2 subcategories of classic models?

[frvomac]

I would like to know your (both moderators and forum members) opinion regarding subcategories of Classic models - there are only Classic pornstars and Softcore models. However, sorting out the models into these 2 categories is a bit chaotic here. I mean, we can see models/actresses who did porn only once time in Classic Pornstars (as Kristine deBell or Michelle Bauer) and we can find some models featuring in a few porn movies or shooting sets with some porn pics in Softcore models - for example Dita Von Teese (of course I think we can find better examples on both sides, even "pornstars" showing less than "softcore models"). I think this is not problem only of this section - for example pornstar Lina Romay is appearing in Classic celebrities under Classic Celebs, Beauty & Elegance;)
But back to the Classic Model - in first case we have some softcore ceebrities labeled as "pornstars" here and on the other side we can see porn pics and movies in Softcore models section where one would expect softcore pics :)
My opinion is that we should have some strict rules or new category for softcore models featuring in some porn sets/movies (and keep Softcore models strictly for 100% softcore models).
I am sorry if this was already discussed here.

[rickp]

I'm sure the mimimum requirement for a classic pornstar is that the said model/actress has to have been vaginally penetrated by a male penis. Hence Dita Von Tease has only used sex toys, so she's not included in the pornstar section.

[frvomac]

I am really not sure - some model can do absolutely everything except penetration in hundreds of b/g sets/videos + g/g or solo and this is not pornstar? I know that this is more typical for modern models, but...
And for example Carole Laure is pornstar according to your definition though she has done it only once and in art movie :)

[Inglorious]

Once a Model has done penetration work she is classed as a Pornstar, simulated stuff does not count.

This keeps it nice and simple to define between Softcore and Hardcore Models.

[frvomac]

Ok, I can see that you have different point of view.:)

As for the mine, model acting in hundreds of porn movies is pornstar even if she is doing only blowjobs or lesbo movies.
And Carole Laure is surely NOT pornstar for me.

But I understand that it's easy to apply this simple definition here.
However then you have a lot of models in wrong section according this (for example e.g.Michelle Bauer in Pornstars).

[Inglorious]

When the Forum was first set up, any Model who had done B/G work was automatically placed in CP, we have gradually moved them back to Softcore but obviously missed some.

If you see any that need moving, then just report it.

Also, if a model has done 1 or 100 hardcore movie/pics that still makes her a Non Softcore Model.

[Inglorious]

And Carole Laure is surely NOT pornstar for me.
.

Which is why she is in Classic Celebrities
:rolleyes:

http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/showthread.php?t=4235&highlight=carole+laure

[frvomac]

When the Forum was first set up, any Model who had done B/G work was automatically placed in CP, we have gradually moved them back to Softcore but obviously missed some.

If you see any that need moving, then just report it.

Also, if a model has done 1 or 100 hardcore movie/pics that still makes her a Non Softcore Model.
Blowjob or masturbating with toy is not softcore for sure as well :)
Hardcore is including oral sex, other kinds of penetration etc.:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardcore_pornography
While your definition is reduced to penetration by male penis (so lesbian showing everything from her real sexual life can never become pornstar here while celebrit with stolen home porn video can:) ).
I was just surprised that I can find a lot of porn photos in Softcore models so the subcategories are losing a lot of sense for me. But it seems I am alone with this point of view.
P.S.: Luckily some actresses including Carole Laure falling in "pornstars" categories are in Celebrities sections :thumbsup:

[Inglorious]

Well............... the system seems to work, very few complain about it.

[RjG57]

Not trying to add to the confusion any chance of changing 'Softcore models' to Classic softcore models. This would clarify and emphasize the thread, you have in the modern section.

I presume at some time in the future all those in the modern section will be re-classed and drift into the 'classic' section.
Then how do we compare the likes of Dita Von Teese, a softcore classic, almost glamour model with a total slut like Tanya Danielle as she, I believe, does only lesbian. Tanya can't be classed as a pornstar as she does not do vaginal pen.. under current rules.

[Inglorious]

Softcore Models are under the Classic Models Section. Whereas Modern Models are listed in the Modern Section.

1995 is the cut off point for the Vintage Models for the foreseeable future

[Sirch]

I started a thread a while back asking advice on what is considered HC and what is considered SC and it didn't get much traction.

For me SC is any "natural nude" modeling like Pl@yboy or Met@rt. (thought not sure if they are slipping to toys and stuff)

But that's my other thought on this. If a model penetrates herself with toys or fingers I think I would classify that as HC too.

[hobrat]

I have to wonder why Zdrok is listed as softcore when she has done at least 3 photo sets doing this
http://img230.imagevenue.com/loc460/th_404003996_tharsheblows019_123_460lo.jpg (http://img230.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=404003996_tharsheblows019_123_460lo. jpg)
This one had a pirate theme, the other two had her dressed as a clown (oral in that one) and another had a 30s gangster theme, they were on her own website, no penetration, but unless you use the Bill Clinton defence, oral is not softcore.

[TigerCrab]

I've been loving V.E.F. for years and years. The boundary line between hard and soft is of particular interest to me.

For my 2 cents, the best defining actions for hardcore are vaginal/rectal penetration by object or body part, or explicitly shown full oral/genital contact.

But, I also think a model/actress should only be placed among the Classic Pornstars only if a significant portion of their work fits the definition for hardcore. (Whoever's definition is being used.) Or to put it another way, a model should be placed in the section most people would look for her in.

By my logic, Victoria Zdrok would count has a pornstar. She has done a lot of hardcore lesbian work, and has been fully eaten out and finger penetrated by a man, in more than one movie. She's a cross-over. Maybe she should have a pointer record in the Softcore Models section pointing to her Classic Pornsters entry.

Michelle Bauer should perhaps have two listings: one in Classic Pornstarts as Pia Snow (Michelle Bauer), and one in Softcore Models as Michelle Bauer (Pia Snow). She seems to have tried to segregate her work by name.

Sex tapes and one-of's should not count. Carole Laure is a great example.

Not matter what definition is used, there will always be boundary line issues. Thanks to the moderator(s) for making those judgement calls.

And many thanks for keeping V.E.F. going.

[GeorgeMcSoon]

...

Not matter what definition is used, there will always be boundary line issues.

Your proposals show already that there is indeed room for a lot of (controversy) discussion ;)

To avoid this, Moderators have once decided that penile penetration of p*ssy or *ss seems to be the most suitable way to separate "hardcore" from "softcore" action.

It also seems not feasible to have 2 threads either in Hardcore and Softcore for the same model. Too much room for interpretations and hence too much additional and time-consuming work for the Moderators to sort things out.

A clear distinction line (see above) and one single Model-Thread has turned to be most feasible.

[bigtrain45]

Stacy Moran seems to be a great example as well. She was strictly softcore with no penetration of any kind until those Purrfect Productions videos surfaced. After being in the business for years you'd think she would not have been so naive as to think those videos would not get around.

[charliels531]

I don't really care how we classify models, but bigtrain45 raises a significant issue. I worked in the business for most of the 1970s, when courts were very picky about what was shown. Milton Luros, who managed most Southern California porn production in those years, had a policy of inviting boyfriends/husbands/pimps to photo sessions to reduce jealousy issues, but also to see what might happen, because they might do some light b/g stuff, moving to simulation, and moving to real stuff all in the same shoot. Then Luros would save the simulated/harder stuff for later release as police agencies loosened up. Uschi Digard is a good example, and bits of her hardcore work with her husband have come out in recent years. I am pretty sure that the same practice happened with Roberta Pedon, Darlene English, Sharon Kelly, and several others, but the early stuff has stayed locked up. Sharon Kelly later did a lot of hardcore work on her own.

[bigtrain45]

So, Brandy Ledford, who did nothing but softcore when working in the business, is put in with the pornstars because Janine L and that guy she was seeing did a sextape of her without her knowledge, but Kim Kardashian is listed in celebs, when the only reason she's famous is because of a sextape she released. Same with Paris Hilton. Based on the logic used on Stacy Moran and Brandy, those two celebs should also be in pornstars.

[spoonman2]

Categories are always difficult. It's like classifying movies, is this a comedy, or an adventure? That kind of thing.

To me, for instance, putting Adele Stephens in "pornstars" just seems wrong; massive, massive body of glamour and softcore, half a dozen photos in one b/g shoot with penetration, not even a cumshot. It's like calling me Welsh because I went there once on holiday.

On the other hand, I've always thought it a bit strange that any degree of lesbian, including dildos, toys, fingers, etc isn't considered "porn". Apparently. Never really understood that. It's like saying that nothing that (real life) lesbians do is actually sex. I'm not sure they would agree with that.

It's probably one of those things where, wherever the line is drawn, it'll be in the wrong place.