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.'"
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.
Em, they have "actresses", too.
You would like them.
I swear.
The opposite of progress is congress
Let's get a show of hands to see how many people googled that. No? Legs? Anyone?
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.
"Trust me, I speak from first hand experience."
... Must ... Not ... Make ... Joke
Urgh!
Read, refresh, repeat.
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.