Your thoughts on porn sites that post out of focus/poor quality photos

[bigg mike]

I'm not sure if other people have noticed this and I wasn't sure what to call this topic but I've noticed a trend recently were porn sites will just straight up post bad quality pictures. I'm no expert photographer and I get it, having pussy close up in your face will distract any professional causing them to take a bad shot every now and then but why even post that image? It just makes the site look bad. Here's an example.



I've seen some sites where every picture was blurry and had bad lighting but I'm pretty sure it was done on purpose to make it look amateurish. I know nit picky things like bad picture quality is the last thing on people's mind when looking at porn but I'm curious to hear anyone's thoughts on this and what's causing it.

 

[VillellaMcMeans]

I don't think you're picky at all, picture quality isn't last thing on my mind when I want porn - in fact it's the pretty much the only thing I want without a doubt is the highest picture quality possible, only other thing more important to me would be there better be girls and nakedness.

I really hate bad image quality porn too, hate the time it took for me to expect something good and then end up being pissed off even though few seconds wasted only.

Kinda like going to bar expecting girls, then going in and not getting any - that why fights happen because when supply not enough to satisfy demand, or in this case where reasonable expectations not met.

 

[bigg mike]

Is it from lack of pro photographers and companies are stuck hiring amateurs? I don't get it.

Yes, the better the quality, the more realism it adds. I want to be able to count every pussy hair. LOL

 

[John_8581]

I've seen pictures submitted at websites where the girl's pussy is in focus while the rest of her is out of focus.

Like this Sienna West picture ...

Actually this is a pretty good picture. This picture of Sienna was shot by Brandon Michaels, Catalina Cruz's husband.

Have you ever seen pictures where the lens cap is still on? Yes, I've seen that too. About four pictures. And that was a professional photographer at Bang Bros.

Jena Kay Ricci (the picture below was originally a black and white picture photographed by her boyfriend at the time. Buzz Aziani later reshot her in the same pose (with color film), in the same bikini and at the same locale. Then he put her logo onto it.) ...

Is it a bad photo? I kind of think that it is too dark.

=====

Even professionals do mess up sometimes. Andy McFarland at wildAMigations.com messed up beach pictures of Hillary Fisher. Rich Cutrone at his paysite also messed up a few pics of Claudia Costa. But with Andy and with Rich - they were in thumbnails on their sites and not part of the file downloads that were eventually purchased.

J. Stephen Hicks uploaded "test" pictures of Kyla Cole. Her head was out of the picture. Then her arms. Then her legs. Then the lower half of her legs. No feet. Just her boobs and her torso. Hehe. It was very funny. Those were preliminary photos taken as behind the scenes photos as part of her application process when she first signed on at digitaldreams.com (the prerequisite of digitaldesire.com) Not sure, if Mark Lit still has them up there after Mr. Hicks passed away.

Buzz too messed up a picture of his wife, Rachel Aziani. Let's see if I can find it. Alright, it seems that he took it out of the photo gallery. Off the Aziani website too.

=====

The website where I do see this a lot is at Zero Tolerance or ztod.com - that's because there is an absentee webmaster on board. He's not there for an eight hour work day. They got cheap and now pass the hat around as to who will do the webmaster's job.

Here's Heather Summers with the "gray out." (You've seen these before) ...

That website is always broken. Ciao for now.

 

[VillellaMcMeans]

I've seen pictures submitted at websites where the girl's pussy is in focus while the rest of her is out of focus.

Like this Sienna West picture ...

View attachment 895986

Actually this is a pretty good picture. This picture of Sienna was shot by Brandon Michaels, Catalina Cruz's husband.

Have you ever seen pictures where the lens cap is still on? Yes, I've seen that too. About four pictures. And that was a professional photographer at Bang Bros.

Jena Kay Ricci (the picture below was originally a black and white picture photographed by her boyfriend at the time. Buzz Aziani later reshot her in the same pose (with color film), in the same bikini and at the same locale. Then he put her logo onto it.) ...

View attachment 895990

Is it a bad photo? I kind of think that it is too dark.

=====

Even professionals do mess up sometimes. Andy McFarland at wildAMigations.com messed up beach pictures of Hillary Fisher. Rich Cutrone at his paysite also messed up a few pics of Claudia Costa. But with Andy and with Rich - they were in thumbnails on their sites and not part of the file downloads that were eventually purchased.

J. Stephen Hicks uploaded "test" pictures of Kyla Cole. Her head was out of the picture. Then her arms. Then her legs. Then the lower half of her legs. No feet. Just her boobs and her torso. Hehe. It was very funny. Those were preliminary photos taken as behind the scenes photos as part of her application process when she first signed on at digitaldreams.com (the prerequisite of digitaldesire.com) Not sure, if Mark Lit still has them up there after Mr. Hicks passed away.

Buzz too messed up a picture of his wife, Rachel Aziani. Let's see if I can find it. Alright, it seems that he took it out of the photo gallery. Off the Aziani website too.

=====

The website where I do see this a lot is at Zero Tolerance or ztod.com - that's because there is an absentee webmaster on board. He's not there for an eight hour work day. They got cheap and now pass the hat around as to who will do the webmaster's job.

Here's Heather Summers with the "gray out." (You've seen these before) ...

View attachment 895987

That website is always broken. Ciao for now.

Haha yeah mistakes do happen and those that are mistakes aren't as annoying as what @bigg mike was taking about the entire picture blurry. I guess that could have been an actual mistake too, but from he said some sites just consistently post blurry pictures - I think some sites just don't have the professionalism to double or triple check that what they post isn't a mistake, they just don't care enough to fix their own mistakes.

As for the 3 picture you posted, I agree that there nothing wrong with them. The first one have blurry face but that is probably on purpose to focus on clearly on her snatch, I'm like @bigg mike here where I agree that being able to see and count the pussy hairs clearly is best, and her cunt pretty close and clear!

The 2nd picture is too dark as you said, but it doesn't annoy me because it can still her ass and snatch pretty clear with no blurry areas.

The 3rd is definitely a mistake, but missing some of the picture is not as annoying as an entirely blurry picture, in my opinion.

Broken websites and broken links are pretty annoying though🍻

 

[bigg mike]

I'm not a fan of the shallow depth of field look with porn pics but at least I understand why the focus point would be on their pussy only. I mean that's usually the first place out eyes go to. And yeah you are right about ZTOD posting broken images. As I said even the pro's make mistakes but what I don't get is why even post it on the site if it's bad?

Here's another example:



Like...where is the focus point and why is there camera shake? Who approved this and said "Yup, this is fine"

 

[VillellaMcMeans]

I'm not a fan of the shallow depth of field look with porn pics but at least I understand why the focus point would be on their pussy only. I mean that's usually the first place out eyes go to. And yeah you are right about ZTOD posting broken images. As I said even the pro's make mistakes but what I don't get is why even post it on the site if it's bad?

Here's another example:



Like...where is the focus point and why is there camera shake? Who approved this and said "Yup, this is fine"

Totally agree, just don't post it if it a bad photo or simply take it down after posting.

 

[John_8581]

.. And yeah you are right about ZTOD posting broken images. As I said even the pro's make mistakes but what I don't get is why even post it on the site if it's bad?

Back in the day, Zero Tolerance was a very good website. The webmaster got back to you if there was a problem within 24 to 48 hours. But now everything over there breaks down. Not just pictures and videos. Model's profile pictures? What are those? They don't show up.

There is no place that members can complain to. Not anymore anyway. You have to get the payment processor Epoch involved to help resolve the issues. Now what are some of the issues there? Mainly with bad response times. You can sit on a page for forty minutes. Yes I timed it one time. It just spins. The zip files don't work. Then there are also massive http 500 internal server errors, and http 503 timeout errors. When something miraculously works, I'll tend to go to the sister website on the network, Third Degree Films. As on that side, it always seems to be responsive and it works especially with finding stuff on the search engine. When my username and password fail, then it is time to cancel the subscription. I'll re-enroll after 90 days when the subscription "officially" expires. In the twelve years that I have been a member there, I've re-enrolled about six times. Four since 2015 when the webmaster quit. There is just no more pride over there anymore. No one seems to care.

Don't get me started on Mindgeek and the sites they run (into the ground mainly).

 

[bigg mike]

I hate it when sites no longer care. A side note but I've tried joining sex dot com several times as I like to add captions to pics and whatnot but I never got anywhere. Since Tumblr cracked under pressure from SJW's and no longer allows porn images, I needed to find another site to post stuff to. Tried emailing sex dot com and got nothing. You would think having a site name like that, you know, having the easiest porn site to remember in the world, the people running it would care.

 

[John_8581]

Sex.com is like a Pinterest type site. I go there to name ladies. Pinterest members have no clue as to who they are putting up on their boards. But unlike Pinterest, sex.com allows for all forms of female nudity. In .gifs and in .jpeg images. With Pinterest, topless is fine. But you cannot post post pictures of females below the waist. I should know as I was banned there at Pinterest. Now at sex.com, certain models aren't allowed. Bianca Beauchamp, Chloe Vevrier, and Ashley Lawrence aka Fembomb are not allowed. You cannot name them at all. They'll issue DMCA notices if you try to put up boards with their names on them. When you get enough of them, the sex.com webmaster will ban you too.

 

[bigg mike]

Wow, what a joke the internet has become. Everyone thinks they own the rights to everything and if you don't comply they will put up a DMCA notice. I gotta ask though, how did you join sex.com because I had no luck.

 

[John_8581]

Wow, what a joke the internet has become. Everyone thinks they own the rights to everything and if you don't comply they will put up a DMCA notice. I gotta ask though, how did you join sex.com because I had no luck.

When you get to the website, https://www.sex.com/ look for the old sex.com (has the old logo). There is apparently a new sex.com site that opens with a cam show. Anyway, you'll click the red Sign Up! button. And a fold will open up. Put your username (or a name you want to be called at the sex.com website), your email address, and a password.

They will email something like this back to you:

You just need to confirm your email address then you'll be all set.

 

[Mr. Daystar]

In a digital age, who knows what that freaking thing is gonna do. If you're talking a couple in a batch of a hundred, I call it bad quality control....if it happens to 75 of the 100 pic set, well that's bullshit....if their free, how much can you bitch.

If your issue is with a girl who has a nice pussy shot in focus, but her face isn't, sometimes depth of field can be a real bitch. The closer you are to a model, the harder it seems to make it work....and some times, it's obvious the photographer is using it as a tool for his "art".

 

[John_8581]

Here are four pictures of Brandi Love. Everything is out of focus with the exception of her stiletto heels and maybe her legs. However, this was not a foot fetish or leg fetish photo set. It highlights her Pinkness: her pink mesh costume, her pink dildo and her pink pussy ....

I can't understand why these four are so badly out of focus. And yes, like @bigg mike and @VillellaMcMeans and @El Diablo Blanco (the White Devil) have been saying all along: this would get me upset if I was a paying member of her website, which I was at the time.

 

[bigg mike]

When you get to the website, https://www.sex.com/ look for the old sex.com (has the old logo). There is apparently a new sex.com site that opens with a cam show. Anyway, you'll click the red Sign Up! button. And a fold will open up. Put your username (or a name you want to be called at the sex.com website), your email address, and a password.

View attachment 896047

They will email something like this back to you:

View attachment 896051

You just need to confirm your email address then you'll be all set.

Trust me, I tried that several times and never got an email or junk mail from them. I just assumed they no longer accepted new members and just didn't care anymore. A lot of people were finding ways around their policies on what you could and couldn't post.

 

[bigg mike]

If your issue is with a girl who has a nice pussy shot in focus, but her face isn't, sometimes depth of field can be a real bitch. The closer you are to a model, the harder it seems to make it work....and some times, it's obvious the photographer is using it as a tool for his "art".

IMO porn is not art. It's smut, it's filth, and I'm perfectly fine with that. You know why it's called art? Because some guy got caught looking at it by his wife and he told her it was art LOL.

 

[John_8581]

Trust me, I tried that several times and never got an email or junk mail from them. I just assumed they no longer accepted new members and just didn't care anymore. A lot of people were finding ways around their policies on what you could and couldn't post.

I don't know their policies now. I've been a member there for about six years. Though I didn't start creating boards and putting pictures up until five years ago. My last post there was over two years ago. Though I have guys still following me and liking my pictures from three or four years ago. I got in trouble twice with copyright infringement by naming Bianca Beauchamp on boards. Bianca and Martin Perreault (the photographer and her husband) have a guy who must be a member there and he notifies the webmaster. The sex.com webmaster took down 83 of my pictures which nullified my board because I'll just name the picture by the model's stage name. And so, I don't even bother putting Bianca's pictures up anymore. With Chloe Vevrier and Ashley Lawrence, "Vevrier" and "Fembomb" are banned words.

 

[bigg mike]

Here's another one. Not sure if it's done on purpose but it just looks bad.

 

[John_8581]

Here's another one. Not sure if it's done on purpose but it just looks bad.

Team Skeet is a network that is best described as an a la carte group. They charge you for almost everything. These "x" scenes are "challenges" made by Pornhub models and are only open to Team Skeet Premium or Prime members. As I'm just a Team Skeet and a Family Strokes member and a MYLF and PervMom member on the other side, I don't qualify.

The "x ReisLin" series here is a group of videos made by Pornhub's Little Reislin. Does it seem to you that it has an OnlyFans feel to it? Yes, I would kind of think so. Therefore, you know that with these POV attempts made by models, that the quality of these films is always going to be bad.

 

[bigg mike]

Oh, so these are probably snapshots from a video then? I would never pay for quality like this.