Although there is a website with a midget pornstar. I'd give you a link, but I'm too lazy to find it right now. Maybe after I've eaten.

[Link]

Every once in a while, as a variation, they're ok, but they are definitely very low on the list of the types of shots I like to see.

Dr .P

[Link]

On top of that, all you get to see from this vantage point is headless genitals....I could've just brought a mirror and laid it on the floor for that..

[Link]

I will say they overdo it sometimes. But at least they're trying.

[Link]

I maintain though that in porn their first duty is to remember their product is bought mainly by strokers. There is apparently a large subset of those consumers who get bored, too, by the same old angles -- otherwise upside-down, cockroach-cam shots wouldn't sell.

My post was meant to wonder out loud if I am in a minority -- one of those who wish only to imagine themselves as the guy having sex with a beautiful woman in a porn scene without having to crane their necks, use mirrors, or stand on their heads to do so.

I honestly don't mean to be a smartass about it, but if I want film artistry, I'll rent a Scorsese movie.

[Link]

Moving way back and zooming in causes it's own problems. You get the opposite kind of distortion (although it's not quite as distracting as barrel distortion) and you have the added problem of not having the same freedom of movement as you'd have if you were closer up and at a wider angle. Plus, you're going to end up shooting anything that's between you and the performers.

So, one solution is to hit it at an angle that will allow more of the bodies of the performers to be in the frame. That generally means from down low or up high (although it could be from the side if it worked out that way). This does two things. It shows you more of the performers without having th keep the camera in constant motion (which people will complain about as well) and it also adds a little bit of dimension so it actually does kind of resemble reality instead of a two-dimensional photo. It obviously has it's limitations and no matter how they shoot it, somebody is going to be displeased. Personally, I'd be happy if somebody could just manufacture a camera lens that doesn't make everything look like peephole vision. The human body seriously doesn't benefit from that kind of distortion.

Edited by - randomprecision on 3/5/2007 2:38:19 PM

[Link]