Hi Folks,

Here's another cool offering for the UMD photo archive.

Anabelle Pync is Syrena Blue, a pop princess who is afraid as being taken for 'lame'. So she figures a plunge into a mucky bog will spice up her next music video. Now that the idea is in her head, she just needs to find the right spot. As it happens, Syrena isn't lame. In fact she's pretty hot. But maybe she's a little lame in the common sense department. An interesting tale, well written, and very well played by Anabelle.

This awesome scene appears on the DVD Damsels in Quicksand #8 and is available for immediate download at Club MPV.

Enjoy!

WOW! Now **that** is what I call a WAM outfit.

Utterly magnificent!

Do we get to see her crawl out of the mud post-sink? Some years back I bought one of the "Elizabethan collar" scenes, the sinking part of which was great but it was disappointing not to have video of the emergence and crawl-out. There were some photos but no video, which to me seemed odd as that would be one of the best bits. Did you not film the crawl-outs? Been meaning to ask this for ages.

Perhaps info that should be in the description?

This issue just came up with regards to a rather misguided review of a different dramatic scene.

I include post-submersion photos in the samples to satisfy the requirement of 'showing' that the actress survived the scene. The frame captures show how the purchased scene plays out. Yes, the crawling out and showering pics are included in the photo set. But the photo set is in two parts. By the time you get to the end of the 'action', you already know that you are viewing outtake images. Thus, no mood is broken.

To explain this in each relevant scene description would be like having a disclaimer to explain a disclaimer. Pretty exhausting IMO.

We film everything. The crawling out bits are compiled into 'Escape' collections and are organized by actress. The video we shoot is compartmentalized like this for dramatic content to preserve the magic. If you're not a fan of the quicksand angle of WAM, then this will not make much sense.

Here's an example of an Escape compilation - https://umd.net/download_info/kym-escapes-1

FWIW, this (Edgy) scene goes on sale here at UMD tomorrow (Saturday). As I was collecting links for the scene, I realized that it had not yet been published here.

TBH that's what reminded me to ask, but have been meaning to for ages, I think I bought my scene some time before the Great Pestilence!


Not sure I follow? Assuming the "action" is the first part, presumably what you're calling the outtakes are the second one?


At least two people, me and the person who recently complained, have said we were disapointed not to get the crawl-out when we bought our respective scenes. And as a business colleague of mine once put it, regarding finding data problems in an ISP database, "where there's one, there's hundreds". Most people won't complain, just write it off and move on, but you can be sure there will be other people who've bought scenes wanting to see video of the mud-coated girl at the end, and cursed thoroughly when the video cuts out just before the money shots. At which point you've lost potential customers.

I'm a firm believer in "there ain't no such animal as too much information", in my previews and descriptions I always try and give as much information as possible, so people can make a fully informed choice when purchasing. Granted there is a limit to quite how much detail can be added, but basic stuff like quick or slow sink, what's shown in each video, and in any case where something could be misinterpreted the detail to avoid that, is a good thing?


I get the point that the main video is meant to end with the final sink under leaving the viewer with the mystery of whether the character lived or not. Not my thing but I know it's been part of WAM since the early days.

But does that really mean the crawl-out couldn't be included in the same package as a separate file?


Glad to know they are filmed at least! But having them by model is no good to me, as I'd resent having to pay for something with a bunch of nudity or skimpy outfits, in which I have less than zero interest, just to get the one fully clothed scene I'm after. But I can see it would be a logistical nightmare to create groupings of all the different ways people might want to group things. Wouldn't it just be easier to have all clips from a specific sink, including the after-shots and wash-off, all in main package?


Noted.

I stand by my scene descriptions, as well as the keywords selected for each scene. You seem to be suggesting that I describe what is not in the scene. I should not have to do that.

Perhaps the precise keywords the producers use should be displayed for the customer to contemplate. That is information the producers are providing, and yet it is not currently informing the customer directly.

For example, scenes of mine that end with a 'crawling out' feature the keywords Surfacing and Total Coverage. So, I am already doing what you are recommending.

Superseding all of this is the fact that I have segregated my quicksand and mud/coverage content into two completely different stores. Anyone who is looking for coverage content in a quicksand environment should probably make sure the model is shown on video after the conclusion of the scene.

Apologies for the delay in replying to this, the forum index was insisting the last reply was mine, when in fact you replied 11 days ago. I'll flag that to MM, would have replied way sooner if had spotted that you'd replied.


I think that (for all producers) depends on what exactly it is that isn't included. I have scenes where the model's hair and faces remain clean throughhout, they only get messy from the neck down - I explicitly state that in the descriptions of those scenes, because I know most wammers prefer head and face coverage. Likewise my early scenes with no audio because we'd music playing and didn't want to be sued for copyright infringement, they all have "Due to copyright music playing when this scene was recorded, the soundtrack has been removed." We did that long before MM added the "no audio" tickbox, after complaints from folk who wanted to hear the splatters.

So when what's not included is something that a reasonable customer would expect would be, they need to be warned it isn't, in order to avoid "buyer's remorse" and negative reviews.


The keywords field is meant for additional keywords that can't be sensibly got into the main description but may be helpful when people are searching. It's mainly meant for similies. For example if I mention "wellies" in the main text, I'll put "wellingtons, rubber boots, boots" in the keywords. Or if the main text has "skin-tight leggings" the keywords will have "yoga pants", as another common term for the same thing. Or main text has "jeans", keywords has "denim", and so on.

It's mainly meant to assist the UMD search function in returning relevant scenes for a given search without missing any out because the main text uses a different term for something than the potential customer is searching for.

Everything important about the scene should be in the main description, keywords is only for extras.


I suspect a lot of customers, especially when looking on the common UMD store that shows everyone's content, don't pay a lot of attention to which store a scene is from. They do a search for something they're into, like "jeans" or "spandex", and can browse through and buy from anything that is returned, regardless of producer. I think about 75% of my sales are from the general store rather than my specific URL.

Spot-on responses DM1, thanks. I do have to note that Dave did everything we requested that he do with regard to editing all his submersion scenes to include a pic set with the reemerging. After a compliance officer from our biller had contacted me about his sinking scenes, I worked with them and Dave to see if adding a photoset from the same scene that included the reemerging would suffice to prove the model was OK and it wasn't a snuff film, and they said that would be fine.

What we end up with though, is set of thumbnails from the video that doesn't include reemergence, and set from the photoset that does. Showing a pic set from the same scene showing reemergence implies that it also exists in the video, with the customer likely assuming that that thumb was simply not selected as one of the video previews. This is a rational assumption from a casual shopper who is not intimate with all of our little rules, so I allow negative reviews from customers who felt disappointed about the lack of video footage that matches all the action shown on the preview page.

This is not a case about who is technically right or wrong. We must prepare our content and preview pages to do everything we can to make it frictionless and easy for our audience to understand at a glance. That said, if an additional disclaimer is added to descriptions of these scenes that explicitly mentions that the video portion does not have reemergence, then I would not approve a negative review complaining about that, because it's explicitly stated. I understand that adding this to the description would diminish the "magic" of imagining that the model doesn't return.

This will be an unpopular opinion, but it slightly bothers me that omitting reemergence footage from any video is seen as part of the magic, especially if that footage exists. If seeing the model not come back up is part of the fantasy, then what fantasy is that exactly?