I've noticed recently that full-body shots seem to be replacing
headshots on many of the girls' pages, which means that
for all but the most familiar faces I now have to open the
gallery to ensure that I've got the right one.
Is there a rationale for this apparent [and to me, at least,
most unwelcome] change?
Picture question
Picture question
"a harmless drudge, that busies himself in tracing the original, and detailing the
signification...."
signification...."
Re: Picture question
I did not notice, but JJ why would you not look favorably at this change?
Although IAFD seems to favor the head shot format, I prefer the EBI format in frequently showing the full body, instead of just the head. Sometimes when you are trying to identify similar looking actreses, seeing the full body (or as muh as possible) really helps.
Although IAFD seems to favor the head shot format, I prefer the EBI format in frequently showing the full body, instead of just the head. Sometimes when you are trying to identify similar looking actreses, seeing the full body (or as muh as possible) really helps.
Re: Picture question
I'm all for full-body shots as vital aids to identification;
but the simple fact is that humans initially recognise/
distinguish others by facial detail- the majority of
characteristic recognition-features are in the face, and
that IMO ought to be the focus of any main pic: body-shots
can [and should] of course be featured the gallery along
with additional headshot-angles and pics of tattoos, etc.
As it stands, with a full-body pic as the 'headshot' in
normal resolution a face's apparent area is effectively
reduced in size by around 60-70% and for me at least,
renders any detail vague at best. I fail to see any advantage
in making a girl less instantly recognisable as opposed to
the converse.
As an example, look at Destiny's gallery. You'd have to
have previous acquaintance with the girl to recognise her
from pic1, which has been used as the headshot- although
you can see her tattoo and her general figure [and very nice
it is too], the face is indistinct, shadowed and angled away
both from the vertical and from the viewer. Pics 2 and 5 on
the other hand give an instant and clear impression of her
features- and pic4 is even better, an ideal compromise between
face and body, but I suspect too vertically deep to make a
good headshot; it'd have to be reduced in size and so vital
detail would be lost.
but the simple fact is that humans initially recognise/
distinguish others by facial detail- the majority of
characteristic recognition-features are in the face, and
that IMO ought to be the focus of any main pic: body-shots
can [and should] of course be featured the gallery along
with additional headshot-angles and pics of tattoos, etc.
As it stands, with a full-body pic as the 'headshot' in
normal resolution a face's apparent area is effectively
reduced in size by around 60-70% and for me at least,
renders any detail vague at best. I fail to see any advantage
in making a girl less instantly recognisable as opposed to
the converse.
As an example, look at Destiny's gallery. You'd have to
have previous acquaintance with the girl to recognise her
from pic1, which has been used as the headshot- although
you can see her tattoo and her general figure [and very nice
it is too], the face is indistinct, shadowed and angled away
both from the vertical and from the viewer. Pics 2 and 5 on
the other hand give an instant and clear impression of her
features- and pic4 is even better, an ideal compromise between
face and body, but I suspect too vertically deep to make a
good headshot; it'd have to be reduced in size and so vital
detail would be lost.
"a harmless drudge, that busies himself in tracing the original, and detailing the
signification...."
signification...."
Re: Picture question
I don't know JJ. Women change their looks all the time, and porn stars with medium long careers change them all the time. Today they have long brown hair, tomorrow it's short and blonde, then black and curly, they add tattoos, piercings, face lifts, fake boobs.
I do filmografies for an talian forum, and when I have to examine screenshots and video box covers it becomes often difficult if not near impossible to determine whether a person appearing in a movie is the actress in question. It is a daunting task for IAFD, EGFD and other databases to be as accurate as they can when they list a movie title to their filmos.
IAFD only posts one head shot, sometimes it is an old and not very clear headshot, and sometimes it is recent. They do not usually go back and change it if actress had modified her looks recently. EBI usually gives you a more full body shot but you get only ONE. EGAFD usually gives you a headshot pic in its central page but provides additional pics (of how they looked in a number of movies) on another page, which is great in my view.
The pics posted in EBI are usually of high quality, those posted in IAFD are often good but sometimes crappy, and EGAFD has to content itself to a great extent on screenshots that are average in quality unless some copyright owner is willing to provide pics out of courtesy.
So that's the situation basically.
Even the mainstream IMDB provides one pic of actors/actresses but adds a gallery of other pics which is helpful. I myself prefer more than one pic of actress to give you better perspective (and if it is a more complete body shot, I think that i better).
Just my two cents JJ, it has nothing to do with the excellent work you do for EGAFD....
I do filmografies for an talian forum, and when I have to examine screenshots and video box covers it becomes often difficult if not near impossible to determine whether a person appearing in a movie is the actress in question. It is a daunting task for IAFD, EGFD and other databases to be as accurate as they can when they list a movie title to their filmos.
IAFD only posts one head shot, sometimes it is an old and not very clear headshot, and sometimes it is recent. They do not usually go back and change it if actress had modified her looks recently. EBI usually gives you a more full body shot but you get only ONE. EGAFD usually gives you a headshot pic in its central page but provides additional pics (of how they looked in a number of movies) on another page, which is great in my view.
The pics posted in EBI are usually of high quality, those posted in IAFD are often good but sometimes crappy, and EGAFD has to content itself to a great extent on screenshots that are average in quality unless some copyright owner is willing to provide pics out of courtesy.
So that's the situation basically.
Even the mainstream IMDB provides one pic of actors/actresses but adds a gallery of other pics which is helpful. I myself prefer more than one pic of actress to give you better perspective (and if it is a more complete body shot, I think that i better).
Just my two cents JJ, it has nothing to do with the excellent work you do for EGAFD....
Re: Picture question
I accept there's no ideal solution- as you say, actresses [and
women gnerally !!] are to a greater or lesser extent protean-
the 'nature of the beast', one might say- I just don't think
that full-body shots are the best compromise.
It's possible for most girls with a reasonable-length filmo to
select a 'generic' shot that conveys a fairly faithful impression
of her facial features- after all, even with radically-altered
ones like Noemie there's only so much damage the knife can
perpetrate.
Again, all databases are obviously dependent on receiving
suitable photographic material in the first place [which is why
I place so much emphasis in my posts on caps....]. I've some
limited experience with getting caps on iafd and they face
different but equally stringent conditions regarding headshots
to egafd. As you know, both the latter and EBI have attempted
to address the 'single-pic' issue by including galleries from
commercial sources. I think egafd's approach is right but
would query some of the shot-selections, that's all.
Iafd lacks many headshots [especially in the classic category]
AFAICT because of an apparent past insistence on 'stills'- some
mods however [Walter for example] have added 'action' shots
of suitable quality, on the [excellent] principle that anything's
better than nothing.
women gnerally !!] are to a greater or lesser extent protean-
the 'nature of the beast', one might say- I just don't think
that full-body shots are the best compromise.
It's possible for most girls with a reasonable-length filmo to
select a 'generic' shot that conveys a fairly faithful impression
of her facial features- after all, even with radically-altered
ones like Noemie there's only so much damage the knife can
perpetrate.
Again, all databases are obviously dependent on receiving
suitable photographic material in the first place [which is why
I place so much emphasis in my posts on caps....]. I've some
limited experience with getting caps on iafd and they face
different but equally stringent conditions regarding headshots
to egafd. As you know, both the latter and EBI have attempted
to address the 'single-pic' issue by including galleries from
commercial sources. I think egafd's approach is right but
would query some of the shot-selections, that's all.
Iafd lacks many headshots [especially in the classic category]
AFAICT because of an apparent past insistence on 'stills'- some
mods however [Walter for example] have added 'action' shots
of suitable quality, on the [excellent] principle that anything's
better than nothing.
"a harmless drudge, that busies himself in tracing the original, and detailing the
signification...."
signification...."
Re: Picture question
EGAFD, IAFD and EBI have evolved over time, and what may be the rule today, in 6 months or a year things might change.
Until not too long ago, IMBD was not listing information on films made prior to 1989, and there were no pics of female or male porn performers. IAFD will put up either glamour pics they find or people sumbit (and I assume that to a large extent they not not have proper releases from the copyright owners, although they do give a shout out to the supposed copyright owner when the are aware), and from time to time screencaps when nothing else may be avaiable.
In addition and until recently, IAFD was not listing any hc movies not released inthe USA. Now they do.
When EGAFD opened, there were hardly any pics there and would not post screencaps that they did not felt comfortable with (which falls under general fair use guidelines). Then EGAFD started posting many pics of the female performer on a secondary page.
What I really would love to see in any database would be (large and clear)video box covers. Many of the movies released in the 1980's and 1990's have disappeared, and have not been transferred/released on DVD and may be forever gone. A handful of these movies have received some DVD release (supposedly remastered digital versions) but with different art work, and sometimes with artwork that has nothing to do with the movie.
I know EBI and IAfD now list and provide links of other sites where pics of these stars may be found, but there are already other companies that provide much of this useful information (Freeones.com being a major example). The EBI external links are often not specific page links but general site links and finding material on a given specific performer is difficult and frustrating to navigate through.
I think it is valuable to voice our opinions about what we would like in these databases, but the administrators do not necessarily see our point of view, and perhaps sometimes it is technically difficult, costly and impossible. We just have to be patient and work our way through these problems where everybody benefits.
If mods/administrators from EBI, EGAFD and IAFD are reading these messages perhaps they can chime in and give us their view on this.
Until not too long ago, IMBD was not listing information on films made prior to 1989, and there were no pics of female or male porn performers. IAFD will put up either glamour pics they find or people sumbit (and I assume that to a large extent they not not have proper releases from the copyright owners, although they do give a shout out to the supposed copyright owner when the are aware), and from time to time screencaps when nothing else may be avaiable.
In addition and until recently, IAFD was not listing any hc movies not released inthe USA. Now they do.
When EGAFD opened, there were hardly any pics there and would not post screencaps that they did not felt comfortable with (which falls under general fair use guidelines). Then EGAFD started posting many pics of the female performer on a secondary page.
What I really would love to see in any database would be (large and clear)video box covers. Many of the movies released in the 1980's and 1990's have disappeared, and have not been transferred/released on DVD and may be forever gone. A handful of these movies have received some DVD release (supposedly remastered digital versions) but with different art work, and sometimes with artwork that has nothing to do with the movie.
I know EBI and IAfD now list and provide links of other sites where pics of these stars may be found, but there are already other companies that provide much of this useful information (Freeones.com being a major example). The EBI external links are often not specific page links but general site links and finding material on a given specific performer is difficult and frustrating to navigate through.
I think it is valuable to voice our opinions about what we would like in these databases, but the administrators do not necessarily see our point of view, and perhaps sometimes it is technically difficult, costly and impossible. We just have to be patient and work our way through these problems where everybody benefits.
If mods/administrators from EBI, EGAFD and IAFD are reading these messages perhaps they can chime in and give us their view on this.
-
EGAFD Admin
- Posts: 277
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Picture question
jj, Len801 - thank you.
Re. full-body shots - Yes, this format has been preeminent in recent months for images added courtesy of Private and 21Sextury. Truth be told, they've been collected almost as a side product of the addition of Private titles to the database, as well as a concerted push to fill in what was a large number of missing images for 21Sextury performers. In both instances the pictures used were somewhat self selecting in that we had permission to use them from the studios and knew the model attributions to be correct. This saved us an awful lot time scouring the cyber void for images we may not have been able to use in any case. Also, where they displaced an existing default image, the graphic quality was generally felt to be higher.
jj, you raise a valid point regarding the use of full-body images - after all, the primary purpose of the pictures is to facilitate model identification - and we duly take note of it (It's also worth noting as it may be contingent to future enhancements of the database). However, we would point out that images routinely added for non-Private/21Sextury models/titles, as well as more recent gallery images for Private performers (i.e. not the default image), are pretty much what they've always been: screen cap close-ups and half-body shots.
Len801, of course we also agree that in some instances the full female form is the most reliable guide to a models identity and we will bear this in mind as we bring the (Norman) wisdom of solomon to bear upon this conundrum.
As regards IAFD and EBI, they are fantastic resources which by and large complement EGAFD rather than compete with it. No doubt all three sites could benefit from adopting some aspects of each other. However, that would likely only lead to increasing areas of overlap which isn't necessarily the most effective expenditure of resources. Especially when the dog only gets taken for a walk once a week as it is. !doggy!
Re. full-body shots - Yes, this format has been preeminent in recent months for images added courtesy of Private and 21Sextury. Truth be told, they've been collected almost as a side product of the addition of Private titles to the database, as well as a concerted push to fill in what was a large number of missing images for 21Sextury performers. In both instances the pictures used were somewhat self selecting in that we had permission to use them from the studios and knew the model attributions to be correct. This saved us an awful lot time scouring the cyber void for images we may not have been able to use in any case. Also, where they displaced an existing default image, the graphic quality was generally felt to be higher.
jj, you raise a valid point regarding the use of full-body images - after all, the primary purpose of the pictures is to facilitate model identification - and we duly take note of it (It's also worth noting as it may be contingent to future enhancements of the database). However, we would point out that images routinely added for non-Private/21Sextury models/titles, as well as more recent gallery images for Private performers (i.e. not the default image), are pretty much what they've always been: screen cap close-ups and half-body shots.
Len801, of course we also agree that in some instances the full female form is the most reliable guide to a models identity and we will bear this in mind as we bring the (Norman) wisdom of solomon to bear upon this conundrum.
As regards IAFD and EBI, they are fantastic resources which by and large complement EGAFD rather than compete with it. No doubt all three sites could benefit from adopting some aspects of each other. However, that would likely only lead to increasing areas of overlap which isn't necessarily the most effective expenditure of resources. Especially when the dog only gets taken for a walk once a week as it is. !doggy!
Re: Picture question
Yes, I had noticed that it was mainly P/21s appearees [is that
a word? I suspect not...but you know what I mean] that this
affected. So it's more a case of faut de mieux, then, rather
than a policy-change....
Hopefuly we'll get some more pics of those girls as these
titles get written-up.
My dog has been trained to use the exercise-bike; and next-door's
garden for, ahem, other needs : -))
a word? I suspect not...but you know what I mean] that this
affected. So it's more a case of faut de mieux, then, rather
than a policy-change....
Hopefuly we'll get some more pics of those girls as these
titles get written-up.
My dog has been trained to use the exercise-bike; and next-door's
garden for, ahem, other needs : -))
"a harmless drudge, that busies himself in tracing the original, and detailing the
signification...."
signification...."
Re: Picture question
"In addition and until recently, IAFD was not listing any hc
movies not released inthe USA. Now they do."
An interesting point- when that started I wasn't sure where [or
how far] they were going to go with it.... the 'US-available only'
stricture had the ring of practical utility about it but I think
there may have been an aspiration among some mods for iafd
to be truly international, whatever the enormous difficulties
involved. Our mod's point above about unnecessary duplication
is well-made, taken in this context..... of course I myself have
banged the drum for 'necessary duplication', for example with
the many Hustler series populated almost exclusively by Euro
girls and filmed over here, despite being released by a nominally
US outfit- although in this case a further justification is
thankfully provided by several of them having been re-released
on Euro labels ['White Hot Nurses', for example].
movies not released inthe USA. Now they do."
An interesting point- when that started I wasn't sure where [or
how far] they were going to go with it.... the 'US-available only'
stricture had the ring of practical utility about it but I think
there may have been an aspiration among some mods for iafd
to be truly international, whatever the enormous difficulties
involved. Our mod's point above about unnecessary duplication
is well-made, taken in this context..... of course I myself have
banged the drum for 'necessary duplication', for example with
the many Hustler series populated almost exclusively by Euro
girls and filmed over here, despite being released by a nominally
US outfit- although in this case a further justification is
thankfully provided by several of them having been re-released
on Euro labels ['White Hot Nurses', for example].
"a harmless drudge, that busies himself in tracing the original, and detailing the
signification...."
signification...."