RN
Twelve entries used to sit on this page, each one describing a scene and each one tagged with a site — PornHub, xHamster, XVideos — as though that were where it came from.
None of those companies made any of them. Every one of those tags was naming a place a copy happened to be sitting on a particular day in 2020, and that distinction is the whole reason this page no longer works and cannot be repaired by finding fresher links.
What a tube tag is actually telling you
A scene featuring a contracted performer is made by a production company. It goes out on that company's own site, or through a network that licenses it, and that release is the one with a date, a director, a full cast, and a credit that ties the work to the people who did it.
What lands on a tube site is usually a copy of it, put there by an account with no connection to the production, and the copy tends to arrive with the credits removed. It gets retitled by whoever uploaded it, frequently to something optimised for search rather than accurate. It gets cut — a twenty-eight-minute scene becomes eleven. It gets re-encoded down. And it very often gets tagged with performer names who are not in it, because names are search terms and search terms are traffic.
So a list built from tube links is a list of copies, identified by titles that the uploader invented, hosted under URLs that will not survive the year. Nothing about those copies indicates any arrangement with the company that produced the underlying scene.
Why the list rotted rather than aged
Tube sites process takedown requests. Rights holders send them, copies come down, and the same material reappears under a different account and a different title within days. The result is not a stable library with some link rot around the edges — it is a population of files in constant turnover, where the scene persists and every individual copy of it is temporary.
That means a curated list of tube URLs has a half-life measured in months, and the failure is silent. The link does not break; it stops resolving to what it said it was, or resolves to a cut-down version of something adjacent. Fixing the list means rebuilding it from scratch every time, and the rebuilt version is no more durable than the first one.
There is also a plainer point. Whatever a performer is paid, they are paid by the production, once. The re-upload generates advertising revenue for an account that had nothing to do with making it. If the intention is to support someone's work, the copy is the one route that reliably does not.
How to find a performer's actual catalogue
The method is unglamorous and it does not rot.
Start from a filmography, not from a video. The pornstar databases index by release rather than by upload: studio, date, co-performers, series, sometimes director. That is the layer where a scene has a stable identity, and it is the only place a question like "what did this performer shoot in a given year" has an answer rather than a guess.
Expect name variants. Performers work under different names in different periods and for different producers. A database that resolves aliases will show you work that a name search alone will never surface.
Then go to the producer. Once you know which company released a scene, the studio sites are where the full-length, correctly credited, correctly titled version lives. This is also the only version you can be confident is the whole scene.
Check what the performer runs themselves. Many now publish through their own subscription platforms, where the catalogue is maintained by the person it belongs to and the money goes to them directly.
Use tubes for what they are good at. Free tube sites are excellent for discovery — finding out whether you like someone's work before paying for anything. They are poor at being a reference, and a reference is what this page was trying to be.
Why this page has no scene list
Because it could not be made accurate.
The original was written in early 2020 and pointed at copies that are gone. Rebuilding it would have meant either restating scene descriptions that could not be checked against any release, or assembling a fresh set of tube links with the same expiry date as the last set. Neither of those produces something you could rely on, and a list you cannot rely on is worse than no list, because it looks like a list.
What is durable is the method. Filmography first, producer second, tubes for browsing — and a healthy scepticism about any page that presents a video host as though it were a studio.