I really hope the private production team is reading this!

I have to say the Private magazine lines are not as good as they used to be.
In my opinion and the opinion of many others with whom I correspond over the net, Private mags were at their very best in the early to mid 90s.

Personally I thin the peak was around the time of the Private Magazine nos. 115-145, in particular the 120s. Every photoset was a classic. Same goes for Triple X and Sex magazines, even though they had only just started arounf this time.
Incidentally the "Classic" videos produced around this time are the best too.

Stylistically, and this goes for movies too, Private have gone too far toward aesthetics. The current models are simply too supermodelish. The photography is way too slick and generally everything has an excessive gloss that takes away from the sex. It's become way too stylised, hygienic, and artificial-looking.
In terms of models, the earlier 100s struck exactly the right balance between amateurish (by that I mean natural) and professional.

Private! I say at the very least give us a website where we can see these series faithfully restored (the magazine scans are not good enough) and maybe a few extras thrown in too. The old PrivateGold site was excellent, but this has gone - replaced with a very inferior substitute.

Thanks

Oh, and why not give us an extras site showing us the photos left out of series?

I really couldn't agree more. I briefly touched up on this subject in the "magazines" topic. Here's a quote from myself.

I will say that there was a time that Private was far ahead of competition at least here in the U.S. Private at one time was very cutting edge yet very prestigious in its format. Now they're just prestigious and a lot of their competition has caught up to them in the realm of quality. However, magazines such as HustlerXXX, Buttman Magazine, etc. are more edgy than the Private Publications, but are equal in quality. I know Private now has a policy in place directed toward golden showers, fisting, etc. Perhaps with Berth Milton back in the helm, they will revise its policy and pull ahead of their competition all over again.

I have to disagree. I love the fact that the majority of Private's models look as if they wouldn't disgrace an international catwalk. Personally I find it incredibly horny to see such flawless creatures being photographed as they engage in filthy acts (but then models have always turned me on). While I'm not entirely pleased by a creeping Americanisation of late, Private should be congratulated for championing style, glamour and a fine aesthetic sense. You need only trawl the internet to see how the majority of porn is badly lit and atrociously shot, ugly, cheap and downmarket. Private are fighting for high-end, high-concept decadence, and more power to them. It's true that they're struggling to find directors that can match such departed geniuses as Woodman and Adamo, but the recent magazine work of John Palmer and Kevin Maklin is astoundingly horny, and I far prefer such glam kinkiness to the endless parade of 'brunettes-getting-gangbanged-in-woods' that made up much of Private's mid 90s output. Keep those supermodels cumming, I say. It's Private's Unique Selling Point.

Thanks for the feedback guys, good or bad it is always welcome. I will pass it onto our magazine editors and the production department.

Fiona

Hi 3046888,

I understand what you are saying, but as far as I am concerned I agree with Flashboy, The only reason why I watch porn recently is its improved quality in both the presentation and the fine girls who appear in films. I remember the firs porn mag I bought was Pirate 51 in an Amsterdam sex shop. I consider that Pirate is still probably the most innovative and stylish mag also among the private publications.

However its tru that many people prefer rough sex shown in movies and magazines. Take care,

Adam

I think Private could please all of the people all of the time if they really put their minds to it.

There needs to be more'definition' of the individual mags in the Private stable...for example, Private has always been about the best photographers shooting the best looking girls in hardcore sex scenes. Well, with Kevin Maklin and John Palmer behind the lens, and Lenka, Katerina, etc. in front of it, let me just say nothing's changed...in fact, I think it has got better. Maklin in particular is taking it to a new level in terms of lighting and overall look, in my opinion. So as far as I'm concerned, Private magazine is on the cusp of a new golden age in terms of quality hardcore photoshoots, and I'm not the only one. This review of Private 178 is from eurobabeindex.com....


TITLE: Private Magazine 178
STUDIO: Private
PHOTOGRAPHERS: John Palmer, Kevin Maklin, Jeanette La Douce
MEDIA REVIEWED: magazine
REVIEWER: Sbando
WHERE TO BUY: The Private Shop, Sexpress, Xonair, Journaux.fr

CASTLIST: Adriana Durante, Lenka, Angelica, Jana, Katryn, Katerina, Lucky,
Choky Ice, Tony de Sergio, George, Adam. (COVERGIRL: Katerina.
CENTERFOLD: Adriana Durante)

RATING: 8/10 (Excellent!)




BORN TO SUCK
Well... Katerina, apparently, was "born to suck". Private was born to achieve great things, but that, sadly, belongs the past. One significative exception in this slow but relentless descent into generalistic and global m.o.r. porn: their magazines. Believe me when I say: Private mag's star has never shined so bright.
Yeah, I admit that some of their more "experimental" pictorials do suck, but my tastes are quite conservative. But, as far as tradition goes, it can't get any better. Read: a stunning parade of beautiful Internet models, fucked in every position, always confortable with the HUGE guns that sorround them, and always smiling, according to the best tradition.
Palmer and Maklin don't have serious competitors, these days. They're the best of the best. Lenka Horakova smiling into the camera like a naughty kid is worth all the Tropicals, Realities, Movies, Black Labels of this world.

CONTENT
Adriana Durante is a sweet-looking redhead. This time Palmer leaves his deliciously camp sets behind and goes for the "innocent girl" schtick. Lucky sob: Choky Ice. Anal. (Probably) Fake cum. Very good, anyway. Is Adriana the new Simony?
Crystal clear blue eyes, porcelain skin, Lenka is the kind of woman you'd only expect to see in Vogue or in paintings, striking poses other than aerial dp's.
I'm forever grateful to Kevin Maklin and to whatever secret potion that he uses to turn these angelic apparitions into super-sluts.
The rest is more standard fare. Angelica by "Jeanette La Douce" (?) belongs to the afore-mentioned category of fetish photoshoots with experimental layouts and kinky models. But it ends with a bang when the soft, and apparently innocent, Katerina starts to grab huge dicks left and right. I swear I saw this model before, in hundreds of web galleries. Nothing more than nudie pix. Can't be the same girl (anal, rcw and aerial dp, leather, tough guys, big tits, blue eyes)...

IN A NUTSHELL
Collector's item!



Pirate has assumed a fetish identity, which is not something I particularly like to look at, but some people do. Again, quality-wise, they have Trevor Watson shooting for them, who is pretty much considered peerless in his particular field, and with very good reason.

As for Triple X and Sex magazine....I think these are the ones which need redefining fast. Triple X has a lot of backstage shoots and behind-the-scenes stuff on Private's super productions, but it doesn't enthuse me really...seems more like a glorified advert. Sex has some okay stuff in it, but for me represents the the sort of 'excessive gloss' that 3046888 complained about. It just looks rather bland when compared to Private magazine, but then most other mags do.

With regards to peeing, I'm not in favour of it at all...if Private were to start shooting it, I would prefer it if it were confined to one magazine and not all over the Private line. I'm very happy that Private currently does not have this sort of material in its magazines...long may this continue!

Let me throw this question out to the floor...how would you re-invent/re-brand Triple X and Sex to make them stand out? Or how would you improve Private and Pirate magazines? Hand one of the over to Woodman to work on exclusively? Let's have some practical suggestions!!

Interesting topic for discussion, Daniel. Pirate does very little for me these days, though I can appreciate that some people will dig it. Too much emphasis on bizarro clothing and too little suggestion of true S&M decadence. The girls are increasingly looking like strange, semi-androgynous Amazons or fake-tittied androids! Why not tone down the unreality of it all and introduce more shoots with a classic, more natural tone, perhaps with an increased emphasis on female humiliation and whip-play.

As for Triple X... agreed. At the moment it feels like a puff piece. Pages of glorified adverts that could be better used for new photoshoots. Why not rebrand it as the ultimate, high-gloss barely legal magazine, with an emphasis on discovering the freshest, most innocent faces. Just imagine it: Lolita the Private way!

Sex is the real problem. It has no true identity, and always feels like Private magazine's slightly less interesting little sister. Perhaps it's one mag too many? Could resources be better distributed among three magazines, rather than four?

Or perhaps make it something funkier, more cutting-edge, taking inspiration from such websites as Suicide Girls. An indie chic porn mag, exploring the furthest limits of 21st Century sexual culture (it is called Sex, after all). Alternative lifestyles, the horny possibilities of technology... A Wired to wank to.

This is a very interesting discussion.
Some months a go I've started a topic and poll about the same subject.
Here's the link (http://forum.private.com/viewtopic.php?t=434) to that topic.

Dutchy

Some very astute points, Flashboy....and Dutchy's previous topic also mentioned specials, which have been rather left out of the discussion here. With movie special editions like Cleopatra or The Uranus Experiment, does Private really need to devote so much of Triple X to them as well?

Also agree with your point about Sex...when it began it was very thematic, i.e, 'the blondes issue' , 'the brunettes issue' etc., but this way you risk alienating readers who don't like that months current theme...a little variety is always good. My main complaint with Sex today is that most of the shoots are too 'studio' looking, i.e high-key lighting, one colour background...I prefer scenes grounded in reality (even though I know they are shot in a studio anyway :P !).

It would be interesting if some of the Private staff could say which mag sells the most/least (without revealing commercially sensitive sales figures, obviously!), and just rank them 1-4....who knows, maybe Sex and Triple X are the best sellers, but I doubt it!

A Barely Legal style teen oriented mag would be a very good idea, as this is an extremely strong seller for Hustler, both in print and on film.....although I figure Private would just start a new magazine for it if they decided to go for it.

Also, let me add some good points...Sex and Triple X are both very good brand names for adult magazines, and I do sometimes enjoy reading interviews with directors, etc. purely out of technical curiosity.

That said, if you were to offer me a free subscription to one of Private's magazines, I would choose Private itself, and it would be a very easy decision!! The others just don't get close, an your analogy of Sex being the 'less interesting little sister' of Private is very true in my opinion.

I think perhaps the best solution would be for Sex to go in the opposite direction...i.e., leave the glossy glamour stuff to Private and instead go for a more realistic style (although still professionally lit and shot, a la Pierre Woodman, who mostly shot in houses, hotels, appartments etc. rather than studios). But as I say, it might just be a handful of us here on this forum who don't like those two titles as much...everyone else might love them!

Keep it up guys!! All your suggestions and comments will go to the 4 magazine editors!

Fiona

I sense a hint of contradiction in many of the replies. Many comment on how they enjoy Private of today more so than the past. But on the other hand the same one's frequently proclaim Pierre Woodman as one of their favorite photographers if not their most favorite. Pierre Woodman is a classic example of Private's glory days. Private had been catapulted to the forefront of pornography and the example for others to follow in part largely because of Pierre Woodman. Should Private continue its current path, it will be Private that will be following the trends rather than setting them. The differences between the different publications seem to be irrelevant to this topic's subject matter. What do the differences have to do with one's nostalgia for the old over the new have :?:

Yeah,

great indepth comments guys. I was wondering if anyone has ever filled out one of those feedback forms at the end of the mags?

One trend I've noticed in the post-Woodman years is a decline in the ratio of men:women in the photosets and films. Woodman would often have 3 guys in the scene, something I haven't seen too much of recently. More guys, more cum. There's a reason it's called the money shot.

Bawdy 8)

i agree with all that has been said, especially about women in bizarre clothing and bizarre photo sets. We as readers can't fantasize about it because it so unrealistic and just plain 'weird' or alien. The early ninties stuff was good european porn about the girl at work, the new neighbour, people we want to screw in real life, girls dressed in fashion that is currently popular. We don't want beautiful models dressed like sluts; it not hard to find a slut, but a beautiful and well dressed respectable woman doing nasty things is sexy because we think about it.

Private has truly become more like american porn, there used to be a time when you could always rely on a private video for quality, now it all pretty much the same.

I'm usually not so much into magazines but I have to admit that I was really amazed by Michelle Wild's set in Triple X 59. Since I couldn't find an avatar that suited my wishes before I developed one from the TPX-pictorial. I hope you are fine with this.

Since I couldn't find an avatar that suited my wishes before I developed one from the TPX-pictorial. I hope you are fine with this.
Oops, I just realized that it's too large for this place.

I've been consuming Private porn in one form or another since the mid 90s - on and off - and in that time I've kept a 'weather eye' on Private's main competition. To my mind Private has always been way out front - and it still is. If I'm nostalgiac about Woodman's Private works it's because he was a leading light in revolutionising European porn, but since his departure an array of new talent has carried the torch forward at Private and maintained an influential industry standard.
Recently there seems to have been a degree of criticism of Private output - particularly on message boards in the U.S. - with contributors objecting to what they regard as the 'softcore' ethos of the company's high production standards and style. This I utterly fail to understand. For me there's nothing 'soft' about Private's aesthetic presentation - the gloss and glamour serve only to enhance the impact of the hardcore action and celebrate the cumshot!
The cumshot is inarguable evidence of the reality of male pleasure on set, whatever the context - and it's a necessary point of identification for a male spectator seeking gratification from watching the scene. But once the cumshot is guaranteed, and all the hardcore business around it is given, I see no reason why the porn shouldn't be packaged in a slick and stylish form. This is exactly how it should be.
'Real sex' porn is too often an excuse for weak production values. Nothing bores me more than overlong scenes, drab sets, bad lighting, inept composition, crass editing, and costuming and make-up which fail to show the girls at their best. That's not what I want from porn. To be honest, if I want 'real sex' I can go out and have it. I'm interested in porn only if it can use all the expertise and resources of advanced media production to take sex to a different place altogether, a world of stylised fantasy.
As for peeing - save it for the piss pan.

I have to disagree. I love the fact that the majority of Private's models look as if they wouldn't disgrace an international catwalk. Personally I find it incredibly horny to see such flawless creatures being photographed as they engage in filthy acts (but then models have always turned me on). Keep those supermodels cumming, I say. It's Private's Unique Selling Point.

I agree totally with Flashboy. I love glamour, sensuality, beauty. How can a model be TOO beautiful to be a successful pornstar? If anything Private has lost some of it's visual impact, rather than gone too far in search of the supermodel look. Couple the old-style Private combination of beautiful girls, lovely costumes, ultra-glamourous make-up, with mind-blowingly erotic sex, and you have a product which is unique in the porn industry. I said pretty much the same in my reply to the 'Lame cumshots' question.
I've loved Private's style of high-glamour porn since I first saw a magazine in the mid-80s, and I'm pleased to find this forum to tell Private what I like. Maybe the increasing trend towards rough and cheap porn serves a particular market, but I find it find it offensive, and a total turn-off. We've rented videos in which naked girls with black eyeliner are roughly fucked on a filthy mattress on somebody's bedroom floor. OK, it's cheap, undoubtedly very profitable, but not what I enjoy.
There must be thousands of women who enjoy the classy depiction of sex, with nice guys, beautiful women, and quality production. We like to imagine ourselves in that scenario, beautifully dressed in knock-em dead lingerie, having a bunch of guys who just cannot resist us. The millions of pounds spent on lingerie every Christmas and Valentine's Day tells that lots of men want their women sexily dressed too.
Particularly memorable scenes that hit the spot just right for me are the ffm threesome between Magdalena, Colette and Philippe Soine in The Collector; and the extra scene on Italian Flair with Daniella Rush and Sandra Russo......so stylish, so sexy! If only there was a little ass-to-mouth, and an old fashioned messy facial I'd vote it the best scene I can remember. I know it's old, but in the finale in Forbidden Desires, Steve Perry makes a wonderful effort to hint at the girls' preparation for the orgy: the close-ups of lipstick being applied, the stockings sliding up the legs, panties being pulled snugly tight are all terrific, and then the final appearance in the club are a wonderful build-up to a fantastic group scene. OK, it's not like Cameron Diaz's appearance in the club in The Mask, or Vivian Leigh at the ball in Gone with the Wind, but Steve Perry tried, which is more than happens in most porn today. I can't give examples of particular magazines (except Private 75, which was the first I ever saw, and have loved ever since), but the late 80s seemed to be a specially creative era.
So no, a photoset or movie scene can't be too stylish, or well produced, or the models too beautiful. There is plenty of porn where no effort is made to look good. Private should aim to be to the top of the list for style and glamour.

I have read the posts put up by Flashboy and Daniel as well as the ones from the "magazines" topic and to tell you the truth I honestly don't see any distinction between Private, Sex and Triple X other than the layout of the presentations. I have been collecting Private long before Triple X and Sex were even thought about and I enjoy all of the magazines equally. Nevertheless, Pirate is the only one that stands out distinctly different from the others. Although I'm not a particular fan of the fetishes such as leather, latex and rubber. I do find Pirate very enjoyable because it is so different and intriguing. I would like to think that it would make more sense to differentiate the other three magazines more. Perhaps making Private even more glamourous or more Vogue-like. While making Triple X the exclusive magazine for all unpublished photos at the same time keeping it's behind the scenes theme intact. As for Sex it would be nice to see a line of magazines dedicated toward the more extreme, and cutting edge that would include dap's, deep-throating, monster-sized dildoes and toys.

There are fairly definite stylistic differences between the magazines, although a lot of this will obviously be down to the different photographers used. However, to me it is a question of whether those differences are enough at the end of the day.

If we were to contrast Private with Hustler's hardcore print output, you can see that there are 3 very definite niche mags:

Hustler XXX (their flagship, although probably more akin to Triple X because it mixes photosets with film coverage & backstage shoots...when it first debuted, and was simply reprinting Woodman's Top Models X material, it was as good as Private was under Woodman, only in a larger format. However, recent editions I've seen seem to have nosedived in terms of quality, whereas Private's star has probably never been quite so ascendant as it currently is, photographically speaking.)

Barely Legal Hardcore (A hardcore version of their already successful Barely Legal magazine, featuring young teen-look girls, plus a print companion to their extremely profitable Barely Legal video series...if you want to see teenage style models in XXX photoshoots, then this is most likely the pre-eminent magazine in that genre.)

Asian Fever Hardcore (Again, another successful hardcore migration of a pre-existing softcore magazine from the Hustler stable, and another one also backed up by a popular hardcore video series. This time the focus is on the lovely ladies of the Far East)

Now, all three magazines are significantly divergent from one another in thematic terms to ensure that none of them will ever 'eat the other's lunch', i.e., cannibalise sales from other magazines in the Hustler stable...they might, however, steal a few sales from their competitors...let's say I have a fetish for Asian chicks, and Katsumi's on the cover of Triple X, but she's the only Asian girl in it...Asian Fever represents more bang for my buck...likewise, if I have a thing for younger-looking girls, and a teen-look model like Tiffany Diamond graces the cover of Private, but the rest of the girls in it don't fit the 'teen' category, I'm better off going for Barely Legal.

Right now, with the exceptions of the flagship Private (Utmost highest quality hardcore) and Pirate (Cutting edge experimental fetish), I don't see that sort of clear definition across Private's magazine line....I see no reason to pick up Sex or Triple X as they don't give me anything significantly different or better than what's already in Private, in my opinion. Don't get me wrong...I'm not a fan of Pirate per se, but I do admire it for being what it is, not a mix and mash of all sorts of stuff (By the way...what the hell was that Victoria Swinger photoset doing in Private #184? Riding boots, crops, saddles, reins, and cock-twisting...it positively screamed 'fetish' :shock: !).

As I've said previously, I simply think Sex and Triple X (which are both fantastic, catchy brand names and well worth keeping alive) are in need of re-branding or a slight change of identity to differentiate them from the pack. Part of Larry Flynt's success in magazine publishing is that he has always given the customer what they want by catering to the specific tastes of the audience...he has separate magazines for leg/foot/stocking fetishists, people who like busty girls, guys who like asian women, or black women, etc., and thus creates a dedicated audience. He knows what his customers want when they buy Asian Fever, and likewise his customers know what they're going to get when they buy it. Whilst variety is the spice of life, there's something to be said for giving the customer exactly what they want as well.

If we flip my previous analogies on their heads...let's say I don't like Asian girls, or I think teeny-style stuff is quasi-pedophilia and I prefer real women to girls....does a magazine without a set identity which might carry one or both of these types of shoot risk losing my money in favour of one that caters to my tastes exclusively? I'd have to say yes. That's the risk I think Private runs with Sex and Triple X at the moment...both high quality, but both much-of-muchness in terms of thematic content. The photography might not even be half as good in, say, Asian Fever, but it's the type of photos I want to look at.

Just out of curiousity, how does Private itself differentiate between the three 'regular' magazines in terms of how it promotes them? Which audiences are the three magazines aimed at (Private, Sex, Triple X)?

Also, while I'm talking about Hustler...to forumites who have seen them, do you prefer the larger-format Hustler hardcore mags, or the pocket-sized, easy to conceal Private format? Would you want to see Private's magazines in a larger format?

Part of Larry Flynt's success in magazine publishing is that he has always given the customer what they want by catering to the specific tastes of the audience...he has separate magazines for leg/foot/stocking fetishists...

Whilst variety is the spice of life, there's something to be said for giving the customer exactly what they want as well.


I couldn't count the amount of times I've picked up one of Flynt's "leg" magazines and then dropped it straight back down because it was full of photos of feet. :evil:

Video is one thing, but with magazines you just cannot cater to everyones individual tastes and keep it high quality..
I never rated hustler's attempts in the hardcore area - partly because I'm not a fan of woodmans overlit style but mainly because the quality was (is) zero. Having said that I've not seen anything recent.


Just out of curiousity, how does Private itself differentiate between the three 'regular' magazines in terms of how it promotes them? Which audiences are the three magazines aimed at (Private, Sex, Triple X)?

Also, while I'm talking about Hustler...to forumites who have seen them, do you prefer the larger-format Hustler hardcore mags, or the pocket-sized, easy to conceal Private format? Would you want to see Private's magazines in a larger format?

Private always labled its magazines:
Private - all round hardcore flagship magazine.
Pirate - Rougher, kinkier magazine of the same quality.
Triple X - Essentially a magazine to promote other private products (mainly movies) comprising backstage material, interviews and the occasional photoset.
Sex - The trashcan. Anything not quite suitable to go in the other magazines.

I prefer the small format and one of the main reasons it is kept is due to most sellers having displays of that size. Go look at the hardcore magazines in a German sex shop and see how they are displayed :wink:

I never rated hustler's attempts in the hardcore area - partly because I'm not a fan of woodmans overlit style but mainly because the quality was (is) zero. Having said that I've not seen anything recent.

From what I've seen recently, we would be talking less than zero, then....the decline from the earlier issues is very evident. I realise Woodman is not the most technically gifted photographer, especially compared to the current crop at Private, but even so, it was well below the standard I have come to expect from him.


Just out of curiousity, how does Private itself differentiate between the three 'regular' magazines in terms of how it promotes them? Which audiences are the three magazines aimed at (Private, Sex, Triple X)?

Also, while I'm talking about Hustler...to forumites who have seen them, do you prefer the larger-format Hustler hardcore mags, or the pocket-sized, easy to conceal Private format? Would you want to see Private's magazines in a larger format?


Private always labled its magazines:
Private - all round hardcore flagship magazine.
Pirate - Rougher, kinkier magazine of the same quality.
Triple X - Essentially a magazine to promote other private products (mainly movies) comprising backstage material, interviews and the occasional photoset.
Sex - The trashcan. Anything not quite suitable to go in the other magazines.

Precisely the point I made in a previous post...Triple X just seems like a promotional piece for the movies (which are amply covered by the Special Edition mags Private puts out for the big productions), whereas Sex is just a mish-mash...neither this nor that. By your definition, its contents are defined not by what they are, but instead by what they are not...i.e., not suitable or appropriate for Pirate or Private.

Perhaps the solution would be for Private to have an unofficial fifth magazine which changes from issue to issue (so it's basically a series of Special Editions) i.e., one issue of all girl-on-girl action, one with all asian girls etc,. However, when Private has exhausted the number of profitable niches (let's say there are 10, for argument's sake), and it comes time to do another all girl-on-girl issue, rather than being issue number 11, it should be issue number 2 of the particular niche edition. That way, if one niche proves to be so incredibly popular that it demands a title of its own, it can simply be seamlessly dovetailed into the existing numbering.

I prefer the small format and one of the main reasons it is kept is due to most sellers having displays of that size. Go look at the hardcore magazines in a German sex shop and see how they are displayed :wink:

Sounds like a fun homework assignment :D !

Perhaps the solution would be for Private to have an unofficial fifth magazine which changes from issue to issue (so it's basically a series of Special Editions) i.e., one issue of all girl-on-girl action, one with all asian girls etc,. However, when Private has exhausted the number of profitable niches (let's say there are 10, for argument's sake), and it comes time to do another all girl-on-girl issue, rather than being issue number 11, it should be issue number 2 of the particular niche edition. That way, if one niche proves to be so incredibly popular that it demands a title of its own, it can simply be seamlessly dovetailed into the existing numbering.


That is a nice idea. If they were to do it properly but you know what would happen?
Re-prints of stuff everyone has already seen. I think they would view it as a compilation and not as a 'new' product.

Maybe they should start aiming higher. Who would pay $100 for a hardback, 500 page Ltd edition called "Privates cumshot Bible"?

I don't know about a Cumshot Bible. But I would pay very generously for a limited edition reprint of the earliest "Best of Private" hardbacks because they're out of print and many are so rare.

Interesting dissection of the 4 big Private mags, which we had never seriously considered before. (Us being the couple primarily viewing these things as photosets scattered across the site.) Doing our own unscientific calculations based on our three "best of" lists this year ("Top 20 Unpublished (http://forum.private.com/viewtopic.php?t=1161&highlight=)", "Top 14 Pile-Driving Shots (http://forum.private.com/viewtopic.php?t=1148&highlight=)", and "Best Pics of 2004 (http://forum.private.com/viewtopic.php?t=1070&highlight=)"), we counted how many times a photoset came from each magazine brand. The results: Sex Magazine (http://www.privatemembers.com/member/lib/viewpic.asp?listing=%2Fmember%2Flib%2Fmagviewer%2E asp%3Fbrand%3Dsxm%26issue%3D52%26maxpages%3D124%26 mtype3Dnew&displaytitle=&special=&NO=/content/lib/sxm/052/img/sxm052m_f084-085.jpg&brand=sxm&page=&issue=52&maxpages=124&mtype=new) = 18 Awards
Private Magazine (http://www.privatemembers.com/member/lib/viewpic.asp?listing=%2Fmember%2Flib%2Fmagviewer%2E asp%3Fbrand%3Dprv%26issue%3D185%26maxpages%3D124%2 6mtype%3Dnew&displaytitle=&special=&NO=/content/lib/prv/185/img/prv185m_f040-041.jpg&brand=prv&page=&issue=185&maxpages=124&mtype=new) = 15 Awards
Triple X Magazine (http://www.privatemembers.com/member/lib/viewpic.asp?listing=%2Fmember%2Flib%2Fmagviewer%2E asp%3Fbrand%3Dtxm%26issue%3D60%26maxpages%3D124%26 mtype%3Dnew&displaytitle=&special=&NO=/content/lib/txm/060/img/txm060m_f096-097.jpg&brand=txm&page=&issue=60&maxpages=124&mtype=new) = 11 Awards
Pirate Magazine (http://www.privatemembers.com/member/lib/viewpic.asp?listing=%2Fmember%2Flib%2Fmagviewer%2E asp%3Fbrand%3Dpir%26issue%3D88%26maxpages%3D124%26 mtype%3Dnew&displaytitle=&special=&NO=/content/lib/pir/088/img/pir088m_f034-035.jpg&brand=pir&page=&issue=88&maxpages=124&mtype=new) = 6 AwardsHmm, so what does that say about us? Seems like we might end up liking those pics in Sex Magazine originally doomed for the trashcan. No wonder we like all those unpublished photosets... 8)

Sex - The trashcan. Anything not quite suitable to go in the other magazines.

The term "trash can" hardly seems fair. The porn in 'Sex' is as high quality as in any of the other titles (Greg and Sarah's photoset choices indicate this, and I've just reminded myself of the fact by browsing through the 'Sex' issues I have on PDF.) I guess the point is that 'Sex' isn't a magazine which has any unifying concept other than top-quality Private fuck action! - and to be honest, it doesn't need one!

Ask the people at Private what the intention of "sex" was.
They only started it as a dump for photosets not good enough for the other mags.

Look at some of the earlier issues and see what's inside. Maybe later on it has changed and now has its own sets, but as I said - the intention was as a trashcan.

Sex - The trashcan. Anything not quite suitable to go in the other magazines.

The term "trash can" hardly seems fair. The porn in 'Sex' is as high quality as in any of the other titles (Greg and Sarah's photoset choices indicate this, and I've just reminded myself of the fact by browsing through the 'Sex' issues I have on PDF.) I guess the point is that 'Sex' isn't a magazine which has any unifying concept other than top-quality Private fuck action! - and to be honest, it doesn't need one!

Yeah...as I said in an earlier post, for all I know, Sex and Triple X could both outsell Private by 3 copies to 1...however, I very much doubt that is the case.

I don't really have an axe to grind with the quality per se, just the purpose...sure, as Baskkk says, it doesn't have a unifying concept other than top-quality Private fuck action, but....the exact same thing can be said of Private magazine. I don't see a great difference between Sex and Private other than the sets in Private being better (a statement based upon my own personal tastes, I should add, and not seeking in any way to disparage any of the photographers/models whose work appears in Sex). It's good stuff, certainly better than what you'll find in Hustler XXX, but I just wouldn't pick it (or Triple X) up ahead of Private, or even Pirate for that matter.

But hey, if Sex didn't sell (there's a paradox for you :shock: !), then Private would either cease to publish it or radically overhaul it, so it must be doing the business for someone out there! :wink:

Whilst we're talking about trashcans and all, as I said in my post in the unpublished photosets topic, sometimes we don't all see eye-to-eye with the editor, and sometimes (in our opinion) they get it wrong...it's like watching deleted scenes on a DVD...some are just filler, and some have you scratching your head thinking 'Why on earth did they leave that out?'.

Perhaps, therefore, Sex and Triple X exist to help Private 'please all of the people, all of the time'?

Ask the people at Private what the intention of "sex" was.
They only started it as a dump for photosets not good enough for the other mags.

Look at some of the earlier issues and see what's inside. Maybe later on it has changed and now has its own sets, but as I said - the intention was as a trashcan.

ff, do you have some 'inside information' on Private's internal editorial policy at the time? I've just checked issues 1-4 of 'Sex' and recognise many of the girls as talent appearing in other high-profile Private products of the day, including the video ranges. To me, the photosets seem of comparable quality with what we got in the sister magazines; although admittedly, when it comes to matters of taste, one man's meat is another man's potato!

All in the eye of the beholder. We couldn't help but try to match up the photosets between the latest issues of "Private" and "Sex" available on the member site: We have to admit that, in terms of consistent high quality, Private 185 was much stronger than Sex 49; but, interestingly, they both had a Cindy Lords FMM threesome, and we found the one in Sex 49 (http://www.privatemembers.com/member/lib/viewpic.asp?listing=%2Fmember%2Flib%2Fmagviewer%2E asp%3Fbrand%3Dsxm%26issue%3D52%26maxpages%3D124%26 mtype%3Dnew&displaytitle=&special=&NO=/content/lib/sxm/052/img/sxm052m_f072-073.jpg&brand=sxm&page=&issue=52&maxpages=124&mtype=new) more pleasing than the one in Private 185 (http://www.privatemembers.com/member/lib/viewpic.asp?brand=prv&listing=%2Fmember%2Flib%2Fmagviewer%2Easp%3Fbrand% 3Dprv%26issue%3D185%26maxpages%3D124%26mtype%3Dnew&NO=/content/lib/prv/185/img/prv185m_f012-013.jpg&displaytitle=&special&brand=prv&page=&issue=185&maxpages=124&mtype=new) (although we enjoyed both!) So it's that B-sides thing again (or Daniel's deleted DVD scenes or Baskk's meat & potatoes, pick your metaphor)--there's a few gems that are "thrown away" into the "Sex" trashcan that are even more fun than some of the best Private bits, in our humble opinion.

This all of course is a fun, silly debate, along the lines of "Which is better, Coke or Pepsi?", "Ice: Cubed or Crushed?" or "So do you think FF will ever give the Forum members a more intimate look at Miyah or do we have to really wait until the summer?" 8)

'B-Sides' is another good analogy...there are plenty of B-sides better than the A-side you bought them for :shock: !

The Coke/Pepsi metaphor is also very valid...although I've made my views clear on how Pepsi could better use all those advertising millions in the 'Sex Sells' topic in the Shop forum :twisted: !

As for Miyah, well, I'm sure we all understand FF can't give the goods away for free (especially the ones awaiting publication in Pirate), but my Spider-sense tells me that when they do eventually surface, they're going to be more than worth the wait :wink: !

ff, do you have some 'inside information' on Private's internal editorial policy at the time?

oooh I can't say :lol:

oooh I can't say :lol:

*now* i'm intrigued - but if you can't say, i won't ask!

or maybe i will...

ff - short for 'femme factory' - or maybe -

'famous frenchman'? (hehe)

baskkk

I tend to agree, check out how Private used to do it by looking at these of Carol Rouge in Stars Spoghtlight section

http://www.privatemembers.com/member/spotlight/disp_pic.asp?setNo=2&week=070&dir=carol_rouge&bigpic=exist&No=14&isbigpic=yes&page=
http://www.privatemembers.com/member/spotlight/disp_pic.asp?setNo=3&week=070&dir=carol_rouge&bigpic=exist&No=3&isbigpic=yes&page=
http://www.privatemembers.com/member/spotlight/disp_pic.asp?setNo=3&week=070&dir=carol_rouge&bigpic=exist&No=10&isbigpic=yes&page=
http://www.privatemembers.com/member/spotlight/disp_pic.asp?setNo=4&week=070&dir=carol_rouge&bigpic=exist&No=12&isbigpic=yes&page=
http://www.privatemembers.com/member/spotlight/disp_pic.asp?setNo=4&week=070&dir=carol_rouge&bigpic=exist&No=13&isbigpic=yes&page=
http://www.privatemembers.com/member/spotlight/disp_pic.asp?setNo=4&week=070&dir=carol_rouge&bigpic=exist&No=14&isbigpic=yes&page=
http://www.privatemembers.com/member/spotlight/disp_pic.asp?setNo=4&week=070&dir=carol_rouge&bigpic=exist&No=15&isbigpic=yes&page=

Funny, it's nice to see newly posted (and high-resolution) photosets on the web site from the older magazines (which us youngin's otherwise never knew, so couldn't compare opinions to the Forum's "those were the days" nostalgia) but 3045481's postings on Carol Rouge seem to confirm our suspiscions that Private had an easier time of photographing excellently timed cumshots (http://www.privatemembers.com/member/spotlight/disp_pic.asp?setNo=1&week=070&dir=carol_rouge&bigpic=exist&No=10&isbigpic=yes&page=).