Slashdot Mirror
Porn Industry May Not Decide Format War
nixkuroi writes "MSNBC Reports that the porn industry may be overstating their numbers and, as a result, may not be the decider of the next winning movie format. Even more interesting: Vivid Entertainment says that despite Sony's refusal to license Blu-ray to the adult industry, they've found a way to replicate the technology and will release Debbie Does Dallas on both formats. Film writer Jimmy Digiorgio states, in an email with MSNBC: 'In the past, porn embraced new technologies that were just gaining a foothold. DVDs are not new, and I don't think consumers perceive Blu-Ray and HD-DVD as new technologies. Instead, they see them as an evolution of an existing technology.... With Blu-ray [versus] HD-DVD, porn will go where the masses go.'"
no way do I want to see any of these "actors" in HD, either format.
Sent from your iPad.
Porn or not, I find it quite worrying that Sony is able to dictate who is allowed to print films onto Blu-ray. If indeed that is the situation.
Let's get a show of hands to see how many people googled that. No? Legs? Anyone?
I also believe Vivid's claims that the revenue of the porn industry is grossly overestimated. Yet having worked at an adult media shop and reseller I know that even though there might not be that much profit to be made there's a still a damn high volume of discs sold. And this is the important factor in this whole discussion: there might be less market share in terms of profit but higher market share in terms of media sold.
:/- spoon(_).
I'm a very sex positive guy and have a total of 4 porno DVDs. These sit happily out in plain view within my collection of over 300 DVDs.
Being that I am an above average DVD consumer, I really don't see where the Adult Entertainment Industry thinks they have any real clout in the DVD market.
In fact, the only real use of a HD-DVD or BluRay disc I see that makes good sense for the adult sector is bundling movies in Standard Definition together on one disc to try to bolster disc sales I would imagine would be waning due to broadband video download becoming more obiquitous.
The very notion of the adult sector claiming that they are somehow driving global DVD sales... that's a laughable notion at best.
It really makes me wonder just how much drugs those guys shove up their nose in a day.
HD porn may actually finally be the porn that's good for relationships. Once you see the "actors" in glorious HD, your girlfriend/wife suddenly starts to look a whole lot more appealing.
Porn is only but one factor in who will win the format war. In the early 80's porn really made a difference in the Beta vs. VHS war because there was such a large demand for people to be able to enjoy porn in the comfort of their own homes. That was a huge driver and made a difference in VHS toppling Beta.
Fast-forward to today, does anybody think that the driver for HD Porn is as strong as being able to watch porn in your own house back then? It's not... So even though porn may be a factor in the blu-ray vs. HD-DVD war, it certainly won't play as big as a role as it did back int he 80's when it was Beta vs. VHS.
All these porn studios won't be able to ignore the millions of PS3's out there for long if there is in deed a market for this kind of stuff so in the end, like Vivid, they will find a way to bring porn to Blu-Ray if they have a chance of making a profit that way.
Women are unequal and always will be. We men, so much better than women in every way, will always tack the "ress" onto "act" to symbolize this, damaging fragile girl's self-esteem and causing them to fail calculus in high school and earn less then men for equivalent work. Also, I personally have meaningless sex with brainless bimbos that I never plan to marry.
And eventually, a new crop of porn directors will come up, who have learned their craft on HD Video (I can't believe I'm carrying on this conversation). The extreme close-ups make sense in a VHS 480i world, but not in an HD world.
It's no different then the rest of television adapting. Most shows are show on film, and I the last time I read about the "technology of porn" was 5 years ago discussing HD adaption, and at the time, Vivid and Wicked were shooting their "movies" on film like a normal movie (multiple angles, stationary cameras, etc.), and everyone else was doing video (amateur style zoom-ins, etc., single camera, limited audio editing).
Today, a pro Audio/Video editing rig is pretty powerful and straight forward, HD Video cameras cheap and powerful, so unless you have a preference for film (I personally do for movies, and I'll take a film transfer, grains and all, over an HD Video shot any day, but for porn, I have no idea, ask porn aficionados). I mean, watch an HD Net football or hockey game some time, since they are only shooting for HD, they pull the camera back, letting you see more action. Then watch an NFL HD broadcast, the camera is set for SD, so despite the greater resolution, most of the sides of the screen is wasted (you NEVER need the edge of the shot to go more than 2 yards beyond the deepest back, but if you have centered for SD, you just have grass behind them), etc.
Some directors, rather than whining about Pan-and-Scan videos, shoot their movies with a cinematic 2.15:1 box and a television 4:3 box on the camera. When they set their shots up, they set them up for the movie experience and the television experience they want. In that case, you aren't "loosing image to go pan-and-scan" or even worse, shooting 4:3 and zooming in for the theatrical release, you have setup the movie to be shown in two ways, two experiences.
No reason that HD porn isn't shot on video, multiple cameras, multiple mics (actual set mics, not the built in on the camera one), like a real movie, not heavily zoomed in, and editing for a 16x9 field. There is no need in HD land to do major close-ups, and you can watch the people engaged in the behavior, not just the genitalia. You might have to cut back on looping and reusing footage, but so what.
In the age of amateur/quasi-amatuer Internet porn, where anyone can take nude pictures, put them online, or get them discretely printed at CVS, and home camcorders are small and $300-$500, I would think that the professional adult industry would WANT to move up market. They need to compete with the amateur offerings, and real production values could no doubt help.
Compare HD Net's HD Video productions to the Network's film conversions. The film vs. video choice is a personal choice, there is no wrong choice. However, HD Net is SHOT for HD, it is shot assuming that you have a large, detailed screen. The Network are shot for 20" SD televisions. HD Net's production shows you the set and what's going on, the networks zoom in to a lot of head shots, ask yourself which looks better on an HD setup. The same rules apply for porn.
On the plus side, one of the complains from the adult veterans was that all the imperfections show... they don't mean pimples and normal skin imperfections, EVERY actor and actress is complaining about that, mainstream or porn, and until they stop zooming in for the HD shots, it will remain a complaint. They mean all the plastic surgery scars, weird stretch marks from enhancement, etc. If HD shows all of that, while it may not eliminate plastic surgery in the adult space, it will force people to focus on quality (a well done augmentation), not just get the biggest your body can support... and that's not a bad thing.