Prostitution or pornography?

Interesting discussion at the Volokh Conspiracy over the legal distinction between prostitution and pornography. Professor Volokh notes a recent New Hampshire Supreme Court just recently overturned the conviction of a man who had been convicted of soliciting a couple to allow him to film them for $50 an hour. According to the court, this was a First Amendment violation of Constitutionally protected speech.

So the real question is, does adding a camera make prostitution legally acceptable? There seem to be few good answers, which in my mind, weighs more negatively on the existence of anti-prostitution in the first place more than it does anything else.

I've also always found it curious that the concept of the Constitutional right to privacy would protect sex between consenting adults in the privacy of one's bedroom, but that the same right to privacy disappears as soon as money is exchanged. Again, this is probably more about old fashioned moralizing than it is about good law.