Forums > General Industry > Penthouse vs Playboy

Model

L Mami

Posts: 266

Los Angeles, California, US

I know playboy has always had allot more integrety but Penthouse recently changed their look, do you think models would ever try to get into Penthouse like they do Playboy if there was a big change?
btw the way whats the real difference in career impacts by appearing in either one?

Jul 15 07 06:20 am Link

Photographer

Sharpshoota photography

Posts: 134

New York, New York, US

Penthouse changed their look....Does that mean the models no longer have to give golden showers in every pictorial?

Jul 15 07 06:22 am Link

Model

L Mami

Posts: 266

Los Angeles, California, US

lol why do they?

Jul 15 07 06:23 am Link

Photographer

Jim Shibley

Posts: 2987

Phoenix, Arizona, US

Penthouse doesn't have the prestige that Playboy has do I don't think so. Plus not everyone knows Penthouse has changed & is less explicit than it was.

Jul 15 07 06:30 am Link

guide forum

Photographer

GPS Studio Services

Posts: 36683

San Francisco, California, US

Looks can be deceiving.  The magazine is much tamer.  They did that because they had to get their advertising dollars back.  They still shoot the same hardcore content they did before.  Now they just use it for the web or other venues.  It is kind of like selling zip sets on a website.  If you buy the magazine you see one level if you want to see more, you spend an extra few bucks.

Penthouse is making money again, but it will never be the same as Playboy.  That doesn't mean you shouldn't shoot for them.  I know models who have managed to get in and refused to shoot hardcore (although they were asked).  They avoided the hardcore by passing on shooting for centerfold.  They for Penthouse basically for the money.

So if you want to do Penthouse, go for it.  Just don't expect it to have the same prestige as being in Playboy.  It isn't going to happen.

Jul 15 07 07:52 am Link

Photographer

FKVPhotography

Posts: 30064

Ocala, Florida, US

This subject was discussed in an earlier thread. It seemed at that time everyone thought that Penthouse was so improved over the "old" Penthouse.

Having known Penthouse from it's first issue, literally, but not having seen it for quite a few years now I went an bought this "new and improved" Penthouse just to see what eveyone was talking about.

It was the biggest waste if EIGHT freaking dollars I ever saw!! If this is the "new & improved" Penthouse.....they might as well distrubute it straight into the trash.

Jul 15 07 08:23 am Link

Photographer

photoduvall

Posts: 308

Longwood, Florida, US

Thanks for taking one for the team Frank and saving me the 8 bucks.

Jul 15 07 08:30 am Link

Model

L Mami

Posts: 266

Los Angeles, California, US

Jul 29 07 12:35 pm Link

Photographer

Studio 530

Posts: 682

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, US

Jim Shibley wrote:
Penthouse doesn't have the prestige that Playboy has do I don't think so. Plus not everyone knows Penthouse has changed & is less explicit than it was.

I didn't know thay had changed their look... I'll have to grab a copy and check it out. This is pretty interesting news!

Jul 29 07 01:14 pm Link

Photographer

Rick Edwards

Posts: 6165

Wilmington, Delaware, US

at least you can't see the models tonsils via her vagina like Hustler

Jul 29 07 01:25 pm Link

Model

D M M

Posts: 7905

New York, New York, US

Rick Edwards wrote:
at least you can't see the models tonsils via her vagina like Hustler

I buy Playboy often. My friends and I gather round and talk about whose tits look great while drinking beer at my house.

So, I checked out Hustler once; it was lying on my friend's bed. I opened up to a photo of a woman with a guitar up her vagina. Classy stuff.

Jul 29 07 01:34 pm Link

Photographer

Rick Edwards

Posts: 6165

Wilmington, Delaware, US

Ian Miranda wrote:

I buy Playboy often. My friends and I gather round and talk about whose tits look great while drinking beer at my house.

So, I checked out Hustler once; it was lying on my friend's bed. I opened up to a photo of a woman with a guitar up her vagina. Classy stuff.

yep, nothing subtle about Larry Flynt's style

Jul 31 07 01:37 pm Link

Photographer

LeDeux Art

Posts: 50123

San Ramon, California, US

they both blow, to many of the shooters on here think they are shooten for one of those lame rags! lets try a few words, boring, without imagination and poorly thought out images that rely on a pretty model to sell the image rather than the shooter. so says the California Kid

Jul 31 07 01:47 pm Link

Artist/Painter

Vincent Wolff

Posts: 2866

Chicago, Illinois, US

there are some beautiful women in both magazines, and Penthouse definitely changed their pictorial style.  A lot of the poses, however, have gotten very formulaic---you see the same shots showing up over several pictorials.

Jul 31 07 01:51 pm Link

Photographer

La Seine by the Hudson

Posts: 8587

New York, New York, US

I haven't looked much at either in recent years, but I did notice the big Penthouse shift. If you ask me, Penthouse got a little more interesting. Playboy still seems the same now as it has been for a long time, and it's looking very tired, almost anachronistic, if you ask me.

Jul 31 07 02:26 pm Link

Photographer

DHayes Photography

Posts: 4861

Richmond, Virginia, US

Ian Miranda wrote:

I buy Playboy often. My friends and I gather round and talk about whose tits look great while drinking beer at my house.

So, I checked out Hustler once; it was lying on my friend's bed. I opened up to a photo of a woman with a guitar up her vagina. Classy stuff.

I was in the Army when Hustler first hit the stands and the guys in the barracks used to buy it and pass it around for the grossout factor.  I remember Hustler having a long run of puke-inducing models:  extremely old women, hairy (total body) women, grotesquely fat women, amputees, you name it.

Aug 01 07 06:39 am Link

Photographer

J C ModeFotografie

Posts: 14718

Los Angeles, California, US

FKVPhotoGraphics wrote:
This subject was discussed in an earlier thread. It seemed at that time everyone thought that Penthouse was so improved over the "old" Penthouse.

Having known Penthouse from it's first issue, literally, but not having seen it for quite a few years now I went an bought this "new and improved" Penthouse just to see what eveyone was talking about.

It was the biggest waste if EIGHT freaking dollars I ever saw!! If this is the "new & improved" Penthouse.....they might as well distrubute it straight into the trash.

Sadly, the new Penthouse is now a Fundamentalist rag being marketed to gay hairdressers!

Seriously now - the old Penthouse (though admittedly sometimes just basic pornography) had some truly artistic and arousing erotic photography of some of the most beautiful women on the planet.

I hope that they will go back to the old format.

Best Regards,
JAY

Aug 01 07 06:47 am Link

Photographer

Stacy Leigh

Posts: 3064

New York, New York, US

Sharpshoota photography wrote:
Penthouse changed their look....Does that mean the models no longer have to give golden showers in every pictorial?

that was 15 years ago.

Aug 01 07 06:49 am Link

Photographer

GDS Photos

Posts: 3328

London, England, United Kingdom

Wow, did we miss out in the UK?  Penthouse was actually well shot and few if any shots between the legs.  Certainly no showers etc..   It had some interesting photographers who shot the models in a much less foemulaic way than Playboy which it has to be said is a wank mag for middle class execs.

Aug 01 07 06:56 am Link

Admin

theda

Posts: 21717

New York, New York, US

Penthouse has been all over the map stylistically. there was a period in the 90s where golden showers were frequent. there have also been period, so I'm told, in which Penthouse's photography was actually interesting and extremely well done.  There have also been stretches of complete crap.

Aug 01 07 07:10 am Link

Photographer

J C ModeFotografie

Posts: 14718

Los Angeles, California, US

theda wrote:
Penthouse has been all over the map stylistically. there was a period in the 90s where golden showers were frequent. there have also been period, so I'm told, in which Penthouse's photography was actually interesting and extremely well done.  There have also been stretches of complete crap.

All I can say in reply to that is that I hope the models who did the golden showers hadn't eaten asparagus right before their shoots!

Best Regards,
JAY

Aug 01 07 07:18 am Link

Photographer

Merlinpix

Posts: 7100

Farmingdale, New York, US

Playboy has  always  been the benchmark for  men's  magazines, there also the  least  controversial.
Penthouse  has always  been it's  redheaded  stepchild.
Yes,  Playboy is formulaic to  a  large  degree, but if the  cake sells why  change the  recipe.

Aug 01 07 07:19 am Link

Photographer

J C ModeFotografie

Posts: 14718

Los Angeles, California, US

Merlinpix wrote:
Playboy has  always  been the benchmark for  men's  magazines, there also the  least  controversial.
Penthouse  has always  been it's  redheaded  stepchild.
Yes,  Playboy is formulaic to  a  large  degree, but if the  cake sells why  change the  recipe.

If these magazines were food, Playboy would be sugar-coated corn flakes while Penthouse would be braised antelope with truffles.

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

Aug 01 07 07:37 am Link

Photographer

Merlinpix

Posts: 7100

Farmingdale, New York, US

JAY carreon wrote:

If these magazines were food, Playboy would be sugar-coated corn flakes while Penthouse would be braised antelope with truffles.

JAY carreon
PHOTOGRAPHER

I agree, unfortunately the cornflakes  outdraw the  antelope.

Aug 01 07 08:57 am Link

Photographer

Steve Mills

Posts: 4783

Hermiston, Oregon, US

The sum total of Penthouse's useful influence, IMO, was to get Playboy off the pot and showing pubic hair. That's it. Not that anyone actually has pubic hair these days, but that was what happened in the mid-70's. I still remember the first centerfold with a bush. It was phenomenal.

sigh....

Aug 01 07 09:25 am Link

Model

KATHY JEAN

Posts: 5513

Pekin, Illinois, US

Steve Mills wrote:
The sum total of Penthouse's useful influence, IMO, was to get Playboy off the pot and showing pubic hair. That's it. Not that anyone actually has pubic hair these days, but that was what happened in the mid-70's. I still remember the first centerfold with a bush. It was phenomenal.

sigh....

big_smile Hmm, good idea for a '70s retro shoot?  Bush

Aug 01 07 11:43 am Link

Model

Ava de Mer

Posts: 114

Macon, Georgia, US

Both magazines seem to always have interviews with all kinds of celebrities.  Its nice to know that anything considered risqué isn't scaring people away anymore.

The covers of Penthouse seem a little more upbeat and stylish now.  Take the one with Dita on the cover for instance.  (in her green corset)

Aug 01 07 12:44 pm Link

Photographer

DevilsTowerMedia

Posts: 295

Douglasville, Georgia, US

Erotic Pin-up Art wrote:
there are some beautiful women in both magazines, and Penthouse definitely changed their pictorial style.  A lot of the poses, however, have gotten very formulaic---you see the same shots showing up over several pictorials.

Both mags have been formula since the 80's.  If you note in Playboy, virtually all the gatefold pictorials repeat every x number of months in page layout and shot type.  As well as the fact that they began digitally modifying Centerfolds so the models all fill about the same amount of space and relative scale in every issue.  Wasn't that way up to about '84.  Then and before, Playmates were all unique and memorable.

Penthouse has recently changed, because about a year or so ago, they went bankrupt.  Quite honestly, both magazines have *way* too many advertising pages in the back for phone-sex, and astrology.

I never liked the soft-fuzzy photos of Penthouse, which most people think was a 'trademark' style-- it was actually due to the fact that Guccione started out using a 35MM camera, not the larger cameras that Playboy used.

Playboy had beautiful women-- approachable.  Penthouse had beautiful women-- mostly, and you got to see everything for a change, without obscuring the genitals, and Hustler of course, I will defend simply because Larry Flynt's magazine really isn't so much about his mag-- but rather about his defense of the first Amendment irregardless of what puritanical zealots throw his way.

IMHO

Aug 01 07 03:00 pm Link

Model

Amber Justine

Posts: 113

York, Pennsylvania, US

I got offered to be in Hustler but I just couldn't bring myself to do it... even for good money. My deal is, don't pose any style that I wouldn't like to personally drool over. I'm a softcore girl...

Aug 01 07 03:05 pm Link

Photographer

Marco Aureliani

Posts: 719

Reggio nell'Emilia, Emilia-Romagna, Italy

Rick Edwards wrote:
at least you can't see the models tonsils via her vagina like Hustler

Yeah, the classic "inside beauty" big_smile

Aug 01 07 03:07 pm Link

Photographer

TestShoot

Posts: 1098

Beverly Hills, California, US

What was the rumor? That they brought over editors and a photo editor from Esquire or something? I have a bunch of emails of new staffers over there if anybody wants them.

Aug 01 07 03:09 pm Link

Artist/Painter

Vincent Wolff

Posts: 2866

Chicago, Illinois, US

DevilsTowerMedia wrote:

Both mags have been formula since the 80's.  If you note in Playboy, virtually all the gatefold pictorials repeat every x number of months in page layout and shot type.  As well as the fact that they began digitally modifying Centerfolds so the models all fill about the same amount of space and relative scale in every issue.  Wasn't that way up to about '84.  Then and before, Playmates were all unique and memorable.

Penthouse has recently changed, because about a year or so ago, they went bankrupt.  Quite honestly, both magazines have *way* too many advertising pages in the back for phone-sex, and astrology.

I never liked the soft-fuzzy photos of Penthouse, which most people think was a 'trademark' style-- it was actually due to the fact that Guccione started out using a 35MM camera, not the larger cameras that Playboy used.

Playboy had beautiful women-- approachable.  Penthouse had beautiful women-- mostly, and you got to see everything for a change, without obscuring the genitals, and Hustler of course, I will defend simply because Larry Flynt's magazine really isn't so much about his mag-- but rather about his defense of the first Amendment irregardless of what puritanical zealots throw his way.

IMHO

True, but advertising pays for the magazine, not just newsstand or sub sales.

Yes, they are formulaic, and I've discussed with a Playboy model friend several times, but its worse than before, IMO.   I don't like Hustler per se, but I also defend Flynt's First Amendment rights.  I'd like to see a men's mag that is more arty, more chances, more ethnicty, more sophisticated, and one that would treat its models with more respect---but it would never sell!

Aug 01 07 03:27 pm Link

Photographer

Steve Mills

Posts: 4783

Hermiston, Oregon, US

KATHY   JEAN wrote:

big_smile Hmm, good idea for a '70s retro shoot?  Bush

Oh, yeah. smile

Aug 01 07 07:17 pm Link

Photographer

Chris Beyond

Posts: 1514

Los Angeles, California, US

Ian Miranda wrote:
So, I checked out Hustler once; it was lying on my friend's bed. I opened up to a photo of a woman with a guitar up her vagina. Classy stuff.

It's not nice to make fun of Courtney Love. Anyone could mistake their guitar for a tampon.


...Ok, I'm going to gag now.

Aug 01 07 07:22 pm Link

Model

Charlene

Posts: 106

Greenville, Alabama, US

I remember the first Hustler mag (and last) I saw had a story about a guy fingering green watery fecal matter (referred to as goop) into his wife's vagina and then he did her while she was passed out over a toilet.
Thats just too overboard, I hope it didn't really happen.

Aug 01 07 07:30 pm Link

Model

Charlene

Posts: 106

Greenville, Alabama, US

Chris Beyond wrote:

It's not nice to make fun of Courtney Love. Anyone could mistake their guitar for a tampon.


...Ok, I'm going to gag now.

Hahahaha!

Aug 01 07 07:30 pm Link

Photographer

Scott Christopher

Posts: 39

Cresco, Iowa, US

I think both magazines are outdated and akin to being dinosaurs in the modern age.  If someone really wants porn/nudity there is no shortage on the net for free, and how many people really buy playboy or penthouse for art aspect?  I personally don't like playboys style, it's insanely overprocessed and the pics might as well be paintings for the amount of actual reality that exists in them.  I've seen a few playboy models in person and it's jarring the difference between that and the magazine.  I know some people might like "perfection" but i just don't like their overdone look.

I haven't seen penthouse in years so i can't speak for them.

Aug 01 07 09:19 pm Link

Photographer

Andy Pearlman

Posts: 3411

Los Angeles, California, US

I didn't see it mentioned here, but the main reason Penthouse changed is that they went broke and were sold to a whole new publisher. Bob G is long gone as are all the staff, although I think Ken Marcus is shooting for them again. I used to shoot B/W promo headshots of PH Pets (for personal appearances) for their west coast office back in the late 80's. One of my assignments was an 18-year-old, pre-boob job Janine Lindemulder. (Does anyone here remember her w/o the tattoos?).

Andy Pearlman

Aug 02 07 02:50 am Link

Model

Natasja Gil

Posts: 5

Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico

I WOULD LIKE TO BE IN PENTHOUSE AND PLAYBOY ... !!!!!!!!!
NATASHA
: )

Nov 26 08 11:44 am Link

Photographer

rp_photo

Posts: 42502

Houston, Texas, US

Penthouse was an early participant in the Green Movement.

In order to save paper, they frequently shot two models for a single spread.

Nov 26 08 12:16 pm Link