Is it me or did porn look better in the past with incandescent light bulbs/lighting?

[takemeunder]

I found a few sites and I went and perused old porn films/pic and noticed a lot of them (not all of course) looked better, they had much better lighting.

The warm glow of incandescent light bulbs suited it much more and wasn't as unforgiving. Now, with fluorescent being the #1 lighting source because incandescent lighting has been practically banned I've noticed a lot of porn just doesn't look as good as it could.

Sure sure, I might just be crazy but check it out for yourself sometime. It's not only the case with video but also picture...maybe I am just crazy?.
...And well, maybe it doesn't help that a lot of the porn I've been watching lately doesn't have the highest production values. And of course I know there have been vast improvements to camera and video quality, not to mention changes in the way porn is shot.
Of course though, it doesn't only affect porn. Everything now uses fluorescent lighting, or some alternative.

Or am I wrong and missing something entirely?

 

[LeyaFalcon]

As much as incandescent light sounds wonderful I think they do the fluorescent because its more conducive to the whole HD thing.

 

[D-rock]

I think there is a couple things at play. In some ways the old incandescent lighting did have a softer feel and might very well work better in some situations, but I also think it's overall inferior as far as film quality goes. Achieving good true color with it was probably a pain in ass. The thing is I think back in the day when they used it the technical, movie making, and photo taking abilities of the people that did the work were generally much better than the people that do the work now even if what they had to work with wasn't as good. I wouldn't be surprised if that is what you are seeing. One can also see the limitations in what they were working with like with mainstream things back then as well.

Now there is much more user friendly technology and it's easier to take technically proficient video and photos, and after production processing of it is way easier than before, but in some ways I think that's also used as a crutch and some or the artistic and technical know-how isn't what it used to be when it's easier to point and shoot than before. Maybe to take extraordinary material now somebody still needs to be a virtual artisan of their craft, but to take just decent alright material all it takes is a moderate knowledge of what they are doing. I think when the artistic ability is combined with the better technology of toady it leads to the best material.

It doesn't help that so much of the industry makes things as cheaply and quickly as possible to maximize quick profits. For them all it has to be is good enough for that.