Unused Porn Footage

You are not logged in
Log in | Register to Post

Reviewers Recommend

Hot Wives 8, The - review by Captain Jack
Director: Mike Quasar
Starring: Van Wylde, Jay Smooth, Codey Steele, Ella Reese, Charlotte Sins, Freya Parker, Melissa Stratton. Read review

Participate...

log in
register

Browse...

Etiquette
Active Topics
Popular Topics
Member List
Search

All Forums > The Porn Pool > The Porn Pool Forum Page 16 > Unused Porn Footage

Author	Post
J92633 Member 35 Posts 6/03	Posted - Mar 22 2005 : 7:01AM What happens to all of the raw and unused footage from a porn shoot? Thrown away? Archived for later use? Can copies be purchased? j92633 [Link]
TonyC Comstock Films 2523 Posts 8/03	Posted - Mar 22 2005 : 7:09AM J92633 wrote: What happens to all of the raw and unused footage from a porn shoot? Thrown away? Archived for later use? Can copies be purchased? Click to expand You're kidding, right? -T.C. Comstock Films:Real Life, Real People, Real Sex [Link]
pimpmeister Member Spain 29 Posts 3/05	Posted - Mar 22 2005 : 7:30AM yes u can buy it on "porn! the scenes no-one wants to watch" :) pimpmyporn Edited by - pimpmeister on 3/22/2005 7:30:41 AM [Link]
J92633 Member 35 Posts 6/03	Posted - Mar 22 2005 : 7:56AM I kid you not =) Take for example Jill Kelly Productions' "100% Haven" or "Secrets 2." As a Star E. Knight fan I was dismayed to find that not only was her screen time way too short in "100% Haven", her scene was also digitally glossed/blurred. In the case of "Secrets 2", Star's scene is presented in sepia-toned filter. j92633 [Link]
DVDwishes ComX 1060 Posts 7/04	Posted - Mar 22 2005 : 8:43AM TonyC wrote: J92633 wrote: What happens to all of the raw and unused footage from a porn shoot? Thrown away? Archived for later use? Can copies be purchased? Click to expand You're kidding, right? -T.C. Comstock Films:Real Life, Real People, Real Sex Click to expand why would he be joking? I've had this question for years as well and it seems many of the best production companies out there are putting there unused footage on bonus DVDs, i.e. Evil Angel. frankly, I'm waiting for Skeeter to release an All Banned* edition to his best scenes and no, I'm not joking* [Link]

ninja1 Senior Member 2939 Posts 1/08	Posted - Nov 23 2010 : 7:37PM I'd like to get the raw/unused footage from a scene which the editor totally ruined. Who would be the person to contact? Is it saved/stored somewhere? Has anyone ever done it? [Link]
Rod Member 908 Posts 8/10	Posted - Nov 23 2010 : 8:19PM Some publishers release the edited version on DVD and offer both the edited and raw versions on member's only websites. [Link]
ninja1 Senior Member 2939 Posts 1/08	Posted - Nov 23 2010 : 11:22PM ^I'm not talking about the typical editing of a sex scene, cutting out the slow parts to make it seem more exciting. I'm talking about a tease sequence in which the editor decides to utilize a boatload of special effects and bells and whistles for no reason except to impress/entertain himself, and laying waste to a big chunk of otherwise good footage. [Link]
bootymeister Senior Member Gravity as Curved Space: Bootymeister's Theory of General Relativity 1589 Posts 11/08	Posted - Nov 24 2010 : 7:34PM ^ That's most def what I'm talking about. Also, the tease segements that get chopped up for promos or DVD intros but not used in the actual scene. Plus, the BTS shots which show off the ladies' great body rather than the lady trying to politely cope with the lame interview. [Link]
Dirtyhabit Member 145 Posts 8/09	Posted - Nov 25 2010 : 7:32PM I've seen quite a few scenes where you can just tell the girl was about to say something too nasty for the camera, and then BAM cut. I'd be interested in hearing those :) Edited by - dirtyhabit on 11/25/2010 7:32:51 PM [Link]
TresGatos New Member 2 Posts 12/25	Posted - Dec 2 2025 : 7:31PM I actually just messaged Tushy.com customer service about this. One of my favorite pornstars, Kimberly Brix, is retired for good, it seems, and her Tushy scene, the one on one with Manuel Ferrara, is my favorite K. Brix shoot, for some mysterious reason I can't quite put my finger in - errrr - on, I mean, lol. I don't like MMF scenes to begin with, but the MMF Tushy scene with Kimberly is disappointing on top of that, though there could be something they didn't use that's actually more aligned with my tastes than what they opted for. I sent a request, or really just an inquiry, rather, about any unpublished/unreleased material from either of the two K. Brix shoots, and whether or not it's just simply impossible for me to get my hands on a copy of it, if it exists. I'm more interested in photos than film, though I'm interested enough in both. I figure if they publish something like 200-ish photos from a shoot, then they probably took like 500 or even 1,000, right? Especially if they did some rapid fire captures, and I feel like it's safe to assume they'd have a nice enough camera to be able to do that. Of course, I'm expecting them to say it's not something they do, because they don't want to risk it leaking, or me posting it, and it wouldn't even surprise me if it was illegal, somehow, even though I know that adult film actors usually sign over the rights of all the film/photos taken of them to the studio, and probably for eternal perpetuity throughout the universe, forever and ever and ever, no givesies backsies. On the other hand, it's not that much different of a situation from the expectation/requirement for paid site members not to leak any published content they're privy to. Or maybe it is, with her being retired, but I feel like I watch enough porn, where if releasing previously unused materials of a retired pornstar was a thing, I'd have a memory of at least one instance of this happening, and in this moment, I do not. I dunno. I'm also similarly surprised to some of you, that no one seems to know much about this. Any industry employees or lawyers amongst all you forum goers? [Link]
studrams Deactivated User 409 Posts 7/16	Posted - Dec 3 2025 : 1:02PM ^ The details of what happens on set seems to be something that only people who're actually there know about. Other than the people on set, no one even knows how long the cameras are running for but like any other video medium, it's more than likely that at least two thirds of footage never gets to see the light of day. When it comes to porn footage, it's very unlikely that any of it goes in the bin but it's even less likely that the general public ever gets to see any of it either. [Link]
veridical Member 176 Posts 3/24	Posted - Dec 3 2025 : 2:17PM I think the bigger issue for this kind of stuff is that, in professional production, video and audio are captured separately and put together in post-production/editing. So, there might be video footage and audio capture, but unless they cared enough to spend the time (and money/resources) to put it together, it likely won't be in any state ready for release. All of this would also take up a lot of space on someone's server, so unless there's a good reason to keep it around, it's typically deleted forever. (The same happens for many movies, TV shows, and records. They might keep the Master, but they're less likely to keep around all of the editing bits.) [Link]
studrams Deactivated User 409 Posts 7/16	Posted - Dec 3 2025 : 3:44PM ^ I don't profess to be a whizz kid at this kind of stuff so I may be making a few in correct assumptions here. It's 20 - 25 years ago since I bought my first digital camera, whatever pics or vids I took were stored digitally and I downloaded them afterwards. Sometimes I'd fuck around editing out what I didn't want but I always kept the original copy of whatever I took. Here's where I might be fucking up, I've always believed that professional standard equipment would work the same way. As an example, someone like Team Skeet or Nubiles shoots a video and whatever footage they have is then handed to editing and a video is produced out of that with whatever audio and effects added and that's what gets released. It could well be a lot of hard drives that someone's got stored but wouldn't it be possible for someone in the editing suite to simply download or transfer the master footage onto a hard drive and keep it? Once again, it could be a lot of hard drives but couldn't the company producing the final product use the same process to keep a master copy of whatever footage they have? [Link]
veridical Member 176 Posts 3/24	Posted - Dec 3 2025 : 4:11PM It's even more complicated than that. Like, at a basic level, sure, but you have to remember that these are professional studios with tons of footage, i.e. needs a ton of data storage and has to make business decisions about what to spend time on editing, releasing, deleting, and so on and so forth. Add on top of this that many of these companies aren't exactly managed by Hollywood-level folks with venture capital or independent funds. So, an initial shoot might have three cameras, plus one or several audio sources. Original footage was put into some software for compiling and editing. Then the final product is rendered and released in multiple formats. The old footage takes up space on a production-capable machine, and needs to be moved elsewhere. Unless there's a reason to keep it (legal, future release, etc), it's likely to, at best, get moved to a never-seen-again server/drive or, at worst, get deleted entirely. Even if the source project was kept, that software, in 5 years, will change versions so many times that the original files may or may not even be compatible anymore. It's an IT nightmare. Then, this industry has a very large turnover. Editors aren't paid much and often work as independent contractors who don't tend to be the best at keeping records or keeping source files on their own machines. After all, space is money. So, is it possible they kept the source footage and audio, or even some version where it's actually synched? Maybe. But it's doubtful for most scenes unless they foresaw needing it in some future release. At best they may keep a scrubbed rendering of the original (to where they can add in new title scenes, effects, etc), but it's far less likely they'll keep source BTS footage after the fact unless there was specific intention of releasing it (or needing it for something else, like legal reasons). In business, all of this boils down to money. [Link]

someduda Member 78 Posts 8/21	Posted - Dec 4 2025 : 6:35AM My crazy conspiracy theory is that producers have bonus stuff of pornstars that they sell to very rich people. Would be fucked up without their consent, but.. I've seen a lot in the music industry for one. Woodman cuts a lot of stuff, like the pissing parts for example. You'd have to be extremely naive to think he deletes those. I don't think he sells those tho, he prob has a fetish of owning/seeing something no one else can lol. Just get that vibe from him. [Link]

All Forums > The Porn Pool > The Porn Pool Forum Page 16Unused Porn Footage

Previous topic: Dancing Bear Series
Next topic: Worst positions for anal scenes?