|
Best Porn Sites | Live Sex | Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar |
General Erotica Post here for Erotica that is neither or both Vintage and Modern |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
October 6th, 2011, 04:03 PM | #11 |
Vintage Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,216
Thanks: 18,391
Thanked 12,704 Times in 1,147 Posts
|
I think there is some truth in the fact, older stock was less clear, sometimes darker and fuzzier. It was more of a mystery for the brain. All good points.
But as noted before its not just the technology. Old shoots were creative, they used interesting locations or assembled sets that evoke an erotic mood. Today's photo shoots are shot "anywhere" and all the photo is saying is, "Look at me. I am naked!" While I hate the excesses with Photoshop retouching, having the digital medium show me every pore on the girls face isn't so attractive either. |
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Sirch For This Useful Post: |
October 6th, 2011, 04:28 PM | #12 | ||
Vintage Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,406
Thanks: 55,003
Thanked 60,212 Times in 4,401 Posts
|
Quote:
Quote:
It's the singer, not the song. |
||
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to blondifan For This Useful Post: |
October 8th, 2011, 05:33 PM | #13 |
Vintage Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Edinburgh Scotland
Posts: 706
Thanks: 7,330
Thanked 9,841 Times in 704 Posts
|
For me the best thing about older stuff is less Tattoos. piercings and silicon.
|
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to lothian For This Useful Post: |
October 20th, 2011, 08:24 AM | #14 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 33
Thanks: 311
Thanked 168 Times in 31 Posts
|
I don't know if digitally shot and recorded stuff really is 'more accurate' like people say though. To me a lot of digitally shot stuff looks worse. For example there's this intense brightness that's unrealistic. In one movie when they sun came out it made the whole screen turn white, that's not what it actually looks like when the sun comes out. It's weird though because when analog stuff is transferred to digital it comes out really good. Like the combination of low-fi (analog) and high-fi (digital) is a great balance. So the initial recording to tape or film serves as like a filter for the final digital product and tones down the high-endness or brightness or whatever it is. It would probably be possible to make settings for digital cameras and audio recording programs to mimic this effect. I know they've been trying this with audio recording but it still doesn't come out as good as when actual analog is used in the recording process.
|
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to milffan1 For This Useful Post: |
October 20th, 2011, 08:27 AM | #15 | |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 33
Thanks: 311
Thanked 168 Times in 31 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to milffan1 For This Useful Post: |
October 20th, 2011, 05:34 PM | #16 |
Blocked!
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,033
Thanks: 6,523
Thanked 4,461 Times in 918 Posts
|
Leave us not forget digital remastering; these two words actually mean 2suck the guts out of it so that it can be played in the car wih megabass and sub-woofers for people who have no concept of a natural sound.
Digitally remasteredby callow yoofs who were born after most of the music they are shredding was recorded I listen on valve (vacuum tube) equipment and it brings out all the depth and richness of sound to an extent that still surprises me occasionally. Some digitally remastered stuff makes my equipment sound like bean tins Digital remastering? Quality in---Garbage out |
|
|