A friendly debate on what is amateur .

[sbm4latinaz]

First off this is not ment to start arguments , please keep emotions in check.

OK that being said , I've noticed that for the most part porn surfers and porn providers tend to have a different idea about what amateur is .
To many amateur means blurey scanned polaroids , I for one dont think quality defines whether a photo is amateur or not . The price of high end digital cameras has gone down dramatically in the last few years, hell camera phones today take better pic's than digital cams did 5 years ago , and digital cameras are still far ahead .
Infact not only have low end digital cams caught up with high end 35mm cams , but high end digital cams are almost up to the level of 64mm cams .
The reason I brought that point up is to point out that any joe sixpack can buy a 2 year old digital cam at the pawnshop and take pics at the level of a first semester photography student (because most digital cams ajust lighting and focus etc etc ) .
Where I stand on this issue is , its not the quality of the pic its the sets and the model itsself.
EXAMPLE:
1. if the background looks too perfect .
2. if the model looks too posed, made up, etc etc ...
3. lighting is too uniform.

THINGS I LOOK FOR:
1. Things that make the house look lived in , cig's in the ashtray , movie poster on the wall, beer bottle on the nightstand. etc etc....
2. a few imperfections here and there .
3. That feeling you get when buy a used car and find a photoalbum under the seat filled with naked 8x10 glossies of the previous owners alchohalic crazy ex from college.

To me even if the model is amateur , if the photographer is a pro , and the set looks like something out of playboy ,I will call it pro-am and keep going.
So I would like to hear the imput from you guys on what you think of when one says amateur .

[wicked1]

I guess for me you get the feeling you are looking at real people engaging in real sex and it does not look staged .

The body language reflects the fact they are truly having sex for pleasure not being told how to do it for the camera.

I think true Amateur is normally more spontaneous .

Wicked1

[Rocco]

I have about the same openion on defining what amateur is. Personally I prefer the "Pro-Am" content where a amateur model (not modeling educated) appears and the content beeing shot from a professional photograph. The reason why amateur models became so popular on the net? Think it's a bit voyeurism and also the fact that professional porno stars are mostly oversaturated. New faces keeps the dicks getting stiff again and again

[selena]

To me, that is always a confusing category. I use it as a last resort, because I'm never really clear on it.

I never know if it is supposed to be the quality of the photography, if the girl has a 'name' built up or not, or if it's posed or natural activity.

[Jim]

The term amateur has had me confused since 1996. And maybe DannyCox can enlighten all of us. Carol has been in the business since before me. She has sold countless memberships and movies. And yet, she is most definitely considered an amateur. But, would Danni from Danni's Harddrive be considered an amateur?

[Halfdeck]

For me, the girl isn't amateur if I've seen her somewhere else -- which means if a paysite shares content or even their models, I don't really consider it an amateur site.

I don't care about the setting, camera used or lighting, although they can enhance the amateur feel to the photographs. You can put Jenna Jameson in your backyard and shoot pictures of her with a polaroid camera but you'll still end up with porn star content.

[DannyCox]

Ah, the Amateur debate once again. This has been going on for over 10 years! Remember, this is just a term we coined on the 'net back in 1994!

My response is quite simplistic in nature. An "Amateur" is a Woman/Man/Couple who are not involved in any other aspect of adult, and don't use their websites to promote other said aspects. Therefore, a dancer, escort, porn star, etc, shouldn't be considered Amateur. The term really is geared toward the housewife/mother/girlfriend type of website. Most of the early Amateurs were also Swingers who used their sites to meet others (such as we did).

You really can't bring money into the debate, since everyone who does this, does it for money in some way. And just because one Amateur is much more successful than another, doesn't cause her to lose that status.

We started on the 'net when there were very few people on it, and you really couldn't make a cent. It was all for fun. We were using Mosaic as a browser, Pegasus for e-mail, and you still needed to install Winsock to get your 14.4K modem to dial up to your provider! Your only HTML program was Notepad! But, when the chance to make money came along, we jumped right in! The concept of the website stayed the same, we were just charging for it now.

We all have our own ideas as to what "Amateur" means in regards to a website, and this question will never be resolved. And I won't even get into "Corporate Amateur"!

[DannyCox]

BTW, way, way back, we came across a great little site called jamesandvictoria.com. I thought it was such a cool idea, a husband & wife Amateur site.

Hmmmmm, wonder whatever happened to them??

[Surfn]

I never really liked the term amateur because to me if you are making money you are NOT an amateur.

[DannyCox]

It all comes down to how it sells to the Surfers. Webmaster's opinions don't really count at all in any of this. So the debate truly is moot.

[sbm4latinaz]

Originally Posted by Surfn

I never really liked the term amateur because to me if you are making money you are NOT an amateur.

Yes I agree to a point, to me (no offence danny&carol)
your site has not been amateur in years.
What ever happened to free amateur sites ?
they are easier to create now than they were when they were more popular.
My last site was all free exept for the streaming vid (because it came from 2 sources) .
it had tons of pic's (50% I took myself) .
Hell people dont even post pic's in newsgroups anymore , they are nothing but spam wastelands now .

Now , dreamnet , southern charms , and webhoneys are pay sites but they still have an amateur feel .
but alot of what gets passed off as amateur is over produced, and photoshoped to death.

I have several pics from vanessa del rio's site she was a pornstar but her pics have the amateur feel (exept for the classic pics).

[Jeka]

To me amateur means real sex at real locations, no studios or casted models.
You go out and find a girl on the streets take her home and shoot the video or a couple that films their own sex.
It's very hard to make a professional amateur site because you won't find that many average girls on the street for a shooting.

[furrygirl]

"Amateur" is just another buzz word used to sell 80% of the porn online. It's about as ubiquitous as "horny" or "sluts".

[furrygirl]

Originally Posted by sbm4latinaz

Now , dreamnet , southern charms , and webhoneys are pay sites but they still have an amateur feel .

The reason I would never promote a Southern Charms site is, despite the painfully ugly template designs, the women providing the content only get 50% of the sales and don't own their content, and I prefer promoting people like me who run the show themselves. (When it comes to single-girl sites, anyway.) How is that any more "amateur" when a large company is selling content they bought from women, masquerading as personal DIY sites? The content may be low-brow, but I've never liked the dynamics of SC. Although, I have heard women like me who have their "real" site and then a little SC site, and say it brings in good amounts of cash for little effort and are happy with it. I just wouldn't want someone else owning my content and having control over a web site that's supposedly made by me and from my perspective.

On a side, speaking of painfully ugly designs, I'll never understand people who judge a web girl's worth based on how poorly-done her site is. There are the "militant amateur" folk who seem to think that any site that's well-done and have decent photography is just made by some "fake porn star bimbo" and not a "real person". Isn't the very essence of being a real person the ability to learn from mistakes and get better at the things we do? There must come a point for some people where they know how to take better photos and make more user-friendly sites, and they decide to purposefully keep it crappy to not lose their "amateur" appeal. Crazy.

[sbm4latinaz]

Originally Posted by furrygirl

The reason I would never promote a Southern Charms site is, despite the painfully ugly template designs, the women providing the content only get 50% of the sales and don't own their content, and I prefer promoting people like me who run the show themselves. (When it comes to single-girl sites, anyway.) How is that any more "amateur" when a large company is selling content they bought from women, masquerading as personal DIY sites? The content may be low-brow, but I've never liked the dynamics of SC. Although, I have heard women like me who have their "real" site and then a little SC site, and say it brings in good amounts of cash for little effort and are happy with it. I just wouldn't want someone else owning my content and having control over a web site that's supposedly made by me and from my perspective.

On a side, speaking of painfully ugly designs, I'll never understand people who judge a web girl's worth based on how poorly-done her site is. There are the "militant amateur" folk who seem to think that any site that's well-done and have decent photography is just made by some "fake porn star bimbo" and not a "real person". Isn't the very essence of being a real person the ability to learn from mistakes and get better at the things we do? There must come a point for some people where they know how to take better photos and make more user-friendly sites, and they decide to purposefully keep it crappy to not lose their "amateur" appeal. Crazy.

I dont think it's a matter of the site being crappy , I think its about the illusion of the girl being attainable.
as an amateur site becomes more and more proffesional in appearance it makes the girl appear to be less attainable > Like danny said in an earlier thread , many of the early amateur sites were started by swingers looking to show off or meet other swingers , THAT was the ultimat in attainability .
When what used to be a true amateur site in look and feel , with pics that looked like they were taking after a long night of drunk passion , only to slowely become a site were the AMATEUR frolics around in what looks like a palace or penthouse suite, you begin to loose what was once the image that "hey I could meet and bang this chick" .

[furrygirl]

Originally Posted by sbm4latinaz

I
When what used to be a true amateur site in look and feel , with pics that looked like they were taking after a long night of drunk passion , only to slowely become a site were the AMATEUR frolics around in what looks like a palace or penthouse suite, you begin to loose what was once the image that "hey I could meet and bang this chick" .

Don't take this as an insult, but it sounds like what you're looking for is "amateur porn" featuring poor people. You've repeatedly mentioned how you like beer bottles on tables, dead cigs in ashtrays, and "real" apartments as settings, but in actuality, that just sounds like a search for the cliche of a lower-class setting. I'm not a millionaire living in a penthouse suite, but I don't have trash lying around my house. Having a dirty apartment, to me, means nothing about content more than the fact that the people who live there are slobs, and I don't find junk and garbage in photos to be erotic, personally.

On a side, I do understand the desire for lower production values to entice surfers' fantasies that they "could" bang the featured babe. Not all of us who run our own sites are going for that, though, and I state several times on my site that I'm not available for sex and that I don't date people via my site. It's one of my most popular questions in chat and via email, and I'm always honest about my personal preferences. (Some folk, like Danny and Carol, regularly have call-outs on their site for regular joes to come have a gang bang, and that's great, as long as it's real and it makes everyone happy.) But, they have one of the very few sites run by "true swingers" who solicit participants from it and actually invite them over. For me, I like sex and I like being an exhibitionist, and I like being able to do those things from the safety of my home, in an environment I control. I think it's stupid to have a site set up to make it seem that the members could be invited over for a shag when the girl really doesn't want that, that's an element of dishonestly that I'm not cool with. I realize we sell fantasies, but it is entirely possible to make a living off selling porn that doesn't play on people' emotions or trick anyone into thinking they're getting more than content for their $18 a month, if indeed, they aren't.

[sbm4latinaz]

Originally Posted by furrygirl

Don't take this as an insult, but it sounds like what you're looking for is "amateur porn" featuring poor people. You've repeatedly mentioned how you like beer bottles on tables, dead cigs in ashtrays, and "real" apartments as settings, but in actuality, that just sounds like a search for the cliche of a lower-class setting.

Who said anything about lower class? I'm not talking about a "trashed out" apartment , I'm simply talking about a place that looks LIVED IN .
My house is clean most of the time , but after I have a few buddies over, yes there will be dead cigs in the ashtray , and empty pizza box on the coffe table , or a few beer bottles in view. since when is that lower class ? I just go for a look that says" hey this was not planned a week in advance".

I'm not a millionaire living in a penthouse suite, but I don't have trash lying around my house. Having a dirty apartment, to me, means nothing about content more than the fact that the people who live there are slobs, and I don't find junk and garbage in photos to be erotic, personally.

Its not the junk thats erotic in and of itself , It's the feel it creates , the spur of the moment, the memories of college etc etc ....
In fact , when I first started the site I put much though into it. I used to sell used cars at one point and what i learned was the secret to selling anything is to put the customer in a pleasant and FAMILIER place.
So when selling internet sex ,I thought what place should I put the customer? And it hit me .
18 - 24 , that is the age in which MOST guys got the most sex with the least effort . That point in which all you need is your own place and the pussy train is rolling in . when girls have no exspectations of you (even older women) , and through the look and feel of my photographs I try to capture that memory and feeling. There is no time after that where sex is THAT easy. Think of it as a the next step to "girls gone wild" , you know, after you bring them home .
And I also later I started with other themes , like the first "live in" girlfriend , you when your still in love fucking like bunnies,sitting around all day eating pizza naked, and not arguing about bill's and other BS.
That is a reason I seldom have males in my pics, because I like the series of pics to be like a slidshow of a day with your virtual girlfriend.

On a side, I do understand the desire for lower production values to entice surfers' fantasies that they "could" bang the featured babe. Not all of us who run our own sites are going for that, though, and I state several times on my site that I'm not available for sex and that I don't date people via my site.

It's not you pers'e that your fans or potential fans want to have sex with (though I'm sure some do) , its the idea , or the image you project . By projecting an image that I could bang a chic LIKE her. The site I had didnt promote meeting the models , but the image of the type of woman you COULD meet(with the exeption of the models that were local strippers) .

It's one of my most popular questions in chat and via email, and I'm always honest about my personal preferences. (Some folk, like Danny and Carol, regularly have call-outs on their site for regular joes to come have a gang bang, and that's great, as long as it's real and it makes everyone happy.) But, they have one of the very few sites run by "true swingers" who solicit participants from it and actually invite them over.

Yes I agree , in the past there were alot more but things change , and not always for the better.

For me, I like sex and I like being an exhibitionist, and I like being able to do those things from the safety of my home, in an environment I control. I think it's stupid to have a site set up to make it seem that the members could be invited over for a shag when the girl really doesn't want that, that's an element of dishonestly that I'm not cool with.

I agree , but like I said , its not about meeting your members , its about promoting an IMAGE of attainability , meaning this is the TYPE of woman I could hook up with.

I realize we sell fantasies, but it is entirely possible to make a living off selling porn that doesn't play on people' emotions or trick anyone into thinking they're getting more than content for their $18 a month, if indeed, they aren't.

I agree , there should be no tricking people .

[furrygirl]

Originally Posted by sbm4latinaz

Who said anything about lower class? I'm not talking about a "trashed out" apartment , I'm simply talking about a place that looks LIVED IN .
My house is clean most of the time , but after I have a few buddies over, yes there will be dead cigs in the ashtray , and empty pizza box on the coffe table , or a few beer bottles in view. since when is that lower class ? I just go for a look that says" hey this was not planned a week in advance".

I'm not saying everyone who doesn't live in an immaculately clean home is a welfare recipient, or that every low-income person is filthy. You've repeatedly used the image of having garbage lying around the scene as a good indication of the "real amateur" status of content, and as I said before, that just feels like you're looking for the *cliche* of lower-class surroundings. Call me a snob, but I suppose I do stereotype leaving garbage sitting around in one's home to be a "trashy" thing, pardon the pun.

Originally Posted by sbm4latinaz

Its not the junk thats erotic in and of itself , It's the feel it creates , the spur of the moment, the memories of college etc etc ....

Well, I think we're just arguing about taste at this point. It really sounds like since *you* personally feel sexually comfortable in messy "lived in" surroundings, you assume that's what everyone else likes the most.

I also love porn sites made by the people they feature, people you can interact with and get to know a a bit, but I still thinks it's gross to purposefully not clean up when shooting content. It doesn't feel "spontaneous" to me, it just feels lazy and gross.

For example, I shot a set a few weeks ago in a part of my hall where my cat box normally is. Would it have been sexier of me to leave the cat box there, kitty poops and all, in full view while I played with my pussy? No, because that's gross. A web girl friend and I have this one "amateur" photo we've repeatedly gotten a laugh from and been grossed out by because you can see the chick's filthy, dropping-laden bird cage in the frame and she bends over and spreads. I swear, I'm not alone in my interest in cleaning up my surroundings before taking pictures.

Originally Posted by sbm4latinaz

I agree , but like I said , its not about meeting your members , its about promoting an IMAGE of attainability , meaning this is the TYPE of woman I could hook up with.

Originally Posted by sbm4latinaz

I agree , there should be no tricking people .

I don't see a difference between "promoting the image" that a model is available for banging and "tricking" the viewer into thinking she's available for banging.

I would like to think I run a reasonably successful "amateur" site, and I work to NOT make people think they have a chance with me. I really don't think you need to use any element of tricky or deceit or "image projection" to run a good single girl site.

[Amy Lockheart]

This is a very fascinating discussion. I've been struggling over this very question for a while. I just finished my site design, and I'm afraid it might look too flashy to be an amateur site, run and built by me. I want to communicate that I'm approachable and "attainable" as was mentioned earlier in this post. Anyone care to give me an opinion on this? My URL is:
http://www.amylockheart.com

Furrygirl... I hear your argument completely about the "militant amateur" folk. I think it's gonna be really tough to be polished enough to compete in a very glossy industry, but 'down-home' enough to appeal to guys who thrive on getting to know the girl on the other side.

[Surfn]

Originally Posted by Amy Lockheart

This is a very fascinating discussion. I've been struggling over this very question for a while. I just finished my site design, and I'm afraid it might look too flashy to be an amateur site, run and built by me. I want to communicate that I'm approachable and "attainable" as was mentioned earlier in this post. Anyone care to give me an opinion on this? My URL is:
http://www.amylockheart.com

It has an amateur feel to me, the vid loads fine on the tour which is a plus. It looks to me like you have a winner on your hands. Good luck

[Halfdeck]

Originally Posted by Amy Lockheart

I just finished my site design, and I'm afraid it might look too flashy to be an amateur site, run and built by me. I want to communicate that I'm approachable and "attainable" as was mentioned earlier in this post. Anyone care to give me an opinion on this? My URL is:
http://www.amylockheart.com

Nice looking site The title graphix gives it a glam twist but the site looks like an authentic "amateur" solo site. The cap you wear on one of the tour pages is a nice touch.

I know I'm going off topic, but just a quick couple minor things I noticed is you have the bottom thumbs and side area with live cam schedules that repeat on every tour page which may train visitors to ignore parts of your page that repeat. Also, I like the video in the tour, although it would be also cool to have a short sample video of you looking into the camera talking directly to the visitors. Finally, I'm not sure if the phrase "Fan Club" fits with the "attainable" fantasy you're going for.

[Trixie]

It seems like this issue really only effects people who run sites with bought content, and have no hope in hell of seeming "real" to surfers.

Those of us who actually produce our own homemade self-shot content and interact with our members don't need to worry about not seeming "amateur" or "attainable" enough because our members actually get to talk with us, see us on cam, and can tell we're real people at home, not in a studio. We don't need to litter our photos with piles of dirty laundry, moldy dishes, and/or the dregs of our latest white trash party remnants to seem "real" to our members.

Do I really need to look like I'm cooking meth on the side to convince people I'm real? I don't think so.

[sbm4latinaz]

Originally Posted by Trixie

It seems like this issue really only effects people who run sites with bought content, and have no hope in hell of seeming "real" to surfers.

Those of us who actually produce our own homemade self-shot content and interact with our members don't need to worry about not seeming "amateur" or "attainable" enough because our members actually get to talk with us, see us on cam, and can tell we're real people at home, not in a studio. We don't need to litter our photos with piles of dirty laundry, moldy dishes, and/or the dregs of our latest white trash party remnants to seem "real" to our members.

Do I really need to look like I'm cooking meth on the side to convince people I'm real? I don't think so.

I will agree with you to a point, yes if you interact with your members it does remove some doubt , unfortunatly many web mistresses can be bothered to answer their e-mail , and not all webgirls have streaming vid .
But that being said I apload you, if you are one of the few that actually listen to your members.

[sbm4latinaz]

Originally Posted by Amy Lockheart

This is a very fascinating discussion. I've been struggling over this very question for a while. I just finished my site design, and I'm afraid it might look too flashy to be an amateur site, run and built by me. I want to communicate that I'm approachable and "attainable" as was mentioned earlier in this post. Anyone care to give me an opinion on this? My URL is:
http://www.amylockheart.com

Furrygirl... I hear your argument completely about the "militant amateur" folk. I think it's gonna be really tough to be polished enough to compete in a very glossy industry, but 'down-home' enough to appeal to guys who thrive on getting to know the girl on the other side.

Well I viewed your site and tested it on 3 computers and it loaded in a reasonable amount of time (thats good)
I took your tour and must say I only saw 3 pics that looked amateur (one of the pics on the bottom row).
your free pics section was very small (I would suggest 3 - 4 free galleries regulerly updated).
But all in all the look and feel of your site is pleaseing.
A good thing you have going for you is the fact that your site loads fast , too many girls get a website and go flash crazy which slows down their site, many surfers will give up and move on before the page loads.
I wish you good luck .

[Tommy]

(another one of my thousand ideas for selling porn)

ya know what I wanna try sometime
is take one of these single amateur girl sites

and get them to take a bunch of pics in a tommys tshirt
then put them in the tour and put the tour on my domain

and see how that sells