Very informative reply, thank you. I was told that there may be some
photo's of interest on newsgroups and was referred to this one. First
time at this sort of site, but an education to say the least. Thank
you for the background and history lesson.........
On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 08:32:42 +1300, Vladimir <Vladimir@RedSquare.ru>
wrote:
>In article <guglk594ll0dgv0b80sdebg14q2j15o9ia@4ax.com>, FilterBoss
><FilterBoss@GalleryBook.com> wrote:
>
>> if the young people in the posts were to have some professional
>> mentoring. It would also be of benifit if they had a REAL professional
>> photographer to shoot their sets. These ammature shutter punks
>> wouldn't know how to deliver a decent set if their lives depended on
>> it.
>
>Agreed 100%. But here's the problem: Presenting a girl on the web in a
>photo-series is done for money. That more or less demands a credit card
>processor. And no card processor is willing these days to offer
>facilities to an up-front operation. A low-life moron can twist and
>weasel his way into a facility but it will last only until he is found
>out.
>
>A talented, pro photographer, on the other hand, has too many scruples
>to lie, cheat and run a risk arranging a payment gateway or, worse, he
>doesn't know where to go to find the slimy ones who will take him on
>until the shit hits the fan.
>
>Photo shoots that do not attract the wrath of the card companies will
>not make much money. So, at the end of the day, the photos and
>webmasters must look to dangerous or at least risky sets of photos.
>
>The exception to this is Sandra Orlow. To my tastes, her photographer
>has been and still is a talentless moron and she as a model has been
>over the hill for many years. Yet, somehow, her material is still
>popular yet was and remains mostly legal. I don't even think she is
>pretty so how come such wide appeal? Beats me.
>
>I used to have a web site and I regard myself as a good photog. I chose
>to present only material that was legal back in those days and I made
>not enough money to cover expenses. And, worse, these days, that
>material might no longer be legal! Certainly its bold enough to attract
>the wrong sort of attention today.
>
>And, on the second part of your post, I was constantly puzzled where
>those LS/BDC teams could find such lovely settings. I know they made
>their own clothes and painted their own backdrops (a real talent at
>work there, in my opinion) but where did they find beautiful homes with
>expensive furniture and so on? A big, professional operation can
>justify staff to find locations and make clothes but those days are
>gone. Today's amateurs are forced to ask their girls to pose in
>toilets, stairwells, in front of boring backdrops and other shitty
>places. It's appalling and must be terrible for the models but that is
>life today. Only the scumbags, morons and no-talents survive. Viewers
>lament, talented photogs have no forum and pretty girls who might want
>to get serious about modelling as a career, have very few choices.
>
>Take it up with the card companies! Or...tell me, who would be willing
>to pick up a shareholding in a new company seeking to set up a card
>processor with the proper facilities and attitude. It would work but
>would need much seed capital and no one in here is willing to expose
|
|