Professionally written reviews for qs scenes?

[Viridian]

It was a one-off purchase anyway.

[Duncan Edwards]

It was a one-off purchase anyway.

I understand.

[Ace]

The one time I did really want to write a review was for a DVD, and it was because I felt disappointed with the overall production value, an obnoxious script, intrusive recording, a model that looked disinterested, etc.; with consideration that I only enjoyed one video in that DVD. That said, I felt I would've killed off a producer's revenue if I publicly posted a negative review, which brings me back to the point I made in my first post.

Okay whoa whoa, wait. This. This is exactly what I'm talking about here. Why should this be frowned upon? You were, from the sound of it, well within your rights to be disappointed by the product you paid for. You say you felt the urge to write a negative review, but didn't out of sympathy for the producer, yes? This is not how things work. Sure you, one customer, could write the producer privately, expressing your opinion. But countless other customers may be lured into making the same purchase, and end up with the same buyer's remorse. And when said producer sets out to create his next product, he will look at sales figures and think that, if the previous DVD sold, that he should just stay the course (in terms of production values or what have you).

Why do you feel like you have to hide the poor quality of a product, if you in fact felt that way? You don't think other potential customers deserve to know about something like that before they spend money? I realize this community is very close and friendly, but at the end of the day, it's still a business, and is filled with business transactions. Your heart was in the right place, but, by choosing not to speak up about poor quality in a product, you stand to potentially harm both parties: other customers may also feel disappointed like you were, and may choose not to buy products from that producer in the future, leaving both parties dissatisfied.

It may seem harsh, but porn producers aren't entitled to tenure. If a bad product is created, they must either increase value in their product, or potentially stand to lose business. Public reviews, or at least public discussions of product quality, instead of private messages to producers help facilitate this.

[Viridian]

Firstly, as I said before, a lot of it comes down to preference. What I dislike in a video, a lot of people will like. I don't like the grey gloopy clay; a lot of people do. I don't like pointless struggling; others love it. I find certain models unattractive and obnoxious; others like their tits. I tend to feel that my preferences are in the minority and I expect an indifferent response by producers and other users, who will say a) that there are scenes out there that do suit my tastes and b) they love the scene anyway. That said, I haven't really come across a product that was bad -- just ones that I didn't like. And the ones I don't like, I don't buy, and the wide availability of preview material makes it very easy for the discerning quicksand enthusiast to make an informed choice. With most producers offering individual scenes for sale instead of DVDs, a prospective buyer need not worry as much about spending money on scenes they don't like on a DVD.

While the quicksand scene does operate like a business, there's a crucial element that is lacking: competition. A porn producer competes in wide market, where they have to promote themselves and provide quality products. Quicksand is a niche. There are only a small handful of producers, and they aren't directly competing against each other. If anything, each one specialises in certain aspects. MPV, in my opinion, has the highest production value especially with the new locale. Studio588 has a large library of scenes and models (I personally don't like the re-use of scenes/scripts, but it suits people who want to see a different model in the same kind of scene). TSM does the Asian side with its Philippines location. DIDVP explores more creative scenes. PRP does a lot of dry-sand scenes. Loch Ness does...herself. Given that all of the above (minus Studio588) share a distribution channel through ClubMPV, there's not much to gain by being discerning and critically reviewing individual productions. They already get a fair bit of feedback as it is, as I understand.

Other producers tend to be a bit more critically panned. Downloaddreams and BondageCafe have made forays into the QS side and have made appearances here, allowing a positive avenue for feedback (and public too). ArchEnemys, being primarily a heel fetish site, got bad reception for the poor quality of their QS/mud videos and buyers have been deterred from purchasing when enquiries were made here. DevilClownProductions got a bit of a bad rap due to mismanagement and a botched delivery system -- and partially, I believe, because the owner initially typed like a 10-year-old and didn't give a shit about PR.

All this has happened from word of mouth and forum posts. There already is a form of quality control and feedback.

What would a professional review cover that isn't already done? Scenes are generally priced the same, so value isn't a concern. Critique of acting? Most models don't have acting experience. Script/story? Very few videos develop that and skip straight to the point, and the market is primarily interested in the mud/qs component more than story anyway.

But most importantly, what would be the point? All the producers, at some stage or another, work together. The buyer generally knows what they are getting. The producers generally know what their buyers want. Reviews, for the most part, will probably nitpick the details that separate people's personal preferences. The bottom line is that the qs scene is very much a community and not a buyer's market.

[Duncan Edwards]

Firstly, as I said before, a lot of it comes down to preference. What I dislike in a video, a lot of people will like. I don't like the grey gloopy clay; a lot of people do. I don't like pointless struggling; others love it. I find certain models unattractive and obnoxious; others like their tits. I tend to feel that my preferences are in the minority and I expect an indifferent response by producers and other users, who will say a) that there are scenes out there that do suit my tastes and b) they love the scene anyway. That said, I haven't really come across a product that was bad -- just ones that I didn't like. And the ones I don't like, I don't buy, and the wide availability of preview material makes it very easy for the discerning quicksand enthusiast to make an informed choice. With most producers offering individual scenes for sale instead of DVDs, a prospective buyer need not worry as much about spending money on scenes they don't like on a DVD.

While the quicksand scene does operate like a business, there's a crucial ...All the producers, at some stage or another, work together. The buyer generally knows what they are getting. The producers generally know what their buyers want. Reviews, for the most part, will probably nitpick the details that separate people's personal preferences. The bottom line is that the qs scene is very much a community and not a buyer's market.

Very well stated. Friendly competition is probably becoming a bigger thing than most here might be aware of. At very least each producer is motivated to compete against their own previous efforts. With the profits (or lack thereof) involved its not exactly a moon race.

[dlodoski]

I have read this entire thread and feel that I can make a couple relevant points.

First of all, the original post came off as a gimme to me. But that's just my perspective as a producer. If someone wants to write reviews, that's fine, but they should be a paying customer at some level.

Second, I think it's important to separate the concept of a review, from that of a critique (which it seems was not done successfully by some of the posters here). Epoch offered services as a reviewer, not a critic. Critics nitpick, while reviewers summarize.

Third, I don't necessarily have a problem with public feedback, especially if it relates to the customer experience overall. For example, a misleading description or other incorrect information that may create a negative experience for another customer. In other words, the 'Buyer Beware' type stuff.

But here is the point that I feel most passionately about. And that is This Forum Has Become Lame Regarding Discussions. There is definitely an attitude here that has a chilling effect on open discussion regarding producer content. I call it the 'Don't Piss Off the Producer Syndrome'. I'm culpable in this regard, but it mainly stems from producers strongly discarding criticism as uninformed and/or irritating. The reality is that nobody here is that much smarter than everybody else.*

And, it's ironic, because I used to discourage comparisons between producers. But if quantitative comparisons are being made continuously (literally with every post in some cases), I think that qualitative comparisons are fair game.

So, in the case of general appeal and customer experience, I think folks here should speak their minds in the relevant forums - with the exception of specific tastes (elements, models, etc.). Like others have opined in this thread, I feel that those issues are best championed in quieter channels, if results are desired.

*I should point out that I remain opposed to grandstanding, and will call it out whenever I see it. So if anyone was thinking back to the Benmetal incident, that's what that was.

[PM2K]

For better or worse, here's my two cents.

This is reminding me of why I have a love/hate relationship with movie reviewers... there are those who feel as a reviewer, them must find fault with the product they are reviewing, or they are not doing their job. Others have their own personal preferences built in, so anything which doesn't fit that is savaged, and still others assess films based on what their core audience will like. Personally, there are certain reviewers I will pay attention to because their tastes mesh with mine, and others I'll disregard or get pissed off at because their tastes don't align with mine. But it doesn't mean they are right or wrong, just as it doesn't mean I'm right or wrong or anyone is. It is all a matter of opinion.

I can understand producers and filmmakers getting annoyed or defensive about their work... only they know what went into creating it, and if they had any kind of pride in their efforts, of course they will defend them. And, really, would you want to bother with checking out scenes a producer just knocked off quickly and didn't really care about the finished product? I know I wouldn't.... and fortunately, here it is clear the producers and their actresses and crews do care, and care passionately, about what they produce. Thaty is why we have such a high quality of scenes available.

I can only approach their works and the actresses who "do their thing" with what works for me, as I'm sure everyone else here does. My opinion counts as much as anyone else's, and likely those who agree will have similar tastes, and those who do not will disagree. But it doesn't make either opinion wrong or right. Just different.
Personally, I'm into dramatic scenes.... nudity is nice but not necessary.... I tend to prefer grim endings, but that is not an absolute. Erotic scenes are great, too, depending on the actress's ability to sell it. I love all the actresses for different reasons.... which I won't bother on listing because it is different for everyone.
Anything which spoils the illusion really kills the moment for me. I'm not a fan of clean up scenes, for instance, or anything which emphasizes how this is all make believe.
None of that means these scenes shouldn't be done.... it is just they don't work for me. I'm sure they work for others just fine, and more power to them.

My point is every scene is going to have its supporters and its detractors, and all of it based on one's personal opinion. Since it is so damned different across the board, I'm not sure if reviews would be useful except for those who are already fans of such scenes. But again, that just might be me.

[Duncan Edwards]

Anything which spoils the illusion really kills the moment for me... or anything which emphasizes how this is all make believe.

Amen! This is great. Who's next?

[bbjohn]

As a professional writer who wrote movie reviews early in his career, I thought I'd put my thoughts in.

What needs to be remembered is reviews reflect the views of the reviewer and no one else. The reason someone like Roger Ebert became well-known as a critic was because people liked his reviews and his opinions often reflected the views of his readers. It also helped than he and Gene Siskel were often hilarious together.

On mainstream films and TV, professional reviews can serve as a consumer guide, letting people know whether they really want to spend their time and/or money on what's being offered. In some cases, even a positive review will let me know I don't want to watch something. As an example, I know critics have described Seth MacFarlane of "Family Guy" as a genius. Yet, when I read what they found so brilliant in the series, I knew I didn't want to watch it (I have seen it on a few occasions, and I learned my initial impression from the reviews was right).

The problem with specialized markets like fetish films is they target a certain audience, and the tastes within that audience can be very different. As someone on this thread noted, one person could find an actress terrible while another could like her because she's gorgeous.

What this market needs is what all markets need: feedback from consumers. If you like something, say why you like it. If you don't, say why you don't. That may be the best way to let the rest of us know if a video or a photo set is something we want to purchase. You may like something, or I may like something. However, you may find that what I like is something that turns you off, and I could feel the same way about what you like.

What we don't need are reviewers who are "in bed," so to speak, with producers. No offense to the producers here, but that can lead to problems for consumers. One of the reasons I became fed up with model railroading was because I found the manufacturers and hobby media were too close to each other and I was not getting honest reviews of products.

As an example, I read reviews of Code 83 track in HO scale. This track does look more realistic than standard HO scale track, which is Code 100. I also read reviews of how wonderful magnetic couplers are. So, I bought some Code 83 track and magnetic couplers for my freight cars.

Guess what I found out? It seems the uncoupling magnet used for magnetic couplers is too high for Code 83 track. The cars and the couplers got hung up on it. I had ordered the track and couplers by mail, but when I mentioned this problem at a hobby shop on a trip to the big city, they told me that was a real problem with Code 83 track and magnetic couplers. If I used magnetic couplers, I was better off with Code 100 track unless I mounted the uncoupling magnet under the track.

Mind you, I saw no mention of this problem in any of the product reviews I saw of couplers and Code 83 track. I might have thought this was a fluke, but I bought a couple of locomotives highly recommended in the magazines that had couplers that were next to impossible to install. The coupler housings themselves broke very easily, leaving me with a model I couldn't use. No mention of those problems, either. When things like this happen often enough, you start to wonder if you can trust the reviewers.

I then began to see how closely the model railroad publications worked with the manufacturers, and it started to make sense. I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but it was clear they were so "buddy-buddy" with each other, I couldn't trust the reviews.

I should tell you I had some very positive experiences with many model railroad products. There are some manufacturers who still know how to produce products that are affordable, look great, and are easy to work with.

So, while I believe "professional" reviews wouldn't work in this forum, I believe honest comments and reviews from consumers who aren't beholden to any producer would be the best way for other quicksand product consumers to decide what's right for them.

Just my 50 cents on a Tuesday night. (I know it's supposed to be 2 cents worth, but there's inflation).

- Big Bad John

[Nessie]

Loch Ness does...herself.

And on that note, I made an executive decision early on that I would accept reviews including criticism and suggestions when I was able to implement suggestions without suffering quality issues (asking isn't getting when you work with Mother Nature) and if I ever got to the point where I could set feelings aside. (When I look at a mudpit, I have personal issues.)

That day never arrived.

But I do have an opinion on reviews.

I would suggest that reviews that factually lay out what happens in a clip, in honest detail and including spoilers, without getting into the question of whether anything is good, bad, hot, a turn-off or nothing at all, do help people decide what to buy.

This is my all-time favorite non-critique:

"It would have all been so much better if only she had worn boots."

Oh, yeah? Says who?

This statement is humorous. It is so utterly self-centered. And it happens all the time in fetish. Forget about awesome camera work, convincing acting, a top-notch gorgeous model, or even a goodlooking mudpit.

Is the model wearing boots?

Okay. Should we tell him if there will be boots before he buys?

I say...yeah!

Nessie