NY Times: Pornography and HDTV don't mix

Seems like the NYT has a beat writer for the porn film business.

 

Reading the article, you get the impression that the male porn stars like HDTV
Apparently, their penises appear bigger than with simple video or old-timey film.
The men, I gather, like this.

I'm going to go back and read the article again.

 

This thread/NY Times story is useless without downloadable videos.

 

Shit, they should. I saw on CNN that the porn business brings in more money than the NFL, NBA and MLB combined (could be world-wide, I'm not sure).

It's an economic beast.

("Um, honey, AEBN is Netflix. Yeah, that's what it shows up as on the credit card statement. Absolutely.")

 

The article was actually pretty interesting.
Sony doesn't allow porn to be produced, so it means no porn on Blu-Ray. Good quote from a porn executive that said it was a bad idea. How porn was the driving force behind technology changes.

 

I'm sure that there is a smaller Sony-owned company that will be more than happy to take the Pron money to make the copies on Blu-Ray. It's kind of like Disney. Disney won't put nudity in its flicks but a subsidiary will.

 

You mean the glory and splendor that was Miramax in the '90s?

 

Actually, I think Touchstone (in the 80s) was the original Disney subsidiary to make films aimed more at adults. As I recall, "Splash" with Tom Hanks and Darryl Hannah was the first Touchstone movie. Saw it in '84 at some movie house on Main Street and Northern Blvd in Flushing when I lived there for my first job out of college.

 

Wasn't porn scarce on Beta - and later Laserdisc - as opposed to VHS? The Blu-Ray people should take note.

 

So what you are implying is that if the Blu-Ray people want their format to take off, they better make porn available in it? Otherwise, the format will fail?

Sound logical to me.