Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Adult Film Industry Chooses HD-DVD

Posted by kdawson on Thu Jan 11, 2007 05:11 PM
from the BetaMax-deja-vu dept.
Sarusa writes "If this is true, it's Beta vs VHS all over again and HD-DVD may be the foregone winner of the format wars. First, Heise reports (summarized from the German by sgknox.com) that Digital Playground, who were committed to Blu-ray last year, are now producing HD-DVD titles instead. No Blu-ray disk manufacturer would make their disks because Sony doesn't want porn on Blu-ray (just as with Betamax). Second, as reported by tgdaily, the porn industry overwhelmingly favors HD-DVD because it's much cheaper and easier to produce. As noted in the tgdaily article, porn was a huge factor in VHS winning the VHS/Beta format wars even though many people don't like to acknowledge it. Porn, like gaming, pushes tech adoption."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Hardware: Blue Blu-ray 396 comments
TopSpin writes "Early this year the meme circulated that Blu-ray might be going the way of Betamax, and for the exact same reason: Sony's unfriendliness to the porn industry. But at Japan's recent euphemistically named Adult Treasure Expo 2007, adult filmmakers said Sony has begun offering technical support, and this was later confirmed by Sony PR. The company stated that Sony would offer support to any filmmaker working on the format, no matter their industry. Apparently, Blu-ray is now the preferred medium for Japanese adult films."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by Average_Joe_Sixpack (534373) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:13PM (#17564434)
    Too much detail can be a bad thing ... unless you're into that sort of thing.
    • by wizzard2k (979669) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:16PM (#17564492)
      I can just see one of the first shot for HD DVD porn's title being....

      1080pee
    • by SanityInAnarchy (655584) <ninja@slaphack.com> on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:28PM (#17564698) Journal
      Let me put it this way: It's like a real woman. Just because you can whip out a microscope and examine every inch of her body (every pimple, every blemish, every hair), doesn't mean you do. She's there, she's naked, presumably she wants to fuck you, so why are you counting the hairs in her landing strip?

      Same thing with HD. Yes, if you pause it and zoom in, it may look much worse. But you've got a giant HDTV and some nice surround sound; again, why count the hairs in her landing strip when you can just sit back and enjoy the show?
      • by Kadin2048 (468275) <slashdot@kadin.xoxy@net> on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:35PM (#17564834) Homepage Journal
        Well I think that's exactly the point.

        "Sitting back and enjoying the show" would be watching it on DVD.

        Going out and buying the HD version instead is like buying a microscope.
        • by imkonen (580619) on Thursday January 11 2007, @06:51PM (#17565908)
          How is that different from anything else in HD? I'm not going to miss any action in a football game on a regular cable broadcast, but if I'm to believe the ads for comcast HD I see everyday, I ASBOLUTELY MUST GET HD so I can REALLY appreciate the game. If you think you can see too much of a porn star on HD, why the hell would I want to watch a game populated by 350 pound linemen in HD?
          • by SQLGuru (980662) on Thursday January 11 2007, @07:13PM (#17566122)
            What I like about watching sports in HD vs SD:

            1. I can actually read the coach's clipboard (especially the ones that print it instead of writing it on a whiteboard).
            2. The crowd looks like real people instead of a blur. You can see the thrill of victory and agony of defeat. Entertaining, really.
            3. And probably most important....you can see the cheerleaders in more shots.

            Layne
        • by foreverdisillusioned (763799) on Thursday January 11 2007, @09:04PM (#17567410) Journal
          What's with the massive anti-HD sentiment regarding porn? What happened when you guys see a woman in real life? Do you go "EWWWWWWW! She's so hi-def! I can see her pores!" Christ, if detail really turns you off that much why not just confine yourself to viewing hentai?

          I think that just as most people (of the appropriate gender and orientation) prefer to see a naked woman in real life vs.a naked woman on DVD, so too would most people prefer to see a high-resolution picture of a naked woman vs. a picture which is so low-rez that you can actually see the individual pixels fairly clearly from 10 feet away (I can, at least.) Now don't get me wrong, that's not enough to make me want to rush out and buy an overpriced, over-DRM'ed piece of shit AND a new TV to use it with, but saying that HD is the TV equivalent of a microscope is just dumb. My laptop has a WUXGA (1920x1200) screen, and you'd have to be smoking some amazing crack to say that it makes naked women look uglier. It most certainly does NOT. It makes pictures--ALL pictures, regardless of whether or not they involve naked women--look vibrant and real in a way that makes owners of XGA-resolution laptops weep with envy. I suppose I COULD stare with my eyeball an inch from the screen and scream "AHHHHHHHH! I SEE A PIMPLE!" but... why? Just why would you do such a thing? Not to imply that imperfections bother me that much--on the contrary, I find that the plastic, 'pancake makeup' look to be pretty unappealing... I'm just saying, why would you go out of your way to look for such things?

          HD isn't a microscope; it's simply a MUCH NICER PICTURE TO LOOK AT.
      • DVD porn already makes women look substantially worse. Google around, I'm sure you can find an adult film company talking about it. Flaws that you wouldn't even see on VHS are going to look like another orifice in HD.
      • Obligatory (Score:5, Funny)

        by Guppy06 (410832) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:55PM (#17565164) Journal
        "She's there, she's naked, presumably she wants to fuck you"

        You must be new here.

        Why else do you think pr0n technology makes headlines around here?
      • by hotdiggitydawg (881316) on Thursday January 11 2007, @07:32PM (#17566360)

        Let me put it this way: It's like a real woman. Just because you can whip out a microscope and examine every inch of her body (every pimple, every blemish, every hair), doesn't mean you do. She's there, she's naked, presumably she wants to fuck you, so why are you counting the hairs in her landing strip?
        She's there, she's naked, presumably she wants to fuck you, and the object you choose to whip out is... a microscope. You, sir, are one nerd who is overdue for a promotion.
      • by Osty (16825) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:39PM (#17564892) Homepage

        Most people could not see the quality difference between the two formats.

        The OP was not suggesting that Beta had higher quality pr0n. He was suggesting that in the VHS v. Beta war there was no interweb. When you can get (legally or illegally) high quality pr0n online, who cares if you can get high quality pr0n on HD-DVD as well?

  • by HTH NE1 (675604) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:14PM (#17564440)
    In the previous discussions about pornography decided the HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray battle, I'd always said that the porn industry was fully capable of going both ways, and a few others besides (with the double-entendre wholly intended).

    However, hearing that Sony itself has been pressuring the porn industry away from the Blu-Ray format, it seems they've shot themselves in the foot and mooted their brand from competition.

    I suspect they want to keep the format that is used in their gaming system free of purient-interest content and not be a portal for pornography, preserving it as a "kid friendly" device. And with a limited number of facilities able to produce BD disks compared to DVD houses refitted for HD-DVD production, that scarcity allows Sony more control. Perhaps Sony is still stinging with the parental backlash against kids putting porn on their PSPs [wired.com]. How many more PSPs to adults did that revelation sell again?
    • by UnknowingFool (672806) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:32PM (#17564754)
      I'd always said that the porn industry was fully capable of going both ways

      Must. Resist. Urge to comment.

    • by HappySqurriel (1010623) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:33PM (#17564794)
      The more I have thought about it the more I think that the 'best' (and probably most plausable) outcome to this whole Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD war is that both formats will retain enough support for the first few years that eventually every 'Movie Player' will support both formats; at that point the consumer doesn't care anymore and the each of the 'camps' will be fighting over content providers.

      Ultimately, if I see this as the likely outcome next christmas I will probably buy a HD-DVD player because I will have no worries about the content I buy not playing in future devices.
      • by Heir Of The Mess (939658) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:47PM (#17565018) Homepage
        18 months ago I read an article that said Toshiba said they had a triple layer HD-DVD disk which holds 45GB, which pretty much makes the extra expense of Blue-Ray pointless. I read that Here [theregister.co.uk]. Move ahead to August 2006 and they are still just talking about it Here [hometheaterblog.com] and say the spec won't be finalised until mid 2007. They should make sure that HD-DVD players are ready now for this format, and can be firmware upgraded to read them. Of course even if they don't, the next gen HD-DVD players will still be able to play all the HD-DVD movies you already bought, so looking at that it's probably still the better investment.
    • by russ1337 (938915) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:36PM (#17564860)
      listing to 'this week in tech', last week and someone (Leo / Dvorak) was saying they visited the HD-DVD booth who's rep's were all about how movies can be filmed with 'skinable features'.. and gave the example of Fast and Furious Tokyo Drift where they got to select the color of the cars....

      I think Leo went on to predict the Porn industry will win the race with this feature alone...

      Slashdotters will be able to superimpose their own face over Ron Jeremy's and finally get to see themselves (albeit a hairy version) do nasty things to girlz.
    • by Total_Wimp (564548) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:52PM (#17565110)
      I know a lot of people say that neither Blue-Ray or HD-DVD will win as the next format. The winner, they say, will be broadband and hard drive. In general, I disagree. Enough bandwidth to do High Def is years away, as is the hard drive space to store very many movies. People are going to be hitting the stores for discs of various kinds for quite some time.

      But porn is different. There already exists a thriving movie download industry. The quality regularly improves as bandwidth allows. Small studios coexist with large ones without the conltroling cartels that force "legitimate" indie movies to distribution hell. In short, unlike in the "legitimate" movie industry, customers have both accepted the quality and continued to pay for downloadable content in large numbers, despite the greater production values and higher resolution of DVD.

      I have no doubt that many people will buy HD-DVD to view porn. There's a market for higher quality and physical media. But I'll be very suprised if the download scene doesn't outpace the HD-DVD scene all the way to the point where HD downloads start making practical sense for everyone.

      TW
      • by Lumpy (12016) on Thursday January 11 2007, @09:47PM (#17567778) Homepage
        Enough bandwidth to do High Def is years away, as is the hard drive space to store very many movies.

        Really??? then why am I able to store HD content as Xvid at only 5.5 gig at full resolution and 120 minute length??? It looks FAN-TAS-TIC on customers Projectors and high end LCD and plasmas. This is a conversion from a HD-DV recording shot with a Canon XL1HD at the Michigan international speedway. We use it to show the customer what their display is capable of ...

        I can easily fit a HD movie in a standard dual layer DVD. There is no need for HDDVD or BLU RAY for HD video content. and hard drive space will easily hold many many movies at that bitrate.

        The only reason BluRay or HD-DVD exists is to introduce a new DRM type and licensing revenue stream.
    • by MasterC (70492) <cmlburnett&gmail,com> on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:52PM (#17565120) Homepage
      However, hearing that Sony itself has been pressuring the porn industry away from the Blu-Ray format, it seems they've shot themselves in the foot and mooted their brand from competition.
      Along with this point, why does Sony get to ride the moral-high-horse after their rootkit debacle?

      "No, we don't want porn released on our products, but secretly installing crippling software on computers -- regardless if people accept the EULA -- we fully support (*ahem* until we get caught and sued *ahem*)."

      Just me or is that a big hypocritical? On the other hand, I'm sure there is a "business philosophy" disconnect between the HD DVD and music groups/divisions.
      • by HappySqurriel (1010623) on Thursday January 11 2007, @06:23PM (#17565562)
        For most people in the world this is the standard situation:

        You have a wife and 3 kids -> you're not buying a $3000 TV
        You have a wife and 3 kids -> you're not buying a $500/$1000 DVD player

        The format war will be over before the average family even knows there has been a format war.

        From what I have seen, early technology adopters seem to be the young single well employed men or older men with no children living at home who are still empolyed; in either case they are (probably) interested in porography because they have no woman or no woman who is interested in sex. I (used to) know a woman who worked in a video-rental store that had an adult section and one of her comments was that it seemed like men lost their interest in the 'Adult Section' at 30 and regained it at 50.
  • VHS vs. Beta (Score:4, Insightful)

    by RightSaidFred99 (874576) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:15PM (#17564464)
    You mean the mythical VHS versus Beta where the "better" format lost, or the _real_ VHS vs. Beta war where the better format (longer tapes, for one thing) actually won but where people keep propogating the "Beta was better than VHS!" myth?
    • Re:VHS vs. Beta (Score:5, Insightful)

      by LeninZhiv (464864) * on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:50PM (#17565074)
      Right on. I think the only reason more people don't point out the parallels between HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray to the last format war (SACD vs. DVD-Audio) was that SACD and DVD-Audio were both such catastrophic failures that only audiophiles even know what they were. Because in the mean time, mp3s took over.

      And if VHS was 'technically inferior' to Betamax, mp3 compared to SACD/DVD-A would be off the charts bad. And guess what people chose?
  • History repeats (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:16PM (#17564474)
    It really is VHS vs. BetaMax all over again. And it's even Sony again pushing the more expensive and less open option!
  • one big difference (Score:5, Insightful)

    by arazor (55656) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:16PM (#17564476)

    In the VHS vs Beta days you couldn't get high quality porn for free. I want HD DVD to win as I have invested in it but I just don't think this will be a big push for team HD DVD.
    • by rolfwind (528248) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:45PM (#17564994)
      Off topic - but does HD-DVD have a scratchproof layer like Blu-Ray licensed from TDK? (Based on my TDK scratchproof discs, this stuff works great and would influence my decision. I lost more than a few CDs/DVDs due to scratches).
  • by k31bang (672440) * <amontoya AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:16PM (#17564494) Homepage
    So in other words, Blu-ray is...erm Fucked.
  • by meta-monkey (321000) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:21PM (#17564556)
    Whew! Thanks for this news, Slashdot! Now I can finally feel confident buying an HD-DVD player!
  • Profit? (Score:5, Funny)

    by zappepcs (820751) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:22PM (#17564576) Journal
    1.Create rootkit
    2.Create new HD Disc spec
    3.Shoot feet
    4.??????
    5.Profit
  • by tgatliff (311583) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:26PM (#17564672)
    With the porn industry behind HD-DVD now, there is little doubt that the HD-DVD format will be hacked into oblivion. Nothing inspires developers more than the possability of free porn....
  • Oh noes!! (Score:5, Funny)

    by mcknation (217793) <nocarrier@nOsPAM.gmail.com> on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:28PM (#17564682) Homepage


    I've got Blu-Balls!

    /ducks and runs

    /McK
  • by xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:29PM (#17564708)
    "HD-DVD" will win over "Blu-Ray" because of the name of the tech anyway...

    Average consumer: "WTF is Blue Ray?"
    Answer: "It lets you watch high-definition DVDs."
    Average consumer: "Is there a Red Ray?"

    Average consumer: "WTF is HD-DVD?"
    Answer: "It lets you watch high-definition DVDs."
    Average consumer: "Sorry I was such a dumbass."

  • Right on (Score:5, Funny)

    by James_G (71902) <james.globalmegacorp@org> on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:33PM (#17564790)
    HD-DVD DVDA! I can hardly wait.

    (Anyone who doesn't know the reference should watch this [imdb.com])
  • by yeoua (86835) on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:38PM (#17564882)
    So does this mean that the PS3 is a kiddy system because it won't actually have any "adult media" while the XBOX360 can?
  • Bad Comparison (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MBCook (132727) <foobarsoft@foobarsoft.com> on Thursday January 11 2007, @05:58PM (#17565208) Homepage

    This has been on /. before, but you can't call the war based on this.

    When VHS/Beta came around, there was no real way to watch that kind of content at home before. That was HUGE. Right now, that exists in the form of VHS and DVDs.

    People wanted VHS. Going from nothing to a way to record TV or watch movies at home when you want was HUGE. DVD->Whatever is just going to higher quality. There is no massive benefit like before.

    Then there is the computer factor. You know where I could watch high quality content without buying a $500+ player? My computer. You know where I can find tons of FREE content? My computer. The only competition that VHS had was "those kind" of theaters in the "bad part of town". People already are in the privacy of their homes

    Then there is the higher quality is not better argument.

    Let's face is, no one cares that much about this battle. It's almost NOTHING LIKE VHS/BETA. Same field (home video), same circumstance (two competing formats), same players (Sony on one side, this time with other people). But the reasons why people will choose a format are different. VHS was longer. Blu-ray is longer, but but since HD-DVD isn't limited to 60min like Beta was that isn't as much of an issue.

    Can't compare the situations. Doesn't hold up.

    Random theory: Blu-ray will win in end. Why? Cooler name. I have no idea.

  • by 2ms (232331) on Thursday January 11 2007, @06:36PM (#17565740)
    I would like to call for the desistance of calling HD-DVD "technically inferior" on the simple-minded basis of its only very limitedly lower theoretical storage capacity. This seems to be a very popular thing to do by people who like to think they know what they are talking about. However, it is actually stupidly simplistic and inaccurate.

    Blu-ray is capable of having some more storage capacity. Meanwhile, HD-DVD disks are cheaper to make, do not scratch as easily, are more backwards compatible, have a more capable and author friendly development environment/UI system, more advanced video encoding algorithms (as of at least very recently), and support the highest available resolution available (1080p)!

    Apparently, what people mean by "technically superior" is "has a little more storage capacity". I prefer my way of looking at things -- HD-DVD is "better" and was more intelligently designed because it has all the advantages above over BluRay. It appears that Sony reinvented the wheel for negligible gain, yet many-fold setback.
  • by tgibbs (83782) on Thursday January 11 2007, @08:20PM (#17566946)
    The notion that porn was available only on VHS is entirely myth. I lived in New York City during the height of the VHS/Beta wars. At that time, VHS had only a modest lead. Video stores had large beta and VHS departments (these were video sales stores; rental stores did not become common until later on). And both the beta and VHS departments had substantial porn sections. Videos, no matter what the rating, were quite expensive, selling for close to $100 (which was real money in those days)

    Sony had chosen to go after the high-end market, a practice that had been successful with other items in their audio and video equipment line. Sony imagined that VCRs would be used mostly for TV time-shifting, with sales of modest numbers of (expensive) prerecorded videos to enthusiasts. Sony players tended to be the videophile favorite, because they usually got the hot new features such as stable still display and hifi sound a bit earlier, with VHS catching up a few months later. The cheaper VHS machines sold to the more budget-conscious buyers. What Sony failed to anticipate was the emergence of rental outlets as a major market force. The first rental stores that I saw carried both beta and VHS (and yes, all ratings in both formats). But since the cheaper VHS machines were a bit more common, they stocked VHS a bit more heavily. Consumers noted this that the rental selection was better for VHS, and began favor VHS machines even more heavily. In response, to the increased demand for VHS tapes, the rental outlets cut back still further on beta to favor VHS. Within a couple of years after rental outlets became common, I began to see stores eliminating their beta departments. Around that time, Sony dropped the price of beta VCRs to make them competitive with VHS, but by then it was too late for Sony to catch up.
        • by king-manic (409855) on Thursday January 11 2007, @06:17PM (#17565486)
          I,>porn: 12-15 billion annually (US)
          movies (theatrical): 8-11 billion annually (US)
          dvds (non-porn/rental and purchase): 21-25 billion annually (US)
          music: anyones guess. numbers range from 5-15 billion depending on who is doing the telling. the music industry is notorious for lying about sales though - perceived popularity of music makes people buy more music. This number is probably high.

          Complete fabrication. Porn is a large industry but not larger then the Theatric movie release industry. The 12-15 number is based on interviews AVN did then re-enforced in Frobes for mentioning it. It's not based on hard numbers. Let me ask you this, how many porn produces are as WEALTHY as Speilberg. Or how about the head of any major studio? According to those numbers, under a similiar distribution system there should be at least 1/3 as many WEALTHY porn makers as there are film makers. But it's not supported. Even well known industry icons like Seymour Butts is only "rich."

          Porn is a little more democratic then hollywood since any person wiht a camera can make it, but distribution (digital* or old school) still requires money. So we may have 100,000 producers but only several large distribution houses and online pushers. More conservative "studies" peg the amount to be 2-3 billion per year within the US.

          *for online distibution, you still need to attract traffic which require money. The most successful online porn retailers use some pretty complex referral systems and networks of sites to generate cash. You need cash for this.
          • by Squirmy McPhee (856939) on Thursday January 11 2007, @06:34PM (#17565720)

            Complete fabrication. Porn is a large industry but not larger then the Theatric movie release industry. The 12-15 number is based on interviews AVN did then re-enforced in Frobes for mentioning it.

            Yes. According to a bunch of adult industry folks [boingboing.net], the real figure is more likely $400-500 million annually, which makes much more sense than $12-15 billion if you believe the guy from the BoingBoing post who says $216 million is spent making porn movies each year. The $12-15 billion number includes the entire adult entertainment industry -- strip clubs, sex toys, etc. in addition to porn movies, but keeps getting pushed as the size of the "porn industry".