What does it take to shoot the best porn?

[Paul Markham]

A thread here asking for the best videographer in LA made me think. What would it take to shoot the best porn?

Of course there are different niches and styles. Still the best porn possible would need a few things what ever they were.

1. A great idea. A girl on a bed or sofa type porn has been done to death. so someone has to come up which makes the viewer sit up and take notice. Not so much that it takes anything away from the action though. Also it needs someone to come up with different twists on the theme. Watching 5 scenes with the same scenario gets boring, watching 50 gets tedious.

2. Great porn actors and actresses. Essential to have them giving their all to the scene. What ever the idea, niche or style it needs them to be real and going for it and getting off on scene. So much is faked today it all blends into one in the end.

3. Great director. Who understands the niche, style and models. Able to get the best out of them. Most porn models come to work with only $$$ in their minds. It takes someone good to get them to pull all the stops out. Get all the angles and grab or create the best moments.

Then for certain niches the following are important.

Lighting. Even the best camera can produce average content if it's not lit right.

Sound. Clear sound from a couple of mikes. We want to hear the models breath, not the shooter. And we want to hear the slurp as the dick, fingers or vibrator slide in and out.

Camera. Once you've sorted the above you need a camera to capture the best image.

Make up. It does not have to be Playboy level but it needs to be done by a pro. Few girls can do their own for a lot of styles and niches.

Location. What ever the niche or style I'm sick of seeing a girl on a sofa or bed, scene after scene. Get a Winnebago, caravan, boat, bus, train. Shoot somewhere that makes it different.

BUDGET. NONE OF THE ABOVE COME CHEAPLY. Which is why a lot of porn today is average to mediocre.

And if you do create such a great product you can sell it to DVD, Cable and softcore markets if you shoot a softcore version.

[american pervert]

i saw a post a while back claiming all you need it top end gear so i'm going with that one!

lol

[candyflip]

What I think is the best and what you think is the best are probably two different things.

So...

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by american pervert

i saw a post a while back claiming all you need it top end gear so i'm going with that one!

lol

Porn is about what's in front of the lens, not behind it.

[Robocrop]

Magic links my friend....and you have them already!

[JustDaveXxx]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Porn is about what's in front of the lens, not behind it.

I disagree. I think without the guy behind the lens directing what is going on in front of the lens, you got nothing. Scenes don't just happen without set control and direction.



Nice thread anyways and i agree with you on everything else.

[justinsain]

Someone needs to tell all those EXGF and amateur sites they are doing it completely wrong

[mafia_man]

Originally Posted by justinsain

Someone needs to tell all those EXGF and amateur sites they are doing it completely wrong

That's why Paul is right. Even with shitty cameras, lighting and no direction good content can be created.

You don't need 5 grands worth of equipment to get a scene done....but it helps.

[SpicyM]

The only key for a good scene is to get a girl who is nice, open minded and who understand and ENJOY the niche you do the shoot for. This is the only important thing, the others are just secondary factors that make the video look better.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by JustDaveXxx

I disagree. I think without the guy behind the lens directing what is going on in front of the lens, you got nothing. Scenes don't just happen without set control and direction.



Nice thread anyways and i agree with you on everything else.

I put directing at 3. Could of put it at 2, but even great directors fall down with bad performers. He needs the control to be able to send them home.

I still think you need a good idea first, otherwise it's like so much that has gone before.

[Overload]

a ... PLOT! to shoot not just BANG-BANG bodies but a REAL MOVIE ... serious, i miss 80s porn so badly ... i still remember MANY old movies whereas the new ones are just slipping from my memory a good story and a good amount of porn, but NOT 100% BLOW-RIDE-ANAL-CUMSHOT scenes ...

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by justinsain

Someone needs to tell all those EXGF and amateur sites they are doing it completely wrong

No idea why you said that.

EXGF is a great idea. If it's produced commercially it still needs a good director and good models. If it's not 2257 and legal matters could be a problem.

Still needs to be varied in the scenarios so it does not get boring. And different locations are good. 50 scenes on a sofa or bed start to be stereotyped.

You don't need much of the second part of the list, except locations.

[JustDaveXxx]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

I put directing at 3. Could of put it at 2, but even great directors fall down with bad performers. He needs the control to be able to send them home.

I still think you need a good idea first, otherwise it's like so much that has gone before.

LOL, good answer, but a good director is gonna hire a good guy to begin with. When i shoot brand new girls, i use top males. The good guy will position the girl where i can see what i need to see. Furthermore, even if the girl sux, my guys will pound out a good scene.


Hot girl=race car
good male=race car driver

Race car+Race car driver=Winning!!! Or great scene.


Race cars, race car drivers is the perfect porn analogy. Keep in mind how many Indy car guys and stock car guys try Formula1 and end up failing miserably. Thats equivalent to using a budget guy with a smoken hot girl. It just doesn't do the race car justice.


Examples:

Manual Farra=Race car driver
Steve holmes=Race car Driver
Rocco Seifreddi=Race car driver



Anybody who uses good guys knows exactly what im talking about.


The director and his experience is always gonna be number 1# in my book.

[justinsain]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

No idea why you said that.

EXGF is a great idea. If it's produced commercially it still needs a good director and good models. If it's not 2257 and legal matters could be a problem.

Still needs to be varied in the scenarios so it does not get boring. And different locations are good. 50 scenes on a sofa or bed start to be stereotyped.

You don't need much of the second part of the list, except locations.

My point was you don't need most of what you listed to create and successfully sell porn imagery.

People will pay to see a huge, expensive, expertly created adult film by someone like Andrew Blake and people will pay to see a very amateurish video of a couple on vacation having sex on the motel bed shot with one table lamp and one video camera resting on a pile of towels on a chair in the corner where the angle never changes.

EXGF stuff is a hot seller right now along with self shot. Disregarding the legalities and only focusing on the creation and results, which is what your list was about, people will pay to see a poorly shot picture taken with a cellphone camera of a mirror reflection. Technically you can't get any cruder than that but it's a hot seller and it doesn't take any of what's on your list to produce it as the original pictures are done by girls that have none of that to work with. Those that REPRODUCE that " exgf or selfshot " STYLE can have all the resources they want but it's not necessary as proven by the girls that created that style.

Your original question was " what does it take to shoot the best porn " and my problem with that is porn covers such a wide spectrum of imagery and literature that it can't be pinned down with one " best way " to shoot it.

Your list falls more in line with producing high end productions which I'm guessing is a small percentage of all the porn available to consumers on the internet.

When digital replaced film, the price of equipment became affordable but still produced a quality image and with the internet making the delivery and sale super easy and affordable, anyone with a few hundred dollars can go create and sell porn. A couple can go buy the bare necessities and create a very successful website shooting themselves around their house and pool and do it without anything from your list. They probably won't win an AVN award but they can make a decent living with a great return on their investment.

So who really makes the best porn. A big budget adult film that's expertly shot but just manages to break even on it's investment or an amateur couple at home that shoots some very average ( technically wise ) imagery and spends $100 a month on expenses and makes $5,000 a month in return.

Today is A LOT different than the 70s and anyone can jump in the fray and try their hand at creating porn. The door is wide open and there is no secret recipe for success that takes years of knowledge and experience to acquire. For me the BEST porn is the kind that yields the best ROI and you don't have to have it all to accomplish that.

[stocktrader23]

I rarely see any porn that is worth a shit. It has always been popular but there is a movement back towards amateur, real looking girls. Unfortunately, I can't think of one damn photographer that can capture a true amateur look and feel. They are more worried about their high dollar cameras than realism.

I have asked for webcam pics here dozens of times over the years and I always got spammed with girls that look like models posed in a fake bedroom (or worse) and shot with standard cameras. Webcams take images / video in 320x240 so any image that could be cropped to that size would be great. Never once have I seen someone respond with content that was worth a shit for webcams. This is hilarious since this is by far the biggest niche around.

So frustrating.

On the other end, if someone would shoot a movie that was actually interesting and had a script it would explode.

[mafia_man]

Originally Posted by justinsain

My point was you don't need most of what you listed to create and successfully sell porn imagery.

Sarcastic comments should be enclosed in the suggested HTML6 tags <sarcasm></sarcasm>

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by JustDaveXxx

LOL, good answer, but a good director is gonna hire a good guy to begin with. When i shoot brand new girls, i use top males. The good guy will position the girl where i can see what i need to see. Furthermore, even if the girl sux, my guys will pound out a good scene.

Which is why I always used good guys. The sponsors who think any guy can be dragged off the street or will do it for cheap are wrong. I always told them "Why should I work with a guy who can't do it to save you a few dollars and give me a nightmare day?"

I can see how it will work sometimes for BG, how about GG and solo?

As for a good guy getting the best out of a girl. Her best is not always good enough. She might look hot and perform cold. No matter how good the guy is there's something missing. I used to shoot for a market where nothing was sold until it was published. There were also lots of good shooters competing in this market. Editors didn't buy unless it was good.

How does it work today with custom shooters commissioned to shoot a girl who turns up and is not as good as she needs to be?

I used to send them home, no point in wasting more money shooting something that won't sell. Do custom shooters do the same today?

[Mutt]

Originally Posted by JustDaveXxx

Examples:

Manual Farra=Race car driver
Steve holmes=Race car Driver
Rocco Seifreddi=Race car driver

i've always said it's the male talent who makes a scene go or makes it a flop. Manuel Ferrara is the best stunt cock since Rocco in his prime and before he went 'extreme'. Manuel Ferrara with a chick who is a 6 or a 7 is a better scene that a mediocre male talent with an 8,9 or 10.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by justinsain

My point was you don't need most of what you listed to create and successfully sell porn imagery.

People will pay to see a huge, expensive, expertly created adult film by someone like Andrew Blake and people will pay to see a very amateurish video of a couple on vacation having sex on the motel bed shot with one table lamp and one video camera resting on a pile of towels on a chair in the corner where the angle never changes.

EXGF stuff is a hot seller right now along with self shot. Disregarding the legalities and only focusing on the creation and results, which is what your list was about, people will pay to see a poorly shot picture taken with a cellphone camera of a mirror reflection. Technically you can't get any cruder than that but it's a hot seller and it doesn't take any of what's on your list to produce it as the original pictures are done by girls that have none of that to work with. Those that REPRODUCE that " exgf or selfshot " STYLE can have all the resources they want but it's not necessary as proven by the girls that created that style.

Your original question was " what does it take to shoot the best porn " and my problem with that is porn covers such a wide spectrum of imagery and literature that it can't be pinned down with one " best way " to shoot it.

Your list falls more in line with producing high end productions which I'm guessing is a small percentage of all the porn available to consumers on the internet.

When digital replaced film, the price of equipment became affordable but still produced a quality image and with the internet making the delivery and sale super easy and affordable, anyone with a few hundred dollars can go create and sell porn. A couple can go buy the bare necessities and create a very successful website shooting themselves around their house and pool and do it without anything from your list. They probably won't win an AVN award but they can make a decent living with a great return on their investment.

So who really makes the best porn. A big budget adult film that's expertly shot but just manages to break even on it's investment or an amateur couple at home that shoots some very average ( technically wise ) imagery and spends $100 a month on expenses and makes $5,000 a month in return.

Today is A LOT different than the 70s and anyone can jump in the fray and try their hand at creating porn. The door is wide open and there is no secret recipe for success that takes years of knowledge and experience to acquire. For me the BEST porn is the kind that yields the best ROI and you don't have to have it all to accomplish that.

Try building a site with porn that's shot by random couples and singles and staying legal.

As for profits you clearly do not understand. Which Exgf or amateur company makes the money Wicked, Hustler, and many more like them make?

Yes anyone can jump into the fray and make porn. Few make the money the big boys make.

When digital replaced film the price of digital cameras were way higher than film cameras.

Even a couple working from home shooting themselves need good ideas on scenarios, or it will get boring after a while. They need to be good models, do you want to watch ugly people fuck, and they need to be self directed. The idea you have of people just picking up a cheap camera and shooting is so way off. Maybe you would like to show us some examples of these.

There is nothing wrong with Amateur or Girlfriends type porn. I made a lot of money shooting it. www.astral-blue.com/tour it's just that there is more money in shooting other styles.

[Paul Markham]

My personal favorite directors or series.

Ed Powers early stuff. He got some real hot real girls and the viewer found out something about her and then he fucked their brains out. His style was amateur and gonzo mix.

Pierre Woodman. A director who could produce some great action either in top end productions or in his "Auditions" series.

Steve Perryman/Ben Dover. Again a director who could produce great gonzo or great top end films.

John Stagliano/Buttman. To me the top Gonzo producer ever.

Private. Up until 2000 produced some of the best films or single scenes ever. Hardcore and full on fucking. It often depended on the director, the best IMO would of been Bill Wright.

[candyflip]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Try building a site with porn that's shot by random couples and singles and staying legal.

Does this count as a porn site with content shot by random (ie. real amateur) couples and singles?

http://www.newbienudes.com

They seem to have no problem staying "legal" and making money.

As someone already pointed out...lots of people like "the real thing" and not your typical industry pornography.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by candyflip

Does this count as a porn site with content shot by random (ie. real amateur) couples and singles?

http://www.newbienudes.com

They seem to have no problem staying "legal" and making money.

As someone already pointed out...lots of people like "the real thing" and not your typical industry pornography.

Do you think they have all the documents on "User" submitted content?

I never said amateur was not good. Lots of people do like it. But the big money is in better stuff. Go ask Twistys. LOL

[justinsain]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

1. Try building a site with porn that's shot by random couples and singles and staying legal.

2. As for profits you clearly do not understand. Which Exgf or amateur company makes the money Wicked, Hustler, and many more like them make?

3. Yes anyone can jump into the fray and make porn. Few make the money the big boys make.

4. When digital replaced film the price of digital cameras were way higher than film cameras.

5. Even a couple working from home shooting themselves need good ideas on scenarios, or it will get boring after a while. They need to be good models, do you want to watch ugly people fuck, and they need to be self directed. The idea you have of people just picking up a cheap camera and shooting is so way off. Maybe you would like to show us some examples of these.

6. There is nothing wrong with Amateur or Girlfriends type porn. I made a lot of money shooting it. www.astral-blue.com/tour it's just that there is more money in shooting other styles.

1. I specifically said to ignore the legality as the discussion was about quality and even though the quality is poor the consumers are buying it up. That's the point.

2. Melissa posts here sometimes and she once said that she makes $500,000 a year AFTER expenses. Look at her photography. Simple shots taken around her house with a simple digital camera with no complicated light setup. Can you see the difference between her pictures and a top shooter like Dean?

Of course it helps her sales that she is a super self promoter, very interactive and kinda hot but the foundation of her business is her images and they are done in an amateurish way. Nothing creative just point and shoot. Most anyone can take the shots she uses on her site with a $500 camera.

http://www.melissamidwest.com/main.html

3. See #2

4. Of course the first digital SLRs were expensive but I'm talking about TODAY where you can buy a Canon Rebel, card and a flash for under $1,000 and be ready to go. Same for a video camera. Some people could even get started with a good point and shoot camera.

5. While there might be a few people out there that will watch ugly people have sex it's pretty much a given that beauty is very important. I don't have a problem with that. The discussion was more about behind the camera and my point is you don't have to be an expert to create sellable porn in today's market.

6. All I'm doing is disputing your points on what it takes to shoot great porn. Read what you wrote and then see how that applies to someone like http://tour4.ravenriley.com/?nats=NjM6Mzox&p=1 who I'm willing to bet is making a pretty decent living

What bothers me is when people say you need expensive, complicated to use camera equipment and lots of knowledge and experience to create and sell profitable porn. It's just not true in today's market.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by justinsain

What bothers me is when people say you need expensive, complicated to use camera equipment and lots of knowledge and experience to create and sell profitable porn. It's just not true in today's market.

You don't need it and if you read my first post you will see I put equipment under this quote.

"Then for certain niches the following are important."

[marcop]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

My personal favorite directors or series.

Ed Powers early stuff. He got some real hot real girls and the viewer found out something about her and then he fucked their brains out. His style was amateur and gonzo mix.

Pierre Woodman. A director who could produce some great action either in top end productions or in his "Auditions" series.

Steve Perryman/Ben Dover. Again a director who could produce great gonzo or great top end films.

John Stagliano/Buttman. To me the top Gonzo producer ever.

Private. Up until 2000 produced some of the best films or single scenes ever. Hardcore and full on fucking. It often depended on the director, the best IMO would of been Bill Wright.

I agree with these choices 100%.

One thing you didn't mention, Paul, was editing. And by editing, I meant not just cutting/assembling, but also enhancing the audio and video, etc. Good post-production work is essential to creating top quality content.

[Jakez]

Bangbus is the shiznit IMO. Not really sure how you can get much better than picking up some random hot chick and fucking her brains out then ditching her in the middle of nowhere..

[mafia_man]

Originally Posted by Jakez

Bangbus is the shiznit IMO. Not really sure how you can get much better than picking up some random hot chick and fucking her brains out then ditching her in the middle of nowhere..

You know it's fiction right?

[JustDaveXxx]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Which is why I always used good guys. The sponsors who think any guy can be dragged off the street or will do it for cheap are wrong. I always told them "Why should I work with a guy who can't do it to save you a few dollars and give me a nightmare day?"

I agree when it comes to males, but an amateur or low experience director would not understand that. You keep saying that a good director is #3 in importance on your list. Maybe if your list is a "one off" shoot with everyone is already picked for him.

But how consistent will your #3 importance director gonna be when he doesn't have the experience to know what guys to book? When to kill a scene? What are the girls strong points and week point when positioning them? How to deal with female talent when they are having a bad day? What positions are going to be shot? how many positions are gonna be shot? How to hit the nitch?


Male and female talent does not just show up and fuck. The director is the captain and what happens or doesn't happen is all on him. And you really think that a good director should be #3 in your list?

You are wrong, way wrong. You are not taking into consideration that you got 20+ years being a director. That everything you do is not even a thought. Booking, picking talent, identifying talent, identifying strengths, identifying weakness, etc.

Your list is OK if you are shooting a one off scene, but what happens when you shoot 25 a month for a year? How good is your #3 director now? Is your #3 guy gonna be consistent over time?


I would rank your director at #1 especially now that your director is the everything guy. He books males+females, books locations, takes pretty girls, sex-stills and chooses how the overall scene is gonna go. Most importantly he has the direct communications and instructions from the client on what is actually required in the scene.

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

How does it work today with custom shooters commissioned to shoot a girl who turns up and is not as good as she needs to be?

Yes, and the client generally pics the girls to be shot.

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

I used to send them home, no point in wasting more money shooting something that won't sell. Do custom shooters do the same today?

It depends. If the client is dead set on that girl, you do what ever it takes to make that scene work. And if you want to send them home because your #3 director doesn't have the experience to know how to make things work out, its gonna cost you $200 to kill fee the girl,(especially if its an LA Direct girl), $100+ for make up, $200+ for location and $100 for your assistant.

Thats $600 you don't get back ever. Who pays? the director, because the client is paying for a completed scene. (ask BM Bradly about that one)



The more and more i read and answer this post, the more and more i see how disconnected you really are from what is going on today. I live in LA and i swim with the big boys. #3 directors out here are called PA's or are jobless.


The best example of swimming well in a "sink or swim" situation, is Jay Rock. This guy was mediocre at best when he was shooting in Texas. He moves to LA and his game, his style and his quality has gone through the roof in all aspects of shooting. Why is that?? Because people in LA are that good, competition is fierce and if he didn't up his game, he would go hungry. Got much respect for Jay Rock for all of his successes and industry accomplishments. People do not come into adult and make shit happen in adult production the way Jay Rock did.


I really don't think Jay Rock and other good directors are gonna rank themselves as #3 on your list of what is important when making good porn.

Originally Posted by Mutt

i've always said it's the male talent who makes a scene go or makes it a flop. Manuel Ferrara is the best stunt cock since Rocco in his prime and before he went 'extreme'. Manuel Ferrara with a chick who is a 6 or a 7 is a better scene that a mediocre male talent with an 8,9 or 10.

You are way on point and a #3 director on Markhums list of importance would not see that.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by marcop

One thing you didn't mention, Paul, was editing. And by editing, I meant not just cutting/assembling, but also enhancing the audio and video, etc. Good post-production work is essential to creating top quality content.

Agreed, good editing is essential in a lot of niches, if not most.

Missed that one.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by JustDaveXxx

I agree when it comes to males, but an amateur or low experience director would not understand that. You keep saying that a good director is #3 in importance on your list. Maybe if your list is a "one off" shoot with everyone is already picked for him.

But how consistent will your #3 importance director gonna be when he doesn't have the experience to know what guys to book? When to kill a scene? What are the girls strong points and week point when positioning them? How to deal with female talent when they are having a bad day? What positions are going to be shot? how many positions are gonna be shot? How to hit the nitch?

Male and female talent does not just show up and fuck. The director is the captain and what happens or doesn't happen is all on him. And you really think that a good director should be #3 in your list?

You are wrong, way wrong. You are not taking into consideration that you got 20+ years being a director. That everything you do is not even a thought. Booking, picking talent, identifying talent, identifying strengths, identifying weakness, etc.

Why do you assume because I rate the director as #3 on my list I'm talking about a 3rd rate director? You're way off there.

Even the best directors shooting scene that has been done 100,000 times before will have trouble getting it to make the viewer sit up and take notice. And yet we've all seen scenes that were fresh, innovative and with the right model they just worked. Bang Bus would be one site that proves that.

Even the best directors can't make a girl who simply is not into it or faking everything badly look hot.

Your list is OK if you are shooting a one off scene, but what happens when you shoot 25 a month for a year? How good is your #3 director now? Is your #3 guy gonna be consistent over time?

Most people shooting 25 scenes a month are going to get stale.

Yes, and the client generally pics the girls to be shot.

It depends. If the client is dead set on that girl, you do what ever it takes to make that scene work. And if you want to send them home because your #3 director doesn't have the experience to know how to make things work out, its gonna cost you $200 to kill fee the girl,(especially if its an LA Direct girl), $100+ for make up, $200+ for location and $100 for your assistant.

Thats $600 you don't get back ever. Who pays? the director, because the client is paying for a completed scene. (ask BM Bradly about that one)

Yes I can see the disadvantage of that. Some girls are great on stills and suck on video. With a client choosing a girl on a picture that has to be a problem. Same goes for a shooter choosing a girl on the strength of an agents pictures.

I admit I worked in a different time. When I shot content if it was not good enough it was not sold. Even if the buyer asked for the girl. He just would not buy. We had no option but to send the girl home.

BECAUSE I PUT DIRECTORS AT #3 ON MY LIST I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT A 3RD RATE DIRECTOR.

Just in case you missed it.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Jakez

Bangbus is the shiznit IMO. Not really sure how you can get much better than picking up some random hot chick and fucking her brains out then ditching her in the middle of nowhere..

Great site, one of the first I joined. They took the idea of picking a girl up in a vehicle and made it great. Got a bit repetitive after a while.

[marcop]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Great site, one of the first I joined. They took the idea of picking a girl up in a vehicle and made it great. Got a bit repetitive after a while.

For a lark, I was going to shoot as a BangBus parody of a guy on a tandem bicycle picking up a girl on Venice Beach, taking her home and fucking her, then dumping her by cycling like mad away from her. When I checked, someone already had the domain name bangbike.com registered, and I thought that was funnier than my parody idea.

[JustDaveXxx]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

BECAUSE I PUT DIRECTORS AT #3 ON MY LIST I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT A 3RD RATE DIRECTOR.

Just in case you missed it.

LOL, K

[james_clickmemedia]

>>What does it take to shoot the best porn?

Experience and a cheep supply of viagra...

[SpongeBub]

Annette Haven and it's 1978 again.

[Supz]

Photography is an art. Some people have the eye and some don't.

Of course good equipment and training helps. It helps with good ones better then others..

Might not be a good analogy but I would bring up sports...

Everyday two athletes can do the same training for there whole lives side by side. One with always be better then the other.

[JimiKing]

I think a creative concept and the skill/talent to execute it properly is what it's all about.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Supz

Photography is an art. Some people have the eye and some don't.

Of course good equipment and training helps. It helps with good ones better then others..

Might not be a good analogy but I would bring up sports...

Everyday two athletes can do the same training for there whole lives side by side. One with always be better then the other.

True also when it comes to pornography.