What do you think is the difference between a paid session and content shoot?

[Soles_Scream]

I'd love to hear your thoughts, especially from people who do not shoot content. Do you think there's any difference between paid sessions (not recorded for sale) and paid content shoots (recorded for sale)? You can talk about the difference between free consensual play and paid content shoots if you wish.

 

[brotherted]

There’s a certain category of model who would be willing to appear in a video shoot, but who wouldn’t participate in a private session. They think of a video shoot as a type of “modeling gig” whereas they consider a one-on-one private session to be a form of prostitution that they’d look down on.

I’m not defending this distinction myself — I’m saying there are some people who see it that way.

 

[P[a]pi]

I pay women as models for sessions. I take pics during the session and share them for free. The gal also gets the pics, and can do what ever she wants with them. I do not create clips.

For a content shoot 99% of the time the goal is to create clips for sale, so getting about 10 min worth of intense balls to the wall tickling recorded is the goal. And of course the goal could be to bang out several clips during 1 shoot, so that's a lot of work.

For my sessions I have a few goals. I want us both to have fun. I want the gal to go on a ride of ups and downs. And I want to create good looking pics. The session is about 3 hours, enter to exit. I want that whole experience to be good for us both.

What I do is rare in comparison to tickling companies, and gals have told me that the vibe is different than what they are use to. I don't mind that at all. Some gals do wish I created clips, so more $ for us both. However, I just really don't enjoy creating clips. It's a different vibe that I am not use to lol.

 

[yinzer]

I just did my 3rd paid session today. I've never shot any content, and I wouldn't want to. That would mean focusing on what you think would sell. Also, I'm way too self-conscious to do something like tickling on camera. I've mentioned I don't like seeing guy 'lers on camera, and this is possibly a projection of myself. It's not a matter of not accepting this about myself I don't think like feeling ashamed exactly, but tickling women is definitely not something I'm proud of either. Plus, I really like the intimacy of doing a private session.

 

[ChicagoDavid]

Great question!

If I were a producer, my clips would be different from my private sessions. For example, in a session, I'll cuddle up next to her while I tickle her, but in a clip, I'd feel too self conscious to do that, so I'd stand next to her instead. In a session, I might crack a weak joke and then tease her for laughing at such a weak joke, and I'm guessing the viewing audience does not want to hear that. (Though I think James Darke is hilarious.). I wonder how many producers do clips they produce the same way they would do a private session. Perhaps most are less self conscious than I am! But for example, the producer of tickleyes does not talk during the session (I assume so that no one recognizes his voice), and I assume that he would not be silent for the whole hour in a private session.

From the model's viewpoint, I've seen varying perspectives (because I often ask). I am told that producers typically pay about 150/hr for shooting time and the shoot is usually 2-4 hours. Private sessions typically are about 400/hr, though they often are for just one hour. (I think some producers pay 200 and I know some models charge 500 for sessions.). Some models say, "I'd rather make 400/hr than 150/hr." For example, one model told me she canceled a paid shoot because her schedule filled up with sessions. On the other hand, some definitely say, "I'll do clips with a producer because they are professionals and usually someone else is there, but no way would I just go in a room with some guy I've never met and let him tie me up, regardless of how many recommendations he can provide." Or as a variation, "I'll only do a paid session if the pay is significantly more than 400 for this reason." I avoid this last group, in part due to the higher cost, but beyond that, if she doesn't feel safe, it won't be a fun session and I don't like the idea of it. On the other other hand, some have said that they enjoy a session their favorite session clients more than a typical shoot.

My first sessions were with dominatrixes who didn't do videos. So for them, going in a room with some guy she'd never met was what they do, and the only question was whether they'd indulge tickling. As a result, I almost always found those to be great sessions. Most of my sessions with models have been great as well, but a lower percentage.

 

[quinn65]

My old content vids are out there, and I've written about a handful of sessions (mostly unpaid).

There's more hassle and distraction to shooting a video -- worries about masks, angles, lighting, what's said, etc -- even though aside from a couple of campy staged skits our style was just to turn on the cameras and have fun. Sessions remove all that, so the focus shifts to real relationships, natural interactions, and the "internal" aspects of tickling and being tickled.

Fans used to like the "hanging out with friends" vibe of our videos, but everyone still acted out for the camera a little. With no recording, everyone behaved less self-consciously and I'd say the tickling itself got a little edgier and more intense (we intentionally kept the videos PG-13).

In non-recorded sessions I've done with groups I've just met -- mostly curious vanilla types -- everything seems to center on the pure fun of watching people lose control.

 

[Comfort Eagle]

Fans used to like the "hanging out with friends" vibe of our videos, but everyone still acted out for the camera a little. With no recording, everyone behaved less self-consciously and I'd say the tickling itself got a little edgier and more intense (we intentionally kept the videos PG-13).

Sexo

 

[TobiAndyBuddy]

My old content vids are out there, and I've written about a handful of sessions (mostly unpaid).

There's more hassle and distraction to shooting a video -- worries about masks, angles, lighting, what's said, etc -- even though aside from a couple of campy staged skits our style was just to turn on the cameras and have fun. Sessions remove all that, so the focus shifts to real relationships, natural interactions, and the "internal" aspects of tickling and being tickled.

Fans used to like the "hanging out with friends" vibe of our videos, but everyone still acted out for the camera a little. With no recording, everyone behaved less self-consciously and I'd say the tickling itself got a little edgier and more intense (we intentionally kept the videos PG-13).

In non-recorded sessions I've done with groups I've just met -- mostly curious vanilla types -- everything seems to center on the pure fun of watching people lose control.

So out of these categories, where would you put “Paige” the self defense teacher that turned out to be extremely ticklish? Was she a campy skit w/ a premise? Friend of yours? Woman in the wild you managed to reel in?

 

[quinn65]

So out of these categories, where would you put “Paige” the self defense teacher that turned out to be extremely ticklish? Was she a campy skit w/ a premise? Friend of yours? Woman in the wild you managed to reel in?

Paige was a cool, tough lady who threw the right vibe and took me up on filming a kneeling bondage escape challenge with her back to the camera.

She wasn't ticklish at all anywhere but her feet...first person like that I'd ever met. She didn't think being tickled would be so bad til it happened.

 

[C4urself85]

There is absolutely a difference. In the simplest terms, a paid session is for me and a paid shoot is for an audience.

One you have to consider your and your play partner's wants and the other you have to do that AND consider what will sell, audio, lighting, editing, wardrobe, marketing, paperwork, etc. And that's not even delving into the different dynamic a session would have from a shoot. I've had sessions go much further than anticipated.

 

[Grad]

I don’t have any brief way of responding. I'm replying chiefly because responses from non-producers/content makers was especially requested.
Matter of fact, I don’t session at all. But it's still an interesting topic.

The shortest thing I can put together is that there is a wide line between producing content to distribute for anonymous mass audience, and providing fetish/erotic/sexual service privately in direct contact with a client. One is considered performance and the other … a service. Without reading psych journals, I can’t project the conclusive rationale as much as I can theorize it to be the case.

Headline adult film talent (I feel strong in assuming) generally won’t do private sessions just to do them (paid or otherwise, unless we’re talking payment that far … and I mean FAR surpasses what they make as a headline star). We see all the time that adult film stars have romantic partners or spouses and they say unanimously that production and romantic intimate sex are as different as motor oil and apples.

But let frame it this way. Has a fetish/kink content creator/talent offered to pay someone who is NOT a creator to be the top for a media session? Ex. A tickle fetish (ticklee) model/creator asking a random person on this forum (who has never been in media but from by all accounts on the forum, they are an amazing and experienced Ler) to be the Ler in one of their videos for pay?

In particular, have female ticklees offered to PAY non-producer/creator male Lers for unfilmed private tickle sessions? Hell, have non-creator female ticklees paid producers/creator LERS for private sessions the way that average males with foot fetishes pay female creators for foot sessions?
My guess is "no".

If so to either, I feel save thinking it's extremely rare. But I have no doubt that Lee and Ler creators who genuinely share the fetish have and do session just for private fun with no media involved. But also, a ticklee creator might enjoy some private play with non-creators for a purity-of-the-fetish kinda feel, in which case, there's no payment involved.

After that, then it really breaks down into top and bottom regarding kink. Going to P[a]pi’s example (dude, if I’m wrong in any way, let me know).
He isn’t involved in production for profit, but because he has an online presence with following, can be considered a creator. And I am assuming that the bottoms/subjects of the content have not paid him session privately. That the sessions that are not recorded/photographed are purely for mutual enjoyment like any meetup play between kinksters. He’d have to say but I’m speculating that the play partners accept pay because he is sharing but aren’t paid as “talent”. That is, I THINK the play partners aren’t saying they won’t session with him unless paid (media or not). But just simply “We’re going to have a mutually fun session regardless, but I like to share pics from my sessions. And if you’re cool with that, then since you are the central subject and likely will be in the photographs alone, I prefer to pay you for being featured.” And if the partner declines to be photographed/recorded, I don’t think he’s then canceling session.
Again, tell me if I got any of that wrong.