Hypothetical Question - "Plan on being a director?"

[Guest deeply]

Thought about this years ago, but probably it will get in way of many other things planned for life's activities. It would be more of a hobby to do if there's any spare time, afterwards.

Given no real limit on a budget, think REALISTICALLY what kind of content would be directed. This is a hypothetical question, so it's going to be to each and every individual users' preference, and they can post how, where, when, who, what, etc. here.

This is a rating system that was made in 2006. Note, in 2006, vocabulary and ideas were not as advanced.

"Rating System"

This is a highly advanced rating system which all content, no matter what shape or form, fits under. This exclusive way to measure how well any content is here to put things in a certain perspective, and to give an idea of what is hot and what is not. This can apply to any media type, even merchandise, along with a common mobile phone.

So, firstly we need to take example item A, which will be the content example's name from now on. A is a set in the motion-clip file type.

Now A is the finished product of a specific process B. The rating will be measured by a certain score. This may be changed, as I might find I have to redesign this system of measurement. B will be part of what is assessed that makes up to the final total.

So I will start with how the content is made and developed: B. We have:

-Initial Concept
-Direction
-Production
-Acting
-Choice of Product
-Equipment
-Ways of Shooting
-Who
-What
-Trends, if any
-Technical information

Initial Concept is what is being proposed. For example, as we know in today's society, everyone that's selling something, even not for any prospective gain, blags whatever they're offering. Bias is used with the most repetitive motion, and so even is propaganda in some cases. This is a good thing in initial design, intentional or otherwise, it gives a perspective to the content. This may give appropriate insight, but as with most cases, is never 100% accurate. So we may decide:

-is what is being proposed a real picture of what is being given?
-does it fit with anything that is affiliated to the content, such as what is expected, even if stereotypical aspects take place?
-is the product initially well presented, without any over-indulgence?
-is it a good idea; one that works and is working, or a new creative concept?

OK, Initial Concept is barely important, as this scoring poorly is usually down to being unprofessional in business. Really this is only for the big players online, such as megasites, conglomerates and even the older websites.

Direction can mean in what way the content is going. In the best of cases content needs no improvement that would make a significant difference. However, this can also mean how has it been directed, obviously. This can be non-existent, as with many gonzo pieces, but usually there is a plan of what will be done at certain points, and how these things will be done. Improvised content rarely appears on the professional market, usually tending to be poorly made, and amateurish. But this content can be attractive depending on relative perspectives, as the amateur industry is a big market in itself. General points to consider:

-what is the most significant point of the content?
-is the director in full control?
-is the director's style appropriate?
-is there any over-obvious direction, that interferes with the content?
-is the director lenient with the actors? If so does this spoil the content?
-can you see the similarities between pieces that have been directed by the same participants? And if so, is this a good thing?
-is there any misdirection?

Production is really what has exactly been made. We've got to look at all sorts of points with this. When it comes to most websites, having a unique style, or even a style which sets them into a specific group is paramount to trying to find an audience.

This is a prologue reference, to give as a small example of a rating system.

But, this is a little off tangent... as this is WHAT others have made, being rated, not what COULD be made by potentially, future directors that seek optimum ratings.

Will post an answer in a separate post.

[Guest deeply]

Camera: H.D. Hand-held, not a steady-cam (seem too indulgent, can cost up to $50,000... any giant tripod monstrosities are a no no).

Query: what type preferred? Unsure, but like Panasonic and Canon's latest top-spec models.

Budget? For equipment, up to $50,000 for everything. No green screens, no advanced editing. No high-end licenses. No copyright claims. This is raw, "who gives a fuck about profit?," content. Will spend suitable money on lighting, as natural sunlight and working outdoors is not as compatible for recording equipment. Ambient sounds, shadows, light source... too variable and unreliable. Definitely would consider buying decent sound recording equipment, if it highly enhanced audio, to a satisfying level. Money on props and sets would be a no no... have a blank canvas to work on, minimalist. Would look for maximum utilization without expenditure for needed resources: gloves, lubes, objects, machines, electricity and any other resources for activity within content, would be outside of budget, as they are already available.

Booking actresses and models would be a taxing pursuit, so probably looking to befriend and have girls provide freely their services. This is possible: do not doubt resources. If booking specific actresses, then would use any resources to get others to provide their fees. Thinking about a site similar to when they have their surgical enhancements funded by others, others would pay their fees to see them in content.

Any potentials that are going in content, would have to be schooled and do their research, as this would be as accommodating as possible to a rehearsal. Filming on location would be over a period of weeks, not days. Time, work and effort would be done, to ensure an optimum rated product. Content could last many hours, even days. After finishing, any girls that had worked, wouldn't need to necessarily be called back to work again.

Content would be made to retain as much as possible, quality. Edit would be kept to a minimum: if even made. Content would be screen-tested and first, shared with peers with similar interests. Then it would be shared publicly, FOR FREE (any profiteers in this Industry should be forced out of competition).

File size? Per model, dependable on collective performances, but looking at highest definition possible, highest bit rate possible, best quality audio... so per hour, maybe up to 20 gigabytes uncompressed.

Due to large file sizes, would probably out-source uploads.

Content? No make up, no hair extensions, no fake expressions, staged reactions, fake orgasms... everything real, and as natural as possible. No airbrushing.

Each model would have to meet minimum requirements. Once minimum requirements had been met, effectively their contract would be over, and they would no longer be needed for future performances.

A standard, for minimum requirements would be:

-Follow invisible direction (direction off-screen, off-audio, even previous to part of content on display).
-Do not quit mid-scene.
-If there's even a slightest possibility of changing mind, do NOT even bother turning up to location.

Content in terms of preference, would obviously suit. No compromises. Not going to bother producing and directing content, for it to not meet standards. Edited May 3, 2010 by deeply