The Aminima weighs about 5 pounds, is about the size of a PD150, and has a light baffle that allows away from the eye shooting. All the advantages of film, in a handicam package. If the 5 minute load is a problem, then rent two of them (they're only about $250/day to rent). When you're getting short, give your assistant the high-sign and swap your nearly spent camera for one with a fresh load. Now all you have to do is figure out how to sell enough additional DVDs to pay for the film. (Figure stock, processing and transfer of 6400ft @ $.75/foot = 500 units @ $10/unit)
So this would be an inappropriate place to spout off about how the last 5 NS discs I've seen have had the very same "Bonus" scene, which is no longer a bonus at this point really. That's not really a lie, it's just them showing the same bonus scene on every movie for a year now. Still, I feel better now that it's been said. Thank you. (At least I think NS is the company doing that. It's one of those porno companies, you know.)
I never thought it did. I just felt an irresistible urge to use that lame ass pun.Nothing wrong with expressing honest opinion about movies, even if the director sadly happens to be deceased. You weren't slamming the person in any way. And I couldn't possibly fault you or anyone for finding his movies lacking 'something' to get your engines revving. If it came across as if I did, it certainly wasn't my intention. The guy obviously knew his craft and what he wanted. His productions just happened to combine a bunch of my personal porn fetishes.
But we already agreed on the different strokes angle.
Yup. We (and lots of others, I'm sure) are in full agreement on those things. That we all have different preferences for specific details is hardly any great surprise.
Well you can get either a PL mount (which I think is german) or a Nikon mount (which I know is japanese), so I suppose the Aminima is perfect for either heavy scat scenes or bukakee.
After seeing more than 100 replies and close to 3000 hits on this topic I guess I got my point across by being frustrated with the misleading images and descriptions on the covers of this DVD, Pleasures Of The Flesh 10, released by NS/DS.
I can accept that the faulty description and images on the box cover of this product was not intentionally made to deceive the customers.
But, since this is not the first time that NS/DS has done this, as noted by other readers, personally I'll be very skeptical and cautious about giving their products another chance. With that being said, people at NS/DS should probably upgrade their QA, if they have one in place, so they won't lose customers.
On that note, NS/DS is not the only company that makes mistakes like this, and I encourage the moderators to devote a permanent section/thread to this type of topic where every messed up DVD is pointed out by the ripped off customers so others won't fall victim to it. Let them have cold sweat over it, we are the customers and we are the ones that pay their bills. we should not pay for something that isn't delivered as advertised, no one should.
I'll think about changing the wording of the headline to something less sever than "lies".
Maybe you should rent before you buy. It saves me from making mistakes all the time. Also, let's not forget the reviews.Feel free to start a thread, though I feel it more properly belongs in the Shopping forum. Just FYI, it's up to the admins, not the mods, which threads get 'the sticky.'
And if the admins agree with you, they'll move it back after I move it to Shopping.Steph, Drew and Saki are the admins. They are gods. We are mere acolytes. As a general rule, mods handle the daily affairs while the admins step in to handle the extraordinary stuff, like banning a user who's abused his posting privileges once too often.
Poor Turkey running for her life with Christmas Hat 3713 Posts 9/01
Posted - May 18 2005 : 10:54AM
I just posted a comment about another New Sensation/Digital Sin misleading title -- Ass Wide Open, directed by Jean Yves Le Castel , to the thread Ass Wide Open. Basically, we have the same mistake (coincidence, I doubt it), where a double anal (or dp) scene was completely censored. That is 3 that I have caught -- Harder Faster 3, Anal Retentive 4, and Ass Wide Open 3. Here is the comment I posted in another thread.
First of all - thank you for being such an avid viewer of our products. I would like to believe that you actually enjoyed some of the over 180 all new releases that we put out in the last year. The company has an excellent reputation for quality and consistency which I am sure that you have seen throughout our releases. Our success proves that. If we have lost you as a fan because of recent errors then so be it.
Now to the point - Le Castel DID edit Ass Wide Open 3. Pictures were provided for each and every scene and a box was created from this. Our new QC procedure failed to catch the box error. I will ask LeCastel to join the forum so he can explain how something like this can happen.
This is the first I am hearing about this and I am sure you can't imagine my disappointment that this has followed so close to the POTF issue. But if I am going to be a public figure then I must allow myself to field any and all harsh judgement. You have every right to your perception but I can tell you that our intent is never to defraud. This gets harder to justify the more this happens but just know that we have several hundred products in the market and an incredibe fan base that was built on the satisfaction of our customers. We are not about to intentionally sacrifice that in some dying last gasp for money.
So, as target of the month, I would like to point out that AWO # 3 is an excellent product with amazing girls and awesome sex scenes. LeCastel is featured in the product and he is one of the best at getting girls to gape. He has a worldwide fan base that I am sure he wants to please as much as we want him to. This volume is an excellent showcase of his work. Somehow you were able to pull your cock out of your hand long enough to complain about the lack of a single DP scene in the product. Congrats!
Should you ever feel the need to comment on the positive aspects of his and/or our product rather than to continually rent or buy it merely to find fault - GO FOR IT. Or you can boycott our products and miss out on all the excellent series we produce.
Thanks for the heads up of this problem and we will honor any and all credit as we would defectives should you decide to return it - assuming you bought it. We will cease distribution of this title, as well as AR 4, until we change the inserts to reflect the proper content. In the meatime feel free to go back to the rest of this great all anal movie - bust multiple nuts - sleep - and prepare for your next "oh poor me - the sky is falling" rant.
Poor Turkey running for her life with Christmas Hat 3713 Posts 9/01
Posted - May 19 2005 : 9:38PM
DS Director,
You have not really addressed the issue yet. How did Bibi Foz's dap or dp get edited out? Why did the dap scene in AR4 get edited out? In AWO3, the still gallery has the dap or dp shot. I want the DVD's but with those scenes in them. Is this a policy of Digital Sin to edit out all daps? You have evaded answering this question.
It is not just the mistake but the pattern that we buyers see. Replacing an insert is not my idea of the solution, but just a cheap and very unsatisfactory fix . I would prefer a reedit with the missing scenes added back in and then a complete rerelease. If you truly care about the product, then remaster the entire DVD and add back the missing scenes. Sure, you will loose money but then it will show that you truly care. What is more important, money or truly correcting the mistake in the only honest way? Anything else is dishonest in my books.
Remember, the chain is as strong as its weakest link and one bad mistake can destroy (and to be brutally honest, deservedly so) the entire company. Many major companies have gone bankrupt over 1 just mistake.
Not to take sides with this question, but if there's maybe ten seconds of DAP, DP, whatever, where it wouldn't have a chance to really do anything other than to say "We have sex act X in movie Y" when the performer might not even look like they're enjoying themselves for much of it, is it worth re-editing the movie to be able to say that? I can't say that I'm happy with the job DS's quality control seems to be doing lately (I think Trump should have a couple words with him or her with how they're doing), but re-editing a movie for what might be something so brief doesn't make sense either. At least DS is stopping things to try to make sure that they're not deceiving customers any longer than possible (okay, not the best word since it shouldn't have happened in the first place). I think DS is doing the right thing here, but what's coming out as a snotty attitude from DS Director when they're caught fucking up with three titles in under a month isn't really helping me want to stand up for them...
"Vegetarianism for me is about saying ‘yes’ to things - even meat." - Coupling
This happens more with Digital Sin BY FAR than any other adult movie distributor. I used to buy DS titles but AT LEAST 50% of the boxcovers dont have every scene shown on the back boxcover. Yes, I know other studios do this but not near as frequent as DS. I dont even rent them anymore honestly, only JYLC titles. I have even started a thread way back to address this, and DS says the same thing in every thread - they dont know how this could have happened, will try and prevent it in the future, blah blah blah. The best thing to do is keep this thread at the top of the forum page so hopefully less and less people will buy or rent DS titles. Maybe then they will wake up and realize 'Hey, they are finally catching on that we dont care at all about misleading the customer'. I will never, and I mean ever, buy another DS title!
Depending on where in the world p_ramezap lives, renting may not be an option (can't rent at all in Australia, for example). Reviews are always good to check as well, but there's no accountinf for the sheer volumes of new releases and stumbling on the single copy of a good-seeming title with a favorite performer on the cover while in Porn Palace doesn't allow much in the way of checking reviews beforehand. Also, with the aforementioned glut of titles, many have no reviews whatsoever.
The one review of this title I could find via rame.net for example, came up 3 days after this thread was started
Someone who clearly above all else, has been devoted to perfecting what we see, and how we see it, I would certainly be interested in hearing what Jean Yves LeCastel has to say. Not that I necessarily expect it, nor would hold it against him in any way, should he decline to do so.
Jean-Yves LeCastel is a long-time member of this forum and has been for some time. Like many industry people, his posting is cyclical, sometimes he posts a lot, sometimes not at all, depending on his time.
Mod: While your presence here is appreciated and welcomed, especially in topics like this where a view from the horse's mouth can help very much to explain problems and issues to disgruntled consumers, fanning the flames by insulting your customers when people have a legitimate gripe about misleading covers is not at all useful.
While I understand your frustration and that your response is in many ways "in kind", I'd suggest that you try to make an attempt to "rise above" such posts as you did with your first message on this topic. if nothing else, it's better for business.
Hi everybody, Here is jean-yves lecastel. I just get into this new problem right now. I am so sorry for what has happened. I explain immediately. We started to shoot the pictures with bibi fox, and the plan was to make a single boy girl. The thing is that during the pictures shooting, I got so horny i decided to join a little bit, what i did. That's why there is a picture with a DP with myself, greg centauro and bibi fox. The problem started with the video, and she didn't want anymore to do the DP. Why ? I have no idea. I apologize, I should have told it to the Digital Sin. I hope everybody will forgive me because today I was shooting a scene for AWO # 5. The thing is that David Perry did the pictures alone, and I jumped in the scene for the video : so on the pictures there is no DP, but on the video there is. Without being aware of this forum, I repared my mistake from AWO # 3. I shoot to have a good sex and also to have fun. That's why I prefer to make unexpected thing than pre planed things. But it is true that all you guys want to see more than less. From now on, I will have a closer look at it !
Next week I will explain how I see the porno today. I am managing to create a new serie. I am waiting for your comments.
I am looking forward to Jean-Yves future posts. It's refreshing to hear that a director in this business is all about having fun on his shoots.
As for the topic itself -- Anytime that you are dealing with a creative process that involves more than one person, you are going to have some errors in the eventual product.
I think that in this case, the director himself is saying exactly what DS Director, and others in this string have said: No intentional attempts at anything to "decieve" or in any way "mis-represent" what is in this movie.
I'd go farther and say that it probably hasn't been the case in any of the movies named by any company, let alone Digital Sin.
It's not always the fault of the company that is releasing the movie either - they can only go by what the director and photographer tell and show them.
I agree that there needs to be some way for fans to trade information on this. I also think that ADT is probably the best forum for it, since the posters here are serious about their porn!
But I also think that sometimes the fact that we're disappointed with a product is because we expect it to be as perfect as we assume that we'd make it ourselves. Until you've been in the director and production company's shoes, doing that job every day, then it's impossible to know whether any of us would make those same mistakes or not.
I know that I sure ain't perfect. I fuck up from time to time. But I also know that if I had to answer to thousands of other people on every one of my fuck ups, then I'd definitely have to hope that they would cut me some slack, while I tried everything in my power to make amends.
Poor Turkey running for her life with Christmas Hat 3713 Posts 9/01
Posted - May 20 2005 : 10:30PM
Maybe there is no attempt to deceive. I never claimed that there was a deliberate attempt on the part of DS to deceive the customers. All I said is that there were mistakes made and the answers have not been very satisfactory. Okay, the Bibi Fox scene may have been meant to be a single 1-on-1 scene, but the dp in the rear cover and the dp in the description should never have been placed. I am still not sure I buy JYLC's explanation in its entirety. Whether there was a deliberate attempt to deceive or not, the bottom line is that I was deceived by the box cover . When I get deceived, I don't really care whether it was deliberate or not, and I have a right to get annoyed. Mistakes like this should never happen. Just hire a person to screen all DVDs twice and check for errors with the box covers and gallery photos. If he/she makes a mistake, he/she is fired.
Also for Anal Retentive 4, Melissa reported doing a double anal. The rear cover clearly showed a double anal with Melissa. The scene was cut from the video. DS director has not responded to that question. Is it the current DS policy to censor all double anals? I do not buy DVDs from any company that has such a policy. I have stopped buying from Private and Hustler (although Hot Letters 6 may have a double anal scene with Lucy Lee).
What the company should do is to make meaningful restitution. Making me go back to the store, complain to them, and hope that they will allow an exchange is not meaningful restitution. I did mention remastering the entire DVD, not because it makes that much sense, but it will cost DS big time. It is like making a sin and kneeling down for 5 hours on a hard stone floor with no knee pads saying 100,000 Hail Mary's. It gotta hurt before I will feel that the company really has the highest integrity.
DS's response is the typical response you get when you take a business writing course, praise your product and deflect criticism. That to me is not satisfactory as no real attempt was made to address the issues with the highest integrity. How did it happen? If it happens again, what penalty will DS pay to the customers that is truly meaningful? Why was the double anal scene in AR 4 censored? A complete honest and candid answer will go a long way.
I think expecting DS to remaster the DVD because you feel they should be punished in the most painful way for the DVD-cover error is quite unreasonable.
I think the best that can be expected on a reasonable level would be re-doing the covers and allowing you to return the DVD, either to your place of purchase for a refund (or perhaps direct to DS for a replacement of another title).
Despite aspects of the tone of DS Director's last post, their first post on this topic mentioned that they're recalling it for a new cover, and also authorised credit for returns. I think that's about as good as you can reasonably expect. The "great vengeance and fuuuuuious anger" mea culpa you're suggesting is pretty over the top.
Certainly, keeping an eye out and mentioning these mistakes when they happen is useful for all of us and will hopefully lead to better quality control on DS' part. I actually picked up this DVD in a store the other day and was giving it the old "hmm.. this looks interesting" when I realised it was this DVD.. so I put it back.
Lady B, What's your role in the industry? In at least one post you've referred to yourself as "an insider", yet you write posts like this one as if you have nothing to do with the business.
#SDNY he's all yours. -- Michael Steele 5110 Posts 3/03
Posted - May 20 2005 : 11:19PM
The disreputable and, believe me, intentional practice of putting out films, tapes and DVDs with covers showing people who aren't in the movie, or people doing things that aren't in the movie, has been going on since the dawn of commercial pornography. Maybe in some cases it's accidental, but it's usually to try to foist off shit wrapped in a pretty package to unsuspecting buyers.
Poor Turkey running for her life with Christmas Hat 3713 Posts 9/01
Posted - May 20 2005 : 11:26PM
[scipo wrote:] I think expecting DS to remaster the DVD because you feel they should be punished in the most painful way for the DVD-cover error is quite unreasonable.
I think the best that can be expected on a reasonable level would be re-doing the covers and allowing you to return the DVD, either to your place of purchase for a refund (or perhaps direct to DS for a replacement of another title).
Despite aspects of the tone of DS Director's last post, their first post on this topic mentioned that they're recalling it for a new cover, and also authorised credit for returns. I think that's about as good as you can reasonably expect. The "great vengeance and fuuuuuious anger" mea culpa you're suggesting is pretty over the top. [/quote]
I disagree. Toyota had a minor problem with the suspension and one trunk had a minor accident. What did Toyota do? They are spending billions to recall their trucks to fix the problem. With such a perfectionist and highest integrity attitude, Toyota has the best quality control. GM and Ford usually have to be dragged screaming and forced to issue a recall. GM has lost market share, and Toyota has gained GM's market share. Integrity and quality means everything. If DS will remaster everything anytime a mistake is made, they will learn real quick NEVER[ EVER/b] to make a mistake and they will have the highest standards. The problem in the adult industry is that the level of honesty is not as high as it should be.
I still have not received an honest candid answer from DS.
I would not expect there to be any need for you to apologise Mr LeCastel. This was not associated with any of the unfortunate NS/DS mishaps that have recently occurred. As we have been informed, and can now further assume, those problems have since been adaquately addressed.
While we can appreciate the clarity you've brought to this, its certainly regrettable, that you even came to be affected by it at all. Having been a regular viewer of adult film, for nearly twenty five years, spanning a marriage, and four girlfriends, over thousands of titles, and countless directors, all have disappointed, at one time or another, all but one that is..
Only the "Assman" has never disappointed. This afternoon, I mistakenly picked up Assman #27. This, because you remain the only filmmaker who's work I buy, without so much as glancing at the cover, beyond its number. Yours have been the exception to the rule, as the only covers that always "understate" how good, the movies within them, actually are.
So today, to come home, and find its not yours, I am indeed disappointed.
Only the "Assman" has never disappointed. This afternoon, I mistakenly picked up Assman #27. This, because you remain the only filmmaker who's work I buy, without so much as glancing at the cover, beyond its number. Yours have been the exception to the rule, as the only covers that always "understate" how good, the movies within them, actually are.
So today, to come home, and find its not yours, I am indeed disappointed.
Ron. It's a false parallel. When Toyota changes a truck over a safety issue who knows? Everyone. Who cares? Everyone.
If DS were to remaster these titles instead of changing the misleading packaging, who knows? Those ADT members who've read this far on this thread. Who cares? Not many people at all. You, basically.
They don't have to answer to you personally Ron. They can explain their stance but really it's not going to affect them a whole lot if you take it or if you leave it. If they change the packaging and offer a refund, then they've rectified their mistake. In the end, one person screaming at the void on the internet for DS to remaster a porn dvd makes no difference to anyone.
I agree that honesty in adult overall isn't what it should be, but mistakes happen. We've seen mistakes with EA product before and Tricia made her explanations. But nobody has to keep answering to you until you're personally satisfied that enough blood has been shed to avenge your honour.
Ron, Do you really think that the answer to this is for them to go back and re-shoot a scene containing the acts that took place during the still shots, but didn't take place while they were shooting the video?
I'm not sure if they've settled on another Assman, or if they're planning on leaving the title unclaimed. They cast a couple previous Assman alumni, with no one really stepping forward to take lead, despite trying to at least keep a bit of the original theme and comradeship. Sorry to say, serious consideration of gapage, isn't high among that list of priorities. All in all, as an anal flick? Nice, oral skittish ass spirited.
I have thought ,that i bought the wrong movie with Assman #27 ,but now it's to late . When it's really bad i should write my first review , because i was always disappointed from the latest Anabolic Gangbang Girl titles . Some JYLC titles for DS was not top quality , but i watch a long time porn movies and not many directors can make better anal movies than JYLC. Some little mistakes would not stay me away from buying his movies . Anabolic should get a new Assman to keep this series alive and i will nominate Greg Centauro , if you have watched Ass Drippers #3 ,you will know what i am talking about . He's the only one who can keep the Assman series alive !
Poor Turkey running for her life with Christmas Hat 3713 Posts 9/01
Posted - May 21 2005 : 10:26PM
Shooting new scenes to add to a reedit of the original title is still cheating and dishonest. That is a big no go in my books.
Honesty and integrity does not depend on circumstance, industry, company, or whether people know about it or not. If the company makes a mistake, and even if no one ever would find out, the company must still do all it can (even if it will go bankrupt) to correct the mistake (regardless of whether it is a big car mistake where lives are at stake or a small mistake that is inconsequential). That is integrity.
Back to the car example, Mitsubishi for years hid the defect problems but when it came out, their car sales plummeted. GM and Ford did not bother to maintain integrity and quality, and are suffering the consequences.
If the adult industry were to maintain higher integrity standards, we would all benefit (including the studios). Just because higher integrity standards may not benefit anyone initially is NO reason not to have high standards. It is a slippery slope and high standards should never be compromised for minor reasons.
Now there are other ways to correct the error. What needs to be done is to come up with a way that will be satisfactory to all, not provide a few irrelevant excuses and develop corrections only based on cost effectiveness. That to me is inadequate.
Patience is a virtue, but who wants to be virtuous? 4283 Posts 4/00
Posted - May 22 2005 : 4:30PM
DS is at this point, doing appropriate actions to eliminate discrepencies between the boxcovers and the movies.
When Evil Angel recalled movies that had technical defects, we received back only about 25% of what was originally sold.
So it doesn't make sense that DS needs to do anything more than eliminate the 'potentially deceiving' pictures so that future people don't buy the movie based on those pictures only to be disappointed. They have offered to give you credit for the movie. If the scene in question doesn't exist or is horrible, they would be deceiving people if they put it in. Then the boxcover would show a happy porn girl, and the video an uncomfortable porn girl.
Finally, having 3 mistakes in a month is indeed serious, but the true test is a couple of months from now, when the boxcovers that are coming out from them would have been worked on and approved AFTER this thread was started.
The loophole that the first mistake went through is THE SAME loophole that the other 2 mistakes went through, and did not have a chance to be corrected before DS was made aware of the problem.
Unfortunately, if that theory held up, there wouldn't be so damn many examples of "loopholes" with this company. There have been multiple threads, they've made multiple comments about correcting erros, and yet it still happens with fairly frequent regularity.
Such as back in January 2004, when Harder Faster 3 had a fairly lengthey DAP cut out, even though it was shown on the back. (Although to their credit, they did release that scene on HF4 with the DAP intact, and I forget, but may have re-authored HF3 to include it.
Or the loophole in May 2004 where there are various anal positions sown of a girl who did no anal in the movie at all in Ass Angels 2.
Or Gia Paloma's missing DAP position in Anal Perversions 3.
I still enjoy DS's movies, but it seems they have erroneous stills much more frequently than the other major studios.
Poor Turkey running for her life with Christmas Hat 3713 Posts 9/01
Posted - May 22 2005 : 10:35PM
And coincidentally, most of the mistakes are dap scenes that were accidentally left in the cutting floor. Harder Faster 3, Anal Perversions 3, Anal Retentive #4, and as far as I can tell, Ass Wide Open #3 (JYLC says it is a dp, but rear cover and gallery shot suggests dap) all have missing dap scenes.
