Editing 101: 54 Seconds

Author	Post
BigBobxxx Senior Member 2681 Posts 5/04	Posted - Jul 4 2009 : 11:34AM Just watched Bee Spanx in The Blowjob Adventures of Dr. Fellatio #16. We're getting to what is looking like the climax of the scene... The stud is hard-as-a-rock, and Bee is really tugging it hard... Bee keeps moving her face into position (clearly she thinks he's ready to pop)... But, no! The stud takes his cock away from her, and starts pounding it himself... For 54-seconds (an eternity at this point)! Then, he hands it back to her (he tells her "take it"). In lick-lick+eight-quick-strokes, he's -- finally -- blowing a load. My point is that, the entire 54-seconds of the stud pulling his own dick could have -- and should have -- been edited out. I can tell you that, this edit could have been done seamlessly (and that's based on just the footage I'm looking at that made the final cut). Instead, because of poor editing, or knowingly who-gives-a-fuck, an otherwise decent scene loses most of the heat it had going. Why am I re-stating the obvious now? Notice all the "how to save porn" and "what's wrong with porn" type threads lately? Granted, this is a 1999 scene, but nothing ever changes. Make better porn by doing the best job you can with what you have. It costs nothing more to edit a scene well (unless we're now using the stockroom guys for minimum-wage). [Link]
presto_nl Member 103 Posts 3/09	Posted - Jul 4 2009 : 11:50AM Big Bob i absolutely agree with you. An edit had improved the scene. Unfortunately bad editing/or no editing at all takes place in a lot of gonzo movies. Most scenes ranging from 40 minutes till over an hour are way too long. Good editing improves the rhythm and the heat of the scene. [Link]
Dubious_Leftovers Senior Member And on that fateful day, the hatred consumed me... 1423 Posts 3/09	Posted - Jul 4 2009 : 12:40PM Very true. Good editing is paramount in a scene's success. At the culmination of the scene, it should come across to the viewer as the absolute height of the momentum and heat built up over the preceding action. Long footage of the guy desperately whacking off (often made worse by the cameraman PANNING to a guy's struggling-to-cum face - like we want to see that?!) goes to completely destroy that momentum, and cause annoyance to the viewer. These are the very reasons that editing software exists, and why there are occupation titles held by trained people called "editors". Ultimately, it comes down to lesser studios not giving a shit about final output. Doubt there's anything more to it. [Link]
TedtheBellhop Member 767 Posts 6/09	Posted - Jul 4 2009 : 3:07PM This is a great post. I respect your opinions, but I have to disagree completely. My personal preference is for continuity. The less editing the better. It seems more real and natural. Have you never had to lend your significant other "a hand" in getting you there? I haven't had tons of partners, but I've only met one woman who could tug it as well as I do. In terms of what I would like to see in editing is chopping these 30-40 minute scenes down to 15-20. I understand that will never happen because of the expenses associated. [Link]
BigBobxxx Senior Member 2681 Posts 5/04	Posted - Jul 4 2009 : 3:37PM ^ Another reason to buy your porn on DVD. The reason for 30-40 minute scenes (where a well-edited 15-20 minute scene used to be the norm), has, IMHO, everything to do with selling porn-by-the-minute via streaming video on the Internet. Good editing is virtually seamless (just like the "natural look" make-up jobs some women master). "Less editing" doesn't mean no editing, does it? I believe that 54-seconds of the stud jerking himself off needs to be edited. If nothing else gets edited, studs jerking themselves off is right at the top of the list. Particularly when it detracts from the climax of the scene. BTW, I do a lot of editing of porn for my own enjoyment. I am frequently astounded at how a good editing job can turn dull scenes into whackable material -- especially leading up to the cumshot. [Link]

TedtheBellhop Member 767 Posts 6/09	Posted - Jul 4 2009 : 3:55PM BigBobxxx wrote: ^ Another reason to buy your porn on DVD. The reason for 30-40 minute scenes (where a well-edited 15-20 minute scene used to be the norm), has, IMHO, everything to do with selling porn-by-the-minute via streaming video on the Internet. Good editing is virtually seamless (just like the "natural look" make-up jobs some women master). "Less editing" doesn't mean no editing, does it? I believe that 54-seconds of the stud jerking himself off needs to be edited. If nothing else gets edited, studs jerking themselves off is right at the top of the list. Particularly when it detracts from the climax of the scene. BTW, I do a lot of editing of porn for my own enjoyment. I am frequently astounded at how a good editing job can turn dull scenes into whackable material -- especially leading up to the cumshot. Click to expand You make a great point about the DVDs. The VOD is what really makes the scene length frustrating. Although picking up 3 DVDs from the store and finding 1-2 scenes that are to my like is equally as frustrating. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on the 54 seconds, of course that's in theory as I haven't seen that film. However, I think that's awesome that you've taken the initiative to do something about it! [Link]
rashidnz Senior Member Eve Angel 4645 Posts 12/03	Posted - Oct 20 2009 : 1:48AM Hello a similar topic/thread just started up at the viv thomas forum where they asked what makes a good straight sex scene, Of course there is no agreement on what everyone likes there does seem to be agreement on what was not wanted though and seeing the guy jerking off and making faces was very high on the list of Stop Showing us this Crap Have the Girl Finish the Job she started(If I want to see a guy jerking off I will Look in the Mirror) NO Need to see the guys face its obvious he is Happy,He is shooting Cum out show us the Girls Face and her reaction and show the post cum head clean up and swallowing [Link]
duefuss Member Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09	Posted - Oct 20 2009 : 2:56PM Just adding my agreement with Bigbobxxx. Couldn't be said better. [Link]
NewRomancer Deactivated User under THEIR avatar 738 Posts 7/08	Posted - Oct 20 2009 : 3:03PM All scenes of the meat jerking himself off should be edited out. It's pathetic [Link]
Boob Enthusiast Member 91 Posts 3/08	Posted - Oct 21 2009 : 5:34PM deleted I've recently started editing my own porn. With simple editing software, I can now remove all the stuff I hate: male spitting, closeups of male faces, males jerking off, camera angles from between or thru the male's legs--i.e. crack n' sack shots, reverse cowgirl and other unrealistic & uncomfortable looking positions, etc. Out of a standard 20-30 minute porn scene, I consider myself lucky if I get 3-5 minutes' worth of whackable material. It's usually difficult to make it flow smoothly when I cut so much out, but that's still better than trying to sit through all the usual bad camera angles and sex positions. Edited by - BigBobxxx on 10/21/2009 5:57:47 PM [Link]
presto_nl Member 103 Posts 3/09	Posted - Oct 21 2009 : 5:53PM Boob Enthusiast wrote: deleted Click to expand Dear Boob Enthusiast, You are stealing original content. This is not something to be proud of. You damage producers, pornstars, you damage everybody in the porn industry. When you think that most of the material is crap anyway stop watching it and do something useful with your life. Note to all... I don't want to see any further conversation regarding illegal downloads (and quoting those comments that start down that path). presto_nl your comments are fine, however, Boob Enthusiast's inappropriate remarks have been deleted. ANY further discussion of illegal downloads, etc. will be deleted. And, I mean the entire post. This thread is regarding editing -- particularly how the studios edit their movies and scenes. -- BigBobxxx Edited by - BigBobxxx on 10/21/2009 6:40:23 PM [Link]
Aplus Senior Member 1431 Posts 5/05	Posted - Oct 21 2009 : 6:00PM Boob Enthusiast wrote: Out of a standard 20-30 minute porn scene, I consider myself lucky if I get 3-5 minutes' worth of whackable material. It's usually difficult to make it flow smoothly when I cut so much out, but that's still better than trying to sit through all the usual bad camera angles and sex positions. Click to expand Oh believe me I know your pain there. I'd say that was one of my main issues with sex scenes in general. I was watching a scene the other day that had a few genuinely hot moments surrounded by mostly filler. I was thinking it'd be nice to see more of the hotter moments, or at least less of the filler. I would find editing the filler out too tedious though. [Link]
BrekkyDJ Member Australia 246 Posts 10/06	Posted - Oct 22 2009 : 12:34AM I agree with BigBobxxx. I'm not a fan of seeing a guys jerk off, or seeing his facial expression - dare I say it, it's like watching a gay men's movie - NO THANKS The one thing I hate the most is when a girl is getting pounded, you're enjoying the scene and about to blow your love juice, then you see a full close up of the guys straining face - talk about a way to ruin the scene! Can we just focus on the girl please? That's what we pay our $$$ to see. BrekkyDJ (With slow internet in Australia) [Link]
Johnothan Pedak Senior Member Catastrophe 1594 Posts 6/07	Posted - Oct 22 2009 : 7:02AM Dubious_Leftovers wrote: Long footage of the guy desperately whacking off (often made worse by the cameraman PANNING to a guy's struggling-to-cum face) Click to expand [Link]
ninja1 Senior Member 2939 Posts 1/08	Posted - Oct 22 2009 : 1:51PM BrekkyDJ wrote: I'm not a fan of seeing a guys jerk off, or seeing his facial expression - dare I say it, it's like watching a gay men's movie - NO THANKS Click to expand I never watched gay porn...I wonder if they even zoom on the guy's mug like that. Does it appeal to anyone other than these clueless directors and editors? [Link]

BigBobxxx Senior Member 2681 Posts 5/04	Posted - Oct 22 2009 : 2:16PM It has been stated, although never verified or proven, that, the panning to the guy's face before the cumshot often has something to do with particular studios/directors/performers as an "aid" in their editing process. I guess it helps them slam something together quickly (as opposed to real editing) Since 99-44/100ths of the time porn is being filmed with a single camera, this often leads to unintended poor results. One of the worst, IMHO, is missing the start of the cumshot (or its related fuck-up: needing to crossfade into the cumshot already in progress) [Link]
ninja1 Senior Member 2939 Posts 1/08	Posted - Oct 22 2009 : 2:46PM ^Interesting. Come to think of it, this "technique" is used in some euro-kink movies I have seen. But it has nothing to do with an impending cumshot. Like there will be 2-3 girls involved in some bizarre fisting daisy chain or something. And some dude just happens to be there, but not participating in the sex, he is fully clothed even, maybe he's a "peeping tom" or something. They'll pan the camera to the dude's face, then there's a jump edit to the girls again, from a new camera position, perhaps with a new configuration of the girls. Kinda like in the old Golden Age porn where they would pan to an object in the room like a wall painting or table lamp or stuffed animal or something mundane like that, to signify some sort of camera/edit transition about to happen. Edited by - ninja1 on 10/22/2009 2:47:32 PM [Link]
fotomatt Member 78 Posts 8/08	Posted - Oct 22 2009 : 3:55PM Well, I understand how these guys need to jerk it off themselves to get the pop shot. It's always easier to make yourself pop than for someone else. Especially after having sex for a prolonged amount of time when your dick becomes numbed to the action. But I do agree that it's almost always better (for me) visually to watch the girl bring it to a pop. The main reason is that it gives the appearance that the girl is more "into" the sex and actually wants that pop shot all over her face because she's in control of that cock. There can be some exceptions to that. Such as when there are multiple girls in the scene and the guy needs to nut on all their faces - it's just going to be too difficult for the girls to control that kind of action. Or if it's a scene where the guy is in a male dominating role and is "subjecting" the girl to himself. Some of this could be taken care of in directing also. One of my pet peeves in porn is how the facial comes to be. A guy will be pounding away on a girl, and all of a sudden he's ready to blow his load, and so he jumps up, she has to roll over, get off the bed & onto her knees into "standard cum shot position" (and while doing so you can see her looking around the room catching the eyes of the director/cameraman/lighting guy) and take the cumshot on her face. Often times she'll throw in a few out of place comments that are soo faked, such as "oh yeah baby, I want you to cum on my face). I'd rather the guy just pull out and blow his load on whatever body part is there - ass, pussy, stomach, tits... It would flow much better. Otherwise, if the director wants a facial, then the director needs to let the actor know that if he's getting close to losing it, switch to a position that allows for a more natural facial to occur. But alas, despite all my gripes, I'm still going to watch it. After all, it's the hot chicks doing all those wonderfully nasty things that keeps bringing me back, no matter how bad the acting, directing, or editing. [Link]
Rosco Fuji Deactivated User On the licking stick, Mr. Magic Dick! 3309 Posts 2/09	Posted - Oct 22 2009 : 4:10PM I agree! It's all about laziness on the part of the producers/directors etc. Part of it probably comes from the proliferation of porn tapes from 10 years ago before the whole VOD era. You go to the porn store to rent and you see 2 tapes that you like. Tape 1 is 1 hour and forty minutes, whereas tape 2 is 2 hours and 20 minutes. The average person thinks they are getting more fuck for the buck by getting the 2:20 tape. It continues on today. Who's going to pickup a dvd that runs 1:40 compared to a 3:30 disk? Quickiest way to extend run time is not to edit out pencil sharpening. [Link]