"Camera Hyperactivity" in Giorgio's recent scenes

[TheVulture]

Giorgio this is becoming a real problem now. I just tried to watch the new Anna de Ville scene which (I assume) is also directed by your new camera guy who butchered the recent Christie Foxxx and Natasha Ink scenes with his incredibly hyperactive camerawork.

Again here he moves constantly and can’t hold the camera still for more than a second or so. I bailed on the scene about 8 mins in as there simply isn’t a constant signal for my brain to send to my dick and it was just torture. Really weird but I think the guy sees himself as some kind of Orson Welles-style porn auteur or something. As pieces of porn “art” (if you like) they work fine (the zooms and framing etc. are certainly proficiently done) but they break the fundamental tenet of porn camerawork, which is that you need to hold still for long periods so that the viewer can properly take in the action.

I have a subscription to Evil Angel just now and the camerawork there is perfect - totally unfussy with the penetration area and girl's face framed perfectly and simply and the camera then just left in place for long periods. What's weird though is that Giorgio's scenes also subscribed to this until very recently, give or take the odd exception and an occasional frustrating obsession with tilting. I simply think he has made a mistake in allowing a new director to film some recent scenes. This director has to go or at the very least be asked to review his (assuming it's a guy) filming method.

IV had a very similar issue recently, which Joachim engaged with (kind of) in the IV forum and has potentially been addressed (bit early to say for certain but I've seen an improvement). Is this the same camera guy maybe? Weird how the same issue has now "infected" Giorgio's scenes.

Would love to get other people's views on this and with this scene in particular (which I suspect will be a bigger seller than the other 2 I mentioned given Anna's popularity).

If you want to check the validity of what I'm saying please simply start to count every time the camera stops in a certain position. I'm quite confident you will never get even to the 2 count. Some people might like that I suppose. If so I'd be grateful to hear those opinions also.

Thanks in advance for any comments and opinion.

[teammelee15]

Your not alone.....

This is where Gonzo is WAY better as far as camera work goes.....

The less the camera moves THE BETTER!

I prefer the far out shot. Legs, face, action all in one shot. With the OCCASIONAL slight zoom in on the DAP action

I CANT stand when they zoom in on the gals face and take away from what I am jerking off in the first place....2 dicks destroying a butthole!

I get that the "director" is trying to keep the scene interesting and all but....

When your moving the camera once ever 10 seconds...in...out...zoom way in....cut to the face...and so on

It makes it really hard to even cum....

Sh#t half the time your better off pausing the scene to a part where it's not sh#t camera work and blowing to....

I sometimes think these guys shooting for LP (non Luis) never went to school on how to shoot video/lighting....

FFs your selling a product. Sell it the BEST that you can or dont bother in the first place.

So many GOOD shots have been wasted to trying to be "creative" with the shot.

When in reality your just butchering the sh#t out of the scene and making it crap....

We want to see ALL the action....not parts of it.....

[dap-addict]

IV had a very similar issue recently, which Joachim engaged with (kind of) in the IV forum and has potentially been addressed (bit early to say for certain but I've seen an improvement). Is this the same camera guy maybe? Weird how the same issue has now "infected" Giorgio's scenes.

That would be shocking news!
Have downloaded but not watched the recent Anna de Ville DAP yet. I'll report back as soon as I can.

[YumYum74]

Same for me. Downloaded it but did not have time to check it out yet. Had definitely problems with the earlier IV scenes, so will let you know how I view this one.

[magizi877]

once you notice it, you cannot go back, lol.

[grimwolf77]

Yep.
I have a rant that deserves its own thread. It's about the camera work, of course.
So here it is in a nutshell.

What makes LP popular? What would you say studio guys? DP? Gangbang? DAP? Out of those three, which is the biggest reason?
So when you cut dap out of a film by zooming in on the actresses face you're cutting the thing out that brings you money. Now it's no big deal, one or two face zooms in a film. That's only 4 to 8 seconds lost. But a dozen times? That's around a minute lost. Not a big deal, unless people watch in slow motion. 60 seconds in slow motion is A LOT of viewing time.

Side rant: If you're going to tilt the camera sideways complete it and turn the motherfucker completely sideways or completely vertical. One way or the other. Horizontal, or vertical. NOT IN-BETWEEN. Why? Because a TV can be turned horizontally or vertically. Because media programs can do the same. Transpose or anti-transpose. Putting the camera at a 35 degree or 70 degree angle is super facepalm worthy. But it's still less of an issue of the routine of the camera work where you cut out the thing that brings you money.

[Giorgio Grandi]

With all respect, except few isolated cases, I don’t see all this unnecessary hiperactivity.
I reviewer all last 10 updates for fuck sake, something I never did in years, about 8h watching porn (it’s a working day) lost because the problems doesn’t have exist. The movements are part of a scheme we use from about 15 years or so.
I don’t shoot porn for “one people”, but for everyone and of course there are movement you don’t like, but someone else does, so deal with it because you are not the only customer on the placet.

Don’t you understand that when you hassle with bullshit us director/producer you bring us to start ignore you?
Don’t you really understand why you can count on the fingers of a single hand the director/producers that interact with people of forum worldwide?
The reason are the bullshit we read that make us lose interested to interact.

[TheVulture]

The movements are part of a scheme we use from about 15 years or so.

So how come for me - someone who has amassed many dozens of scenes over the last 4 years or so (check my d/l activity if you don't believe me) - this has only become a problem of late? Is it just me? Or might there be something in it?

How about the other people here saying the same thing?

I do accept that the zooms and re-framing are things you have always done. But the important point is that whereas before they were bearable and perhaps even beneficial to the scenes they have now increased to an unacceptable level and which renders the scenes unwatchable. If you can watch your recent Christie Foxxx, Natasha Ink and Anna de Ville scenes and honestly say that you can't see a difference between these and your scenes of, say, 2 or 3 months ago in terms of the camerawork then I can only assume that you are either protecting your director(s) or not looking properly.

One thing I would say is that it's important to look at them from the correct perspective. As I say, if you were reviewing these scenes from a directorial proficiency angle (ie is it all technically correct, does the camera zoom in and out properly etc.) then I'm quite sure you would give them the thumbs up. But what you need to do - and I appreciate this is probably hard for you as a porn-hardened director of many years - is view them from your audience's point of view. Basically drop your trousers, get your dick out and see if they work on that level. When you find a shot that you would agree is the "bread and butter" shot (ie everything in view) does the camera stay there long enough? Would you have managed to build up a wanking momentum (ha!) before the camera moved if that were your desire? Unless I'm some kind of outlier, they won't pass this test. Watching them with this purpose in mind is the equivalent of trying to knock one out to a magazine that's blowing around in the wind.

A genuine question. As a director how long do you think the camera should hold on a nicely framed profile shot (ie everything in view)? Do you have a view on this as a director or is it basically just a case of whatever feels right for the scene in question? As I say, with these 3 scenes it seems to me that they are in view for maybe 2 seconds at a time before the camera moves. For me it should be more like 30 but an absolute minimum of 10. I would have thought - as others have said - that all of this would be a very basic tenet of porn directing and there has been nothing until very recently to make me think that you didn't subscribe to it.

At the end of the day it's up to you Giorgio and if you want your camera to whizz around the action like a deranged fly then knock yourself out. For me though I won't be buying those scenes (notwithstanding the awkward fact that I won't know they're like this until I spend my hard-earned cash on them) as it's irrelevant how good looking and horny your girls are and how long and hard they can perform extreme sex acts if I basically can't use their scenes for the intended purpose, namely to get myself off. You are letting your performers down badly with this as well as your fans in my opinion.

A genuine suggestion that might help is that you clearly list the person operating the camera with the scene info. That would be useful to me as I can then hopefully regain confidence in certain directors, whilst possibly passing on others. If you're genuinely confident that the fast-moving style isn't an issue (or any different from what you have previously done) then you should be confident enough to advertise the name of the director(s) using this style in advance. Then we can all make our minds up based on personal preference and not be mis-sold based on trailers (where it is obviously impossible to gauge the directing style).

Hopefully this feedback is of use to you.

[TheVulture]

Just thought I would put a little flesh on the bones of this issue with a bit of scientific research.

I just watched the Anna de Ville scene from 10 mins to 12 mins (picked at random) and counted the number of times the camera moved. I made 24 times.

I then picked an older scene of Giorgio's at random to compare it with and also selected the section from 10 mins to 12 mins. The scene I went for is Lisey Sweet's gym gangbang scene (GIO588). I picked this as I watched it earlier and enjoyed it (as I have previously) and detected no issues with zoom etc. I would say it is a fairly typical scene of its kind. The number of camera moves here was 11, although there were also 2 edits (ie jumps to new position).

The sections were quite similar in some ways. Anna is in doggy being fucked by a train of guys and Lisey is in doggy briefly but then on her back being DAPed. Both girls are very much stationary and move very little from their starting position so they seemed to be fair comparisons.

What should also be mentioned is that as well as there being less than half of the camera moves in the Lisey scene they are also much slower and travelling a much lesser distance. Some of them are actually quite negligible. This means that even while the camera is moving the viewer can still take in the action. I would say that nearly all of the moves improve the experience. They are with the purpose of giving a full panoramic view of the action. Basically when watching the scene "normally" I would barely notice them.

By contrast, the camera moves in the Anna scene can only be described as "violent". The camera moves suddenly, at high speed and covering a lot of distance. For the split second when the camera is moving you basically can't see (or at least, take in) anything. For one move that amounts to very little time but for 24 moves this must be, what, 10-15 seconds of absolute dead air during the 2 mins, compared to none with the Lisey scene.

At no point whatsoever during these 2 minutes of Anna's scene does the camera "settle". The director can only be described as hyperactive. Quite genuinely I had a slight headache when I closed the scene down. By contrast, you would say that the director of the Lisey scene is completely settled. He picks his moves carefully but makes real effort to essentially stay still for the duration.

Whilst you could challenge the Lisey section and say that I might have got lucky or whatever there is no question in my mind that the Anna section is quite different to anything I have ever seen from Giorgio, with the exception of the recent Christie and Natasha scenes I mention that suffer the same fate and are presumably directed by the same person as the Anna scene.

Very happy for anyone to carry out similar checks. Arguably the most geeky experiment ever carried out on these pages but I think it's an important and interesting point, especially in light of the fact that Giorgio is essentially denying it.

At the end of the day my dick doesn't lie. It has enjoyed the Lisey scene numerous times (including earlier tonight) but simply does not know what to do with the Anna scene unless I pause it and use it as a glorified wank mag. That is as much science as I need to know that something is up here.

[grimwolf77]

"Unnatural porn move"

^^^^

Ask yourself this question when filming something: What perspective do the consumers, myself, and everyone else see in? Do we normally view things at a 35 degree or a 70 degree angle? Do we walk around with our heads tilted sideways? Do we view movies with our heads tilted sideways? Some people do, sure. They have medical issues is why, typically.

Anyway, my solution is easy. I just remove myself from the equation.

[TheVulture]

Where are dap-addict and YumYum74's analyses of the situation?

Some good input in this thread but this campaign needs some big hitters on board to get a result.

Come on guys - help a brother out here. (honest opinions of course)

[TheVulture]

Interesting update - Charlotte Sartre just mentioned on her page that she just shot a scene for Giorgio and that Giorgio himself filmed it. Could this mean he quietly accepts there is a problem and is "taking back control"?

Either way, it gives me (and anyone else who agrees with my comments) a chance to buy a scene for useful comparison purposes and also with relative security.

Would be really good if Giorgio could confirm who shot his recent scenes, for sure. I'm pretty sure this info would be very revealing.

[YumYum74]

Sorry man, haven't had the chance to watch Anna's latest scene yet. Might take me a couple more days to find the time, life is getting in the way of watching porn sometimes.

[TheVulture]

Sorry man, haven't had the chance to watch Anna's latest scene yet. Might take me a couple more days to find the time, life is getting in the way of watching porn sometimes.

Ah no problem good sir - thanks for the update. I genuinely want to know what you and dap-addict think about this so would be very grateful if you could feed back when you get a chance but obviously no rush.

[TheVulture]

Also check out the trailer for the latest Francys Belle scene. I know it's a trailer but the still frames here are like microsecond quick - as though it was very hard to pick out even trailer style clips with a still camera. My strong hunch is that this is another 1000 mile an hour scene.

Anyone seen it and can confirm/deny?

[dap-addict]

I genuinely want to know what you and dap-addict think about this

Sorry, same here, life preventing lots of porn watching.

But I now quickly checked some of the Anna de Ville GIO1114 insertions: And at one hand I see what your bug, at the other I dont really know wheter its really more to be honest as it doesn't really bug me that much. Its sure no way IV200-300 problem style!

What I noticed is some of those 30/120 degree camera moves during Anna's 1st anal insertion, i.e. no horizontal line kept. I can live with that, though.
In Full Nelson DAP camera is way hyperactive zooming in and out and also leaving 180 degree horizontal line at times. But again I can live easily with that. Zoom-in shows Anna's lust.

All in all camera is still quite steady.
That was a quick scan, though.

[dap-addict]

UPDATE:
Just compared the Anna de Ville 7on1 (GIO1112) with Kiara Golds BBC (GIO1032) - and there is indeed a quite big camera work change to the worse.
Camera @ Anna 7on1 is much less steady, @ Kiara its very stable indeed.
Is there a new cameraman at GIO or is it really same Andrey?

[Giorgio Grandi]

Few answers.
The cameraman changes frames for 2 reason:
- the frame is not interesting or it doesnt look as good as he supposed before to take this position
- he thinks he can get a better frame than the one he is actually filming

there is not a rule about how long the cameraman should keep the same frame before to change it. It doesnt depends from the cameraman, but it depends from the action. The more the action is interesting, the less is necessary to move the camera.

You are not watching a porn movie, you a watching a particular model performing into a porn movie, so you focus on the model and you dont understand why the cameraman change position when in your opinion all is good. Evidently the cameraman moves because there is a better way to frame the model in his opinion or simply because he consider "boring" what he is framing.

Its hard to understand, but basically the cameraman moves when the action in the frame doesnt suit our needs.

Personally, as we shoot "gonzo", I believe the camera should move all around all the time, this is the natur of a "gonzo" as I believe the dutch angle is part of the way the gonzo should be filmed (and not only).
I shot few scenea in the last days because my cameraman was on holiday and Im more and more convinced that the nature of "your complain" is based only on your need to see the model in the way it turns you on, not in the way the ABC of porn/gonzo tells the way to frame a model.

If we talk about "steady", well I image you mean the camera is shaking and this is not connected to how long the cameraman keep the same frame, but more about in what condition he is shooting.

Anyway if you want to consider as a "defect" the research of a better frame than I dont really know how to answer you. Technically I did not see anything so terrible and if I take out my dick it could be just worse as I would consider the framing too much static to get me into a fantasy

[dap-addict]

If we talk about "steady", well I image you mean the camera is shaking and this is not connected to how long the cameraman keep the same frame, but more about in what condition he is shooting.

No, no shaky camera, luckily!
With steady I mean smooth camera position changes vs. often zooming-in/out and camera often hoovering around the girl being fucked.
Klara Gold (GIO1032) had much smoother camera position changes than the around 5-6 weeks later shot Anna de Ville 7on1.

[Giorgio Grandi]

Kiara Gold BBC - shoot on 18/04
De Ville7 - shot on 12/06
That’s almost 2 months.

I will watch these scenes

[TheVulture]

Thanks for the feedback Giorgio.

Your line about moving when the shot becomes dull or to get another (better) frame doesn't add up though. If that were the case you would expect the camera to move in a fairly random manner (eg sometimes a lot, sometimes not at all) whereas the thing with this scene (and the Christie and Natasha ones) is that without fail the camera guy moves every couple of seconds (if not quicker). So following your argument that either means he can never find the correct shot (!) or - more likely and certainly my assertion - that he just has a very restless style and doesn't like staying still beyond a couple of seconds regardless of the shot he has. Indeed what is frustrating about these scenes is that the camera guy is very, very adept at finding the good shots - the problem is simply that without fail he doesn't wish to keep them on screen beyond 2 seconds.

An important point when reviewing is to simply check how often he moves. Even taking on board what you say about a fast-moving Gonzo style, surely you would agree that the camera moving every 2 seconds or so is too much, wouldn't you?

In terms of dap-addict and "steady" I think what he means might be what I referred to earlier in terms of the speed of the camera moves. In other words, they really lunge in and out at high speed, which means there is nothing on screen during the moves. Or perhaps he does mean shaky. I wouldn't say the shooting is shaky as the camera guy seems to be proficient with his moves but there are quite a few half moves (if you like) where he repositions very slightly, which perhaps is what dap-addict means. I don't think it's the camera guy shaking - he knows what he's doing I'm pretty sure. It's like "There's 2 seconds up - let's have a move but maybe just a little one this time". Again it is just too busy for the viewer (or at least me) to enjoy the scene.

Will you take on board my request to share the name of the scene shooter with the scene info moving forward? This would be hugely beneficial for me as sadly I can't risk buying any of your scenes at the present time due to this issue. Can you also advise the name of the shooter of the Anna, Christie and Natasha scenes? I take on board your point that I am only 1 viewer but bearing in mind that I have almost never had issues with your camerawork before (and have actually gone to lengths to praise it on occasion) and also taking on board the other comments in this thread I don't think you can simply write this off as a lone outlier with a specific niche complaint. I think you either need to get rid of the style (ie go back to your earlier style) or more carefully label the different styles. Is this something you might be agreeable to?

[dap-addict]

the problem is simply that without fail he doesn't wish to keep them on screen beyond 2 seconds.

An important point when reviewing is to simply check how often he moves. Even taking on board what you say about a fast-moving Gonzo style, surely you would agree that the camera moving every 2 seconds or so is too much, wouldn't you?

Its not every 2 secs or not even every 10secs, though.
At least not the anal/DAP insertion footage I checked as written above.
But the camera still is much more insteady as with Kiara Gold (GIO1032), by which I mean dutch angles are used (which I dont mind), but also it is zooming-in and -out often and hovering around the girl. I prefer it more steady rather, like in GIO1032.

[Giorgio Grandi]

@TheVulture
would you please find the time to send me some example (just the code of the scene and at what minute you see the issue), the more - the better.

"Can you also advise the name of the shooter of the Anna, Christie and Natasha scenes?"
pls drop me the codes of the scenes

"Is this something you might be agreeable to?"
Today I spoke about this with my 2 editors and both of them told me they dont really see the problem as you explain it. They also told me there is really a minimal difference between me and my cameraman and they notice it above all in the intro

--

Even if you maybe do not believe it, we spoke about camera movements pretty much every week since someone started to complain about framing the action, but maybe we are not able to really get the issue (this is why I would like you address me some some samples please).
I start to believe we are looking for something different than what you mean with your post.

[TheVulture]

Codes of scenes with hyperactivity as I see it:

Christie Foxxx (GL039)
Natasha Ink (GL050)
Anna de Ville (GIO1114)

In terms of the times to look at, really the issue is there throughout the whole scenes but as per my earlier comment I would perhaps focus on the Anna scene between 10 and 12 mins, where the camera not only moves 24 times but the moves are very long and fast (I thus describe them as "violent"). This isn't necessarily the section that is the worst, just the one that I chose to scientifically "investigate" at random.

I disagree with dap-addict in that the camera very much does move every 2 seconds (or at least very close to this - check that section if you don't believe me)....my maths tells me that 24 moves in 120 seconds makes a move around every 4 seconds, which is pretty much what I was getting at. I'm pretty sure that this trend is reproduced throughout the whole scene. 4 seconds is nowhere near enough time to take in and enjoy a camera position and is in no way typical of your earlier scenes. It thus marks a considerable change of filming style.

If you want a comparison point of a recent scene of yours where there are no such issues with hyperactivity then try Ciri (GL042). This is very much in keeping with the scenes of yours I've been watching for some time. Minimal camera movement, nice long frames, all very steady and the action well captured.

Hopefully this is enough info for you to investigate the issue.

[TheVulture]

Ha ha ha my maths letting me down there. 24 moves in 120 secs is exactly a move every 5 secs on average.

My point remains. Excessive movement, impossible to relax with the scene, in my case (I realise not everyone might get this) genuinely headache inducing.

[Giorgio Grandi]

@TheVulture
The same cameraman shot all the 3 scenes and also the one with Ciri.
He basically shot all the scenes this year except maybe 10 or so that I shot. He shot also 90% of what released on 2018.

I checked the timelapse in the scene of Anna and I understood your problem (that for example is not my problem as viewer). Actually we already worked on this, months ago.
Here the date of shooting of the 4 scenes:
Christie Foxxx - May 31
Natasha Ink - March 07
Anna de Ville - June 06
Ciri - May 18
What you call "Hyperactivity" (for me it has another name), was mostly fixed from April or so. We had a lot of meeting with my editor and the cameraman to analyse the motion of the camera.

Lets talk about Anna De Ville in detail.
Well personally I think the problem was the position of the performers mainly. I would have personally stopped, make a cut and setup something different but still "standing".
That position is tricky to shoot and the frame "doesn look full enough" in almost all the way you try to frame it. This is why the camera move like a rubber-band close and far away from the action as every frame he was able to get was not satisfying at all.
He should have stopped and re-place the performers, something I deprecate specially at the beginning of the scene as it doesnt let the action to go fluentely.

I randomly checked the scene and I see the problem again, but I feel he "follows" the movements of the male performers that are "keeping" what they are doing for to short time and they dont follow what the cameraman is doing (example to "call a gape" when you see the camera just arrived on the close up of the face, forces to make a movement that was not planned: but its anyway a problem somehow.
This what gonzo is, follow the actors, but I understand it can be improved with more "feeling" between camera and performers.

I will speak with the actors tomorrow and we will improve the "understanding" between cameraman and male performers as I think the problem is mostly there. the action needs to "go along" with the position of the cameraman otherwise cameraman is forced to move when he should not.

[TheVulture]

Good stuff Giorgio. I don't entirely understand your analysis there (quite technical in places) but I appreciate the feedback and good to hear that you have acknowledged some issues and that improvements can be made.

This has done something to restore my confidence and hopefully you can quickly get your scenes back to the style when you were operating the camera.

Good comments from otto1219 as well and he hits the nail on the head. No need to remove zooms in to face/gapes etc. as these are very welcome in moderation. However, always make sure there are long sections in the scenes where all of the action is visible and the camera operator makes an effort to hold still to best capture this action. This as otto says should be the "default" camera setting of the scene.

[Giorgio Grandi]

@TheVulture
You have to understand that most of "close ups" are "support-frames", it means a close up HAS TO BE USED between 2 open frames, even few second makes the framing technically correct.
I aware many cameraman use to move from a "open frame" to another "open frame" without a close-up in between, I personally deprecate this, its simply a technical mistake.

Anyway we are trying to improve that mentioned.

[Giorgio Grandi]

The issue is very subjective, but I noted all the comments and already worked to improve

[Bottomless_Fan]

Interesting that you mention that thing about moving the camera around with no purpose, still I believe the camera don´t suffer in Giorgio scenes of shakiness at all, in American porn, they take shaky camera to another lever, sometimes unwatchable, I usually focus on other things that bother me like every time they pull down the girls lingerie or tanktop to the waist, it looks grotesque, and makes the girl look fat, but that's just me, everyone has their opinion on things and Europorn is much more artistic than American porn to my view.