Quote:
Originally Posted by PamWinterReturns
These pics are from forty-plus years ago. High def wasn't around, Photoshop wasn't around and cameras weren't cheap. The quality is fine for a magazine intended to get you off.
The models are average but attainable to most guys. The gorgeous models are fantasies where these girls are at the mall. Some have masculine features but some guys like the androgynous look. A few looked under seventeen but that look appeals to some.
The natural look is great and shows what we really look like. I'm sure many here think it's gross but you grew up with childish-looking models as the norm. Natural was perceived as icky and dirty. Fortunately, many men appreciate natural!!
Where I was visiting porn sites, I wanted to see guys without the fancy lighting, makeup, sets and props. Give me a really hairy guy, looks don't matter, decent film quality and hot action!
Content is king but best-quality isn't needed for everything IMHO.
|
Not quite that old. But Steve's an idiot. How many sites are there that cater to guys looking for the girl next door? Back in the day there just as many magazines for the Penthouse, Playboy market as there were for the these.
First Barely Legal
Jana Cova.
For me, this has always been a business. Who cares what nobodies think of my work, the only thing in business that matters is $$$$$