i have been noticing alot lately alot of girls with a lot of make up but now since alot of stuff is shot in high def , u can see the acne on alot of the young chicks, i dont know but acne turns me off, so now I think companies shooting young chicks need to invest good money on quality make up artists to make these young girls acne free on high def. ???? Expanded on the subject line. Edited by - heynow on Jan 5 2008
It doesn't matter how good the make-up artist is. Hi-Def is just too unforgiving a format to shoot porn on. If the girl has perfect skin, no razor burn, no bruises, no imperfections whatsoever, and the scene is lit perfectly, and the make-up was done by a real, trained professional make-up artist, ( not your average porn make-up girl), then fine. But all those elements are rarely in place on a porn scene. I may be one of the only porn shooters who feel this way but I don't think Hi-Def will ever be the format that porn will work best on. With my little old school Sony, I can see everything just fine and I don't need to see the things I don't want to see any better. Just my opinion.
i'm not into high definition either. i'm fine with the current dvd-picture...and if the movie is good i won't complain about a vhs either... isn't there the danger, that plastic surgery will be on top of the list for many girls when hd is standard? who has a real perfect skin that won't need any tricks when cameras can see everything? ...and who wants to see every tiny vein on a throbbing cock?
[Link]
sam46 Deactivated User
564 Posts 1/07
Posted - Jan 2 2008 : 6:41AM
Many of us are not Playboy freaks - interested in fake, airbrushed perfection. I like the imperfections, makes it real. Butt pimples are hot!
Jake has a point about the format being unforgiving. As a woman watching porn, I always feel sympathy when I see blemishes, bruises and other inperfections on a performer. We all want to present ourselves in our best light. That's why people turn their heads to be photographed from their "good side." We all have a healthy amount of vanity, and I'm sure some girls are mortified when they see themselves in certain scenes. It's like waking up with a huge pimple the day they're taking graduation photos.
i'm definitely with you at this point and my post was not referred to my personal taste. but i think the majority of the consumer is more into the perfect-plastic kind of woman. or some girls might think that they have to be perfect for the new format cause they don't want everyone to see their (well liked) butt pimples. iirc it was mentioned in the topic about jesse jane's new boobs that some editor liked them too cause he does not have to photoshop them anymore... i'm afraid that this will be rather standard than exception... lates!
As a long time sufferer, I'm here to tell you that acne isn't something you choose to have. It picks you. And when it does, there's not a whole lot you can do. I almost never really pay attention to acne on a porn girl because I'm so used to seeing it when I look in the mirror. I've tried everything and still, I have acne at 34.
I agree with Jake Malone. We at Wildlife don't shoot Hi Def either. It is not flattering for gonzo. Features are different...subdued lighting, more wide shots and softcore, etc. Our girls have their make up done by one of the best in the business. A former pornstar and Hall of famer, who understands what looks best, but she only works on the faces. Once we go underneath to give the viewer what they want to see, hi def on a big screen just doesn't look good. I've had people say, use a filter, but if you do that, you might as well shoot without hi def. A football spiraling into your den on Super Bowl Sunday, looks great in hi def. The up and over, on the other hand, doesn't. Just because hi def exists doesn't mean it has to be used for everything. Is it necessary to see the weather report in HD? For certain applications, it's great. For gonzo, in my opinion, it's not. coachcam
My two cents only because this subject is near and dear to my heart. I love HD and like it or not, everything will be HD eventually. If you're not shooting HD, you're cutting yourself off from what may be the only thing that slows down the erosion of the DVD market. Also, if you are selling your product for broadcast, more and more outlets are asking for HD only. Once you've seen the difference, there really is no going back. Lighting, makeup, filters, camera settings can all be utilized to make a spectacular AND flattering image.
I wanna see real girls in these movies. After all girls are humans too. If I wanted to see perfect creatures I would watch two Barbie dolls fucking or something. What's wrong with slight imperfections? Unless we are talking about the real ugly stuff of course...but if you are suffering from heavy acne problems you shouldn't be in porn in the first place, imo. Certainly I'm not an expert on this like you porn guys who have had some experience with high def first hand probably are. But if you zoom in real close than shouldn't you see all those imperfections in SD too? And porn is all about zooming in real close I think. I don't know why most American porn studios try to clean up something which is actually a rather "dirty" thing. The same goes for their shooting locations. All those neat polished apartments tend to get a bit boring.
[Link]
sam46 Deactivated User
564 Posts 1/07
Posted - Jan 2 2008 : 12:31PM
The stores only carry HD TVs anymore, and when everyone has an HD DVD player by next year, they aren't gonna buy standard DVDs. The porn guys can blabber all they want about gonzo not being suitable, but sales is all that matters. I won't be buying standard DVDs of anything.
If your going to use filters please put a consumer warning on the box. If I pay for high definition gonzo, I want it realistic to life not softened with beer goggles effect movie.
[Link]
sam46 Deactivated User
564 Posts 1/07
Posted - Jan 2 2008 : 1:16PM
Man, these porno producers never worried about subjecting us to tons of Ed Powers/Ron Jeremy close-ups, disgusting hairy man ass, and ball sacks, but all of a sudden gonzo won't look good in HD? Hilarious.
Mr Quasar, With all due respect to someone who has way more experience than me and has probably forgotten more about shooting porn than I will ever know, a couple of things come to mind: First, I don't think "Broadcast" quality is pertinent to me because I don't ever shoot a soft core version of my movies. If I ever decide to shoot a movie that WILL have a soft-core version, then I would probably shoot it in Hi-Def, knowing that that will require much more attention be payed to planning. That brings up another question: There seems to be a lot of discussion/disagreement over what is "real" hi-def. Some people say the Sony, ( you know, the one that costs 5 grand or so) is Hi-Def. Other people say, "No, the Sony doesn't shoot enough megabits per second. Only 25, or whatever. The PANASONIC shoots 100 megabits per second, so that's REAL Hi-Def". Then there's people who say the Canon is the "real" Hi-Def. So what's up with that? Then there's 1080 vs. 720. Blue-ray vs. HD DVD, yada, yada, yada. I'm also not a fan of 16:9 for all porn. I would like to be able to shoot 16:9 if I want to and not if I don't. In Hi-Def, it's 16:9 or nothing. I'm also amused by directors who put "Shot on Hi-Def" on their covers but don't mention, " But you're not SEEING" it in Hi-Def, cuz we converted it to regular format before stamping the disk". Ha, Ha, Ha. In the case of people shooting in Hi-Def, but down converting, or whatever they call it, and releasing it in regular format, and saying, " Yeah but I have it in Hi-Def for whenever it DOES become feasible. For whenever all the formats, "types" of Hi-Def, editing software, encoding, compression rates, etc. gets all worked out". So what, then these people are going to "re-release" these titles in "Hi-Def"? Will there be that many consumers who will want to "re-buy" a title that's, by then, a couple of years old? Maybe. I have my doubts. Oh, and filters. I like filters sometimes, but if you have to put a filter on media that's in Hi-Def, to make it more pleasing to the eye, aren't you defeating your purpose? These and other questions gnaw at me as I debate this dilemma. The truth is, I haven't really SEEN stuff that has been "released" in Hi-Def. Can you direct me to some stuff that will open my eyes? That I can look at right now on my 30" Hi-Def computer screen and be blown away by how much better it looks than the stuff I shoot on my "olds cool" Sony? I'm really interested and would really appreciate the benefit of your knowledge. Maybe I'm wrong...wouldn't be the first time.
First off, I hope I wasn't coming across as a know-it-all Jake because I think your stuff is great and I wasn't knocking it at all. For me, as someone who shoots in Hi Def and edits in Hi def, it breaks my heart when I see the standard definition DVD because I know what the consumer is NOT seeing. Right now if you see a DVD that has "shot in HD" printed on the cover, that's purely for marketing unless it's actually an HD-DVD or Blu ray disc (although an anamorphic widescreen transfer will have much better picture quality than a letterboxed version) As far as filters are concerned, softening or altering an image isn't robbing it of any resolution, it's simply smoothing out some of the imperfections that may be there. Cameras get loaded up with matte boxes full of filters all the time on "real" movies. 16:9 is indeed tricky for gonzo, especially for dutch angles that don't quite work the way they did in 4:3 but you get used to it eventually (actually, I don't really shoot them anymore). Then there's the nagging question of what is "real" HD. What most of us in porn valley shoot is not real HD, it's HDV; extremely compressed 1080i resolution. That would be your Sony, Canon and JVC camcorders. It's the least "real" of all the HD formats but to me it still looks 100% better than standard NTSC video. Some shoot with the Panasonic HVX200 which records DVCPRO HD, much less compressed than HDV and a better way to go. Then there's the Sony F900 which none of us can afford and that shoots what most would consider the real thing; HDCAM. Technically, if your image is 1080i or 720p, you can call it HD. The obvious example that comes to mind is anything by Digital Playground recently. Their High Def trailers look great. We've released 2 movies on HD-DVD so far (Girlvana 3 and Dreamgirlz) and they look amazing (I'm talking about the picture quality. The actual content may bore the shit out of you. Who knows) At the end of the day, shoot whatever works for you obviously but give some thought to future revenue that may come from re-releasing old titles on HD-DVD or Blu-Ray. I plan on buying the HD version of every single Hollywood movie that I have now that I've seen the difference.
Mike or anyone who may have insight here is the million $$$ question what is going to be the prefered format for Porno is it going to be HD DVD or is it going to be Blu-RAY. From what I hear is what ever Porno chooses to be its main format, that will be the eventual winner of the Blu-Ray,HDDVD war. My choice is Blu-Ray but what do i know.
Personally, I think the whole industry could have decided this war already if they'd have said Fuck you to Sony and started releasing HD-DVD's in large numbers. HD-DVD is a far more practical choice for the biz than blu-ray but there are more mainstream new releases coming out on Blu-ray at the moment and that will probably emerge as the format. I have no idea why the industry as a whole has been so slow to embrace HD in general.
Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son. 1048 Posts 7/04
Posted - Jan 3 2008 : 1:28AM
Meh, a little bit of acne being seen on a porn babe is usually just confirmation that she's still a young 'un. Also in some cases it may be indicative of the reason(s) the girl may be doing porn. It could be validation to her of her attractiveness. She could be saying "yeah I have some acne but I'm still pretty enough to be paid to have sex on camera".
Patience is a virtue, but who wants to be virtuous? 4283 Posts 4/00
Posted - Jan 3 2008 : 1:28AM
I disagree with you guys saying that "Shot in HD" is only a marketing gimmick. When I have a DVD where the both discs are standard format, but the movie was shot in HD or HDV, and the featurettes were shot in SD, I can definitely tell the difference. When you start out with 2 different quality things, and put them through the same processes, the one that was better originally, will probably turn out better in the end. To answer the original question, unfortunately better makeup can only do so much. If a girl has acne, she probably has raised bumps on her skin, that even if the redness is covered up, there will still be an unevenness to her skin. Then, during sex, when she gets sweaty, the makeup will start to sweat off, and you'll see bumps and redness. Jake - wow... reading those posts, it was exactly like having you here in my office. :) Mike - while HD-DVD is good enough, I'm holding out between HD-DVD and Blu-Ray. I've been looking at Java applications being used by Blu-Ray which were going to be seeing in the market in 2008. I was ready to give HD-DVD a chance a while back, until Disney's Blu-Ray only push. Now, I can't imagine investing in authoring an HD-DVD product that will more than likely not be the format of choice in a couple of years.
HD is great to watch, it makes everything more real. being a performer, HD is a pain in the ass. i dont have perfect skin and now every time i see the HD logo on the side of a camera, i start to worry.
Wait, do you mean that movies that have been released in regular format are going to be re-released in HD? And movies are shot on film so then they "convert" it to HD? Then couldn't digital video media be "converted" to Hi-Def?
I do prefer Blu Ray it seems like the discs can hold more info , and also the quality seems just a bit better on my tv than HD dvd. I am not tech savey but maybe I am just bias to Sony products and quality of there products. Altough I have heard from friends of mine it may be hear say or rumors, that Sony/blu-ray really do not want to be associated with porn, much like the early 80's when sony created BETA and JVC created VHS, and Sony did not want porn on Beta because of the stigma and corporate standards, so producers went with VHS and the rest is history. Is this true? If it is fuck sony, I will go buy an HD DVD player at costco for 199. Also just to be honest the best High Def dvd BLU RAY or HD DVD is an HD DVD and it is transformers, Holy shit watching it on my Sony Bravia lcd is like being at an Imax almost the thing is ridiculous its like nothing I have ever seen. A close 2nd is Planet Earth blu ray wow amazing
the main reason I started this thread was beacuse I enjoy the young girls 18-21 and seeing alot of them shot in HD is kind of scary in a way,due to the fact I have always thought Lorena Sanchez was by far one of the hottest girls in the biz, natural boobs, a perfect ass, a pretty pussy, and a angelic face, but i just saw her on mouth to mouth shot in HD and yikes she has very bumpy skin and you can see blemishes it was a major turn off to me. I would not want to see her in HD.
edited to correct video title Edited by - sgv626 on 1/3/2008 2:08:33 AM
The perfection of imperfection: Acne in pornography as a proponent of positive socio-cultural paradigm shifts Friends of the porn pool, take heed for a moment to what I must say. The beauty standard set forth by media imposed societal norms shall soon come crashing down. Akin to the impact of a meteor of the most massive scale, high-definition shall come to be the great leveller. Yea, the emperor wears no clothes, and even the finest in cosmetics can not cover up the empresses' blemishes. When one sees that tabloid publications have dealt us the ugly truth regarding the imperfections of Hollywood icons, American society will come to the realization that they have been fooled all along. Perfection is an ethereal fantasy. Oh yes, beauty is not just skin deep, as you must know being a swimmer in this great natatorium of debauched delight and debate known as the porn pool. Long ago I, your man, have eschewed the Janine Lindemullers and Jenna Jamesons of this naughty galaxy we call porn in favor of the Maggie Starrs, Haley Paiges (rest her sweet soul), Cherry Roses, and Flick Shagwells. These true visions may (or may not) have acne, stretch marks, scars, and stubble but the performances they provide coupled with their unique qualities place them in my own personal pantheon of purile powerhouses. Oh, these budding sirens and those of their ilk shall be at the vanguard of dispelling the beauty myth. Perfection is a lie, no more than a opaque cock and bull story. The dilemna is one that resides in the recesses of our minds, for we the consumers and connisuers of that which is rated XXX have painted ourselves into a corner so unrealistic and so self-defeating. In the pursuit of fantasy we have fed the beast. Our collective quest for the pinnacle of carnal satisfation and furthering the frontiers of the erotic realm has ended in triumph yet has also proven to be a phyrric victory. Fantasy has been sated, but at what cost? Pornographic devotee, you cannot go home agian. Shall you return to VHS in search of the unattainable or will you better your conscious and unconscious altering that which is considered divine? The reconstruction of pulchritude by individuals such as ourselves is tantamount to revolution. We are the trailblazers, yea we are the pioneers in the act of defining beauty for this fledgling millenium. Let us not be further manipulated by the gatekeepers, for we shall be the ones to tear down the gates. May the likes of Belladonna, Allie Sinn, and Audrey Hollander carry the torch and set the new standard and may we, members of this warm and wonderful pool of porn be their infantry, foot soldiers in the battle against the oppression of womankind. Fear not for HDTV, we have seen the truth and the truth is a portrait of exquisite beauty that includes acne, stretch marks, scars, stubble and oh my... hemmrroids. All hail our porn princesses for they are the genesis of a fresh and amended American spirit and American soul.
There won't be a real winner in this format war, not even in a couple of years. The scores are just way too even. So if you are holding out on releasing Evil Angel movies in HD there can be no winners only losers: the customers. :-(
I could be but that would be pointless since it doesn't hold more resolution. Film on the other hand even shows more resolution than 1080p in some cases. That's why even really old films often look good in HD (in any case better than on DVD).
[Link]
hanniballs_licktor Deactivated User
A census taker once tried to test me. I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti 46 Posts 1/08
Posted - Jan 3 2008 : 4:04AM
Maybe there will be no loser in the format war, Warner Bros are bringing out the Total Hi Def Disc which can be read in both HD and Blue Ray. I've seen both there is no real difference.
Well the Total Hi Def format is on hold for now and so far it seems uncertain if Warner will ever release it. Apparently they are having a hard time convincing others of the benefits and if they are the only ones who choose this format it's not gonna work out.
Well, the real issue is that standard def has a tendency to make things like acne look worse than they really are because of the ringing and noise when you turn the sharpness up trying to get a better picture. The fact is that turning up the sharpness on standard def material just reveals more video noise. You can't get more out of a picture than what the format is capable of recording and/or what was originally recorded. So even if hi def reveals the acne in all it's glory, it's going to be a more accurate picture and hopefully, with less noise to make it look worse than it is. Most of these girls don't have really bad acne. It's just your every day normal level of acne that you see on a 19-20 year old. You wouldn't think it looked really bad if you saw the girl in RL. But some video artifacts can make it look a lot worse. Whom ever is shooting it has to take the fact that video technology (even hi def) isn't perfect into account. They might have to use filters. If I have to choose between a filtered image and an artificially sharpened image, I'll take the filtered one.
Because you're starting with less than half the resolution of HD. Theoretically, you can "upconvert" it but it won't look even close to the real thing.
Tricia, I think you'd be surprised how many pieces you would move if you started releasing in HD-DVD. We've released 3 titles so far and the amount out the door was well worth the investment and we're NOT Evil Angel. I would expect that your numbers would be substantially higher.
Patience is a virtue, but who wants to be virtuous? 4283 Posts 4/00
Posted - Jan 3 2008 : 11:54AM
Mike - thanks for that. We'll be making the move in 2008 for sure, but most likely onto Blu-Ray. And for the record, I own both PS3 and XBox 360 at home and we have both types of players here at the office.
Definitely. Even when digital matches the resolution of film, it will be a while before they really perfect the technology. Edited by - randomprecision on 1/3/2008 4:39:54 PM
Patience is a virtue, but who wants to be virtuous? 4283 Posts 4/00
Posted - Jan 3 2008 : 4:58PM
ukbadboy- As you read, Jake isn't currently shooting on HD or HDV. Manuel and John Leslie are, and John Stagliano will be for his gonzo shoots this year.
[Link]
sickguy Deactivated User
I'm unofficially Beauty Dior's #1 Fan 736 Posts 9/06
Posted - Jan 3 2008 : 5:01PM
+1
[Link]
john_qyoo_public Deactivated User
265 Posts 7/05
Posted - Jan 3 2008 : 5:07PM
Jake, for my money I tend to agree with you. I say take all that extra room on the disc and do something more productive with it, like putting all the cameras on the DVD and letting the viewer select the one he wants to watch, multiple soundtracks (dialogue only, dialogue + music, music only, dubbed, etc.), etc. Of course, a bit more resolution over DVD wouldn't hurt, but using it all for video quality is overkill imo.
Mike, do you guys release both HD and regular format of these titles? Cuz not everyone has an HD-DVD player. By the way, this thread inspired me to go get a HD-DVD player! $250.00 bucks + $100.00 for the HDMI cable, and you get two HD DVD'S in the box. "300" and "The Bourne Identity". Plus you get a mail-in thing to get five more DVD's for free. Good times! I have a 46" Samsung LCD TV and I watched "300" which I hadn't seen, and it looked incredible. ( But I HATE letterbox!) This movie has A LOT of CGI so it isn't a good test, but it is a feast for the eyes. It's great to know that my collection of classic films will all look better, (I can't wait to watch my beloved "Chinatown"!). I watched a little of "Sin City" (also mucho CGI) and it's full screen, not letterbox and looks awesome! As for the HD porn question, I took a good look at my friend and colleague Raul Christian's stuff on asstraffic.com, and it looks REALLY good. Sort of 3 D. Frame grabs so sharp that you can count the eyelashes! (None of the girls have complexion or skin tone issues, so I couldn't check that.) Maybe I gotta get one of these Panasonic HD camera's and figure out how to use it. Raul told me when he was here that they plug the Panasonic into a hard drive that they have attached to their belt!? so they don't have to deal with the internal card and they don't have to be wired to a computer. Gotta try to stay current in a rapidly changing landscape. "CHANGE is not painful...it's RESISTANCE to change that's painful" Thanks for your input Mike. I gotta look at the ZT HD stuff.
300 isn't letterboxed the movie just has a different aspect ratio than your 16:9 tv set. Letterbox means a 16:9 image in a 4:3 frame. It's a pretty annoying format as it basically kills image quality. By the way Warner have just announced they will go Blu-ray exclusive later this year! So I should probably revise some of the statements I made in this thread because this could very well be the beginning of the end of this format war.
Oh wow thanks for the new I did not hear Warner Bros, finnaly choose Blu Ray. Ok so I think we may have a winner then. Unless all Porn jumps on the HD DVD band wagon, but from this thread it looks like EA might be choosing Blu-Ray , and we all know what influence Mr and Mrs . Stagliano have on this industry....
Mr. Malone I hope this might mean we may see Nice Fucking View series in HD :) ... Also it may not be your type genere for mainstream films but take a look when you get a chance at Transformers on HD DVD it is the most stunning flick it is as if you are in an IMAX.
Yeah. We released the standard and HD version on the same day. Also, a lot of widescreen movies that you buy will still have some degree of letterbox because their original aspect ratio (usually 1.85:1) is wider than the standard 16:9 television screen which is 1.78:1
Good point, Tricia. I forgot about that. Big budget Hollywood productions are constantly reapplying and checking make up between scenes or shots. Most porn productions probably wouldn't stop action to reapply makeup for every camera angle. Personally, I prefer the "imperfections." I've been with several women and I fondly recall their "imperfections." Freckles, crow's feet, crooked tooth, acne scars... they bring back memories. A rumpled forehead? Cute!!!!!!! :) Edited by - RFrog on 1/11/2008 11:01:07 AM
That's good news. I'm also please you have chosen to go with bluray. Don't suppose you can let on what your first title(s) are likely to be? Not that it really matters - whatever you choose to be your first blu disc I'll be getting it.
absynth makes the heart grow fonder 434 Posts 8/06
Posted - Jan 11 2008 : 3:53PM
So is HD the next big jump? (kinda like the move from film reel to VHS and then VHS to DVD.) I've seen the difference between DVD and HD with Hollywood movies, but I'm kinda old school when it comes to my porn. I still like to watch my old grainy VHS tapes.
Give me reality anyday. Have an old Vhs tape of an interracial scene of a girl with a lot of acne. It is a turn on. I cancelled my Playboy in 1985. Was not moving with the times. Now, sometimes freeze the scene where I see the girls ass in doggie and see the celulite. They air brush everthing these days including cars. Reality is a turn-on. Women are not a plastic blowup doll with no imperfections. They are flesh an blood real and I like it that way. Old School. Wayne In Dallas
Posted - Jan 2 2008 : 4:00AM
ok,maybe i got a little too excited.....my bad [:P)]