Manny_S I'm not an expert and I notice scaling more than colors when I watch a scene so this is just thoughts when I watch.
I think Milfvr and the old SLR scenes look better. To me they look natural, like I was there. The new SLR scenes look blurrier to me. Look at #1 and #3 from SLRO compared to Milfvr and old SLRO scenes. Even if its 8k vr whatever, doesn't have that real life look. Maybe washed out would be another way of saying it.
I don't know how to say what my brain sees. All I know is that the other 2 look better to my eyes.
Good luck

      Manny_S Hey, I really appreciate taking the time out and considering this seriously. I know some details I've shared would be subjective and difficult to describe per se, and by no means am I an expert at color science. These were the observations based on what I've noticed as an end user.

      Glad you agree on the Claire Roose scene. I'd say it would be amazing if there's any possibility of rework on colors of such already released scenes. Would really push for rewatchability.

      Manny_S Now, i don't seem to quite understand your point if you are comparing only one scene from many scenes from different studios that have different color grading and even refer to the old SLRO scenes that you say were great, but from my opinion have quite washed out colors.

      Overall, I've found studios such as BadoinkVR having better colors(or color grading as you say).
      Even if we eleminate other studios, and stick to 8k(which gets iffy as most SLRO color issues came in with the 8k setup), older SLRO scenes really had better colors IMHO. Compare new with old. Try watching them in headset, you'll see the difference.
      The older one is more realistic, with better colors for the leaves of the plant, her eyeshadow, her lips are pink, I can go on and on. Can't comment on other technical details but this is what I see.
      Newer one just has this sort of orange/brown filter, washing out and muting other colors.

      Manny_S #1 Blake Blossom.
      I think she was just tanned.
      You can check it on her twitter post in the video https: //x.com/sexlikereal/status/1825278496836587970
      Do you want to remove her real tan?
      #2 Myra Moans.
      I think she is just white like that.
      Do you want her skin to be different color then real?
      #3,4,5
      Looks fine to me

      Lets agree to disagree here. I don't have any issues with skin tone here. Just the tint/filter. Rather, I liked the Blake Blossom scene as the saturation was better. Not color wise though.

      With some of the other studios, they have also started picking up on this orange/brown tint with washed out colors. This is what I've already mentioned in one of my initial posts. Can be anything with the camera to the post production.

      Manny_S Badoink again but now from their website
      as they dont seem to have free preview

      Hey, you can add /trailer at the end of video URL to watch the free preview.

      All in all, my suggestion would be to take a few polls to eliminate the subjectiveness of it and test out further with the colors.
      We know SLR has got it to be the best VR site. Just needs a bit more care and attention.

      Again, appreciate what you do.
      Thanks

                rerun119 That blur (focus issue??) has been around since the 8K transition. I don't know how more people haven't noticed it. The resolution is higher, but the image isn't as crisp. Then you have SLR using sharpening filters is post production to try and improve it but it just ends up giving the video an artificial look (over-sharpened??). The 8K has always looked worse than the 6K SLR Originals to me.

                    Hairsational Some of the newer videos look pretty bad from my end. I know nothing about saturation and all of that. I just know that some of them I just skip them once I see it looks blurry.
                    The latest Blake blossom video looks blurry and everything looks too bright. I love Blake but I wasn't about to spend the time looking at that picture.

                    Just think how good all these videos would have been if they would have used the old camera. I really think this is why the older scenes are so much better. Everything got worse with the change.
                    How good would VRHush, FuckPass, and VirtualRealPorn be if they didn't get that horrible 8k camera. I don't even think the images look better but the scale is terrible.

                        rerun119 I notice the sharpness issue too. Other studios have focus on the foreground or background based on the closeness of the shot. SLRO doesn't have the focus on either of these.
                        Eventually I'd adjust the sharpness filter in DeoVR or Heresphere to get it somewhat watchable. It's things like this that make the experience worse.
                        Why couldn't have this been done before it reached us viewers? Before releasing, there had to be some checks in headset. I suppose this isn't the case.

                        And isn't it the Canon R5C that's used here for 8k. Something has gone horribly wrong for so many studios messing up.

                          alphaRonaldo

                          alphaRonaldo Compare new with old. Try watching them in headset, you'll see the difference.

                          yes, there is a difference i observed and loved the sharpness of those several old scenes
                          i can share with you more of the scenes where i noticed great sharpness of the image and fine details.
                          i was working on those scenes at that time:
                          https://www.sexlikereal.com/scenes/karaoke-night-28941 at the end of this scene you can notice out of focus part
                          https://www.sexlikereal.com/scenes/movie-night-28315
                          https://www.sexlikereal.com/scenes/big-black-tits-28255

                          I know why those scenes were sharper
                          Production at that time was setting aperture of the lens at 5.6
                          and the image is sharpest at that point
                          you can read about the effects here
                          and here

                          the tricky part here is that the focus at 5.6 is quite narrow and you have to be very carefull at every position and check the focus with every change of position
                          you can also notice that background is blurrier because it is not in focus
                          the issue with aperture 5.6 is that it is easy to miss the focus if you not very attentive and forget to change the focus
                          that happened several times already on several scenes, not only US scenes
                          i sadly cannot dictate the rules for production
                          so production decided to switch to the aperture 8
                          with aperture 8 you get a wider distance from the camera in focus and its harder to miss the focus
                          and as you can see there is a tradeoff to that

                          besides production part im not sure how many releases other studios have per week
                          but with previous and current quantity of the produced SLRO scenes we have to fit into release schedule
                          that requires us to think on the most proficient workflow that allows us to process enough scenes per week and at the same time preserve decent quality
                          there are many other nuances that regular users not aware of
                          such as codecs that we use to process the scenes
                          that we have 2-3 stages of the post processing
                          that there is a final transcoding on the server that limits bitrate to around 30 mbs
                          that some codecs preserve more quality but slower in processing
                          we researched that over the years and came to one universal solution
                          but it was already changed several times and we are again rethinking it
                          that all takes time and effort
                          together with responsibility of keeping the releases steady

                          of one thing i can mention for some thoughts is that "best" way to preserver quality of the video is to first denoise it and then apply color
                          to denoise it first and to keep the close to original color information of the video you have to encode to uncompressed formats such as prores
                          which just for the record would take around 30-35 hours per 20 minutes video on the best configuration computers that we currently have, latest gpu 4090, almost latest cpu's and motherboard and 60-120 gb ram
                          graphic cards are not involved as much when encoding to proress to it take that long
                          now if we split the scene to several computers lets say 3 that is still 30-35 hours for 1 hour scene
                          thats only one step
                          it goes after initial editing, qa, sound, correction and then denoise step
                          for the record one 1 hour scene files size is around 1 TB
                          you have to somehow copy that to those 3 computers or use local server that would provide sufficient bandwidth to allow you reading the files from 3 computers at the same time
                          the files produced after denoise to uncompressed formats is around 1GB per 1 second
                          thats 60gb per 1 minute
                          and 3.6TB per one hour scene
                          transferring such huge files between computers... ok, you got the point with the server i guess

                          After denoise there has to be either color correction or stereo correction or both at the same time
                          now if we make color correction separately it is another step and another uncompressed files which has to be accessible for the next step somehow

                          If we to make stereo correction and color correction that would increase the render time to about 1 day per scene
                          this step encodes the result into a compressed .mp4 format and it slightly reduces the quality as any encoding does if not to uncompressed

                          then dont forget another transcoding with happens on the slr server

                          i lost my thoughts train somewhere here
                          but there's a lot more i could explain on as many version we tested and their pro's and con's
                          but as a conclusion:
                          the current pipeline that we have is currently the best in terms of time/quality
                          there are some tradeoffs in production and post production
                          it is not like that just because we don't care
                          but it is like that because we came to that point through tests and current requirements

                          Still im again making one more research and hopefully it will give us some better results

                                Manny_S Very interesting read, I always quoted https://www.sexlikereal.com/scenes/big-black-tits-28255 when mentioning some of the best video quality I ever seen on a SLR scene (although it had some scale issues).

                                That quality was such a standout to me at the time that I mentioned it often. I remember I thought the camera hack was the reason for the lower quality/sharpness down the line but the aperture explains so much. Other studios like VR Allure had a few far sharper scenes like that back in the day too. They must have done something similar. Annoying really, cause an out of focus scene is often ruined but the quality difference is pretty huge when done right.

                                Also, weird all these studios still have to use this Canon camera that is so hard to operate and has a weird ipd. You'd expect there to be more of a choice in VR camera's by now. Like with a good ipd, ease of use and form factor at a somewhat reasonable price for a compony. I mean how hard can it be to implement good autofocus with AI or something for a company like Canon?

                                Also hoping Nvidia will finally up the maximum decodable resolution on their GPU's this generation so companies will innovate and push the envelope of their VR camera's again. I mean for instance the fm duo 12k. Just having a larger resolution censor can make a huge difference even if it's only used for 8k. Can't wait to see what porn would look like once camera's like this scale down: https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/media/release/20240611-02. I mean that's 16320x7200@90fps. Absolutely crazy.

                                  and i already found one bottleneck of quality loss
                                  and as i said, takes longer to process, but not as long as the last best quality version
                                  we now have a hope for better quality of regular and PT scenes 💪

                                  Manny_S

                                  Manny_S yes, there is a difference i observed and loved the sharpness of those several old scenes
                                  i can share with you more of the scenes where i noticed great sharpness of the image and fine details.
                                  i was working on those scenes at that time:
                                  https://www.sexlikereal.com/scenes/karaoke-night-28941 at the end of this scene you can notice out of focus part
                                  https://www.sexlikereal.com/scenes/movie-night-28315
                                  https://www.sexlikereal.com/scenes/big-black-tits-28255

                                  Glad we could agree on a few details about the older scenes. These ones are great as well.

                                  Certainly an interesting read on the depth of field due to aperture and the efforts in the post processing work, thanks for sharing these details.

                                  Hopefully we get to see better scenes in the coming months.

                                        alphaRonaldo quick visual sample of differences
                                        the irony is that this gif is compressed too and doesnt show the exact difference but you can see it anyway
                                        these slight fine details are being lost with every step
                                        but now i think we solved it

                                            Manny_S Surely you don't have to output a new file after every step of the pipeline. That sounds like a horribly inefficient way to process a video.

                                                Hairsational what would be an efficient way then? to make stereo correction, denoise, alpha rendering from the raw footage?

                                                    8 months later

                                                    Manny_S made a quick comparison for you

                                                    Did my homework. In this example, the pale one looks more natural than the previous EU example I mentioned (I think Emily Pink) while the other one might be a bit too yellowish for resembling melanin. In direct comparison, I might prefer the paler one.

                                                    Would be interesting to see the same comparison done with this video with two different skin tones.