Over the last say, year, or so,..75-80% of the Celebrity Content has been of the girls FULLY CLOTHED. You are lucky if you find a new(er) picture/video of a Celeb in a Mini Skirt! I have a feeling the next step will be shots of the girls in Parkas.
-
NudeCelebForum has been moved from the vBulletin to the XenForo platform. For additional information, see: NCF Moved To XenForo
-
Welcome to the forum!
You must activate your account in order to post and view all forum content
Please check your email inbox & spam folders for our activation email, then follow the link to validate your email address.
Contact Us if you are having difficulty posting or viewing forum content.
-
You are viewing our forum as a guest, with limited access.
By joining you will gain full access to thousands of Videos, Pictures & Much More.
Membership is absolutely FREE! Registration is FAST & SIMPLE.
Register Today to join the first, most comprehensive and friendliest communities of nude celebrity fans on the net!
-
Now available to Registered Users and Senior Members is Celebrity/Supermodel Fake Images, Videos and Gifs pinned at the top of Misc Groups & Shows
What ever happened to actual NUDE Videos and Pictures?
- Thread starter tommyga1
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2005
- Messages
- 17,441
- Reaction score
- 44,013
Trust me, the posting of 'shots of girls in parkas' line was crossed long ago. We remove mostly clothed pics pretty much on a daily basis. There isn't enough nude only content that hasn't already been posted to sustain the pic section, so we try to maintain a modicum of sexiness as the standard. The golden age of pic posting has passed, unfortunately.
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2015
- Messages
- 1,930
- Reaction score
- 318
Oh boy. This again.
OK. Reality check 101. And this will be the last time I open up on this subject.
Firstly the idea that there were always floods of nudes and that's only just changed.
It's complete bollocks.
Go back to the oldest posts on this board. You will see regular celeb forum fare. Headshots, magazine and newspaper scans of functions and beach shots and whatever. The "nude only" policy was initiatiated before I became a moderator and frankly it was one of the most mentally redundant concepts I think was ever instigated on any forum. It was based entirely on the flawed concept that there was some mythical cornucopia of celebrity nudes that we were all conspiring not to share and that posters could somehow be compelled to find and post all this material. Anything posted that wasn't naked was removed. Posters of such material were infracted, everything was enforced by militant jackboot wearers.
Now here's where it all started to unravel, and it's a fundamental dichotomy of this site that I've never been able to resolve and have given up trying. Apart from the fact that this action policy stopped posting entirely and all but killed the pictures section stone dead, we also had the "duplication" rule kicking in, and one of the biggest nonsense contradictions I've ever seen in my life.
The simple fact is that the single biggest source of A list celebrity nudes is and always has been stills and caps. That's because actresses who would never pose nude for photographs unless it was for the likes of Herb Ritts or Ellen Von Unwerth on a huge budget for Cosmo or Vogue, will shed their kit with gay abandon for a movie or major TV show because it is "artistically justified" and "the script demanded it".
For instance. Stefanie Powers never posed naked for photographers. She did however display her magnificence in the 1970 psychological horror "Crescendo", and in 2019 appeared fully frontally nude in the Tom Dolby movie The Artist's Wife. Staying in the modern world and similar can be said of Anne Hathaway, Rosamund Pike, Helen Hunt and many many others. On TV Sarah Shahi is getting her kit off ad nauseum on Sex/Life and AnnaLynne McCord is likewise parading herself in Power Book III.
So where are these stills? In the videos section of course.
One of the first posts I made on joining this forum were of stills I'd grabbed, processed and colour corrected of Paula Marshal's appearance on Californication. It was an unexpected appearance from a usually cautious actress and I felt it deserved memorializing. Frankly I'd have it cast in bronze if I could.
My post was removed and I was infracted for "duplication" because there were a bbunch of crap cropped stills in videos. This happened to everyone who tried similar. Meanwhile, the galleries in the videos section were getting bigger and bigger, to the point where some posts oould be resolved into animated gifs with some basic freeware and a little patience.
Now since I and my colleague Yakovitch have taken over the pictures section such infractions and removals do not happen but it's hard to retrain Pavlov's dog. No one is posting these stills in Pictures. They all appear in Videos.
Talk to some and they'll say "these galleries are essential to promote our videos". Well OK. Let's take that as given.
A gallery of stills in the pictures section crosslinked to a post in videos that contains two stills and a thumbsheet to accompany and identify the video host links would see both sections served.
"Oh but that doesn't work" say those some.
There's one poster on here I have little time for. He only posts using hosts that generate him click-thru pennies and he only ever posts to the pictures section when he has a video or a GIF to pimp out. Regulars and moderators will know exactly to whom I refer. The point is he does this exactly. A gallery of stills corsslinked to a video and/or GIF link. He's a mercenary bastard. He wouldn't do it if it didn't work.
But this is how this site operates and there's nothing we can do about it. The videos section has more A list celebrity nudes images than the pictures section. If you want to start capping naked actresses and posting that material t pictures, feel free. You won't get any fight from us. But it's funny isn't it, how we get the complaints but not anyone actually doing something about it?
So let's talk about the "fully clothed" celebrities.
When I became a moderator I was struck by this other fundamental contradiction. In the videos section there are posts of people sitting on couches on daytime TV covered head to foot. It has all the sex appeal of tapioca. But it's there and no one complains. Meanwhile if someone posts an image of a celeb in a lovely dress unless the neckline plunges to the navel and it's slashed to the hip offering a flash of knickers it must be removed. I recall a particularly nice set of Monica Bellucci in a white figure hugging number that clung to every curve like a sausage skin. Now it's La Bellucci and she could make me drool wearing a bin liner but even though it was clinging to her like static it all had to be removed. Meanwhile there was a video posted at the same time of someone - I have forgotten who - chatting on daytime TV in a frock that literally did look like a grey cloth sack.
You can't make up that kind of bullshit.
The justification for this is "Rules are different for videos". Why? If it's the same forum then rules are universal. If it's not then "duplication" cannot apply. You can't have it all ways and make any kind of logical sense. Not on the basics and fundamentals.
But I was never ever going to resolve that argument either so I gave up on it.
That being said, when I first became a moderator here we still permitted imagetwist as a host, and imagetwist was and is a notorious clickthru penny generator. We would get literally tons of social media clickbait dumps of celebrities in puffa jackets walking down the road drinking coffee and we shovelled all that crap up and got rid of it. Hours and hours of wasted life. It was the vast majority of what was being posted by a few posters trying to make money off this forum and we stopped it dead. Imagetwist was finally removed as a host, but not because they foster cashwhores but because their pages spat out popups and popunders like the spillage from a clown car, all of which were laden with malware and spyware and enough was enough.
Since then we have looked for the best compromises we could find. We've relaxed the overly draconian rules sufficiently to attract new posters and encourage the finding and sharing of fresh material, and you're far more likely now to find us having a quiet word rather than issuing blanket infractions. Pictures is an active section once again to the best of the material that is out there. Images that are shared are revealing at the very least, headshots are permitted as part of professional photoshoots and tutorials on posting thumbs explain how to edit host galeries so compliant images only appear on the forum but the full set is still available. Best compromises. What we don't do anymore is remove everything that isn't "fully nude" because frankly that would render this section a ghost town again and so would be nothing short of intellectually bankrupt self destruction.
The one big contradiction is stills and caps which remain firmly entrenched in the videos section which has - to my mind - a better nude images collection than the pictures section. There's an easy fix to that that would strengthen and unify the board as a whole IMO but I'm just one voice and I bow to consensus.
However, as I wrote, If you want to start capping and contributing no one is stopping you.
Which brings me finally to perhaps my most salient point. And I write this with all due respect:
It's a bit fucking rich someone with two posts to his name since a join date of 2008 - Seriously. How the actual fuck does a member of 13 years still have "noob" status? We get spammers who are elevated higher after being members for 10 minutes prior to being banned! - moaning and bitching when he hasn't done a thing to contribute to the section or the forum he's complaining about. What you're basically saying is you want everyone else to cater to your whims and caprices without you having to lift a finger, and to quote the timelessly gorgeous Shania Twain, "That Don't Impress Me Much".
Rant over. soapbox dismounted.
Unless it's a meaningful discussion seeking resolution and wholesale forum improvement I will not comment on this subject again
BOC
OK. Reality check 101. And this will be the last time I open up on this subject.
Firstly the idea that there were always floods of nudes and that's only just changed.
It's complete bollocks.
Go back to the oldest posts on this board. You will see regular celeb forum fare. Headshots, magazine and newspaper scans of functions and beach shots and whatever. The "nude only" policy was initiatiated before I became a moderator and frankly it was one of the most mentally redundant concepts I think was ever instigated on any forum. It was based entirely on the flawed concept that there was some mythical cornucopia of celebrity nudes that we were all conspiring not to share and that posters could somehow be compelled to find and post all this material. Anything posted that wasn't naked was removed. Posters of such material were infracted, everything was enforced by militant jackboot wearers.
Now here's where it all started to unravel, and it's a fundamental dichotomy of this site that I've never been able to resolve and have given up trying. Apart from the fact that this action policy stopped posting entirely and all but killed the pictures section stone dead, we also had the "duplication" rule kicking in, and one of the biggest nonsense contradictions I've ever seen in my life.
The simple fact is that the single biggest source of A list celebrity nudes is and always has been stills and caps. That's because actresses who would never pose nude for photographs unless it was for the likes of Herb Ritts or Ellen Von Unwerth on a huge budget for Cosmo or Vogue, will shed their kit with gay abandon for a movie or major TV show because it is "artistically justified" and "the script demanded it".
For instance. Stefanie Powers never posed naked for photographers. She did however display her magnificence in the 1970 psychological horror "Crescendo", and in 2019 appeared fully frontally nude in the Tom Dolby movie The Artist's Wife. Staying in the modern world and similar can be said of Anne Hathaway, Rosamund Pike, Helen Hunt and many many others. On TV Sarah Shahi is getting her kit off ad nauseum on Sex/Life and AnnaLynne McCord is likewise parading herself in Power Book III.
So where are these stills? In the videos section of course.
One of the first posts I made on joining this forum were of stills I'd grabbed, processed and colour corrected of Paula Marshal's appearance on Californication. It was an unexpected appearance from a usually cautious actress and I felt it deserved memorializing. Frankly I'd have it cast in bronze if I could.
My post was removed and I was infracted for "duplication" because there were a bbunch of crap cropped stills in videos. This happened to everyone who tried similar. Meanwhile, the galleries in the videos section were getting bigger and bigger, to the point where some posts oould be resolved into animated gifs with some basic freeware and a little patience.
Now since I and my colleague Yakovitch have taken over the pictures section such infractions and removals do not happen but it's hard to retrain Pavlov's dog. No one is posting these stills in Pictures. They all appear in Videos.
Talk to some and they'll say "these galleries are essential to promote our videos". Well OK. Let's take that as given.
A gallery of stills in the pictures section crosslinked to a post in videos that contains two stills and a thumbsheet to accompany and identify the video host links would see both sections served.
"Oh but that doesn't work" say those some.
There's one poster on here I have little time for. He only posts using hosts that generate him click-thru pennies and he only ever posts to the pictures section when he has a video or a GIF to pimp out. Regulars and moderators will know exactly to whom I refer. The point is he does this exactly. A gallery of stills corsslinked to a video and/or GIF link. He's a mercenary bastard. He wouldn't do it if it didn't work.
But this is how this site operates and there's nothing we can do about it. The videos section has more A list celebrity nudes images than the pictures section. If you want to start capping naked actresses and posting that material t pictures, feel free. You won't get any fight from us. But it's funny isn't it, how we get the complaints but not anyone actually doing something about it?
So let's talk about the "fully clothed" celebrities.
When I became a moderator I was struck by this other fundamental contradiction. In the videos section there are posts of people sitting on couches on daytime TV covered head to foot. It has all the sex appeal of tapioca. But it's there and no one complains. Meanwhile if someone posts an image of a celeb in a lovely dress unless the neckline plunges to the navel and it's slashed to the hip offering a flash of knickers it must be removed. I recall a particularly nice set of Monica Bellucci in a white figure hugging number that clung to every curve like a sausage skin. Now it's La Bellucci and she could make me drool wearing a bin liner but even though it was clinging to her like static it all had to be removed. Meanwhile there was a video posted at the same time of someone - I have forgotten who - chatting on daytime TV in a frock that literally did look like a grey cloth sack.
You can't make up that kind of bullshit.
The justification for this is "Rules are different for videos". Why? If it's the same forum then rules are universal. If it's not then "duplication" cannot apply. You can't have it all ways and make any kind of logical sense. Not on the basics and fundamentals.
But I was never ever going to resolve that argument either so I gave up on it.
That being said, when I first became a moderator here we still permitted imagetwist as a host, and imagetwist was and is a notorious clickthru penny generator. We would get literally tons of social media clickbait dumps of celebrities in puffa jackets walking down the road drinking coffee and we shovelled all that crap up and got rid of it. Hours and hours of wasted life. It was the vast majority of what was being posted by a few posters trying to make money off this forum and we stopped it dead. Imagetwist was finally removed as a host, but not because they foster cashwhores but because their pages spat out popups and popunders like the spillage from a clown car, all of which were laden with malware and spyware and enough was enough.
Since then we have looked for the best compromises we could find. We've relaxed the overly draconian rules sufficiently to attract new posters and encourage the finding and sharing of fresh material, and you're far more likely now to find us having a quiet word rather than issuing blanket infractions. Pictures is an active section once again to the best of the material that is out there. Images that are shared are revealing at the very least, headshots are permitted as part of professional photoshoots and tutorials on posting thumbs explain how to edit host galeries so compliant images only appear on the forum but the full set is still available. Best compromises. What we don't do anymore is remove everything that isn't "fully nude" because frankly that would render this section a ghost town again and so would be nothing short of intellectually bankrupt self destruction.
The one big contradiction is stills and caps which remain firmly entrenched in the videos section which has - to my mind - a better nude images collection than the pictures section. There's an easy fix to that that would strengthen and unify the board as a whole IMO but I'm just one voice and I bow to consensus.
However, as I wrote, If you want to start capping and contributing no one is stopping you.
Which brings me finally to perhaps my most salient point. And I write this with all due respect:
It's a bit fucking rich someone with two posts to his name since a join date of 2008 - Seriously. How the actual fuck does a member of 13 years still have "noob" status? We get spammers who are elevated higher after being members for 10 minutes prior to being banned! - moaning and bitching when he hasn't done a thing to contribute to the section or the forum he's complaining about. What you're basically saying is you want everyone else to cater to your whims and caprices without you having to lift a finger, and to quote the timelessly gorgeous Shania Twain, "That Don't Impress Me Much".
Rant over. soapbox dismounted.
Unless it's a meaningful discussion seeking resolution and wholesale forum improvement I will not comment on this subject again
BOC
Last edited:
J
jack_smack2
All you dudes do is post shit that's publicly on these bitchs' Instagram and other socials accounts. If I wanted to see that overly sterile horseshit, I'd follow their dumb asses.
Just my opinion
Just my opinion
J
jack_smack2
My dude is right. 99% of the stuff that's posted here is just reposts of these bitchs' dumb Instagram posts. What's the point when I can just follow them directly. I understand there's nothing out there anymore but maybe at least change the name of the forum or something? 'nudecelebforum' doesn't really apply anymore. Idiots.
Do you really think so? does it only seem to me that everything is becoming much more permissive, the sizzling eroticism direigentlich every day runs over the way?
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Messages
- 4,281
- Reaction score
- 599
Hey, what’s up? lol
Just popped in and feel uniquely qualified to reply to this thread.
The truth is that this forum exists, because I needed a way to drive traffic to my celeb website, on which I placed ads to make money. The whole nude celeb thing was a gimmick, since celeb sex tapes were popular (thanks Paris!) and I could easily sell memberships to celeb pay sites. It paid my rent for a few years, until I decided to get a real career.
The reason why it is dropping off, is because the trends have changed and the definition of “celebrity” isn’t what it used to be. It used to be all about the latest issue of Playboy or Maxim or paparzzi bikini pictures. Now everything is just random hot girls on Only Fans or TiktTok.
If I was starting this forum today, it wouldn’t even be a nude celeb forrum, it would probably be leaked Only Fans accounts or something.
So yeah, times have changed. That’s kind of the answer.
To be honest, I can believe this play still exists :lol:
Just popped in and feel uniquely qualified to reply to this thread.
The truth is that this forum exists, because I needed a way to drive traffic to my celeb website, on which I placed ads to make money. The whole nude celeb thing was a gimmick, since celeb sex tapes were popular (thanks Paris!) and I could easily sell memberships to celeb pay sites. It paid my rent for a few years, until I decided to get a real career.
The reason why it is dropping off, is because the trends have changed and the definition of “celebrity” isn’t what it used to be. It used to be all about the latest issue of Playboy or Maxim or paparzzi bikini pictures. Now everything is just random hot girls on Only Fans or TiktTok.
If I was starting this forum today, it wouldn’t even be a nude celeb forrum, it would probably be leaked Only Fans accounts or something.
So yeah, times have changed. That’s kind of the answer.
To be honest, I can believe this play still exists :lol:
I mean it's not like there's nude pics released of models, actresses and celebs every day. If ONLY nudes were posted this forum would be dead and you'd be seeing maybe 3 or so posts a week, if that. So standards have to be lowered to bikinis, cleavage and other skin showing heavy stuff. I'd rather see some actress or model in a bikini a few times a week than just 1 nude post of her every 6 months, assuming said girl even goes nude in anything.
J
jack_smack2
Fuck this bullshit site and fuck you all
Oh my, not again... i do NOT own this site... neither am a moderator/administrator... but seriously 
A NUDE celeb forum, should be about nudes, right?
Not about "my random teenage crush in fur clothes" updated daily from her (completely free) instagram. We got 20-30 posts a day, 90%of them copy paste from free sites...what about quality over quantity?
A NUDE celeb forum, should be about nudes, right?
Not about "my random teenage crush in fur clothes" updated daily from her (completely free) instagram. We got 20-30 posts a day, 90%of them copy paste from free sites...what about quality over quantity?
Some quick stats - Of today's 27 video posts - only 8 has (some kind of) nudity - thats just under 30%...Oh my, not again... i do NOT own this site... neither am a moderator/administrator... but seriously
A NUDE celeb forum, should be about nudes, right?
Not about "my random teenage crush in fur clothes" updated daily from her (completely free) instagram. We got 20-30 posts a day, 90%of them copy paste from free sites...what about quality over quantity?
