egafd.com

This is really a question for those involved in the production of feeeelthy pictures.

For years I have marveled at the way photographers manage to get access to magnificent mansions in immaculate condition to use as sets for their spunk-arse models. How?

I mean - imagine you're a rich cunt with a home worth 4 million. You probably already have wife and girlfriend that look like jizz magnets anyway, and you probably have some position in a firm that would be placed in jeopardy if people recognised YOUR house in a photo set with Angel Dark spread out on the glass table with a purple dildo in her bits.

Yet photographers seem top have no trouble in gaining access to the homes of the rich and famous to spend a day setting up and shooting raunchy wank fodder. I'd love to hear from those in the business who have some stories to tell about this (and you can bullshit a bit if you like).

Porn - billion dollar industry many times over

I'd expect a lot of people in porn own enough dwellings of the glamourous natur to house a small nation...They dont give a toss about the public perception(obviously)as long as the price is right


Recently saw an old online add circa 2001 of a well known 80s model/escort offering her mansion for use for the right price

Don't assume they're the properties of CEO's of Fortune 100 corporations. More likely to be the Tony Montana like gaff of some ganglord in a country without extradition treaties.

Jonone wrote:

> Don't assume they're the properties of CEO's of Fortune 100
> corporations. More likely to be the Tony Montana like gaff of
> some ganglord in a country without extradition treaties.

Now that's a good point. The local cocaine king would probably own a few castles and wouldn't at all mind having a few penis enlargers posed around his Lamborghini one sunny afternoon.

I've yet to see a porno shoot with Buckingham Palace as the back drop. Mind you, if Harry becomes King, well...

You also forget that the owners of such houses may also need the occasional pennies to help subsidise living there, get a kick out of being there watching or most likely rich enough or own the company to the point where anyone elses opinions dont mean shit.

Also a lot of people in porn do not live in such dwellings. Hell most porn stars I know are living hand to mouth.

Lord knows what they spend their money on !happy!

In our heyday in the 1980's Roy Stuart and I hired Clandon Park house, Longleat House twice, Ragley Hall and Brocket Hall and looked at Clandon park house to !
This was when we used to get paid decent money for photo sets instead of the pathetic pitance they want to pay now !

Also what you see is not always for real as props are often used to make the surroundings look more luxorious than they really are, i can remember when John Mason had his studio out in Kent which was over the top of a garage the bed was just a piece of board propped up on old car tyres with a duvet over it which many a young maiden got a good seeing to on, there was also fake panneling and window and numerous other props, then all you need to do is visit a stately home on one of their open days shoot some film inside and out then join it together with your studio shoot and bingo, a porno shot in a stately home, well almost !wink!

Hmmmmm... well I can see your point about sets and fake backgrounds. I've seen that plenty of times with painted mountains and skies etc, but some inside scenes are too realistic for it to be faked up - especially 20 years ago when only Hollywood could afford computer graphics.

I'm still in awe of smut photographers.

This is how its done!



There are lots of people who have upmarket homes, etc, which they hire out for all sorts of shoots.

I know a guy (through someone) who has a ?3m house and grounds, the sort of building you see on 'Grand Designs' who finds it in almost constant use by movie crews, BBC and drama producers who want real, fabulous looking places. He can make between ?600-?1500 a day for letting them shoot there.

You said:

"He(The location owner) can make between ?600-?1500 a day for letting them shoot there."

The days of porn producers laying out this kind of money are long gone.Just imagine a no-show, ?1000 down the drain.The consumer is more interested in content now I think, than a fancy set or location.The old idea of bunging 4 woodentop pornstars in a fancy location, with a crummy plot/ script like:

To be delivered in a robotic voice at all times!wink!:

Pornstar A : "I am so bored waiting for pizza delivery man".
Pornstar B : "Yes you are right I am also very bored of waiting for pizza delivery man"
Pornstar A: "What shall we do while we wait for pizza delivery man?"
Pornstar B: "Let us have hot lesbo sex"
Pornstar A "Yes let us have hot lesbo sex"
Pornstar C: "I have arrived with Pizzas with my hunky friend, his moped is kapput so I give him lift on my moped"
Pornstars A & B : "We are both having hot lesbo sex"
Pornstars C : "Would you like DP with my hunky friend?"
Pornstars A & B : "Yes we would like DP with your hunky friend"
Pornstars C & D : We will put pizzas in oven while we all have hot DP session. Then we all eat pizzas we have brought garlic bread as well!"
Pornstars ABC&D : It is good we have also garlic bread as well as DP session!"

PLOT ENDS

cont'd : filming them fuck and then selling the end result for good money is a thing of the past.This is the major mistake that budding pornographers make, they always think a great location with a swimming pool, is more important than the cast or the plot. Big mistake nowdays!!happy!