Undoubtedly, Red Light District features some of the hottest looking girls around, and Vince's camera work is second to none. However, the one major complaint I have against them is the lighting (or type of camera) that they use. The colors seem a little bit "too vibrant" and "artificial" (I think a couple of the Devil's Film series has the same issue). Companies like Anabolic and Evil Angel, on the other hand, use lighting that seems more "natural" -- the flesh tones look better and gives off more of a "raw" feel.
In my opinion, the gold standard for perfect gonzo work were the early Ed Power's DD series -- #1 throught #50 or so (before Ed changed his bedroom setting and decided to shoot the entire show himself). Ed's series was so beautifully done back then.
I don't recall ever thinking Ed Powers' stuff was well lit, but I do agree that RLD's lighting is generally too flat and washed out looking. Of course, they're hardly alone in having questionable production values.
That is interesting, I have always thought the opposite: I love the way RLD's dvd's look, they have a more "vibrant" feel to them. I do not but Evil Angel for many reasons, but one of the primary ones is that the lighting (at least to me) looks bad, everything looks pale and washed out. RLD and PXP (at least now) have excellent lighting imo.
I agree that PXP uses great lighting (better than RLD's, anyway).
Ever since Anabolic and Diabolic offered the Music On/Off feature on their DVD's, I've been renting all their stuff.
On a related note, there seems to be a multitude of gonzo companies coming out every month or so -- Smash, Lethal Hardcore, etc. Can anyone recommend other series that are comparable to Anabolic, Diabolic, and Evil Angel? (I did rent a Smash DVD once and remember being slightly disappointed.) What about Nectar?
PXP and RLD distributes different producers / directors who shoot independently. You might like some and don't like others. So look out for the work of the directors / producers you like. We are very diverse here.
LIghting quality varies all over the map. I think Jonni Darkko has it nailed the best, though. Jules uses so much natural light (big windows), that his stuff is always crystal clear.
Evil Angel directors like Jules Jordan, Jonni Darkko and Christoph Clark have the best lighting in the whole porn business in my opinion. I don't know why anyone can say, that the colors in their movies look washed out. They look natural and the colors in many of the RLD movies look oversaturated and unnatural. But maybe many consumers love colors that way?
After having spooled through vast miles of videotape over the years, in comparisen to DVD these days, my threshold of tolorance, rarely gets tested. Infact, I've even adapted to the widely maligned lighting practices, employed in the often lurid GGG movies series.
Aside from the moderate inconvenience, of having to lower saturation, and bump the bright/contrast levels whenever I play one, rarely has it ever been a burden. On the otherhand, I can certainly appreciate the impact, "optimal" lighting can produce with skin tone, and the astounding clarity of texture attainable, as with the previously mentioned Jules Jordan titles.
One notable company, who's work I recently viewed was EXP. Though only one flick, and hardly much to base anything on, I was very impressed with what I saw of a well heeled cast in "Top Notch Anal Bitches". Basically alotta fine ass, in a full range of profiles and perspective less often seen, that I'd attibute to both creative camerawork, and exceptional lighting.
also, tyrone shuz has done some incredible lighting and camera work. check out his fourth scene in CRAVING BIG COCKS 4 for instance which should be shown in that porn-directing class that should be taught to all those hacks out there.
tyrone shuz at digital sin/new sensations (is this studio not as popular here on ADT?) uses excellent natural lighting. his look is very, very similar to jonni darkko. it is a nice neutral hue and saturation which is accomplished by windows galore and a bright, sunny day
jules jordan is pretty good too but if you notice, the hues are a bit too red/pinkish... this warmer hue maybe makes it feel more raw = raunchier, but i think tyrone and jonni have him beat. maybe the fault is in jule's mansion- the windows arn't as big, thus less natural light.
i don't care for vince voyeur's lighting or his camera work but jake malone at RLD is pretty good. i agree, vince has these bright, cartoon-like colors
also some honorable mentions are chris streams, skeeter kerkove (he has a more unique lighting style), and also of course some of those artsy directors, richard hamilton at hustler (i have a review of Taboo 2 coming up, the lighting there is top notch, much more technical than all these otehrs i mentioned), andrew blake, even robby d
hey, one to look out for is newbie studio X-WorX, i have a feeling they have more potential than a lot of these studios we come to put faith in
I agree that Peter North uses great lighting, but the thing I can't stand (even more than bright artificial colors) is background music. I wish he'd offer a Music On/Off option like Ana/Dia does for their newer DVD's.
And if I remember correctly, Digital Sin/New Sensations also uses background music but has great colors.
The quality of the picture at Rosebud when Rex Borsky and Jackson St.Louis were directing for them was really great. This was like back in 1992 or something.
LOL. Believe me, as I was typing out my complaint about RLD, I realized how much of a porn addict I'd become. When I first started out, it was, of course, only about the girls; now it has to be girls with *specific looks*, scenery with natural/perfect lighting, no background music, good angles, etc., etc., etc. It's pretty scary. I need serious help.
IAFD, supporters of beastiality. Just say no. 7564 Posts 11/02
Posted - Mar 17 2005 : 7:38PM
Why? Because you want porn you like? Seems a natural progression to me.
morbidthoughts said: "Dani Woodward and a hot dog. Mmmmmnnnn."
[Link]
Eric381 Deactivated User
What are you looking at? It 2452 Posts 3/05
Posted - Mar 18 2005 : 7:42AM
OK, so I can't help but ask. Is the equipment that many of these companies are using like Canon XL-2's or Sony VX-1200 series videocams? Or MUCH, MUCH pricier equipment than even those pieces?...
Just curious, being a fan of videography / photography...
Pretty much the XL2 and 2000s ... lately the prosumer psuedo-HD Sony Cams are a fad, but unless you're talking Wicked features, or FASHIONISTAS, you're talking bottom-to-mid-range pro-sumer equipment .... just the way it is ...
Posted - Mar 14 2005 : 3:09PM
