I don't know if I'm the only one who's bothered by this or not but I thought it might be worth trying to get a list going of movies that are shot without that annoying ultra wide angle lens that turns a square room into an oval one and makes furniture with straight edges bow in towards the camera. I think this has ruined more potentially good porn lately than probably anything else and almost everybody seems to be doing it. So, for those of you who watch lots of porn and know all of the major players, it would be great if you could list some current directors who don't do this. Web sites are fine as well. This is probably technically a poll but it'll probably get more attention here so I hope the mods will indulge me.
I think you're compiling a list, which is different from a poll, which is basically just looking for people's opinions on stuff. Good luck with this RP.
I agree!!! A wide angle lens will distort the talent. It'll make the woman's face long and narrow. Any body parts in the foreground are enormous while any body parts in the background look small. Use those wide angle lenses sparingly and with caution.
I saw a couple of movies directed by Chucky Sleaze (Lethal Hardcore) that didn't have the fisheye effect. I don't think he uses them. Unless they were old movies or he just did the ones I saw differently. Edited by - randomprecision on 1/21/2009 10:39:57 PM
I think (at least in the past) some of it might just be the way the camera is made too. I used to have an Olympus digital still camera and no matter what I did, the pictures from that camera just looked fucking wrong. I'm not really that informed on what kind of distortion is what but it seems like for a long time, most digital cameras had problems with serious lens distortion. Video cameras didn't have that problem the last time I bought one but that's been a few years. I'm guessing these guys are using "pro" gear and they can choose their lenses.
What's the fun of getting old if you can't be dirty? 141 Posts 4/06
Posted - Jan 21 2009 : 11:26PM
You can add everything I've ever directed to your list, features and gonzo. I've used wide-angle lenses on occasion, but only for effect, never as a catch-all methodology. It's a fact of photography that the human face is more attractive when photographed at a longer lens; this has the effect of flattening out features and presents a more flattering image as a rule. I once asked a gonzo director why he shot everything with his wide... I aksed him if it didn't bother him that it made all the women look incredibly unattractive and bublous. He said, "yeah, but it makes the dicks look bigger." Hm. Silly me, I though porn was about the chicks...
Thanks Eli and Fingerbanger. Eli - You shoot features, right? I have noticed there's more of this wide angle stuff in gonzo. Most of the features I've seen are at least shot decently. It's the gonzo area that's gone off the deep end with the wide lens. I don't understand why we have to sacrifice decent camera work for harder porn.
Everybody, experiment with your digital cameras. Take a photo of someone with the wide angle, then zoom in and take another. Wide angle lenses can include a wider area at a closer distance, but the drawback is it can distort the image a bit. Wide angle lenses are great for the hand-held POV stuff, where the male talent holds the camera and looks down on the woman. However, an extreme wide angle will distort the talent. A longer lens will not distort the talent, however you have to stand further back. So for a POV shoot, you may need a camera person on a step ladder. And a tele-photo lens tends to make the talent look too flat.
^ Like I said, I think digital cameras are improving but if you look at porn shot with digital still cameras over the last 7 years or so, a lot of it is very unnatural looking. I don't know what the problem is/was. It seems to be getting somewhat better in the last year or so.
I'm not sure what you are referring to, RP. But, wide angle distortion is caused by... wide angle lenses. It has nothing to do with digital or film. It's the lens.
I understand that. I was just pointing out that when they switched from film cameras to digital cameras for shooting porn still photos, a lot of the pictures came out looking very wrong. I don't know exactly why. I think it was a combination of things. Lens distortion, bad color balance, digital noise, exposure problems, camera design flaws, etc. I just meant it was hard to point at one specific thing as the culprit. The thread is about lens distortion, yes. As far as video porn goes, I think if they'd just take the fisheye lens off the camera, porn would be much better for it.
There's more distortion with the same exact wide angle lens on digital compared to film because of the size of most digital sensors is smaller than 35mm film. You have to get even closer to the subject than you do on film to get the wide angle effect on the smaller sensors. However it gives it a more distorted look. However, the newer expensive still cameras now have sensors that are equivalent to the size of 35mm so this aspect should improve.
Interesting. I did not know that. I'm not sure I understand how it works but as I said, I've noticed much better looking images on some sites lately so you're probably right. I have some OCD issues so the wide angle thing drives me crazy (the bad kind of crazy). Edited by - randomprecision on 1/24/2009 8:41:58 AM
Regardless of whether it's film or digital, one must use good photography skills. Remember the elements of composition and value. Some people think that digital means that it's easy: just look through the view finder and push a button. Remember to light the subject, use fill lights to lessen shadows, etc. And, it's not about "art". It's about making good stuff that the viewers get off on!