I have seen very few girl/boy magazine sex layouts that are boring. It seems they capture the perfect angles. Given, the shots are done while posing, the way they’re shot is wonderful and could easily be done on film. Yet, Why am I seeing so many no talent, untrained idiots directing with the same stupid angles shot from the floor with no change of angles whatsoever. Too many directors fascinated with the butt closeups and nothing else. Yet, the magazine shots always seem perfect.
The biggest joke is seeing these porn actresses and actors directing movies. Give me a break. What the hell kind of film school did they go to or for that matter, most porn directors. In the 80’s and 90’s, we could at least see the girl’s faces and bodies on a regular basis. This just baffles me.
Hardware writes: "The magazine photographer can shoot 500 pictures to get the perfect fifty. I doubt many people shooting porn movies are willing to go five hours in order to get thirty minutes of perfect footage."
Mike South says: "The real truth is to get a layout in a magazine you have to be a real photographer. It requires skill. To shoot a movie these days you dont have to know the first thing about even photography and that is evidenced by the poor quality that you noted. There arent a handfull of director or cameramen in porn who know even the basics of what they should, but they can hold a camera and produce porn for dirt cheap, which explains why the product is shit. Cant do that with a camera and get published."
James DiGiorgio emails:
A) I’d like to echo what the hillbilly said. His comments are spot on.
B) I’d also like to add a few personal observations regarding what "Hardware" said: While it’s true a photographer has certain luxuries that aren’t always available to videographers, his or her statement should not be construed to mean there might only be 50 good images in a set of 500. Certainly (and hopefully) the fifty best will be chosen for publication. But that doesn’t mean they aren’t many, many more great images in those 500. Also, as a long-time videographer myself, I’ve worked countless times where 4 or 5 hours were spent shooting one scene only to get 30 minutes (more or less) of great footage. Of course, I’ve also worked where 30 minutes was spent recording 30 minutes of (so-called) useable footage. Depends on the project. Depends on the director, the PM, the company, and other variables.