-content.php

http://www.bargainbasementcontent.com/content.php

http://www.paulmarkhamteens.com/tour/

http://astral-blue.com/tour/

And even a little bit here.

http://www.5dollarsporn.com/ but not much because we don't do anything about it.

Even C4S brings in a few bucks.

As for the idea I don't know how the custom content game works. I know exactly how it works. You work for a day, for a lot less than magazines pay and at the end of the day you own nothing or if you're able to squeeze in a set you get something for free off the sponsors bucks. Overall Sponsors pay poorly. ATK wanted shooters to do 10 sets or 5 sets and videos for $1500. Not just me but loads of shooters, both here in Europe and in the US. Do you remember the scandal when they weren't paying the shooters, not one but a lot. They then agreed to pay them in installments. AFTER IT WAS BROUGHT TO THE BOARDS FOR EXPOSURE. Great company to have in your sig, where's your site?

If you are as good as you think you would be working for magazines. Here's a link to what's left. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ic _magazines

You see how clueless you are about the business. You can shoot one set and sell the same set to country after country. If the set fits the magazines style. You really need to do some research before you post.

The level of what a magazine demands is far higher than what the Internet does. Even Dean has said that the main thing today is getting all shot within the budget.

There are still a few good girls left, but most are shot over and over again. The exposure they got on the Internet has scared most away. It seems every week I get a couple of emails from girls complaining of sites or affiliates using their real names.

The good days here are over for new great girls.

I was lucky to meet Eva, lucky she fell in love with me and lucky she was such a hard worker who made our success here possible. From then on it was my limited skills and our hard work that brought success.

that is why we only film exclusive girls.

Charley.... try and get the fuck over yourself will ya?

Is that your best response.

One of the problems of this part of the porn industry is clowns who are completely clueless about what is happening in it and not even able to think through what they post.

The fact that very few if any of the old time shooters have been employed by Site Owners leads to the conclusion that the money on offer wasn't good enough. Even Eva who I and aren't great shooters found that working freelance paid far more than selling our wares outright to people who paid $100s on sets we earned $1,000 on.

We found that selling content on the stores returned more money than selling out right to Site Owners. Work out what selling a set at $35 x10 and a video + set at $60 x 10 makes. Remember when everyone said non exclusive is saturated? That's the game for content producers. To sell 1 scene over and over again.

Anyone with a grain of sense would see we shot 2,000+ sets, 600+ videos in the last 10 years and not shooting 4-5 a day. We shot 2 a day. Plus we had a 3,500 studio. That takes money to fund. Money that comes from sales. Not at $500 for an exclusive solo girl scene.

But BM Bradly, who now has his link to a customer and not his site, knows better. Does he even have a site these days?

Am I alone in going down the non exclusive route and making money?

Only a fool would think that. There are maybe as many as 100 stills shooters, world wide who went the same route. From Suze Randall across to the likes of me. Yes there was that many of us earning our full time living shooting for mags. BM, I'm just 1 of 100 who found a better route than working for someone else for a day. And selling your work outright, whether your self employed or freelance, means you work for someone else if you're a shooter.

Maybe if you had my success you would be full of yourself as well. Or an arrogant bastard like me. :1orglaugh

And it's CHARLY, Not Charley. The spelling was wrong because a French Director got it wrong on the box cover.

The previous picture of her, was horrible. She isnt gods gift to men, yes, Im not an idiot. But SGS did use the most awful photo of her. Its was kind of unfair to the model. My shot at least shows nice tits, her legs are ok without wrinkles & tummy rolls. I was just stating the obvious. Get a great model with a crap tog, and you still have a shit model. Get an average model & put her with the best, & they can make the model look fantastic.

Everyone on vogue has been touched up by photoshop... lets get rid of those old hagger lines etc

Charley, I know you've been having a hard time with health issues, the wifes accident and biz issues... I wish you and your family nothing but the best, but seriously why don't you stop making a fool out of yourself here at GFY? are you going to end your days like the midget from Fantasy Island, getting drunk, yelling 'fuck you I was a great mag shooter' at GFY on the monitor screen till you drop dead?

there's nothing 'the best I can do' I don't give a fuck about shooting for magazines and never have. and I don't give a fuck about the biz model of licensed content. and actually don't even give a fuck about shooting content other than doing a great job for my clients and paying the bills. don't even really give a fuck about about having a website, but if I ever do, I'll have one and it won't be what you expect.

I came into Internet Content Production after being disabled in 1999 from my TV/Film career and losing EVERYTHING with a daughter in grade school to support... you understand supporting your family don't you? or is that something else I don't get that makes me a fucking clown?

in 2000 I was retrained in computer science HOWEVER I had another disability hit while in school and could not work in the field. with a kid in school and no fucking money and not being a photogrpher I emailed every porn site I could find and asked what they paid for pictures... ATK answered my email in 2000 and put me to work. the first month I made $600, that year I earned over 230K. not bad for a guy that doesn't fucking get it and wasn't a photographer.....

now about you: I see all the webmasters calling you a dumb ass for your 'webmaster posting' and I don't have an opinion because I am not a webmaster... HOWFUCKINGEVER I am a content producer here in porn valley and I can honestly tell you... you have no real idea what the fuck is going on and the way it works out here, at least not more that say the mainstream media does as at anyrate... and I fucking called you on that.

I'm not sure why you think being a mag shooter in the 90's makes you an authority on web mastering and web content production but it doesn't. and hopefully you did make serious $$$ when you had work and hopefully you invested and saved because I'll guarantee you're not making the same income now and you still have the family to support.

so look I'm just here to fuck around and post nasty pictures and read funny shit. what are you here for? to remind us all of how fucking wonderful you used to be? you need to sit down and figure it out because you surley are making a fool out of yourself. :2 cents:

No offense to Paul.
:2 cents:

hey shit happens :thumbsup look, I have serious issues.... my coffee grinder is fucked up...

I have nothing against you or Paul. I just enjoy a good zinger. :winkwink:

I like her.. :winkwink: Good amateur photo.. and she has got a hairy snatch too, yummy.. :winkwink:

yes I would like to see charley move forward etc...

100 broke content producer :glugglug

any drama in here? i skipped pages 1 and 2 ?

He didn't read my post. Or made the wrong assumption. So let me state what I was trying to say.

I'm reminding content producers of how fucking wonderful IT used to be for shooters.

I don't blame shooters for the lousy prices they have to work for. I blame sponsors for it and their attitude that they can fill sites with low quality content and so long as they throw enough traffic at it, someone will sign up. That attitude was obvious from the very beginning.

In 2000 I met, at a show, 2 of the biggest people around at the time. One offered Eva and I a full time job and the other offered to buy all our production. The wages/prices they offered were a joke. They were clearly shocked when told what a solo girl set was worth to a magazine shooter. Those prices carried on until 2005, then mags started to suffer and a few closed, a few cut back on budgets and some employed in house shooters. Even today some magazines shooters are still able to sell to magazines. Yes the magazines listed are still buying.

So why don't some of the Internet shooters, especially those in the CA or NY go and see some editors with some sets? Either not good enough shooters or not good enough businessmen.

The excuse of "I can't be bothered" is a cover up and only the foolish believe that. There's still a small market left and it still pays money. Even if it's only $500 a set, the possibility of selling it twice makes that $1,000. The last set we sold to Barely Legal made $2400 non exclusive. We gave up because of the accident, my illness, that we had enough to retire on and not business problems. The business is still going well considering neither of us have shot for 2.5 years. No custom shooter will have that pillow to rest on.

SPONSORS ARE TO BLAME FOR THE PRICES PAID. Shooters today who can't sit back and retire or take their skills into a far better field of shooting are stuck with working for the prices offered.

If you're not reliant on sucking up to people on GFY, you can even sit back and make a fool of yourself. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

**************

I do have a clue how it works in the Valley. You find a girl, you shoot her, you sell the work. Exactly the same as it works everywhere for shooters. If you rely on agents to find girls you're far down the pecking order unless you pay top $$$. And that's not good for shooters. If you advertise you get to see a lot of frogs before you find a princesses. If you rely on other girls to find girls, you get any girl they met on a shoot and a couple of friends. If you walk up to girls in a mall or street, you risk getting slung out or punched on the nose by an irate BF. No method comes without it's good points and bad points.

And to shoot in the Valley, you should have a permit. Maybe someone will tell me if I missed anything.

You still don't get it.

I don't have to move forward. I'm 60 and no need to work anymore.

Like most webmasters looking back at 2005 I can do the same. 2005 was a good year for us as well. :thumbsup

Yep. Why should I move on? :1orglaugh

nah ..you usually have very good points :thumbsup
im just being the typical lazy american who would rather look at the picutres than actually read the book:1orglaugh

So here's something for you. Can you spot me?

http://myhome.iolfree.ie/~lightbulb/Images/Brain3.gif

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

I think that all porn photography is pretty poor and always was...

The photos for mags although having a minimum technical standards the photography was routine, done to a formula, and pretty boring...same photos different girl....repeat....

The internet and digital cameras has led to fall in standards...but most of all the lack of ambition of photographers and webdesigners, also the piss poor attitude of review sites that live in a porn world where they have never seen a mainstrean photograph or movie.
The fact that a major photo site earns a shit load of cash - the photography is ok but just ok. Quantity over originaliy or creativity. and yet gets top marks from review sites....

If porn now exists in a legal state in many countries and in cyberspace why is it not evolving in to a high quality, customer friendly and artistic venture ?

Its roots of criminals filming prostitutes is long gone, is it not time porn grew up and entered mainstream culture ?

Very few of us porn shooters are good photographers. It's not the required skill. We're pornographers not photographers.

Some like Suze, Joanie Alumn, Jack Harrison, Steve Hicks, Hank London, etc. Could turn their hand to being creative sometimes. But the wankability often suffered and men buy porn to wank over.

The governing factor is it has to sell to the end user. He wants to jerk off to it not sit back and admire the photography.

The difference the porn Internet made was Site Owners ability to know the difference between porn and naked people, budgets and their acceptance level.

I posted a thread a long time ago about the failing of Site Owners to buy or create good content. I never made that kind of post during my time shooting. Why is obvious, the last thing I wanted were Site Owners realising they could make their content free by selling it outside the Internet.

If some of ATK's content had been good enough to sell to magazines they could of swamped the magazine market and made it very hard for those in that field. Especially us who they would of directed competed with.

Think about it, for their $1500 to $2,000 a day shoot they could of sold 1 set that paid for the entire days work. It would of been tough for them to sell 365 sets every year, but we managed to sell over 200 every year.

The harsh truth isn't that they couldn't be bothered. Because I know the truth. They did try to sell to magazines. And got turned down.

Does it apply to DVD sales? Well try and name a few Internet sites who sell or market INTO the DVD market.

So the product webmasters were trying their hardest to sell wasn't acceptable in a better paying market. Imagine what that did to customer loyalty.

You asked a very good question, to which there is only one answer.

"If porn now exists in a legal state in many countries and in cyberspace why is it not evolving in to a high quality, customer friendly and artistic venture ?"

Michelangelo couldn't paint the Sistine Chapel on a house painters budget.

Internet sites pay poorly for content, so webmasters get poor content to sell. 10 years ago the myth was the surfer wanted more and more amateur content, the more amateur the better. As companies started to get more money and shooter got more skill. It all changed, Then Twistys, Only Tease, etc. Were producing what the surfers wanted. I don't suppose it had anything to do with the ability to pay or create better content. :upsidedow

you know what i dont understand, paul? while you acknowledge the obvious (see above) you ask me about f-stop on a blurry pic from an exGF set. think about it... :winkwink:

Some like Suze, Joanie Alumn, Jack Harrison, Steve Hicks, Hank London, etc. Could turn their hand to being creative sometimes. But the wankability often suffered and men buy porn to wank over.


******* these shooters are struggling right now

The difference the porn Internet made was Site Owners ability to know the difference between porn and naked people, budgets and their acceptance level.

********** I read lots and lots of member email and see the set and model rating from a a wide range of models and photography... I think you don't really see what's going on. and I've pretty much pointed this out several times.


If some of ATK's content had been good enough to sell to magazines they could of swamped the magazine market and made it very hard for those in that field. Especially us who they would of directed competed with.

Think about it, for their $1500 to $2,000 a day shoot they could of sold 1 set that paid for the entire days work. It would of been tough for them to sell 365 sets every year, but we managed to sell over 200 every year.

The harsh truth isn't that they couldn't be bothered. Because I know the truth. They did try to sell to magazines. And got turned down.

********** as usual completely wrong again... think about it Charley... you're sitting 7 thousand miles away in a different country telling me what I'm doing on a daily basis.... are you posting drunk? the fact is shooting for atk on a work for hire agreement as an independent contractor doesn't allow the sale of the content to anyone else... several have tried that and been dropped, just as the photographers that do not meet the member needs have been dropped...



Does it apply to DVD sales? Well try and name a few Internet sites who sell or market INTO the DVD market.

*** atk videos are moving 5000 plus units on titles. so there I've named one.

*** http://business.avn.com/charts/Top-5...ateur-Rentals/


Internet sites pay poorly for content, so webmasters get poor content to sell. 10 years ago the myth was the surfer wanted more and more amateur content, the more amateur the better. As companies started to get more money and shooter got more skill. It all changed, Then Twistys, Only Tease, etc. Were producing what the surfers wanted. I don't suppose it had anything to do with the ability to pay or create better content.

********** you are confusing a market segmet with the market Charley. isn't only tease out of business? I'm done interacting with you... good luck and best wishes to you and your family

Joanie's retired, Jack, to my knowledge, is working for Private (ATK couldn't afford him) Suze and Steve have probably like me made enough to retire on.

And from there your post went down and down and made less sense.

I am surprised and pleased about the number of sites I see selling DVD. About time they moved across. All free money for them, after the boxes and duping is paid for. 5,000 has to bring in $10,000. :thumbsup

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Funny thread.... funny because the OP is talking about people like Paul.

Straight up, if you can't make it shooting content today - it's because you're stuck on a 30 year old business model - and bitching about it wont change shit.

Several programs running around where the owner shoots the porn, is in the porn, produces it in house etc... and overall they're pulling down millions a year. If you're still a content producer and not making millions - you're doing it wrong.