PDA

View Full Version : Should I add video file sharing?



Admin
10-13-05, 18:56
Greetings everyone,

Lately I've been receiving a number of requests to allow members to upload and subsequently download video files. Not surprisingly, the possibility of viewing videos of the women has a popular appeal. Consequently, I've been investigating the various options and have arrived at one concrete conclusion: Video clips use a lot of bandwidth, and bandwidth isn't free.

Some of the options are:

1. Start an account on a "free" video sharing website. This has numerous drawbacks, including the banners on the "free" websites, the fact that the hosting website would own the limited copyright, and that many of these "free" services do not permit adult content, and those that do charge for access to their adult area.

2. Add video file sharing to the current Forum on the current server. From a programming perspective, this would be easy enough to do, but given the current server load and bandwidth usage (2000 gig/month), I am sure that this feature would quickly overwhelm the hardware.

3. Add video file sharing to the current forum, but put the videos on a separate server. This would separate the traffic load, but it would entail additional costs of another server and another monthly server admin consultant.

Now, it's possible that I've missed an alternate solution, so if any of you have any additional ideas, I'd be pleased to hear them.

Anyway, here's my plan: I will setup a separate server and related software to handle a video-file sharing feature. Video file contributors would of course be provided free access, and viewing-only members would pay a small annual fee in the area of approximately $10.00 - $15.00 to access the video files.

So the question is: Would you be willing to support such a feature?

Thanks,

Jackson

Daddy Lows
10-14-05, 06:46
While I agree with many others that offering videos would be nice, I think that pictures and posts are enough of a visual clue for what I thought Jackson's mission statement for this site was: the facilitation of sex (free and/or paid) between men and women. To offer video posting would further clog up the ease of navigating this site anyways. That said, there's nothing wrong with providing links as long as they don't violate Jackson's TOS regarding promotions of paysites and generalized spamminess.

Peace

Blacklisted
10-14-05, 08:18
They are so much better than the vidcaps, and really make you feel more like being there. I know of the reason for the site's being, however, many also use the site to reminisce about past (glorious) experiences which is one of the attractions of coming here, as well as scout for future possibilities.

I say, bring on the girls, let's keep the machine rolling forward!


Also, why not chuck a few banner ads up? No-one looks at them anyway, and they make money which could be used to subsidise further expansive activities.

Good luck with whatever you decide Jackson, you know what your doing!

Surfer
10-15-05, 00:00
The Belguel debacle is only the tip of the iceberg. Adding videos will attract even more guys looking for porn ("not that there is anything wrong with that" to quote Seinfeld). That will also attract more attention from NGO and overzealous US attorneys (or local DAs). Please do not complete the conversion of WSG from a TEXT based source of INFORMATION into just another porn site (of which there are PLENTY!)

Marconista
10-15-05, 00:22
Hi Jackson!

My view on this is that most contributors will post bad/poor quality videos (as most amateur do on the www), hence I would not care to view them.

I would not pay for such a feature.

Tadpole
10-15-05, 09:14
Hi Jackson!

My view on this is that most contributors will post bad/poor quality videos (as most amateur do on the www), hence I would not care to view them.

I would not pay for such a feature.Amature video is hopelsss. It'll consist of grainy, low contrast, low resolution, out of focus shots that are either taken from a distance (unmanned camera), or taken by the 'customer' and hopelessly wandering during the action.

A waste of bandwidth.

Mugroso
10-15-05, 15:47
So long as the videos remain committed to true working girls it is a great idea. As far as quality goes, I suggest this. Review the video for quality and size. Poor quality video should be rejected and only the best should be kept.

Just as I contribute pic of the ladies on my website I would contribute video when I expand into this area. The Ladies of Juarez just love the exposure I give them. "More Gringos, more gringos", they say.

Cyberspace
10-15-05, 16:38
If you've determined that you can afford the incredibly excessive bandwidth needed for decent video, I'd suggest you might get better bang for for buck by relaxing the size limitations on uploaded images. Apparently you already have a tariff planned where only paying and senior members can view images in their current limited format. Why not allow uploading of better quality images and make the pay option more intriguing for the viewing members. Increasing the pixel limit to 1024 from the current 648 would be a significant enhancement and it would probably cost a lot less bandwidth to boot.

Hi Cyberspace,

You make a good point. The reason that I've limited the image file size is specifically because of bandwidth considerations. Of course, if I go in the direction of buying another server specifically for videos, I can also consider using it for the images too.

Anyway, please realize that I CAN NOT "afford the incredibly excessive bandwidth needed for decent video". That's why it's only going to happen if I believe that subscriptions will support it.

Thanks,

Jackson

Guido88
10-15-05, 23:46
Most mongers traveling do not have the appropriate equipment or lighting to produce decent quality video. Even the photo sections are not overrun with well-shot photos. It’s not easy for the average Joe to shoot decent material.

There is plenty of smut on the net already. Video may not be worth the cost or potential related problems. The hi-res photo idea by Cyberspace sounds good.

IMHO the strength of WSG is the wealth of info on mongering locations. My vote is to continue with what we do best which is providing great info for worldwide enjoyment.

Monger on

Guido88

Asian Rain
10-16-05, 04:00
Jackson,

It is great to see you thinking of more innovative services under the ISG brand. ISG needs to keep fresh ideas.

For video sharing, I agree with other observations that video distribution might not mix well with the core function of ISG to facilitate information sharing amongst mongers. Even if members could provide better quality material, I am not sure that you would be able to cover the USC2257 legal requirements from distributing video.

To offer a benchmark, as an experiment I shared a heavily edited clip (just 2.5 minutes of a 20 minute original) of one of my vids in the China section a couple months ago. I used the Megaupload.com free service to share the video, disguising the adult nature of the video content (using an innocently-labeled password-protected file) as adult content is prohibited. To my surprise, after almost 1000 downloads the file is still there.

From a commercial perspective, I don't know if there would be a strong demand for sharing amatuer material. Although I believe that the quality of my amatuer video is fairly good - I am planning to commercialize my collection someday - I tend to think that leechers are the overwhelming consumer for porn. They just want something - anything - for free. As an ISG service, the cost would be 25 gig of bandwidth to distribute 1000 downloads of a modest VCD quality 2.5 minute video clip. Centralizing such a service would be rather costly, especially if the videos were long.

Not knowing the quantity or quality of material that members would be able to provide, it might be worth seeing what they could provide. This idea is probably worth pursuing, but I would prefer the service to be kept separate from the core ISG information-sharing service.

Members are invited to check out the video I shared previously to benchmark... would the 40+ members who voted "I will share" provide similar material?

Enjoy, AR+

Admin
10-16-05, 06:56
Greetings Everyone,

Let me interject a couple of points here.

1. It's a competitive world out there. I need to improve all the time if I want to stay in the forefront of sport fucking websites. My competitors have either added videos to their features, or they surely will in the future. The only issue is when.

2. Photos & Videos can generate revenue which can support the information exchange activity. I understand that many active members who actually travel have a reduced interest in viewing images of naked women when most of us see real naked women every day. However, there are a lot of forum visitors who live vicariously through the forum, incuding the photos. Videos would appeal to this group.

3. What I'm trying to gauge here is wether there is enough interest at this time to populate a video library, and wether there's enough interest to financially support the operation.

Thanks,

Jackson

Eaglestar
10-16-05, 18:51
Seems to me this is a little off base. I am not here to watch someone having sex. Just to share ideas about how to get laid, P4p or freebie.

On the other hand if others want it and are willing to pay the added cost without the rest of use having to contribute then more power to them (and to you Jackson).

Prtyr2
10-17-05, 00:17
There are services that allow you to post streaming video on their streaming servers and bandwith has come down considerably in recent years. 25 gig bandwith per month is $50 USD worst case. Using much larger amounts of bandwith drives the price down.

I think you should concentrate on quality rather than quantity. Not allowing anyone to UL videos, but have videos sent via FTP and screened. Then you can post only videos that are of good quality or will add to the experience of these boards.

One point that others failed to realize is, although from a technical aspect the videos may be lacking and others have pointed out there is a wealth of "amateur porn" out there, I don't think the videos here would be trying to accomplish the same thing. There is something to be aid for being able to possibly contact the "star performer" which is not typical of amateur porn.

A short and sexy video of "jane doe" from Help in Rio, even if not pornographic will most likely viewed a decent amount. Heck I would be more interested in non graphic videos showing quality of women, or hotels and sightseeing etc.

Logos
10-17-05, 00:45
Good point from Prtyr2.

Seeing a pair of moving titties on website surely has entertaining value, but in the end it's perishable goods. I'm a relative newbie here but a veteran of other forums. And I'd hate to turn such a valuable website into another one of those numerous sex pics & movies board, even if the content's more original, unless a good selection's been screened. Basically I'm interested in the real thing, not into crude voyeurism. Why favour the prospect of spending hours watching videos over actual fucking sessions ?

If you consider WSGforum's mission statement as something like "enlighten and inform about what's going on out there, where to find it and at what cost", the graphic info I'd appreciate as much as a BBBJ close-up would relate to hard to find locations, hotels, things to avoid, mugs of crooks & starfish, etc.

Bimbo Boy
10-18-05, 00:58
Hey Jackson,

I question the idea of trying to compete with other porn sites by adding video.

I am NOT interested in viewing porn. I like your forum because it is an exchange area for the mongering community. This is what makes it unique.

I am afraid that if you add video and you try to become like all the other porn sites, then this forum might lose its unique appeal and go to a slow death.

Rule #1 of marketing is : DIFFERENTIATE !

Kind regards.

Hi Bimbo Boy,

I'm not trying to "compete with other porn sites". I'm trying to compete with other sex travel forums, several of whom have already added video upload capabilities.

Thanks,

Jackson

Turbo Pascal
10-18-05, 08:49
It is a good idea to allow members to upload and subsequently download video files. IMHO, the possibility of viewing videos of the women has a popular appeal in many countries.

Your plan is very good. Setup a separate server and related software to handle a video-file sharing feature. Only video file contributors of the forum should be provided free access, and viewing-only members would pay a small annual fee access the video files.

Nowadays, many men have cellphones with video taking properties. At first, most contributors will post bad/poor quality videos. But technology is changing very fast. IMHO, after a few months, the quality of videos will be improve and many members will support this feature.

I think there is enough interest to populate a video library, and there will be enough interest to financially support the operation in following months.

California Guy
10-18-05, 09:24
After checking out some of the girls in the photo links people have I would have to say no :) sorry but some of these girls shouldnt be on film! Plus your site will be super slow.

Routard
10-18-05, 11:47
It reminds me the Belguel discussions:

- For most senior members, the forum's purpose is only for exchange of genuine information for the international mongering community. They don't need pics and worse videos as they prefer the forum to be discrete.
- On the mean time, the poll shows exactly the opposite opinions of the reports. Yes, the vast majority of members, not to mention non members, never contribute. They silently read reports and watch pics. I have nothing against it, unless they are not even mongerers.

I previously gave my opinion about pics. I have posted myself pics, but only for informative purpose added to a comprehensive report. I am against exposing worldwide pics of girls in sexual or degrading positions without their consent. It's not only a matter of security for the girls (and also for the mongerer: watch Belguel), but a matter of respect for humanity.

Video will make things worse. It will attract all kind of perverts and anti sex perverts that have nothing to do on this board. As the technical issues will need to be paid by additional fees, banners and pop ups, our beloved and unique forum will become a simple porn site like many others.

Fcrosby
10-18-05, 17:14
Funny how most of the opinions here are against, while the poll is leaning in favour!

Personally, I have to agree with the majority of posters. I rate this resource very highly, and there's plenty of video out there for those who want it.

Perhaps it would be more practical to facilitate some sort of bittorrent based sharing? Then the video heads would be able to satisfy each other.

Don't get me wrong, I love some good filthy porn as much as the next man, but it doesn't beat the real thing!

Yusta Vansel
10-19-05, 10:12
I voted for "Yes, and I would plan to contribute my own videos". The purpose of this Forum is to facilitate the exchange of information between men who are looking for sex with women. IMHO, the information in reports must contain many details about the women including physical details, price, attitude, etc. Photos and videos are also good indicators about selection of women.

WSG is the Internet's largest sex travel forum up to now. It is a fact that some sex travel forums have already added video upload capabilities in order to attract even more men to their forums. You emphazise that "I need to improve all the time if I want to stay in the forefront of sport other websites". It's true. By this way, this forum always be best sex travel forum in Internet.

Thanks

James D 2004
10-19-05, 18:55
1st of all, this is my video contribution some time ago:
http://www.internationalsexguide.info/forum/showpost.php?p=365879&postcount=14
and this famous video:
http://www.angelfire.com/film/jamesd82/ **deleted by hosting company
i know what i'm doing, what i'm talking about.

everything need vision. you cannot wait until video sharing become a necessity and then add it. probably too late. unless you can brought up your competition. you have to get in early and then you are well established when the time comes. i have hundreds of hours of footage that i wanted to publish. if jackson will kindly tell me which of his competition allows video upload i will switch in no time. you may not care much about me but video phone will be hot this christmas, if not the next. who doesn't have a camera phone now? and if you browse ebay, there are very cheap very tiny wireless cameras.

bandwidth: i don't think jackson will sacrifice the present server performance to add the video hosting experiment. so most arguments are irrelevant. here i would serious consider bittorrent as a means of distribution. actually it doesn't cost any bandwidth as it's peer to peer. isg just provide help in listing the videos and indexing the videos (trackers). but if i'm ok with revealing my ip i would have started a video club myself. but i don't mind to reveal my ip if i'm downloading. so ideally we still upload all vids to isg, but downloading using bittorrent saves a lot of bandwidth.

the motivation for users? bittorrent at one time accounts for 1/3 of the total internet traffic. i watched the screener version of the movie, often in foreign language, before i decide whether to go to the cinema. even with the crackdown from hollywood, you still enjoy unlimited supply of free japanese av porns, not to mention that people exchange video clips from all the porn sites. so isg doesn't need to attract people to use bittorrent, numerous people who knows a bit about porn movies do, if not, they will. nowadays bittorrent clients are very user friendly. indeed i prefer to load anything above a minute, even with mp4 compression, via bittorrent. i can use it as if it's a download manager and then forget about it and do something else. rather than wait 30 sec or a minute for the normal download to finish.

quality vs other porn sites: that the vid quality is poorer and that there are numerous porn sites. but no worry. the pic gallery is a solid evidence. people watch pictures in isg and pictures in other porn sites with different standard and purpose. the others pictures you can only wank at, while you can get a ticket and call up the girl on the vid, or something similar.

given half the chance, people post their boring home videos. if you allow them, they will think of something to attract people to view them.

content is as important as the technically quality. so if there's something interesting, a little blurry, a little too much or too little exposure doesn't hurt.

while it's easy to make a picture looks a lot better than reality, it's almost impossible to enhance a vid the same way. that's why the vid in escort malls never take off that much. if people see the reality, they probably won't call. pic captures just one angle, vid at least have many slightly different angles and the subject moves.

quality wise, i suggest very much against limiting to low resolution to mpeg1. the mpeg2 standard of 720x480 should be allowed, which is the same for dvd, camcorders. half sized mpeg1 vid has been around for a long time, but i have no interest in watching or contributing to them. too small to watch. actually, i propose to increase the 640 limit on pictures to 720, so most of the pictures from video capture or better camera phones can go straight through without resizing. that's only 1/8 increase but the whole world is about compatible standards. to conserve bandwidth and improve quality, i suggest to ban all mpeg1 and 2 vid, and go straight for mp4. numerous people are using the technology without knowing it, all cable/satellite recorders have it. most quality porn sites. after sharing one or two dvd's, one will learn to recompress using mp4 to save everybody a lot of time, hours or days. if not, he will be very unpopular. tbc

legal: the two hosting sites above will have the same legal problems or lack of it, and they are bigger fish than isg. i don't think there will be problems with materials that people upload.

there is the gun (usa), how you use it is up to you. you can keep it at home just in case or you can go out and kill the 1st person you see. if one tell me that i cannot capture what i see for my memories, i'll will defend my right to do this before the constitution. sooner or later, more people can afford to put a camera in the sun glasses and beam the vid to his ipod. i don't think you can ban the technology. you have to trust the person until he did something immoral or wrong. same as the gun laws in usa.

how to pay for it: i suggest to provide bittorrent as a free service along side whatever vid service you decide. bt could be 1/1000 or 1/100 of the bandwidth so it's virtually free. people will contribute. people like others to watch their home movies but often just too boring to ask. people post pictures. people buy cameras in order to post pictures. people buy better cameras in order to post better pictures. if you build it, they will come.

will people pay to watch the videos? i don't know. but if there are people willing to pay $20 a year for the pictures, i think you can have an inclusive package for vid.

to emphasis my point, will anyone know of any isg like sites that i can upload my vid? pm me and maybe i'll switch tomorrow.

ps, the 2nd vid above was deleted by the hosting company since i posted the link here. there had been 7,000 page views without problem. my experience is that if the vid got too popular, either someone report it to the webmaster, or the high download rate trigger some sort of policing.

Ezinho
10-19-05, 19:32
I think this is a very good idea, to allow video uploads.

Now, there are two arguments that I keep seeing a lot of here. The first argument is that this is a site mainly about sharing info, not watching porn. I agree, but why is everyone assuming that the videos are all going to be hardcore pornography? I'm sure they will be just as diverse as the photo contributions, so while some will be porno oriented, some will probably just be girls by themselves, both dressed and undressed. Don't assume that every submission will be XXX hardcore porn.

The other argument is that the video quality will not be "good enough". But what do you expect from amateur video? And if you do want to watch professionally filmed videos, this is not the site to be on, sites like that on the web are a dime a dozen.

Again, I think this would be a great idea and I would be interested in contributing as well (but not hardcore video!). Only have one question maybe a tech person can answer, how do you convert video from 8mm VHS-C to a computer? Damn my liberal arts education lol!

James D 2004
10-19-05, 22:00
Your problem is already solved if you have a digital camcorder or going to get one. Other than the 1st generation of digital camcorder's, or the latest very compact camcorders, most have a video input. So you just plug the video output from your old camcorder, or you video recorder, to the digital camcorder as if it is a TV. Be sure they are compatible, NTSC or PAL. The digital camcorder will record to DV tape, straight to hard disk, or straight to DVD. Most free editors can load DV tape and convert to avi. Most camcorders come with cheap bundled editors that can convert to mpeg2. DVD is basically mpeg2 and it's trival to get back the mp2 file.

By the way, I made a mistake of dubing my VHS-C tapes to ordinary VHS tape to save money. And that I didn't fix my old camcorder and keep it. Even though the signal is the same, NTSC or PAL, but the bandwidth is visibly different. I should have keep the original VHS-C tapes and the camcorder. Ordinary VHS recorder play the VHS-C tapes with an adaptor, but the bandwidth is that of the recorder, which is visably poorer when play straight from the camcorder.

There lots of other options, a video card with vid input, or a separate capture box, or a USB cable cable with an adaptor for the video input. But I wouldn't bother any of these unless you original video is very poor and need enhancement, or very professional that you don't want to lose anything from the conversion. And you can always send the tape to some conversion service and come back with DVD.

Indrid Cold
10-21-05, 19:52
I think, the forum does not need such a video-upload-function, because there are a lot of upload-sites to upload huge video-files:

http://www.yousendit.com/ (is online one week)
http://rapidshare.de/ (It is a pity, because they have now a limit [50 Mega bytes], weeks ago, they had not such a small limit for the files. Are there no downloads for 30 days, the file will be deleted)
http://www.putfile.com/ (limit: 25 Mega bytes)
http://www.megaupload.com/ (Maximum 250 Mega bytes)

In the most cases, there won't be problems, if someone upload there a erotic-, sex- or porn-video.

Sorry for my bad English, I can not speak English perfect.

Daddy Lows
10-22-05, 07:15
Jackson,

On a slightly different angle, will you be weighing-in the (seeming majority) consensus of the senior members here a little more than the regular members? The reason being that for most of the seniors and those regulars who are serious, their use of the site is for planned trips to "exotic" locales. Using field reports and some decent photos is the general modus operandi. If some industrious member wants to showcase his exploits in real-time frames-per-second, then like many previous posters before written, let them post a link to their video on some share-a-care video site. Nothing wrong with that?

SIDENOTE: Jackson, is there a way to breakdown the polls better (i.e. show seniors' votes and regular members' votes percentage-wise?)???? Also, do the viewing members have the ability to vote as well? I'm curious as how the voting has become so lopsided.

Peace

Bullet
10-22-05, 10:55
Jackson,

Stick to the knitting-the site is great for mongers to share information on our activities. There are plenty of other sites which allow for upload/download of video file sharing.

Cheers,

Bullet

Blondofil
10-22-05, 12:36
I am against video file sharing because:

- It uses a lot of space and bandwith, which will cause the server to become slower.

- The wsg forum will become a plain porno site, which again will remove the focus from the monger to monger information.

- All kinds of freak might try to upload some questionable or illegal material.

- You might face a law suit, when some idiot publishes a video which actually is copyrighted material.

- It might just be plain boring to watch the adventures of the great macho mikes adventures in Thailand.

- Video file sharing will be an economic expense, for the ISG-forum site and it might be converted to a pure pay site, which could result in less reports.

James D 2004
10-22-05, 16:55
i think, the forum does not need such a video-upload-function, because there are a lot of upload-sites to upload huge video-files:

http://www.yousendit.com/ (is online one week)
http://rapidshare.de/ (it is a pity, because they have now a limit [50 mega bytes], weeks ago, they had not such a small limit for the files. are there no downloads for 30 days, the file will be deleted)
http://www.putfile.com/ (limit: 25 mega bytes)
http://www.megaupload.com/ (maximum 250 mega bytes)


yousentit is basically an email service for hugh files. 7 downloads and the file is history.

putfile allows small file and clean content, useless.

megaupload looked ok, but the upload and download speed is terrible, common to most services. the speed varies, but the upload speed is often at 50 kb/s, which insults my high speed cable connection.

rapidshare is the one i used a few threads down. i think it used to be only 30 mb per file. no account setup and no total limit. decent speed. file deletes after 1 month with no download. 50 mb is less than 1 min of dvd and several mins of mp4, not enough for a bbbjcim.

Need Some
10-23-05, 11:16
i vote no. this is a great discussion forum that facilitates peer to peer discussion. i'm worried about the legal ramification, especially regarding copyrighted materials that would surely be introduced. a lot of people would jump on an excuse to shut this forum down and posting copyrighted videos could make it easy for them.

James D 2004
10-23-05, 18:20
You vote on the poll, not by repeating the same arguements on the message board.

The most important question is whether somebody will be willing to pay for the service. Or even pay to share his vid. This is elementary business sense. Jackson isn't thinking about diverting his resources, to slow down the forum in order to add vid, it wouldn't work anyway. He's making of the well earned name of WSG, and now ISG to expand his empire, which would at least break even, or even derive income from it. So ISG would even benefit from it with more money to burn. A restaurant owner would surely open a starbucks and an ice cream palour next door if he knows he will get enough return. BTW, a gym or a masssge for that matter.

Some say there are many vid upload services but I say they are not relevant. Therefore it's a good time to enter the market to become dominant. Like pic hosting. There really is a lot of hosting company but why not have your own if it pays for itself? And the integrated service is better.

As to the legal issue, Jackson is familiar with it. There really are a lot of upload services. They are not closing anytime, aren't they?

Actually bittorent skips both the bandwidth issue and many of the legal issues. They are doing it already here by posting zipped torrent files and the response is quite popular. No bandwidth, no cost, the vid are in private personal computers. On the other hand, you geting nothing from it. But by providing more service, like hosting the vids, and allow streaming or faster download, you can charge for it and you own more server bandwidth, more traffic of your own, and maybe more money. That's how the world goes around.

Webcams
10-28-05, 05:11
Unless you have a huge member base that is PAYING, it will suck your bandwith so fast you won't know what hit you, worse off unless you are hosted by a company that allows adult content, it will cause problems host's like to take your money until you suck up to many resources then they send you packing or shut the whole site down till you pay overages, Video doesn't pay unless you have alot of Paying members. And everyone says they will pay, but truth be told until there credit card is securely entered and charged don't belive it.

My thoughts anyways.

Webcams
Adult Webmaster for over ten years.

Alinn
10-31-05, 12:34
I think this is a very good idea, to allow video uploads.

Now, there are two arguments that I keep seeing a lot of here. The first argument is that this is a site mainly about sharing info, not watching porn. I agree, but why is everyone assuming that the videos are all going to be hardcore pornography? I'm sure they will be just as diverse as the photo contributions, so while some will be porno oriented, some will probably just be girls by themselves, both dressed and undressed. Don't assume that every submission will be XXX hardcore porn.

The other argument is that the video quality will not be "good enough". But what do you expect from amateur video? And if you do want to watch professionally filmed videos, this is not the site to be on, sites like that on the web are a dime a dozen.

Again, I think this would be a great idea and I would be interested in contributing as well (but not hardcore video!). Only have one question maybe a tech person can answer, how do you convert video from 8mm VHS-C to a computer? Damn my liberal arts education lol!Dude,

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Member #2001
10-31-05, 20:12
Unfortunately I did not get a chance to vote. I would have voted no, have I voted.

The reasons being are that if you want to see porn you can pay for it everywhere on the internet. The second is that if there is going to be video here the site will definitely have to pay for it, meaning you all will definitely have to pay for it. Video here is not necessary, because if anyone really wants to make a video and see it here, they may do so in another form which is free (see sugar baba thread). Also there are a few websites out there the will let you post a vide on there for free and to view there all that is required it to post a link. I seen one with a 250 MB limit, but I can not remember the name of it at the moment. Next if there is to be video here I imagine the cost for accessing would be astronomical, since the owner of this site has requested to making payments for various bills associated with this website. This would limit the number of people that would access to website and limit the number of new memberships here, thus the amount of new reports in every section of the world would be decreased.

On the other had the only benefit I can see is that it would give users a convent way to view armature videos. As for me the prior arguments far out way the later arguments

James D 2004
11-01-05, 04:36
Yes, me again. But unlike somebody like 2001, I have facts to add. The poll is closed at less than 200 voters, so I guess there's something wrong with the idea of polling on this subject. Anyway, here's something new to add, but before that I have to make myself clear.

People kept saying there are sites that allow publishing and sharing of video. But if you actually try them, you will find that they are pretty useless, one way or the other. If you can name the site, I can tell you their problems.

There are porn sites with pictures but ISG also have pictures, and you can pay for it if you want. ISG is just different. The same arguement goes for video. Yes, the bandwidth is a lot higher but may be the attraction is a lot higher and a lot more is willing to pay for it. I'm not saying anyting, because saying anything is guess work, even if you are an experienced adult webmaster. Because only the top sites have top quality material and top quality distribution charging top dollars. Anybody else is nothing is this competitive industry, any boy dreams to be a webmaster earning high dollars and any girl dreams that everybody will want to see her naked. The fact is, that's only in their dreams.

As for the sugar baba case, ISG can help will few extra resources. Just open some video threads like picture threads. At least allow the upload of torrent files, without having to hide the extension first by zipping it. BTW I'm not sure if sugar baba knows that he told everybody where he lives, and everybody who download the file told everybody else where they lives. Outsiders have pretty good idea where the neighborhood is, and insiders know exactly where the house/flat/person is.

There is a new service, at least the free part is new, for hosting torrent files:
Prodigem (http://www.prodigem.com) You can up load the video file, so you don't need to keep your computer on for others to download, and nobody knows where you live. Limit is 100 MB but if the file is popular, the size doesn't count. Download is standard bittorrent. The upload bandwidth is small, the storage is not huge because not all files are kept long, and download bandwidth is small using bittorrent. The content is anything. So if they can break even or make money, so could ISG. But the problem is that, it doesn't allow adult content.

Albert Punter
11-05-05, 09:45
I do not know too much about the technicalities, so I have no ideas there.

It is a few days that I think about what videos will add to this site, or better said, to what I expect from this site.
Reply is now clear: nothing.

At the moment I am perfectly happy with info threads and pics threads and I believe that they usually provide what we look for, or what is the scope of this site.

As Surfer well pointed out, there is a potential risk of more Belguel type situations, as it appears more difficult to hide faces (including ours) in videos.

James D 2004
11-07-05, 02:37
A picture worth a thousand words, a video is made of thousand pictures. There's no absolute necessity such as HDTV, but it make life more interesting.

Yahoo launched free telephone service via internet, who doesn't have a phone a cell phone? It wanted to catch up with Skype, who now grown very big and still half as cheap if call to phones outside internet.

Microsoft launches live.com, trying to catch up with Yahoo and Google with the free service, advertising revenue.

There's a free video editing program WAX which is rather pleasant to use. Cleaner GUI than those entry level editors, friendly to use but with more advanced function such as keyframing - which is used to blur the face of a person while moving with little effort. Keyframing is used in demo porn in hiding the moving private parts, and real video on TV where the face are blurred. Indeed I can now release a lot of my collections with ease, after the faces are blurred.

Drjoker69
11-07-05, 09:33
Hi,

filefactory.com allows unlimited bandwidth and storage space for free for videohosting. However, they do prohibit "obscene" material but failed to define what was "obscene". I would post stuff that didn't include any nudity. Maybe just videos that showed off the girls and how I picked them up. I think most mongers would regard the how more important than a video log of what was done.

What do you think?

James D 2004
11-08-05, 04:46
Slowest of them all.

Albert Punter
11-17-05, 14:27
Maybe a posible alternative would be to use sexuploader website which hosts "adult content" only material for free, up to 250 MB per file.

Red Alert
11-18-05, 03:16
I think its a great idea. I would definilty contribute. As far as the techincal side, that is a different story. It could be difficult.

Wulfe13
11-26-05, 02:45
I think it would be great if we could share videos but I do believe it may be more of a problem than a blessing if bandwidth becomes an issue.

Cronin
12-03-05, 06:12
Hi Jackson,

I'm betting that you have decided to forego upgrading the site to video, based on the somewhat lackluster response to this poll. I don't have strong feelings either way, so I didn't even vote. I'm not much of a porn video fan anyway, even professional efforts seem pretty insipid to me (IMHO).

To no one's surprise, I think stills are much better at capturing the erotic essense of a beautiful woman (again, IMHO). So let me use this thread to do a little quiet lobbying for increased image resolution.

Let me see if I can enumerate some reasons why this might be a good idea:

1. This would only affect my posts and a few others, since few image posters are pushing your current file size limit. As such, I don't think this would take up significant space on your server or reduce bandwidth (unless there is something about this that I don't understand). Hence, no money invested.

2. The difference between high res and low res images is like day and night. My edited TIFs are breathtaking (sometimes). The little 300k-390k image that goes up on ISG is depressing and underwhelming. For the few that would take advantage of hi res, the quality improvement would be dramatic. Will this be appreciated by the forum members? Oh yeah, no doubt about that.

3. Pay sites tend to offer hi res images. Or at least I assume they do, since I'm not a member of any of them. I assume this is a business decision for them. Who wants to pay for low res images? Competition forces them to upgrade file size.

4. It might lure some of the really great photographers back onto ISG. I just don't see the people that I used to admire around anymore. A good photographer may not want to waste his time posting low res images. It might also increase the interest in posting great images from our new crop of good amateur photogs. Easy to make the case that would improve the quality of this site.

5. There isn't much doubt that the photos here are one of the key attractions and benefits of ISG for most people. In your efforts to continually improve the quality of ISG, isn't it time to bump up the quality of the photos?

For every one of my posts, there is a huge sigh of resignation coming from an apartment somewhere in China. All that hard work for nothing... Out of frustration, I've looked for other hi res sites to post supplemental images to my ISG posts.

There are so many reasons I don't want to do that: Those sites are painfully slow and a rip for cash. It would double the number of images I have to edit and more than double my upload time. THEY AREN'T ISG! I don't want to give my images to another site, I'm a loyal member of THIS community. Not many ISG people are going to go there anyway. Again, a lot of hard work for nothing.

What size would I request? According to my Canon manual, an image at 1536 x 1024 pix with high jpeg quality would net out to about 1.4 MB. According to my Photoshop program, that is a download time of 230s for a 56k modem or 12s for a 1MB/s download.

I really hope you'll give this more than passing thought, I know you've considered it before. Thanks again for a great site.

Cronin

Albert Punter
12-05-05, 19:38
I agree 100% with you when you say that "stills are much better at capturing the erotic essense of a beautiful woman".

Surely this is what we feel watching at you pictures.

James D 2004
12-10-05, 02:02
distribute your high resolution pictures for print and sharing on monitors are different things. a 17 inch monitor takes 1280 pixels without the need to shrink it. any bigger will make it look worse on screen when shrinked to fit the screen. though you can zoom around at the natural resolution. also, the majority of monitors are bundled crabs, if you run any video calibration software you will know. so a low jpg compression rate isn't worth it either.

for todays camera resolution, you have to reduce the resolution to fit in 17 screens. so you are mandated to do some resize work to best present your work, and ensure fastest download. for high speed internet, pictures doesn't take much time to download. the server response is an issue. i will prefer to keep it to within a sec or so.

a 4x6 hard copy looks ok, so the same on screen size is ok. that will very roughly be 640 pixels. to save some work, most videos are 640 and dvd 720, so increasing the pixels to 720 make sense so vid captures can pass straight through.

Rick Hunter
12-20-05, 08:45
I think adding videos is a good idea in theory (and I would have a few that I could share). I worry about bandwidth and people posting exceedingly large files.

Madaho
12-22-05, 02:47
I think homemade videos it's a great idea.

Mr Media
12-28-05, 16:05
Hi guys,

If you want to do video, using the best codec is a good idea. The old mpeg1 files were designed about 20 years ago, and while easy to create don't provide the best quality at the lowest bandwidth anymore. I would suggest that more efficient methods be used because video takes a whole lot of bandwidth and without technical considerations it's going to be diffficult to implement.

The new H.264 implementation of MPEG4 is the best all around codec, and can be created by the Quicktime Pro software available for Windows or Mac. The Divx codec is also good. The H.264 codec provides about the same quality at 25% of the bandwidth as MPEG1 video.

Chop Sticks
12-28-05, 20:17
No

Waste of time

James D 2004
12-28-05, 22:25
http://www.internationalsexguide.info/forum/showpost.php?p=365879&postcount=14

And I have hours of her, and many other girls.

Asian Rain
12-29-05, 07:01
And I have hours of her, and many other girls.Given your numerous posts on the subject, I assume that you are really keen to share your vast collection of lengthy videos. Just do it... use SexUploader.com like myself and others have done - it's free, does not restrict adult content, allows uploads up to 500mb and (unlike bit torrent) doesn't require any special technology to use. There aren't many excuses not to use it.

With over 600 downloads of my 2.5min/25mb clip in the last 5 days, it can't be that difficult...

http://www.internationalsexguide.info/forum/showpost.php?p=418978&postcount=3330

We will all be looking forward to seeing your videos posted! AR+

James D 2004
12-29-05, 17:52
http://www.sexuploader.com/?d=K3EUHZUN

Someone mentioned that before, but it's slow at 47 KB/s. The rapidshare I've been using can be somewhat faster, though limited service until new year for upgrading to faster service.

The file I uploaded isn't one of mine, it's professional BBBJ.

James D 2004
12-29-05, 19:36
http://www.sexuploader.com/?d=0DRHKIJY

This is the music video showing how I exploit the minority white in Kaleefonia, as the Governor will say. 6000+ hits until someone reported the non allowed adult content there. So here it is.

It's mpeg4. If you have Xvid or DivX it's good. If not you can download but now the recommended free player is at www.videolan.org.

James D 2004
12-30-05, 18:13
She likes to moan my real name non-stop; so I have to mute it.

Seriously, she salutes every member of my family with every swear word possible, so I have to cut the sound track off.

Really, the camera is at a distance so I don't usually include the inaudible sound track.

Piper1
12-31-05, 03:29
James,

In "Beer", why is the bottle in the way, and why not move the camera around from time to time for better angles?
She likes to moan my real name non-stop; so I have to mute it.

Seriously, she salutes every member of my family with every swear word possible, so I have to cut the sound track off.

Really, the camera is at a distance so I don't usually include the inaudible sound track.

James D 2004
12-31-05, 17:46
James,

In "Beer", why is the bottle in the way, and why not move the camera around from time to time for better angles?
As you can see, my hands are full! The camera is fixed before she arrives and we try to forget about it. After I drank, I really forget about it and put the bottle in the line of sight. More explanation is in the photo technique thread.

Piper1
01-01-06, 00:56
As you can see, my hands are full! The camera is fixed before she arrives and we try to forget about it. After I drank, I really forget about it and put the bottle in the line of sight. More explanation is in the photo technique thread.James, did the girl know about the vid cam?

Piper1
01-03-06, 14:08
As you can see, my hands are full! The camera is fixed before she arrives and we try to forget about it. After I drank, I really forget about it and put the bottle in the line of sight. More explanation is in the photo technique thread.James, looks like a hidden camera to me. Maybe I'm wrong. Did the girl know about the camera?

Asian Rain
01-03-06, 15:52
James, looks like a hidden camera to me. Maybe I'm wrong.Then again, maybe you are right.

Indeed I can now release a lot of my collections with ease, after the faces are blurred.
And I have hours of her, and many other girls.The "beer" and "tinkerbelle" girls don't show any awareness that the session is being taped. Were you using a hidden camera setup? It's just pretty obvious, but perhaps I'm wrong as well.

Maxima Man
01-05-06, 00:24
Adding a video component is a great idea. This may likely encourage folks to switch from still photography to action-filled video streams, which would in turn create the necessary supply and demand dynamic.

Why not give us the option to either participate or opt out.

Maxima Man.

James D 2004
01-05-06, 01:16
It's hard for those to understand who haven't met any good talents or haven't any memorial videos yet.

For the technique side, I have discussed in the photo video technique and equipment threads.

For the talent side, do I care that I exposed my ass for the whole world to see? I don't. Have you met any girl with an oral fixation? If you give them an erect penis to play with, they don't care about anything else, put it in the mouth ASAP is all they care.

Orgasm is also known as high tide or tsunami. When the time comes what else is in their mind apart from pure pain or pleasure?

Piper1
01-05-06, 02:58
James, did the girl know she was being videod? A simple yes or no would actually answer the question. Just curious.

XXL
01-31-06, 16:57
i wouldn't contribute videos nor be too keen to view videos, especially if they risk using up a lot of ressources and create problems with the site.

the core of this site is good reporting and peer review of the reports. even pics do more harm than good imho because they attract voyeurs and encourage faking, not to speak of the (unrresolved) issue of the girls' consent to appear on the www.

i'm only arguing from the point of view of a (non-paying) senior member. videos might make sense from a business point of view, as a way to finance the site.

Muratlale4
02-11-06, 10:32
I believe that showing movies would give this site an edge over many of the appearing knock of sites. And as for the bandwith it is easy to solve. Just use the Torrent platform, this way your own bandwith wont be taxed too much.

Fawn The Guyver
03-28-06, 04:11
A torrent server is no problem I have set up one, but not everyone can use torrent. I think about a fileshare service like:

http://www.filefactory.com
or
http://www.rapidshare.de
or
http://www.sexuploader.com


I think this would be the best solution. But if ppl want use torrent no problem I can open my torrent server to public in few minutes.

Aunsa
03-29-06, 16:11
I would be all for it, as i love to view the current photos on this site, and it would enhance the site that bit more. But I feel that there should be a limit to the size of the video's and recording time, i.e. 15 seconds per clip as otherwise they will take up far too much space!

Thanks,

Fawn The Guyver
03-29-06, 19:24
15sec ? this is a bit short.
We can take WMV the quality is ok size is ok too. I donīt mind files up to 100MB
and WMV in this size would have a lot of minutes.
But when WMV is still to big for you then RM :-P

Mugroso
04-30-06, 16:10
I have begun posting video on my site and have some stuff I won't post on my site but I would love to share some of that video with the guys here on ISG.

In the meantime how can I get the nasty shit out to you guys?

Mugroso

HarryR
11-21-07, 04:28
I've uploaded some of my videos to a site and almost all of them are "Private" which means you can only see them if you have the link. The only ones who will get the link are people with a PM function on this site and have contributed constructively to this site. They will also have to e-mail me from a REAL e-mail address (ie not Hotmail, Yahoo, Gmail and so on) to my real e-mail address.

I want to help this site is my main motivation.

Sure the quality is not great, the photography is not the best, but it is all real action. Nothing something from a posed porn film, although it does have that as well.

Harry Rose.

PS. I don't get any pay from Jackson.

Romano V
02-29-08, 23:18
Take a look on my video in Dnipropetrovsk last week here on youtube you can put videos if they are soft like mine and see to all mongers by the link : http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=kuAtu86StBU

Enjoy your trip

Cybertron
12-01-09, 10:01
I don't think adding videos would be useful to this site. The photos and the threads are more than enough. Plenty of video porn sites for jerking off.

If you're planning on hosting the videos on you're web server it does not consume much bandwidth since it uses the UDP protocol which has a lower overhead.

Johnny Maldiva
04-05-10, 14:00
I agree with a previous poster; bandwidth may be an issue. Depends on the financial status of the board and whether it can cope with increased BW. It also may put some women's identity at danger as videos generally don't obscure faces well, unless it's shot from a specific angle.

It Travel
05-17-10, 11:17
May be no... thre are lots of places where to post videos, usually shaking and grainy... I would widely prefer bigger photos (so you can se more) for the same lost of bandwith...

Just my opinion...

IT

Fun And Sun
12-19-10, 23:07
IMHO having the ability to upload vids would be absolutely great and take the forum to a new level. I have posted lots of vids on a different site and then linked to them from ISG but would post a lot more vids if I was able to just upload them to ISG instead of putting them on a third party site.

Vids are a lot more fun than pictures I think.

Rxracer
02-16-11, 17:20
I was just thinking that it would be nice to have a page where user submitted links to videos were gathered in one place like the Photo Gallery. Not sure we really need the videos themselves if we had this.

Steave69
10-29-11, 22:22
My opinion is that it is not needed to waste technical resources for porn movies. The world wide web is full porn, and that shouldn't be needed.

Switched
12-28-11, 12:00
There are already other websites that allow uploading of video files. I don't think it is necessary for this site.