I know it can be done, but is it feasible? I once saw it done this way, and even though it was a fairly vanilla scene, it was amazing how much it heated things up. One half would show the close-up, the other half the full body shot, or her face, etc. It would occasionally split again into quads, and woah!
Watching Tony's movie with the picture-in-picture was cool, and reminded me of it.
Depends on your tastes (duh, hardware). That is to say, I would consider it distracting and wonder if the editor simply couldn't find any footage worth focusing on.
This could be the sort of thing you're looking for . Unfortunately it's a feature , so for all those looking for Rocco's guide to animal sex you'll be sorely disappointed . If OTOH you think that sex can be about more than how many dicks you shove in how many holes and how hard then this might just be for you .
IAFD, supporters of beastiality. Just say no. 7564 Posts 11/02
Posted - Jan 28 2004 : 12:59PM
Didn't Vivid have some comps that used split screen all the way? I never saw one but I believe they showed different scenes at the same time.
Why no split screen porn? Read the threads about the use of the Dutch tilt and the lack of good angles for shooting DPs. Shooting porn might not be rocket science, but that is exactly the point: it isn't a science at all.
Sir Noel Plum said: "I'll show you mine if you show me yours." (Talking about your wood again?)
Certainly the technology for doing multi-screen is more affordable than ever. The interactive elements of M&J were authored on a TiBook using FCP and DVDSP. Nothing fancy there. But it still takes someone who both knows what they're doing and cares about what they're doing to get a pleasing result.
For example, to create the multi-track extra on the M&J disc, include both the NonPIP and PIP versions, it took about a week to synchonize the footage, cut out the parts from each camera I didn't want to show, elide the footage, create the PIP versions of each track (trying several PIP positions to find the one that didn't cover too much of the underlying image) export the tracks to DVDSP, assemble the various elements in DVDSP and create appropriate navigation. That's about 50 hours just to create the interactive feature. (16 minutes total, 2 versions)
Add to that that it took approximately one full day of editing for each minute of screen time in the documentary (200+ hours) and there's a substaintial investment of manhours in the creation of the disc.
While these numbers are acceptable in my world of low-budget filmmaking, no porn producer in his right mind would ever put this kind of effort into a modern porn production. Maybe back in the day when you could make a killing on theatrical release and there just wasn't that much competition; but not in the 10,000 titles/year, lowest common denominator world of porn today.
Now that's something I really don't want to see because it will be very annoying. I remember Rodney Moore shot a scene with Venus Milan and it was split in four screens, it was really bad because the action became very small. Not my thing.
Which brings up another point: putting a lot of time into something that few people want isn't always a good idea.
Also: I was watching the doc. "Hot and Bothered: Feminist Porn" last week, and Sharon Mitchell descibed what a thrill it was seeing her pussy on the silver screen 20 feet tall. There are somethings that work well on the big screen that a TV screen just doesn't have the resolution or real estate to support.
I'm intrigued by the possiblies of the ANGLES button too. One big frustration though; you have to work through the different angles in sequence. So if you're watching angle #3 of a six angle track and you want to go back to angle #2, you have to work your way all the way up through #6 then back to #1 to get to angle #2.
It would be fun. Do a porn version of 24 and call it 15 or 16 Minutes and have Brain DePalma direct. Or maybe not.
Max Booty "Making people struggle a little bit is not necessarily the worst thing."-Sen. Rick Santorum, Pennsylvania Republican, warning against the idea of child care as an entitlement.
Sounds like the multicam feature on M&J. Virtually unedited, from first kiss to last hand-clasp, in real time, from two synchronous cameras, with view ANGLE control. Total running time: just over 16 minutes.
I love to use the same approach on a gangbang, only with 8 cameras (that's the maximum number of tracks supported by DVD). But I'd like find a way to let the view "step back" in the track, or better yet, jump between tracks, rather than having to work through them sequencially.
If I figure out a way around that, should I tell you or hoard the knowledge for potential personal gain?
The possibilities boggle the mind, don't they? I'm ready for VR porn; I think it'll be more addictive than drugs. I like to think I could make some serious coin exploiting people's base desires. Art appeals to a select few; visceral carnality is universal.
Is this cynical, or merely opportunistic (or is that the same thing)?
Figure out how to assign the up-down-left-right buttons on a DVD remote to tracks 1, 2, 3, and 4, and I'll give you free copies of everything I produce from now till the end of your natural life.
Oh, hell, programming a remote is a no-brainer. I'll give it some thought, but don't hold your breath. Between my kids and my friends and ADT, I'm stretched pretty thin as it is. I should be working on astromite's present, anyway.
I love you, too, of course, but it's pretty much first come, first served for my myriad talents.
The Bring Up Ecstasy series from Japan does this...they somehow manage to keep the girl's face ALWAYS in the shot, and if the camera angle makes it simply impossible they'll have an inset picture focused on her expression. Of course, this rather heightens the exhaustion that the 4-hour-nonstop production tends to produce...
Someobdy has one out now, and for the life of me I can't remember who. I took a look at it in Vegas and was very impressed. I was mostly killing time between interviews and there was a break so I checked them out. I expected it to be the normal half assed first try, but it looked like they had spent plenty of time and money on getting it right.
Posted - Jan 28 2004 : 11:42AM