misangrenegra2 wrote:I vote NO because this could be the beginning to start demanding versions of each fetish and i think we know what could happens. Now you discuss about make No pussy versions and NHB versions but i read sometimes the same thing for prolapse and other fetishes.
....The eternal war between NHB and 0% pussy fans is just the fact to impose their own tastes to the others thinking that they have right. I can tell you that exist this kind of "battles" in other porn fetishes ...
misangrenegra2 wrote:Your post say that they can shoot additional content if the scene is 0% pussy or NBH and adding the work edition.. This could be a new increment of the prices?
hjohjole wrote:I see what you are saying. But the difference is that DP/NHB and 0% pussy are very popular fetishes here on LP. Pretty much every scene made falls in to one of the two categories. If you read the title of the scenes you can see it is always announced there as a selling point. So if you are a regular customer on LP chances are that you are in to one or the other or both.
If you don't want to see prolapse then you don't have to because it is very uncommon.
If you are thinking about those people that are constantly arguing about weather the shoes should stay on or off, well that is just not important to very many people. You will never see a producer put a "shoes on" or "no shoes" in the title of their scene because that is something that just does not affect the sales.
magizi87 wrote:I don't know the numbers but, judging by the performance in sales
of the dry version of pee scenes, I would argue, that it doesn't seem
to be justified to pay an editor, to make that different cut for such movies.
magizi87 wrote:It also seems unreasonable to ask the female actress to be fucked enough for
basically two movies, ever single time.
And for the men, it would make the scenes more of a chore
and impact their performance for future movies as fatigue accumulates, even more so.
magizi87 wrote:And I argued in the past that scenes are not quite as fun as they used to be,
this sounds like it would make them even worse and this is the kind of idea that
follows more into the assembly line issue, we often complain about.
hjohjole wrote:A studio like Gonzo that tends to focus on DP could film some extra positions of regular anal and/or DAP. And then in the alternative version edit that footage in replacing the DP.
A studio like Giorgio Grandi that tends to focus on 0% pussy and DAP could film some extra position's of DP. And then maybe replace some of the DAP footage. Or just add it in, making the DP version slightly longer.
davebowman wrote:I really don't see it being a practical option, given the work involved. Now, if it's a wet scene as well, then you'd need at least 4 different cuts of the same scene: dry DP, Dy 0% pussy, Wet DP, Wet 0% pussy.
Nomad05 wrote:Another thing that might work is just putting options for editing down videos from the site itself. Let people set chapters/sections they wanna skip and make playlists. I don't mind skipping though some puss scenes I don't wanna see and doing the legwork of putting those chapters in. More useful to me than the gif editor.
Nomad05 wrote:Another thing that might work is just putting options for editing down videos from the site itself. Let people set chapters/sections they wanna skip.
davebowman wrote:I really don't see it being a practical option, given the work involved. Now, if it's a wet scene as well, then you'd need at least 4 different cuts of the same scene: dry DP, Dy 0% pussy, Wet DP, Wet 0% pussy.
And if you do it for that fetish, why stop there?
Another huge battle is between people like myself who want heels on all the time, and foot fetishists who want to see bare feet all the time. Do we also get two extra versions with all the shots of bare feet or heels edited out? For me personally, it might be appreciated in some areas (eg: I'd probably buy a barefoot-free version of the new Pineapple Test Kitchen scenes), but I just can't see it practical for this many different edits to be produced.
James567 wrote:I only buy 100% anal and no pussy scenes. Because I want more scenes like that to be produced .
hjohjole wrote:...How about if the studios instead provided 2 versions (whenever possible) one with DP/pussy fucking and one without.
A studio like Gonzo that tends to focus on DP could film some extra positions of regular anal and/or DAP. And then in the alternative version edit that footage in replacing the DP.
A studio like Giorgio Grandi that tends to focus on 0% pussy and DAP could film some extra position's of DP. And then maybe replace some of the DAP footage. Or just add it in, making the DP version slightly longer.
This would no doubt mean more work for the producers. But the potential upside would be more sales and more satisfied customers.
So what do you all think?
101mike101 wrote:Editing is a kind of deception. Because it shows you something that's not true by hiding and cutting out something that has happened. (...) when you have two versions, then this editing isn't hidden anymore. Which destroys the viewer's fantasy.
dap-addict wrote:101mike101 wrote:Editing is a kind of deception. Because it shows you something that's not true by hiding and cutting out something that has happened. (...) when you have two versions, then this editing isn't hidden anymore. Which destroys the viewer's fantasy.
The more I give it a thinking, the more I agree.
What I want basically is more 0% pussy and not more DPs cut out to make it look 0% pussy.
This said we also have to be aware that even in originally 0% pussy shot scenes BTS there maybe pussy only warm-up preparations we never see in the actual video. Thus ever so often it is a fantasy we buy anyway.
misangrenegra2 wrote:I'm still not understanding why make every scene for every fetish.
Already we have the option to choice different studios that shooting scenes with every fetish mentioned here.
I keep thinking is unnecessary and less if the purpose is show what sells better.
SimplyStunning wrote:Interesting so you really don't understand what the OP clearly describes![]()
Here is another attempt of explaining:
Giorgio Grandi Studio (GGS) almost exclusively shoots 0% Pussy scenes correct ?
GGS also has many exclusive girls to his studio, correct ?
So how do fans of these girls get to buy scenes with DP if the studio rarely shoot these scenes (the rare exceptions are girl that are so new they can't physically perform DAP to the studio tip fucking DAP standard) ?
For example: Nicole Black, Jessy Jey, Vicky Sol and Silvia Soprano to name a few girls from recent scenes.
SimplyStunning wrote:For example: Nicole Black, Jessy Jey, Vicky Sol and Silvia Soprano to name a few girls from recent scenes.
dap-addict wrote:101mike101 wrote:Editing is a kind of deception. Because it shows you something that's not true by hiding and cutting out something that has happened. (...) when you have two versions, then this editing isn't hidden anymore. Which destroys the viewer's fantasy.
The more I give it a thinking, the more I agree.
What I want basically is more 0% pussy and not more DPs cut out to make it look 0% pussy.
This said we also have to be aware that even in originally 0% pussy shot scenes BTS there maybe pussy only warm-up preparations we never see in the actual video. Thus ever so often it is a fantasy we buy anyway.
hjohjole wrote:dap-addict wrote:101mike101 wrote:Editing is a kind of deception. Because it shows you something that's not true by hiding and cutting out something that has happened. (...) when you have two versions, then this editing isn't hidden anymore. Which destroys the viewer's fantasy.
The more I give it a thinking, the more I agree.
What I want basically is more 0% pussy and not more DPs cut out to make it look 0% pussy.
This said we also have to be aware that even in originally 0% pussy shot scenes BTS there maybe pussy only warm-up preparations we never see in the actual video. Thus ever so often it is a fantasy we buy anyway.
Ok, maybe a 0% pussy edited scene would be a slightly worse alternative than a genuine version made specifically with the fetish in mind. But not by much.
I watch scenes with vaginal sex in them all the time. And when i do, i (like most people) fast forward over the vaginal parts to get to the ass fucking.
Sure, this is annoying as fuck and it ruins the anal only fetish. But there is really nothing diminishing my enjoyment of the anal parts themselves.
Now imagine that someone have already done all the fast-forwarding for you. And on top of that added extra anal footage to make up for the lost parts. And it was edited as seamless as possible.
Wouldn't you agree that that this would at least be a better alternative than a regular scene with mixed anal/vaginal?
dap-addict wrote:Apart from this basically nice idea OP is one of my old LP dreams, a lost case though I fight 2-3y ago.
Glad it comes back in a different robe now.
But to be honest I am not sure myself anymore meanwhile. One thing is a NHB version shot instead of 0% pussy would water the anal porn purity GIO has reached meanwhile. Another - on the other side - is just to be able to accept that some girls needs a DP > DAP step to get to DAP, i.e. learning to accept the models as they are, especially the rookies.
Thus I have really mixed feelings now end 2020.
dap-addict wrote:
Now talking of AGO, he would also actually have to invest quite a lot of time to cut a 0% pussy edition out of his usual chaos-NHB films with so many so fast position and orifice changes. It might even pay for him, though. Just his scenes would be cut down to 20 to maximum 30 minutes or 0% pussy, which is quite short.
Users browsing this forum: Chimpy.677 and 47 guests