New 'retro' porn?

milffan1 · July 7th, 2012, 02:56 AM

If someone made a new retro style adult video or magazine would you be into it? Or maybe like a pay site that specialized in that kind of content. What I mean by retro is shot on either film or vhs tape (transferred to dvd) and with girls that have pubic hair and maybe hair styles similar to the older styles. And if so would anyone be willing to actually buy it? I don't have any immediate plans to make anything like that I'm just wondering if there'd be a potential market for it.

rastapopoulos · July 8th, 2012, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milffan1

If someone made a new retro style adult video or magazine would you be into it? Or maybe like a pay site that specialized in that kind of content. What I mean by retro is shot on either film or vhs tape (transferred to dvd) and with girls that have pubic hair and maybe hair styles similar to the older styles. And if so would anyone be willing to actually buy it? I don't have any immediate plans to make anything like that I'm just wondering if there'd be a potential market for it.

An interesting idea, but probably not so easy to realize. The girls not only would have to be unshaved, but should also be free of tattoos, piercings and silicone enhancements, and the men should be at least free of tattoos.
I recenly watched a number of Michael Carpenter productions from ab. 1984-85 [House of Lust, Dirty Letters] in which hot sex scenes are visualized within a certain esthetic cadre, and wished that there were movies like that made today.

**Sirch** · July 8th, 2012, 03:41 PM

I imagine it would be cost prohibitive to shoot on film. Not to mention shooting in real locations or on interesting sets. I can't find a babe on the street that doesn't have tattoos or piercings.

So finding the right women would be a challenge to say the least. You would need to digitally paint over tattoos and such. More cost. I think you could find women with natural boobs if the industry would simply set a new standard that natural is "ok".

So maybe shoot in another country? But even Russia and Hungary which seemed to be the last haven for natural women seem to be adopting the crappy US look.

**flipflop2** · July 8th, 2012, 07:59 PM

I don't think it has to be that expensive. 70's porn was low-budget anyway. Super 8 films are still being made, cost from € 20 to € 40 for 15 mtrs ,developing included. Second hand camera's will cost next to nothing at your local flea market. For sets you just get some brown wood paneling and furniture from the thrift shop. The problem would be, getting tattooless actors willing to grow some hair, who can be made to understand that they are not supposed to slap the hell out of each other while putting the lavalamp up the girls backside.

JeffThrow · July 9th, 2012, 01:51 PM

With all due respect, your poll choices are slightly limited.

If it were done properly, I would buy it. Otherwise, it would only be a curiosity for free downloads.

Personally, I'd love to see some David Sullivan style mags/sets, but going all the way. Full penetration, sucking, and ejaculation. My longstanding dream is that these sets were filmed/photographed as real hardcore, and just the softer poses published. Sadly, as a few people have pointed out, in those days, processing was expensive, so only shots that would be published were printed. Although I'd love to think there's some negatives or slides around ...

Unfortunately, looking at all the modern (Uk at least) sites for models and actresses, it seems to be almost axiomatic that to get into porn, you need:

1) shed loads of crappy tats
2) fake boobs that you can tell are fake
3) completely shaven
4) plaster yourself with TOWIE style makeup

milffan1 · July 10th, 2012, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flipflop2

I don't think it has to be that expensive. 70's porn was low-budget anyway. Super 8 films are still being made, cost from € 20 to € 40 for 15 mtrs ,developing included. Second hand camera's will cost next to nothing at your local flea market. For sets you just get some brown wood paneling and furniture from the thrift shop. The problem would be, getting tattooless actors willing to grow some hair, who can be made to understand that they are not supposed to slap the hell out of each other while putting the lavalamp up the girls backside.

I think you're right. If you look at early 90's porn, a lot of it looks like it was filmed just with professional vhs cameras. Those probably cost several thousands of dollars at the time but today you can get one used for around a hundred bucks.

View Poll Results: Would you be interested in this?
Yes & I would buy it	24	54.55%
Yes, but I would probably just try to get it for free & would not be willing to buy it	13	29.55%
No, it's a stupid idea. Go to Hell!!	7	15.91%
Voters: 44. You may not vote on this poll

July 7th, 2012, 02:56 AM	#1
milffan1 Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 33 Thanks: 311 Thanked 168 Times in 31 Posts	New 'retro' porn? If someone made a new retro style adult video or magazine would you be into it? Or maybe like a pay site that specialized in that kind of content. What I mean by retro is shot on either film or vhs tape (transferred to dvd) and with girls that have pubic hair and maybe hair styles similar to the older styles. And if so would anyone be willing to actually buy it? I don't have any immediate plans to make anything like that I'm just wondering if there'd be a potential market for it.

July 9th, 2012, 01:51 PM	#5
JeffThrow Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: UK Posts: 278 Thanks: 895 Thanked 2,138 Times in 218 Posts	With all due respect, your poll choices are slightly limited. If it were done properly, I would buy it. Otherwise, it would only be a curiosity for free downloads. Personally, I'd love to see some David Sullivan style mags/sets, but going all the way. Full penetration, sucking, and ejaculation. My longstanding dream is that these sets were filmed/photographed as real hardcore, and just the softer poses published. Sadly, as a few people have pointed out, in those days, processing was expensive, so only shots that would be published were printed. Although I'd love to think there's some negatives or slides around ... Unfortunately, looking at all the modern (Uk at least) sites for models and actresses, it seems to be almost axiomatic that to get into porn, you need: 1) shed loads of crappy tats 2) fake boobs that you can tell are fake 3) completely shaven 4) plaster yourself with TOWIE style makeup __________________ Seeking :"Nightbirds #1", "Whiteheat #2", (UK mags)

July 8th, 2012, 03:41 PM	#3
Sirch Vintage Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 1,216 Thanks: 18,391 Thanked 12,705 Times in 1,147 Posts	I imagine it would be cost prohibitive to shoot on film. Not to mention shooting in real locations or on interesting sets. I can't find a babe on the street that doesn't have tattoos or piercings. So finding the right women would be a challenge to say the least. You would need to digitally paint over tattoos and such. More cost. I think you could find women with natural boobs if the industry would simply set a new standard that natural is "ok". So maybe shoot in another country? But even Russia and Hungary which seemed to be the last haven for natural women seem to be adopting the crappy US look.

July 8th, 2012, 07:59 PM	#4
flipflop2 Vintage Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 340 Thanks: 37,714 Thanked 14,930 Times in 343 Posts	I don't think it has to be that expensive. 70's porn was low-budget anyway. Super 8 films are still being made, cost from € 20 to € 40 for 15 mtrs ,developing included. Second hand camera's will cost next to nothing at your local flea market. For sets you just get some brown wood paneling and furniture from the thrift shop. The problem would be, getting tattooless actors willing to grow some hair, who can be made to understand that they are not supposed to slap the hell out of each other while putting the lavalamp up the girls backside.