Babestation - General Chat & Discussion

(09-07-2016 22:36 )M-L-L Wrote:  From the point of view of the TV viewer, if you like seeing the babes sitting still and filmed only from the waist up, and maybe with glimpses of their knees close to the camera in the bottom of the frame just for extra spice, then its quids in.

For the rest of us non-cam users, it's a catastrophe.

So it's the same case in BS too? I am not an avid viewer of this channel but I expected BS to at least put a bit more effort to it than st66, who I've thought to be the lazier channel of the 2.

I support the idea of perve cams since I love watching these girls being secretly naughty behind the TV screen. But the top-half-only (or in extreme cases, face-only) shots are a huge turnoff for me since it damages the secretive factor & usually the best parts of the girl are hidden from the TV angle. It has lazy performing & camera work written all over it & is down-right disrespectful for the TV audience. I've seen shows with perve cams that can be hugely stimulating from both POV's. But it usually involves the more professional girls & staff, who actually put some effort into selling their services rather than making themselves feel as comfortable as possible. Can't imagine it's very beneficial money-wise as well, since there are A LOT of foot worshippers out there.

(09-07-2016 11:26 )Danzig Wrote:  

(09-07-2016 11:09 )steviebaby Wrote:  

(09-07-2016 06:13 )Danzig Wrote:  The problem is that most of their night time babes will never show anything Ashley,Alice,lori,Olivia,cali, Danni H look shit scared of the cam anywhere near them...Sophie Hart and kimberley both have potential to be good on the cam. It's good that Kerrie and Amanda and Lynda and Beth have a chance to make real money as they know what to do with the pervcam thing.

Has anyone looked at Dannii's cam. Is she really not producing?
It seemed to me she was sticking it in full view of her open legged poses but it could have just been judicious aiming!

Dannii kept placing the cam where you were not getting a clear view of the goods.The only ones who have shown the goods are Amanda, Kerrie, Lynda, Beth, and Kimberley.

personally I'd be happy is Dannii wasn't forced to use it as I preferred her shows a while ago, when she was allowed to play to the tv audience, just showing a bit here and there, a proper tease show. With maybe a more explicit POV thrown in here and there.
I have no interest in staring at a girl's pussy for ages (well unless I am in close physical proximity that is) and if the babe isn't comfortable with pervcam they shouldn't use it as it becomes a scam and will drive viewers away.
maybe they should schedule a mixture of pervcam girls and regular girls every night so to take advantage of the profit from the cams and allow the others to put on proper tv shows?

sorry but i gotta lol at these complaints about the perve cams. there ruining your freeview?.
if guys are willing to pay to see pussy then why shouldnt the girls take advantage of that.
if you just wanna call, then the girls will put there panties on and do a normal show for the tv.
but if your not calling or willing to pay for a cam then what are you complaining about, your still getting to see boobies for free.
i know that this isnt gonna be a popular comment, but its a business not a charity. there not doing it out of the kindness of there hearts

*sits back and waits for the shit to fly*

i would add that currently there is reason to be sceptical of the cams, as some babestations babes have earned a rep of fucking the customers over.
but because the cam is in plain view of the screen theres very little chance of that if your wise about it.
if you cant see the cam dont connect. the studio wants the cam in shot as often as possible to advertise it without having to advertise it (if that makes sense)
so if the cams being hidden and the girl is out of frame then avoid it till the view angle changes. and you can see what your gonna get for your hard earned cash.

as for being forced. none of the girls are being forced to do anything. its a job not a community work order.
as for plastered all over the web. its nowhere near the issue it was. most of the content thats out there is 1-2 years old now. for a couple of reasons.
the studios locked there cams behind paywalls.
the guys that were sharing got grassed up.
the guys that were sharing moved on.
only a dumbass puts his private recordings on tubesites, where they will be discovered, and will result in the girls shutting up shop. so dont.

Tonight marks the last time I'll probably call the channels...after 40credits worth pissed away enough is enough.... firstly it's almost impossible with the queue to be frank but above all and why I won't be calling is simply the kooky fucking crazy cunts ringing holy fuck some are just off the reservation I mean I was trying to get through to priya and a guy was telling her I want you to eat my shit

Pretty hard to maintain a boner and wait to be connected after that and that was just the tip of the iceberg!!!

No wonder the girls of the channels sometimes look disinterested or find it hard to be on their best form for your call IFFFF you get through

lol fk me... yeah ive heard some shit in my time, and thats up there with it... but hey thanks for sharing coz now i know what made her gag.

(09-07-2016 23:13 )Tractor boy Wrote:  In the old days, guys turned on by such things would stand at the bottom of the escalator in M & S to get their thrills ( well, until they where arrested ) now they can fill your boots

I don't wear boots

(10-07-2016 04:41 )HEX!T Wrote:  sorry but i gotta lol at these complaints about the perve cams. there ruining your freeview?.
if guys are willing to pay to see pussy then why shouldnt the girls take advantage of that.
if you just wanna call, then the girls will put there panties on and do a normal show for the tv.
but if your not calling or willing to pay for a cam then what are you complaining about,

Yes it's not a charity, but many of these babes are not even taking off their panties, so there's no reason for the TV camera to crop the action so tightly - except to try and kid on viewers to log into cams and see something that isn't actually happening.
Doesn't seem good business sense to alienate all the TV viewers - who's going to be tempted into an impulse call by 60 minutes of head and shoulder shots ?

Here's a little fishing-based analogy.
Think of a canal with fish swimming up and down, with a row of anglers sitting hopefully on the bank.
The fish are the viewers, each angler is a babe channel on the EPG, dangling in their phone/cam offers on a hook.
But what makes the fish more likely to pause and sniff around one of these hooks before swimming past? A good dose of groundbait. And that is what the free to view tv output is.
As with the fish, some viewers will bite at the first thing they see, others are much more wary or choosy, and need more persuasion. So every angler will get a few fish whatever, but only the cleverer/more diligent ones will end up with a full net.

Yours truly, Mr. Barbel.

Maybe the analogy should be with industrialised factory fish farming and with angling.
I'd suggest the cam is a big tempting trawler net : but by the time the fish have swum into it and found there's not much going, they're all hoisted up.
The anglers just offering little titbits on their hooks are likely to get capsized ?

That's all well and good but is it worth getting my tiddler out ?