intersting read on the topic of HD in this morning's times... on the subject of one of the major stumbling blocks we became aware of a while back when we were faced with shooting HD videos...
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/22/bu...ewanted=1&_r=1
Printable View
intersting read on the topic of HD in this morning's times... on the subject of one of the major stumbling blocks we became aware of a while back when we were faced with shooting HD videos...
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/22/bu...ewanted=1&_r=1
All I can say is :haha: !
I always wondered if some of these people look in the mirror and become disapointed when they see what is truly there.
Many from Hollywood are complaining about the same thing.
One thing is for sure: the automotive paint booth for humans will once again become popular!
I just got my first HD TV and wow what a difference! I can see that it would take a lot to hide imperfections in this format than in previous TV standards....
I sure wouldn't want to be on my TV screen!
it really is too FUCKING unreal - personally, I hate make-up (not just on me) but on models - it comes off and leaves a mess on everything unless the make-up artist uses fixatives and all kinds of other chemicals and, its real scarey looking into the face of another model who is all made-up - and its all such a waste to spend all of that money when it comes offQuote:
Originally Posted by Paco
my bitch - for a morning full of it already (awakened by helicopters to early this AM)
Funny, a year ago I asked about models with Pimples on their ass.
The answer was "The surfer likes that" "makes it more real" "It's so hot"
yeah, but regular pimples are one thing - huge "in-your-face" HD super Hi-Rez pimples are "pimples of a different color"...Quote:
Originally Posted by IdolKnights
Ugh. Who would've said that?? That's not what my customers like to see. Ugh. But anyway, I've been saying since the start of HD that I didn't think watching porn in HD would be that great because of just the reasons stated in the NYT article. If we shoot in high enough quality to begin with, and keep that high quality throughout the editing and manufacturing process, it looks good enough to me, in my opinion, and I am in no hurry to switch to HD. Having said that, I'm sure that everything will be HD in the years to come, but for right now I don't think our customers are going to care about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IdolKnights
I certainly don't want to see HD porn. Personally, I like the grittiness of the old '70s flicks. That's grainy quality is what makes them so hot.
I've said it before and I'll say it again... contemporary porn is too well shot. It's overlit, it's overstaged and it's overdone. Who has sex in bright lights? Who wants to see every nook and cranny of someone's body? I like sex in the shadows. It's more real. :)
i saw articles about this in both mainstream and webmaster articles.
there ARE ways to set most camcorders to record in a more flattering portrait mode, and that should help. certain lights are more flattering and there are probably things you can do in the video processing as well.
the way i look at it, if HD makes us more money, it's worth hiring a makeup artist for a few hundred a day. i'd avoid students and bargain makeup artists without seeing plenty of their sample work, though, as you could end up really LOOKING made up or even worse, have every spot covered with cover up showing clearly so you'd have spots :shock:
lol, I heard on a mainstream site that cameron diaz's face looks AWFUL in HD, even with makeup on... it exposes all the stars flaws that they try to hide ;)
We're experiencing the same thing.
We are shooting in HD now (HUGE pain in the ass, it's a tapeless format, so you capture to memory cards or a portable hard drive, then transfer the 75 gigs worth of files to the PC and back it up on the RAID array).
But HD is very unforgiving. Not only is it unforgiving to the model -- every ass hair is shown in exquisite detail -- but focus becomes a very sticky issue... you have to have it in precise focus or it's really noticeable, unlike regular DV video, where the lower resolution will cover minor focus imperfections. And the camera's viewfinder or built-in LCD display isn't capable of displaying the high resolution -- not enough pixels -- so to check your fine focus, you have either use an external monitor or the "focus assist" which blows up a small portion of the image on the LCD display to refine focus.
The main reason we started shooting HD content was to have the highest quality for the assets going forward... people may not want it now, but in 2 or 3 years, it might end up being a standard... so we figure the more assets we capture now, the better off we will be.
But... we will most likely continue to downconvert all of our HD material to SD for release on DVD or on the websites. And once downconverted, it looks pretty similar to regular DV content.
chip, sony is making an HD mini dv. does the panasonic not use it? it may if it takes regular mini dvs as well as whatever else it takes...
can't WAIT to see what you've done with it so far. you know i was salivating over the panasonic months before it was released :)
With HD You find out that there are a LOT more freckled people in the world, I'll tell you that
Funny.. we're not going to get into it just yet.
But when we do, we did a test... and it's not going to be a problem for us.
I hate perfect 20 year old men and I can't wait til they're old and fat and have wrinkles and no hair.
We looked into the Sony product. It's not full HD; in order to fit the amount of data onto tape (about 5x the amount of data as regular def), they compress the hell out of it, discard a significant portion of the color data, and convert to MPEG-2, which is basically compressed DVD format, albeit at a higher bitrate than regular DVD. It's still decent 720p, but you can't get full 1080p resolution with full color depth out of it. The ultra-compressed Sony/JVC format is called HDV; true 1080p is called DVC-HDPro (well, Panasonic's name, anyway) and it outputs data at a rate of 100MB/second. vs about 25MB/second for HDV.Quote:
Originally Posted by basschick
Believe me, it would be much easier to use tape, but we felt that the quality difference would make the added effort worthwhile in the long run. We do have the option of using tape in the Panasonic HVX, but it would be at the lower resolution.
I'll be interested in seeing the material as well. We haven't even started to look at it in any detail yet, I'm sure it will be interesting to say the least :)
By downgrading as long as you can while building the HD archive, you might be in the same position as the music industry.Quote:
Originally Posted by gaybucks_chip
The same guy who bought the Beatles on record, 8 track, tape and then CD will buy is favorite porn again on HD when it's available.
Another thing to bring up, HD will save the adult DVD industry. HD is the one technology they will have that online paysites are many years away from. The bandwidth to stream it full screen is a decade away, and HD in a small window just isn't the same.
I don't think male models have to fear HD video blowing their cover as much as the women do. I can think of several paysites that have ultra high quality photo content that gives up everything about the guys, and it still looks good.
I hadn't thought about that before, but you are TOTALLY right, particularly if you reissue as a "director's cut" and add some outtakes, reedit the scene, etc...Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt 26z
That's also a really good point... as I think about it, most of our guys still look really good in the source 8 megapixel photos, and HD isn't even that high a resolution... so it may work better than we think.Quote:
I don't think male models have to fear HD video blowing their cover as much as the women do. I can think of several paysites that have ultra high quality photo content that gives up everything about the guys, and it still looks good.
Well said!Quote:
Originally Posted by XXXWriterDude
ok, so I just got the plan from my plastic surgery group (right here in good ol' BH) re: next steps toward HD and ME...
I must admit that it will probably be cheaper to cut off my head and sew on a new one rather than go through all the work I need to do in order to make myself worthy of the new technology - maybe I should just hang up my cock rings and call it a career (on film that is) !!!
or
there is always the cheap alternative - a littl vaseline on the lense perhaps?!?
Can someone paste the article text - it keeps asking me to log in.
here you go...Quote:
Originally Posted by Rimmates.com
In Raw World of Sex Movies, High Definition Could Be a View Too Real
By MATT RICHTEL
Published: January 22, 2007
SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 21 — The XXX industry has gotten too graphic, even for its own tastes.
Matthew Simmons/Getty Images
Stormy Daniels says she isn’t sure “why anyone would want to see their porn” in high definition because it makes the picture so crisp and clear.
Pornography has long helped drive the adoption of new technology, from the printing press to the videocassette. Now pornographic movie studios are staying ahead of the curve by releasing high-definition DVDs.
They have discovered that the technology is sometimes not so sexy. The high-definition format is accentuating imperfections in the actors — from a little extra cellulite on a leg to wrinkles around the eyes.
Hollywood is dealing with similar problems, but they are more pronounced for pornographers, who rely on close-ups and who, because of their quick adoption of the new format, are facing the issue more immediately than mainstream entertainment companies.
Producers are taking steps to hide the imperfections. Some shots are lit differently, while some actors simply are not shot at certain angles, or are getting cosmetic surgery, or seeking expert grooming.
“The biggest problem is razor burn,” said Stormy Daniels, an actress, writer and director.
Ms. Daniels is also a skeptic. “I’m not 100 percent sure why anyone would want to see their porn in HD,” she said.
The technology’s advocates counter that high definition, by making things clearer and crisper, lets viewers feel as close to the action as possible.
“It puts you in the room,” said the director known as Robby D., whose films include “Sexual Freak.”
The pornographers’ progress with HD may also be somewhat slowed by Sony, one of the main backers of the Blu-ray high-definition disc format. Sony said last week that, in keeping with a longstanding policy, it would not mass-produce pornographic videos on behalf of the movie makers.
The decision has forced pornographers to use the competing HD-DVD format or, in some cases, to find companies other than Sony that can manufacture copies of Blu-ray movies.
The movie makers assert that it is shortsighted of Sony to snub them, given how pornography helps technologies spread.
“When you’re introducing a new format, it would seem like the adult guys can help,” said Steven Hirsch, co-chief executive officer of Vivid Entertainment Group, a big player in the industry. Mr. Hirsch added that high definition, regardless of format, “is the future.”
Despite the challenges, pornographers — who distributed some 7,000 new movies on DVD last year and sold discs worth $3.6 billion in the United States — are rapidly moving to high-definition.
One major company, Digital Playground, plans to release its first four HD-DVD titles this month, and plans four new ones each month. In March, Vivid plans to release “Debbie Does Dallas ... Again,” its first feature for both HD-DVD and Blu-ray.
Vivid, like Digital Playground, has been shooting with high-definition cameras for two years to build up a catalog of high-definition movies. Both studios have released the movies in standard definition but plan to make the high-definition versions available as compatible disc players and televisions become more popular.
The studios said their experience using the technology gives them an advantage in understanding how to cope with the mixed blessing of hypercrisp images. Their techniques include using postproduction tools that let them digitally soften the actors’ skin tone.
“It takes away the blemishes and the pits and harshness and makes it look like they have baby skin,” said the director known as Joone, who made “Pirates,” one of the industry’s top-selling videos. It will be available this month in high-definition.
Joone does not use a last name, but he does use a number of techniques to keep his films blemish-free. They include giving out lifestyle tips.
“I tell the girls to work out more, cut down on the carbs, hit the treadmill,” he said.
Within the industry, the issue seems to have created a difference in perspective that cuts roughly along gender lines. Some male actors have begun using makeup to mitigate wrinkles or facial flaws, but generally they, and the male directors, are less worried about high-definition’s glare and more enamored of the technology.
Ms. Daniels said that attitude was just so typical of men.
In Raw World of Sex Movies, High Definition Could Be a View Too Real
Sign In to E-Mail or Save This
Single Page
Reprints
Share
Published: January 22, 2007
(Page 2 of 2)
“Men are all about outdoing each other, being up with the times, being cool, having the latest technology,” she said. “They’re willing to sacrifice our vanity and imperfections to beat each other” to high-definition, she said.
Other female actors say they generally like working with high-definition — except for the cosmetic-surgery part.
Jesse Jane, one of the industry’s biggest stars, plans to go under the knife next month to deal with one side effect of high-definition. The images are so clear that Ms. Jane’s breast implants, from an operation six years ago, can be seen bulging oddly on screen.
“I’m having my breasts redone because of HD,” she said.
The stretch marks on Ms. Jane from seven years ago when she gave birth to her son are also more apparent. But she deals with those blemishes in a simpler way: by liberal use of tanning spray.
Still, Ms. Jane likes the technology, as does her close friend Kirsten Price, 25, who appeared in “Manhunters” and “Just Like That.”
“HD is great because people want to see how people really look,” Ms. Price said. “People just want to see what’s real.”
Ms. Price is allowing them to do so, mostly. She had laser treatments to diminish tiny purple veins on her thighs that weren’t visible to viewers before.
“You can see things you cannot see with the naked eye. You see skin blemishes; you see cottage cheese,” said Robbie D. “But some cellulite is not necessarily a bad thing. It’s kind of sexy.”
The technology makes the experience more intimate, he said. “People look to adult movies for personal contact, and yet they’re still not getting it. HD lets them see a little bit more of the girl.”
That’s not necessarily good, said Savanna Samson, an actress who last December directed her first movie, “Any Way You Want Me.” During a scene in which she played a desperate housewife, she ran into a problem: the high-definition camera revealed she had a tiny ill-placed pimple.
“We kept stopping and trying to hide it. We put on makeup and powder, but there was no way,” Ms. Samson said. Finally, they tried another approach: “We just changed positions,” she said.
Have you seen perfect 20 year olds on HD TV. You find yourself not admiring their beauty, but saying things like "Oh wow ... do I see a booger??!"Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasun
All this HD stuff...BLAH..BLAH..BLAH
When you have to have more make up than Tammy Fay to cover up all that then whats the point.
Guys only want one thing. HOT SEX.
I dont think that any guy that is jacking off to me takes time to see if I have a blemish on my leg. all they care about is seeing me get fu*ed and getting off.
No doubt about it, if you are going to shoot true HD, you'd better have a make up artist on set. Like it or not. It's not such a mess....hell, I'd rather clean up make up than J-Lube or Crisco any day.:goatse:Quote:
Originally Posted by A_DeAngelo
Bill
it is absurd to think that we must go to these extreme measures to shoot - I know that most of our models think it is a complete turn off to work in full make-up - !
shoot in HD, put up the videos at a smaller but still big version. then you don't have to worry regarding sites. and guys looking for hot mature daddies expect and WANT some lines and weathering. it's not only okay, it's a good thing.
Matt 26z - i am seeing real HD around the web. admittedly it can't be played without downloading first and it is HUGE. my son's computer drops a lot of frames trying to play a huge movie with a 6mb bitrate, too. but they're out there and the lower versions of it are even more out there. silvercash and several other programs have launched scaled down but still big versions. they are 1280 x 720 and play at 1.9mb, which is still purty big.
check out http://www.gaysexresort.com/new.html and choose the HD preview video, not standard. then go full screen with it.
[QUOTE=basschick;185683]shoot in HD, put up the videos at a smaller but still big version. then you don't have to worry regarding sites. and guys looking for hot mature daddies expect and WANT some lines and weathering. it's not only okay, it's a good thing. QUOTE]
I guess that's a good thing - question is, when is enough, enough? of too close and "in your face" and/or too much cosmetic surgery in order to alter our appearance for the camera - any camera HD or not / I suppose that this is the age old question of Hollywood/surgery/and the media gone hi-def... gone mad...
i love HD. i look forward to reviewing sites with at least scaled down HD. true, i'd rather see models who aren't covered with pimples from head to toe, but an adequate director, cameraman and/or editor should prevent a single pimple from showing very much. just shoot from the other side, ya know?
i mean, if the blemish is that bad, it shows enough to stand out at 640x480 and i've seen guys in videos at even 320x240 where all you could notice was their pimply butts :-/
Ack! Speaking of that, we had a model this last shoot who told us before coming out he had "a little acne" on his back. Since most of our twinky models are incredibly hyper critiical of themselves, I figured "no problem."
The guy had about the worst case of acne on his back I'd ever seen.
It was hell trying to shoot all of his scenes with no shots at all of his back. We got just about every angle *except* his back. I suspect we will have to do some creative editing when it comes to putting those scenes together.
In retrospect, if I'd thought of it, I would have had him wear a tank top. Live and learn, I guess :)
Not sure if it would fit into your content but body painting party comes to mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by gaybucks_chip
Shoot him painting his arms, legs, face and belly - but when he turns around, it's already painted
How does that happen back there? Always brings me back to wondering just how thoroughly a single person can wash his or her back:DQuote:
Originally Posted by gaybucks_chip
That is a really clever idea, and I think it could definitely work for something different. The "bumps" would still show but it would definitely look better than nothing, and our audience might totally dig the body painting thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by IdolKnights