Many of the models' pics I post on this blog are adult film stars. Shooting these, uhh... (professionally) sexually-liberated women comprises a big chunk of my work. Hey! Someone's gotta do it, right? And trust me, contrary to what many might think, it is work.Besides the obvious, what sells (traditional, non-internet) porn? What makes consumers spend their disposable income on one
I'll tell you what sells porn: The artwork wrapped around the DVD, i.e., the packaging.
When manufacturers of adult films submit their products to regional distributors (who then sell them to retailers) those buyers rarely, if ever, pop DVDs into a DVD player and watch the movies. (Neither do the retailers.) For the most part, buyers don't watch screeners. In fact, except for a few distributors' requirements, screeners aren't even submitted. Instead, buyers look at the packaging, the artwork, and make their buying decisions based on that. Sure, other factors come into play: The popularity of the "stars" featured in the video and on the boxcover, an adult company's brand and reputation, how much juice the salesperson has with the buyer. But, in most cases, how many units a buyer takes, if any, rides on the artwork.
These days, with hundreds of new, adult DVDs being released weekly, it's that much harder to make one's product stand out in a crowded marketplace. That's why quality packaging is the hallmark of some of the industry's most successful players, e.g., Vivid, LFP/Hustler, Wicked Pictures, Playboy/Club Jenna, Digital Playground. Penthouse has recently jumped into the fray and I guarantee this: As long-time purveyors of pretty girl imagery, Penthouse is paying close attention to the quality of their packaging, from the photography to the final, graphic design.Two people are largely responsible for the creation of that artwork: The photographer and the graphic designer. With some manufacturers, more attention is paid to the creation of the artwork than the quality of the product it hopes to sell. That's why so many adult DVDs can be characterized as
Yep, often it's the photographer's and graphic designer's job to frost the turd.
In my opinion, the adult industry, which also includes magazines like Playboy, Penthouse, Hustler, and more, drives contemporary glamour photography in a big BIG way. That's why I believe, from a purely photographic perspective, pics of adult stars are relevant to any discussion of contemporary glamour shooting, whether the model is revealed in all her naked glory or a bit of restraint is employed. (Think Maxim, FHM, and others.) I also believe this genre extends its style impact, in varying degrees, to fashion photography, celebrity shooting, and pop culture imagery in general. Relevant? Call me crazy but yeah. Hell yeah!
The pretty girl accompanying this post is Alexis. I captured these images, in a studio, at a recent adult shoot. I don't know if any of the images from this series will be featured on the DVD's cover art-- Alexis wasn't the main "star" of the video. But I'm sure some of them will show up in mags or as web content somewhere on the planet.
3 comments:
As a satisfied purchaser of the content your work advertises I will say that it does indeed make a difference on what the cover shows. Because if the cover is some half-assed photo or collage of crappy snapshots you know the content is going to suck (8 times out of 10)
However if it's a professional looking 'top shelf' magazine quality (top shelf in the alcohol sense, not the 'save the children' sense IE: Penthouse, Playboy, et al) you konw the content was filmed pretty well and editing / audio is decent.
Why do I care? Well I'm a photographer, not of your style because you don't usually find that many jobs like that in North Carolina and crappily filmed content actually distracts me. Plus it turns the wife off too because for some reason low budget crap tends to scream at the woman more in the content.
Anyway, a ramble, but hopefully my point gets across.
In today's adult market, I think it's wishful thinking to rely on the packaging to convey the quality within. At best, the publishers are cherry-picking the images. I'd rather go with a filmmaker whose previous work I've enjoyed (for example, Andrew Blake). Absent that, I'd want to visit their website and see trailers, or see if they've won any AVN awards, or read positive reviews written by like-minded buyers. But I'd never buy on the basis of the packaging.
I'd rather go with a filmmaker whose previous work I've enjoyed (for example, Andrew Blake). Absent that, I'd want to visit their website and see trailers, or see if they've won any AVN awards, or read positive reviews written by like-minded buyers. But I'd never buy on the basis of the packaging.
you might be in the porn-consumer minority when it comes to buying decisions, i.e., you're an "informed" consumer. one thing to bear in mind, traditional porn has always been a distributor-driven business. manufacturers do very little in terms of consumer research. instead, they play to the likes and dislikes of distributors' buyers. FWIW, that's how the biz, for the most part, operates. thanks for commenting!
jd
Post a Comment