Why directors are still shooting at 24 fps?

Author	Post
MassimoCuoreduro New Member 2 Posts 3/16	Posted - Feb 8 2017 : 2:45PM I'm not an expert on the subject, but wouldn't be better to maximize the "hyper-real" effect on porn movies? I think the idea of "being there" is what turns people on, so why emulating non-porn movies? They have a totally different aim. I'm saying this because i saw clips on some site (i don't remember which, but it was about throat fucking for sure) and altho they were kind of low res, they felt more real and with a better quality. I think someone should try at least. [Link]
Mister Fahrenheit All-Star Member Meh 4655 Posts 10/13	Posted - Feb 8 2017 : 2:51PM I'm probably in the minority, but I'm not that big of a fan of 60 fps so far. Oftentimes it looks like cheap home video to me. As a viewer I like a more filmic, cinematic experience. [Link]
moebius22 Senior Member 1528 Posts 12/09	Posted - Feb 8 2017 : 5:09PM Not everyone want a look that's akin to watching a video or a videogame. Edited by - moebius22 on 2/8/2017 5:10:50 PM [Link]
bahadir Member 200 Posts 7/14	Posted - Feb 8 2017 : 7:44PM I like both 24 and 60 fps videos and understand the points of both sides, maybe they work better for different kind of porn. [Link]
Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12	Posted - Feb 9 2017 : 8:41PM I definitely am open to more technical experimentation. I do like 60fps sometimes. I think Jules Jordan did high speed for a Keisha Grey scene recently which struck me as really dope. Or maybe that was just the trailer. I've been behind a lot in the last year. Mostly I just watch trailers to keep tabs on what I'll check out later when I save money for subscriptions once every season or so. I know Dogfart uses high framerate also. [Link]

pat362 Senior Member 10083 Posts 3/10	Posted - Feb 9 2017 : 9:04PM For me it's a simple equation. A shitty porn video is going to be just as shitty in 24fps as it is in 60fps the same way that a good porn video is going to be just as good in 24fps as it is in 60 fps. That's it and that's all. No movie was ever made better by increasing frame rates. [Link]
bahadir Member 200 Posts 7/14	Posted - Feb 10 2017 : 5:32PM pat362 wrote: For me it's a simple equation. A shitty porn video is going to be just as shitty in 24fps as it is in 60fps the same way that a good porn video is going to be just as good in 24fps as it is in 60 fps. That's it and that's all. No movie was ever made better by increasing frame rates. Click to expand Did you really have to say same thing in every tech releated thread ? This is very very wrong analogy and help nobody in anyway. ''He has as much right to voice his opinion as you do.'' is not an acceptable answer for me. This thread is not about sex act in porn, this is a technical thread, why dont you just enjoy with your low bitrate, 540p, 24fps videos ? Edited by - bahadir on 2/11/2017 4:22:25 PM [Link]
pat362 Senior Member 10083 Posts 3/10	Posted - Feb 10 2017 : 8:24PM ^You do realise that I didn't attack him in any way. I simply stated my opinion. Something you failed to do when you attacked me. The best way to counteract what I wrote is to write your opinion and why you think it's correct. [Link]
bahadir Member 200 Posts 7/14	Posted - Feb 10 2017 : 9:20PM ^ There's not correct or incorrect in this discussion, if you don't care technical details such as resolution, bit rate, frame rate etc. you can simply ignore this threads, your same kind of pointless and rude posts became frustrating for me. [Link]
moebius22 Senior Member 1528 Posts 12/09	Posted - Feb 10 2017 : 9:53PM ^ The discussion was about frame rate, not resolution. [Link]
bahadir Member 200 Posts 7/14	Posted - Feb 10 2017 : 10:17PM ^Yes, i know. I didn't say anything opposite. [Link]
Mass Facialties Deactivated User "Facialized Vol. 7" 2021 AVN Awards Winner: Best Oral Movie 9308 Posts 9/13	Posted - Feb 12 2017 : 1:00AM What's the bitrate for sites like HardX, Evil Angel and the Lansky sites (Blacked/Tushy/Vixen)? [Link]
coming soon Senior Member 1705 Posts 2/11	Posted - Feb 12 2017 : 6:28AM ^Between 24 and 30 fps all of them. Tushy looks better than HardX if you do a random screencap because the action is usually at a slower pace. Those fast poundings are very common in movies directed by Mason, and sometimes you can barely see the actual penetration, and instead you see a blurry mishmash. I believe Mason and HardX would benefit greatly if they upgraded the bit rate. Directors like Lansky or Adriano don't need it that much in that sense. [Link]
Jacco All-Star Member "liable to deprave and corrupt" 2673 Posts 5/04	Posted - Feb 12 2017 : 1:13PM ^ Bitrate and framerate are not the same thing. Jacco [Link]
Jackie Treehorn Member It'll knock both your eyes out! 311 Posts 3/04	Posted - Feb 12 2017 : 3:26PM ^^ HardX and Evil Angel bitrates are about 6,800kbps for 1080p. The fps on most titles is 23.97 or 29.97 [Link]

coming soon Senior Member 1705 Posts 2/11	Posted - Feb 12 2017 : 4:20PM ^^ I stand corrected. I'm a bit ignorant of these matters. Yeah, I meant frame rate. [Link]
BlackSix All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07	Posted - Feb 13 2017 : 2:50AM I'm not a 100 percent on how digital works but I don't think most of it is 24fps, that is specific to 16mm and 35mm film. 60fps works for certain videogames but so far has been tremendously unpopular for mainstream features. The first Hobbit film looked terrible at 60fps for instance. [Link]
moebius22 Senior Member 1528 Posts 12/09	Posted - Feb 13 2017 : 3:49AM BlackSix wrote: I'm not a 100 percent on how digital works but I don't think most of it is 24fps, that is specific to 16mm and 35mm film. 60fps works for certain videogames but so far has been tremendously unpopular for mainstream features. The first Hobbit film looked terrible at 60fps for instance. Click to expand Video is usually 30 fps while cinema tends to be 24. This is not set in stone. Frame rate varies all the time for dramatic effect in cinema. 60 fps is to make visual effects easier, but the techniques employed in terms of set design is based on 24, so it's going to take time for artisans to figure out techniques that works for it. You can also use higher frame rates for slow motion. [Link]
lex von v Senior Member 2511 Posts 12/12	Posted - Feb 13 2017 : 7:32AM ^^ Hobbit in cinemas was shown at 48fps, not 60fps. 60fps is only digital video (interlaced NTSC or newer codecs, e.g. 1080i60, 720i60, ... Very seldom 1080p60 or 720p60 (or even higher, 2160p60, which requires a very high data throughput from the player to the display device). Also, read about "Billy Lynn's Halftime ...something", which was created to be shown at 120fps @ 4K (but only in two venues in the U.S.). Few people liked what they saw, as the hyper-real effect was too real for most. But as you say, for porn things/expectations could be different. Holed.com advertises itself as 4K/60fps (which would be 2160p60, if all stops are pulled). Don't know who else. Having a multiple of 24 or 30 makes it easier for broadcast/home video, as those standards are not as flexible as computers nowadays. [Link]
hoochimama Deactivated User 1437 Posts 5/10	Posted - Feb 13 2017 : 7:55AM MassimoCuoreduro wrote: I'm not an expert on the subject, but wouldn't be better to maximize the "hyper-real" effect on porn movies? Click to expand Better than lower fps? Yes. More profitable than spending the same time/resources on things like higher resolution, wider color gamut or a less compressed image? Questionable. Framerate is nowhere near as marketable as say 4K or HDR, or even small file sizes. And the benefits don't even apply equally to all porn, plenty of it is very slow, almost like a slideshow(heck some people masturbate to pictures). ________________________________________________ Please ID these girls from PlayboyTV's Foursome show Edited by - hoochimama on 2/13/2017 7:57:56 AM [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Feb 13 2017 : 4:37PM bahadir wrote: ^ There's not correct or incorrect in this discussion, if you don't care technical details such as resolution, bit rate, frame rate etc. you can simply ignore this threads, your same kind of pointless and rude posts became frustrating for me. Click to expand The topic is a question about why direstors still shoot at 24fps , yet you want to discuss something that isn't there and demand to avoid to state different prefences than your own. perhaps the vast majority of porn consumers don't care about it and this is why the directors still shoot at 24 fps. pat362 is one if those who don't care about the frame rate but to the quality of the performance which is independent from the tecnique used to film.so his opinion on the subject is very much on topic if you guys have some issues going on, see to set it among yourselves through PMs , it's none of our concerns. Edited by - LCF on 2/13/2017 4:40:55 PM [Link]
bahadir Member 200 Posts 7/14	Posted - Feb 13 2017 : 7:56PM ^ No, i'm not the one who hijack thread, i don't think you're objective at all, pat362 do same thing almost on every tech threads, and this is pointless and also its frustrating when somebody say '' No movie was ever made better by increasing frame rates'' Nobody on this thread try to do. [Link]
Mass Facialties Deactivated User "Facialized Vol. 7" 2021 AVN Awards Winner: Best Oral Movie 9308 Posts 9/13	Posted - Feb 14 2017 : 8:01AM I asked about the bit rates of sites like Evil Angel, HardX and Blacked/Tushy/Vixen earlier because I've always wondered why the picture quality of Lansky's sites is so much better than that of EA and HardX. For all these sites, I stream videos in 1080p and I have to say the difference in picture quality between the Lansky sites and the Gamma Entertainment sites is pretty drastic. The picture quality - like sharpness and vibrancy of colors - is excellent on the Lansky sites while it's not so much so on the Gamma sites. So what is it...bit rate, frame rate, type of camera used? What's the reason for the drastic difference in picture quality between the two? [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Feb 14 2017 : 9:02AM ^^ Frustrating ? It's the truth , a poor performers doesn't become a great one just because someone uses a better bitrate what he said is basically this , FOR HIM a better bitrate doesn't matter , I can't see any hijacking here it just a position related to the topic [Link]
shalalin Senior Member 1734 Posts 11/07	Posted - Feb 14 2017 : 1:38PM Mass Facialties wrote: So what is it...bit rate, frame rate, type of camera used? What's the reason for the drastic difference in picture quality between the two? Click to expand In some cases it might also be the encoding settings. There can be a significant difference in quality between material encoded by somebody who knows what he's doing and by somebody who just dumps the source into whatever the default settings happen to be, even if the bitrate and resolution are the same. [Link]

Kevin Moore Member Subdivided & Synthetic 320 Posts 4/00	Posted - Feb 14 2017 : 2:20PM Mass Facialties wrote: I asked about the bit rates of sites like Evil Angel, HardX and Blacked/Tushy/Vixen earlier because I've always wondered why the picture quality of Lansky's sites is so much better than that of EA and HardX. For all these sites, I stream videos in 1080p and I have to say the difference in picture quality between the Lansky sites and the Gamma Entertainment sites is pretty drastic. The picture quality - like sharpness and vibrancy of colors - is excellent on the Lansky sites while it's not so much so on the Gamma sites. So what is it...bit rate, frame rate, type of camera used? What's the reason for the drastic difference in picture quality between the two? Click to expand They are using a professional camera, with prime lenses. Their entire package is easily 100k. It is the same camera used on many mainstream large budget multi million dollar movies. Bit rate is a factor as well, but the source image will always be the dominant element. 4k or 6k transcoded to 1080p will also look better (sharper) then a source shot in 1080p. Edited by - kevin moore on 2/14/2017 2:25:20 PM [Link]
Jackie Treehorn Member It'll knock both your eyes out! 311 Posts 3/04	Posted - Feb 14 2017 : 2:37PM Mass Facialties wrote: I asked about the bit rates of sites like Evil Angel, HardX and Blacked/Tushy/Vixen earlier because I've always wondered why the picture quality of Lansky's sites is so much better than that of EA and HardX. For all these sites, I stream videos in 1080p and I have to say the difference in picture quality between the Lansky sites and the Gamma Entertainment sites is pretty drastic. The picture quality - like sharpness and vibrancy of colors - is excellent on the Lansky sites while it's not so much so on the Gamma sites. So what is it...bit rate, frame rate, type of camera used? What's the reason for the drastic difference in picture quality between the two? Click to expand -Gamma sites 6.8mbps for 1080p and usually 30fps (29.970 to be precise) -Lansky sites are 12.3mbps for 1080p and usually 24fps (23.976 to be precise) I'm sure Evil Angel sites and Hard X are using cameras of equal quality as Lanksy, the problem seem to be what Gamma does to them. I'm not sure what the process is, but my guess is that these studios submit scenes to Gamma and then Gamma does their own encode from that, rather than use what's given to them. [Link]
Kevin Moore Member Subdivided & Synthetic 320 Posts 4/00	Posted - Feb 14 2017 : 3:35PM Jackie Treehorn wrote I'm sure Evil Angel sites and Hard X are using cameras of equal quality as Lanksy. Click to expand They are not even in the same ballpark. [Link]
moebius22 Senior Member 1528 Posts 12/09	Posted - Feb 14 2017 : 4:19PM Funny how the thread got derailed from frame rates to bit rates. [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Feb 14 2017 : 5:23PM I mistakenly said bitrate but of course I meant frame (per second) rate [Link]
misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13	Posted - Feb 14 2017 : 5:30PM Kevin Moore wrote: Mass Facialties wrote: I asked about the bit rates of sites like Evil Angel, HardX and Blacked/Tushy/Vixen earlier because I've always wondered why the picture quality of Lansky's sites is so much better than that of EA and HardX. For all these sites, I stream videos in 1080p and I have to say the difference in picture quality between the Lansky sites and the Gamma Entertainment sites is pretty drastic. The picture quality - like sharpness and vibrancy of colors - is excellent on the Lansky sites while it's not so much so on the Gamma sites. So what is it...bit rate, frame rate, type of camera used? What's the reason for the drastic difference in picture quality between the two? Click to expand They are using a professional camera, with prime lenses. Their entire package is easily 100k. It is the same camera used on many mainstream large budget multi million dollar movies. Click to expand Wow. [Link]
moebius22 Senior Member 1528 Posts 12/09	Posted - Feb 14 2017 : 5:54PM Kevin Moore wrote: They are using a professional camera, with prime lenses. Their entire package is easily 100k. It is the same camera used on many mainstream large budget multi million dollar movies. Bit rate is a factor as well, but the source image will always be the dominant element. 4k or 6k transcoded to 1080p will also look better (sharper) then a source shot in 1080p. Edited by - kevin moore on 2/14/2017 2:25:20 PM Click to expand People make the mistake of thinking the camera makes the look rather than how you light it and the glass you use. I have seen plenty of people using cameras like RED and coming with video that looks crummy. Just out of curiosity what camera does he use (I assume it's a RED). Anyone also have bts of his shoots? [Link]
bahadir Member 200 Posts 7/14	Posted - Feb 14 2017 : 6:29PM ^ We can't ignore either one of equipment and talent, i thought both important equally. Under exact same conditions result will be better with a better camera, i think everybody accept this, am i right ? I can't compare Gamma sites with Lansky's but even if their raw material not good as Lansky's i believe raising bit rates improve their quality to watchable level. [Link]
Mass Facialties Deactivated User "Facialized Vol. 7" 2021 AVN Awards Winner: Best Oral Movie 9308 Posts 9/13	Posted - Feb 15 2017 : 12:06AM Kevin Moore, thanks for the insight. [Link]
Mister Fahrenheit All-Star Member Meh 4655 Posts 10/13	Posted - Feb 15 2017 : 1:49AM Kevin Moore wrote: They are using a professional camera, with prime lenses. Their entire package is easily 100k. Click to expand Makes me wonder who the hell Lansky's investors are and where he found them. [Link]

BlackSix All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07	Posted - Feb 15 2017 : 1:54AM ^ Often easier to rent equipment rather than buy it. [Link]
Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12	Posted - Feb 15 2017 : 3:49AM David Fincher was the first to shoot and release a movie at 4K. Pretty big hit you may remember. "The Social Network." Back then, the camera he used (Red One) probably cost as much as what Lansky is using now. They have all these new models out now going for 30-50k. When you want the new shit, you don't simply look for a retailer or seller. You look for a dealer. It's basically like investing in a vehicle. Red One lists for 4,000 right now. Why not just use that same model Fincher used? The product will still look incredible and costs pennies on the dollar compared to whatever Lansky is presumed to be using. There's exponential drop off in cost of tech, while almost no one can ever fully utilize what the latest tech can even do. Back to the topic, there's been high speed 1080p cameras for ages, and yet most websites still don't take advantage of high speed, and most consumers still don't necessarily take advantage of 1080p downloads. I personally prefer 720p for storage consideration. It can be a matter of taste, or of server load costs. But I still think less than 5% of porn directors get full use out of the tech they currently have. Lansky is extremely gifted and savvy, and I'd never take anything away from him. He clearly has vision to match talent. All I'm saying is you don't need to substitute your down payment on a new Benz to get something that can still blow away 90% of other porn producers. Of course, there's more to it than just getting a dope camera. So much more. What's better than the technical video fidelity about what Lansky's helped re-popularize is the editing and storytelling. It's getting back to the care they took before the late 90s. And to Moore's point, the line between mainstream and porn is diminishing. Resolution and frame-rate are essentially democratized now. Matching bitrates with the latest and greatest tech will always elude econo-class shooters, but the delivery mechanism of the web and concerns for bandwidth becomes an equalizer of sorts. I think it's great that many directors think forward to get the highest quality source possible so when the demand becomes more mainstream (take 4K for example) later on they have it available. But I still have to wonder, by the time 4K becomes mainstream, or as relatively mainstream as 1080p is now, will anyone really care to see stuff shot today 5-10 years from now in any quality? I mean besides enthusiast cinephiles like myself and others? The market for adult-content shot circa 2006 to be made available in 1080p has to be pretty slim. The most important thing is the basics of photography, staging and lighting, and editing. I've seen some really fantastic fan-edit compilations that blow away the original presentation offering of mainstream porn companies, and even at standard def it's more exciting than highest-available def. Editing and creative angles is so critical. It's what makes scenes pop out and stick in your memory. Edited by - melvyn on 2/15/2017 3:49:58 AM [Link]
Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12	Posted - Feb 15 2017 : 4:01AM Also something I wanted to add that makes the Gamma brands stick out is their deliberately manipulated color palettes. It's more "cinematic" to have a color palette edited in post to emphasize certain hues. Some filmmakers like their movies to look more saturated, and others more muted, but the commonality is that they still look different than reality. This digital color manipulation became increasingly mainstream in the mid-90s. Again I'd cite Fincher as a prominent propagator of this style. It does get abused a lot too. If they overdo it, it just looks washed out and boring on the muted end, or trashy on the saturated end. But I think video editing software can give you a wide enough range to find something appealing. If they can fuck it up in mainstream, then they can definitely fuck it up in porn. At least in porn the bar still isn't that high and most people don't really expect "cinematic" presentation. Personally I'm tired of the saturated style, where greens and reds are always emanating in almost every shot, or orange and blue. They use complimentary colors on purpose because most people find them appealing. In mainstream Hollywood movies, this kind of digital filtering looks trashy to me and amateur. On the other hand, for porn, you could probably use it to your advantage. Either way could work depending on what angle you're going for. Usually more muted for the scripted glam stuff (I remember some people complaining that Lansky and co eventually went too far with the muted palette last year), and more saturated for the gonzo in-your-face stuff. But rules are also meant to be broken. [Link]
bahadir Member 200 Posts 7/14	Posted - Feb 15 2017 : 12:03PM LCF wrote: ^^ Frustrating ? It's the truth , a poor performers doesn't become a great one just because someone uses a better bitrate what he said is basically this , FOR HIM a better bitrate doesn't matter , I can't see any hijacking here it just a position related to the topic Click to expand Do you trolling me or really have understanding problem ? If problem is the sex action itself raising frame rate doesnt make it better. Yes this is truth, frustrating thing is there's nobody try to do this. pat362 has a habit of telling us we should happy with what companies offer and shouldn't required higher resolution, higher bit rate or higher frame rate. [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Feb 18 2017 : 11:18AM ^ bottom line is, except for visual there's no way to improve a bad scene through an higher frame rate , nor that would increase the sales enough given that so many people don't give a flying heck to that (remember most users steal porn at a very bad quality and are fine with that already). There's one thing that high quality porn increases and that is the bill , you would only go to a greater quality if your sales improve so greatly to cover your costs and raise your profit , if it doesn't there's no need to do that. Also the frame rate would only allow to better clarify those scenes with high pace, it is most important on movies with lots of visual effect, might be useful in sports with high speed play (a baseball pitch for example or a volleyball kill) but even the high pacer at drilling a pussy wouldn't be fast enough to need a 60 fps to be seen. We're still talking about the refresh rate of the images , or how many frame per second go to screen and 24 frames per second are a lot already , as said only high speed scenes are affected by such fps pace a ball from frame one captured by frame 5 or more or even halfway btween two frames because it's too fast for itwhether an higher frame rate would have more images per second. how many thrusts would give a pussy in a second? More than 24? that would be the only case you'd need more than 24 fps. You may need more frames in slow motion for example a frame captures a dick just at the entrance and the following captures an halfay top , but how many consumers would actually use such deatailed features to justify the expenses? Not many, however with detailed HD TV sets you may experience some inconvenience while in very slow motion and possibly more at ultrahigh, but then again how many want such features? Edited by - LCF on 2/18/2017 11:30:36 AM [Link]
bahadir Member 200 Posts 7/14	Posted - Feb 18 2017 : 4:39PM ^Simply nobody try to improve a bad scene with frame rate, this is a pointless debate. I didn't understand why you still repeat same thing, you wasting too much effort for defending pat362's bullshits, or you just want to attack me for whatever reason. The rest of the post is your opinions on subject, i respect them. Anyway there's some points i don't accept. There's no need to be too much technical simply there's undeniable difference between 24-29 fps and 60 fps, there's blur on lower frame rates, i didn't say 60fps better, both has its own pros and cons. This is not about ''how many thrusts would give a pussy in a second'' Other thing porn producers dont have a right to punish their customers because of the piracy. If they want my money they have to satisfy my exceptions, otherwise i wouldn't stay as one of their customers. [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Feb 18 2017 : 5:05PM ^ I got news for you, the world doesn't turn around you and yet you seem to take every single reply in a personal manner , it's not I'm trying to make clear one thing , if there's no improvement in quality why the hell the producers should spend more money to shoot scenes at a higher frame rate ? I'm not interested in YOUR faud with pat362 , so try to keep that the fuck outta here and do not involve me in that as you're repeteadly trying to [Link]
bahadir Member 200 Posts 7/14	Posted - Feb 18 2017 : 7:04PM ^I'm sure you know what is mean that when you use a ^ in your post. You either quote my message or use ^ which lead to my posts in this thread. How can i involve you when you reply my messages about the third person, even it's not your first time also in another thread you did same thing. Anybody who read this thread will clearly see i'm not the one who involve you in this. And there's an improvement when producers shot higher frame rate, this is a subjective thing just like anything in porn, and it's not more expensive to shot in 60fps. [Link]
Flash Golden Age Classic 11018 Posts 5/01	Posted - Feb 18 2017 : 7:22PM Considering not all HD cameras shoot in true 60fps, it can be more expensive if you need to upgrade all of your cameras. [Link]
bahadir Member 200 Posts 7/14	Posted - Feb 18 2017 : 7:47PM ^ Yes, but after buying necessary equipment it's not more expensive to shot in 60fps. 24 or 60 fps a good camera always better. [Link]
Flash Golden Age Classic 11018 Posts 5/01	Posted - Feb 18 2017 : 8:16PM Maybe they don't think it is worth the upgrade for the cost. Maybe they just artistically prefer 30fps to 60fps. [Link]
BlackSix All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07	Posted - Feb 18 2017 : 8:18PM It is more expensive to upload higher grade video. [Link]
bahadir Member 200 Posts 7/14	Posted - Feb 18 2017 : 8:26PM ^This is same for 29fps high quality videos, look Gamma sites, their video quality crappy. [Link]
Flash Golden Age Classic 11018 Posts 5/01	Posted - Feb 18 2017 : 9:03PM You do realize there are many factors that can make a video look "crappy," which has nothing to do with fps. [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Feb 19 2017 : 10:02AM bahadir wrote: ^I'm sure you know what is mean that when you use a ^ in your post. You either quote my message or use ^ which lead to my posts in this thread. How can i involve you when you reply my messages about the third person, even it's not your first time also in another thread you did same thing. Anybody who read this thread will clearly see i'm not the one who involve you in this. And there's an improvement when producers shot higher frame rate, this is a subjective thing just like anything in porn, and it's not more expensive to shot in 60fps. Click to expand I do , and the fact that I agree with someone on ONE subject doesn't make me his defendant and yet you keep treating me that way , you mentioned him after putting the ^ under a reply of mine so I ask you again do not involve me with your issues. On the subject , 60 fps equipment not only is costlyier than regular equipment it also requires costly post production equipment and costly storage equipment plus it requires more costly bandwith to either upload and download the products they sell which also requires more than one setting , in fact not every computer could process their data at a satisfactory rate , they need at least two or more settings for mobile owners for example. Blacked, tushy and many others including Evil Angel have experienced many server issues , still do since when they improved their products , when a scene comes out it is almost impossible to watch a scene at their higher resolutions , or even to just download them , the increase in bandwith consumption and data processing is enormous. Anybody wanting to pass to a much higher bitrate and frame rate has to invest a significative amount and may struggle for a lot of time to climb out of the expense and begin to make a profit . furthermore there's no guarantee that such profit would be so much higher than what they are already earning to justify all the troubles you'll face to go there Edited by - LCF on 2/19/2017 10:10:44 AM [Link]
pat362 Senior Member 10083 Posts 3/10	Posted - Feb 19 2017 : 1:46PM ^Sorry to have somehow gotten you involved in my post. I appreciate what you did. I think bahadir should have taken a page from "Fozen" and just Let it Go. It was just my opinion and not some kind of attack on anyone. Now to get back to the subject. Aside from the fact that studios will have to invest serious amounts of money in pre and post production if they want to go with superior cameras. There is possibly something more important to consider before investing in better cameras and it's whether or not they have anyone capable of using those superior cameras. I don't know the answer but maybe Kevin Moore does. I'm curious to know how many professionally trained camera operators are currently working in porn industry? I'm not saying that you have to be one to use a high end camera but if you aren't than can you ever truly be able to use it to it's full potential? In fact how many porn producers plan their scenes down to every small detail before they shoot them? I know I often interject a comment that is not directly related to the thread but I find that too often we miss the forest for the trees because we keep talking about tiny details but overlook the big picture. I don't know which camera or which lens they use but I love the stuff Vixen, Blacked and Tushy puts out because the scenes are well lit, well shot and the image is always crisp. I checked a few of their 128 hex 720 videos and they have an approximate bitrate of 8320 and a frame rate of 23fps. Can anyone tell me what I would see differently if the frame rates were 48 or 60 fps? [Link]