Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
Drooler (Disabled)
|
Is there a premise that digital video is an "advance" over digital still photography, in the way that, say, heating food with a microwave oven is an advance over heating with a "conventional" stove or oven, or that fuel injection is an advance over the carburetor?
If there is, I challenge it. For one thing, digital video has only recently matched stills in apparent image quality, but only within limits of certain screen dimensions.
Still photography has also made advances -- to the point where a 5600 x 3733 jpg still looks far better than would a digital video of the same size -- at least for typical home consumption -- all other things being equal.
And then there's the intangible difference: some people like still photography for aesthetic reasons at least as much as they do "motion pictures," and some even like it more. There has been much discussion on the "why's" of this in the PU forum.
I'm not saying that Denner is making this premise; the fact is, I'm not sure if he is or not, but to anyone who thinks that still photography is becoming an anachronism and that video is its eventual replacement, I say, "You're wrong."
I'll take my microwave, my fuel injection, and my still photos.
|
04-25-10 02:18am
Reply To Message
|
2
|
Capn (0)
|
Eloquently put & I am in full agreement.
Cap'n. :0)
|
04-25-10 02:21am
Reply To Message
|
3
|
RagingBuddhist (Disabled)
|
From the business perspective, I think it would depend on the site. Whatever sells the best is what you concentrate on.
|
04-25-10 03:12am
Reply To Message
|
4
|
Denner (0)
|
I'm mostly into videos - but that does NOT mean, I'm against sites which favor stills/photosets...on the contrary.
It would be a sad day if the stills should disappear - I like them a lot, too.
But lately we've had the discussion here about the fact, that many sites are doing more video-shoots than stills - guess it's some kind of general demand from users....
But in the long run we might get a situation where users are fed up with videos and want to go back to stills - yes, I say back - because I believe it's the development of quality in those videos that made pornusers say at an earlier time:
"We have been looking at photos/stills for years - also because the quality of videos were shit".
Now that quality is way better with possibility of totally crisp full screen videoclips - so that 'moving pictures' are great, now.
But so is the photo-quality for many sites, so:
Bottom line: make it even - maybe like - for example - the old 1ByDay-site - where you get BOTH stills and videos of each set...
|
04-25-10 05:59am
Reply To Message
|
5
|
pat362 (0)
|
I am almost exclusively a video guy. I appreciate photos but I prefer my porn with action in it and stills just don't convey that as well as a video. That said, I would not want one medium to replace the other. I think the market needs both medium to continue the way it as.
Not too mention that the qality of the video has improved greatly over the years but the content has gotten worse. A crappy porn scene that is technologically better looking is still a crappy scene.
|
04-25-10 07:20am
Reply To Message
|
6
|
Denner (0)
|
REPLY TO #5 - pat362 :
"Not too mention that the quality of the video has improved greatly over the years but the content has gotten worse. A crappy porn scene that is technologically better looking is still a crappy scene".
Wow, what a way to put it - and this user most certainly agree...
Great lines, pat!
|
04-25-10 08:24am
Reply To Message
|
7
|
badandy400 (0)
|
There should never be any "downgrading" unless they want a downgrade in memberships. I am all for high end videos and personally think they are more important, but pictures should ever be far behind in quality. The same goes for picture sites with videos. I have seen picture sites with great pictures but horrible videos. They should try to keep them somewhat close to each other. When a site does not it just seems sloppy.
|
04-25-10 09:50am
Reply To Message
|
8
|
Drooler (Disabled)
|
REPLY TO #4 - Denner :
I find it annoying when a good photo site goes on a "video binge" and puts out nothing but videos for weeks before returning to some photos. Nakedby has done it, and so has MyGlamourSite, to give two examples. And I wonder why. Are there insistent video fans who demand satisfaction? I can only wonder.
I guess the best of both worlds are sites like ALS Scans and European Glamour Girls (again, naming just two), which alternate pretty much on a par.
But I'll still go first for sites like MetArt and FemJoy, where the pics rule.
|
04-25-10 10:26am
Reply To Message
|
9
|
james4096 (Suspended)
|
Unless the powers that be are trying to ween people off stills there is no need to start downgrading. They don't take up that much disk space or bandwith to truly worry about. They obviously need to continue upgrading both. As always, In 3-5 years we'll be able to look back and see how poor the quality was of the stuff we though was Hi-Rez.
I don't think we're at the point yet that your typical porn video or photo is shot in a higher resolution than the human eye can see or anything.
|
04-25-10 11:50am
Reply To Message
|
10
|
dracken (0)
|
I don't see why we can't have both, that way whoever prefers images can download images and people like me who are all about videos can have their movies.
Hdd space is so much cheaper now than it used to be, there really should be no limitations.
|
04-25-10 09:14pm
Reply To Message
|
11
|
Drooler (Disabled)
|
"Vidoes," by the way, is not just a spelling mistake. (We all make them.) Sounds like it would be a great brand name for a line of couch-potato snack food!
|
04-26-10 03:45am
Reply To Message
|
12
|
graymane (Suspended)
|
I guess one could say you get either/or with video, in that one simply presses the pause button to produce a still (picture). However, almost all video-cameramen's work in porn I've seen so far leaves woefully much to be desired. I'll also give pictures major credit on one score: You don't get the phoney screams and zero-convincing orgasms
|
04-26-10 11:35pm
Reply To Message
|
13
|
BadMrFrosty (0)
|
Bandwidth and storage costs are getting less and less so there is no reason why both the quality of video and photos cannot be upgraded in tandem.
|
06-01-10 04:18am
Reply To Message
|