PornBox.com

The most important thing for good porn to me (obviously except the girls looks) is the camera angles. Too much porn seems to forget about this or maybe i am too picky and maybe i am the weird one when it comes to taste. So let me ask. What angle do you prefere. Wide shots, close ups, POV, high angle, low angle or does it not matter?
For me it matter because i need to feel active to feel aroused. I cannot passivly watch someone else fuck. But a lot of porn is shot flat to the side from a third person perspective approx a meter away from the action. Also, a lot of intros have a lot of low angles. Why? It makes me feel submissive, like i am bending down. I need angles like nr 1 and not like nr 2. Do i got anyone with me or what is the "norm"?

Example of the typical low angle intro:

mr mystica wrote:Example of the typical low angle intro:

Looks absolutely wonderful from where I'm sitting

[/quote]
Looks absolutely wonderful from where I'm sitting [/quote]
Sure, but wouldn`t a more natural angle be even better?

It's very complicated to talk about camera angles without mentioning the situation, the context.

For example, the OP mentions that low camera angles make him feel submissive,
but IMO that is only true, if the model is looking down at the camera while the camera is looking up at her.

For example,

In a low camera angle, where the camera is looking up, but the model is not looking at the camera,
the feeling is more of an "inspection" or "admiration" not submissiveness.

But also, even if she is looking or facing in the camera's direction, while the camera is low and looking up at her,
if she has her eyes closed or semi-closed, with a seductive gaze, submissive attitude, shyness, etc,
then it doesn't place the observer as the submissive.

I'm just trying to say, it depends.

Moving on.

I don't like when studios capture models who are standing,
with a camera angle that is rotated over 100 degrees tilted sideways,
it's almost like the woman is prone on the floor, but she is standing:



Mai is extremely gorgeous, but that's just bad camera work

It's a million times better when the camera angle it's like this:



And if you want the babe to occupy more screen space, move the camera closer.

This angle, isn't bad, because it doesn't go over 100 degrees:



But here, again, this camera angle, the floor is almost at the left side of the screen,
like I get why the director was trying to do this, but this is just awful camera work.
The actors are doing amazing tho, don't get confused here.



It would have been so much better like this, IMO:

The movie SZ278 has one of my all-time favorite camera angles for 1 on 1 doggy-style anal sex.



When I see this part of the scene, I pretty much just focus on the left side of the screen. On Sandra.

Reasons why I love it:

She is facing the wall, this is more natural IMO
than when the girls are awkwardly looking back, trying to look at the camera.
Because her body is not twisted, her anus lines up in the same direction
as the cock penetrating her, so, the sex is better than normal.

We can see her backside, with a camera angle that is almost perfectly symmetrical. (HUGE plus)
This makes it easier to observe her beautiful ass, as opposed to the typical isometrical view,
which IMO is an inferior method.



Also, because she is not looking at the camera, she can easily spread both of her ass cheeks
with her hands, which makes it extra kinky, I have always dreamed of a scene,
where it's just a model, in that position, with the same camera angle,
the girl is spreading both her ass cheeks, all the same, but many guys, going several times each.

Glimpse in motion:



For something like this to be replicated, and because we can't see the face,
it is key, that the penetration is vigorous and enthisiastic.

^^^^^^^^^^ That is how porn was shot 40yrs ago, and most obviously WAS NOT the best way to shoot porn, straight crotch shots close up, and far away static shots with bodies not occupying but a small portion of the frame, with no real details or HD advantage....