I will not say any site or producer names, but I find it highly unethical to have a subscription based wesbite that also has paid (with dollars or tokens)videoes, and to then with intention, make the subscription videos such bad quality that they are unwatchable. And i am not talking about 1080p to 720p, im talking about using software to make it all liney and grainy, and putting a huge black border around the video to manipulate its real resolution, with the sole purpose of making them unwatchable.

New drinking game: Take a shot every time someone posts a bad review of a producer then refuses to say who it's about.

I do not think it helps to say any names or sites

What you're describing certainly sounds shitty from a customer standpoint, but, if the person/site has been doing it for a long time, then that means either;

A) It works well for them from a business standpoint, in which case, you can't really blame them for doing what works for their business, OR

B) It doesn't work well for their business, but they're too stupid to realize that, in which case, you can't really blame them for doing what doesn't work for their business, because well, they're fucking morons.

Either way, you hold ALL of the power in the scenario because you get to vote with your dollars. If you don't like their practices, don't give them your money. If you love their content but can't stand the way they go about releasing/sharing it, let them know. If they're unresponsive to that feedback, share your opinion elsewhere (like your post here).

But it doesn't do any good to not mention the site or producer, because if your intent is to get a conversation going, ppl can't participate if they don't know what they're supposed to be talking about, and if you're intent is to scare/bully the producer into changing their business practices, well then you're not really making a strong threat without mentioning their name, considering that if Option A above is correct, you're not affecting their business at all, and if Option B above is correct, then they're most likely going to be too stupid to recognize that you're even talking about them here (without directly mentioning their name).

There's also Option C) which is that there's some technical or logistical or practical reason for why they do what you described, and if that's the case, I'm sure they'd rather take advantage of the opportunity to explain it to ALL of their customers at once (in public forum), rather than have to answer the same email about the same complaint over and over one at a time (assuming what you're describing is a common complaint). So even in that scenario, it's more advantageous to mention them by name (but only after you've attempted to discuss this matter privately of course)

I just wanna know the names because I'm nosey about shit.

I know who I instantly thought of when I saw the post title. I'll buy you a shot if you can guess their name

Is this on purpose or is this actually a limitation of the subscription service provider? Now I am curious who this might be as well. Maybe they are unaware of this happening to their streaming clients.

Presumably you didn't know about the video quality before you signed up. So, the benefit of naming the site is that other people are forewarned before they sign up. Also, if it turns out to be a mistake (e.g. a browser compatibility issue) then other people might be able to comment and say whether they've had the same problem.

This seems code for "I'm angry and just want to be angry publicly, not find solutions." Which is a mood that has its place at times, granted, but is not conducive to problem-solving.

Yep...may as well lock the thread then.

I guess since everyone wants to know it is Club MPV. It used to do things correctly but seems to lower the quality of videos to a very very low level and add a black border around the video so its resolution is way less than the file is. I have even bought a "DVD" from the quicksand visuals site which was advertised as DVD quality, it also had a huge black border around it lowering its real resolution, but in this case the video quality itself wasnt lowered too much, only the resolution manipulation.

I should also mention the file size is the same size as it used to be (or larger) when the videoes used to have better quality, so it doesnt appear to be a saving bandwidth thing, it seems to be a, let them buy bad quality and then force them to pay more again for "normal quality"

Thank you! Yes. The entire benefit of naming the producer is to WARN future potential customers.

Have you mentioned this issue to the producer/ClubMPV operator?

This sounds like it may be an issue of them just not being very tech savy and using poor compression codecs when exporting/uploading their files...

Although I could be totally off base, as I'm not very familiar with ClubMPV's work (as soon as they start dumping mud on girls from above, I'll be running to throw them my money, regardless of the quality of their uploads :bahaha

I have not brought this up with them, and I do not think I should have to. I have seen many posts by the owner trying various codecs and remastering of files, sometimes asking for peoples onion which is better, most of t he time its very close when he was trying to find new techniques, and then now it has got like 50% worse quality, so I do not believe it is to do with not being tech savy.

this is the current quality, see the size of that black border, it stays when full screen because it has been added to the video while editing.

previously was like this

Are you on drugs? Because it sure seems like it.

Sorry, but I work too hard at what I do to take this seriously.

The quality has dropped significantly, and black borders have been added to manipulate the resolution, or not?

I understand your name calling at me because of the fact I said it and it made you upset. But what you did not do is deny adding a black border effectively making the videos lower resolution, even on the video I bought from the DVD section. I expected if any video that this one would have the image all the way to the edges. I was wrong. I do not take offence to your name calling as I can see it for what it is, a shield.

this is a full screen video from the dvd section, why is it not all the way to the edge?

If the pictures get approved which show the difference (got a funny feeling they wont be) we can see if there is any explanation. But for now all I get is called to be on drugs.

The only reasons images from an unverified user would be rejected would be if they contained frontal nudity, sexual touching, etc, which would be rejected as "explicit". While there is a copyright option we are not expected to enforce it and certainly from my point of view I would allow example images through for a thread like this as I believe that counts as "fair use" as long as no-one is trying to give away an entire photoset.

I believe manipulating the resolution with black borders would be against the download store rules, so I'll flag this thread for MM's attention, though I gather he's quite busy at the moment so response may not be instant.

Regarding streaming vs download image quality, I believe many streaming systems automatically adjust the resolution of the content, lowering it if necessary, depending on bandwidth demands. I remember watching the royal wedding of the duke and duchess of Cambridge on the BBC iPlayer some years ago, and there was so much demand the resolution dropped to the point where you could no longer see the spokes of the wheels of the horse-drawn carriages going round. I don't know if the UMD system does that or not (another for MM) but that might be a factor. Wouldn't explain black borders though.

Can you post the link to the download store sales page of the scene in question? Do the sample pics show the black border you're seeing?

I have seen a lot of producers continue on bc they are SATURATED WITH VIDEOS. people see their store? they see a SHIT TON OF VIDEOS? they think "oh wow, im geting SOO MANY VIDEOS FOR SO LITTLE" and you would be surprised at how many people sincerely dont give a shit if they can even see the line of the persons body ....they are thinking "if i am only spending this much..." and they have SO MUCH SHIT tto choose from? they will always have buyers. always.

while im over here trying to cut back on bandwidth usage but I have stellar shit shot in 4k i wanna put up in the best resolution as a choice for buyers to download but i dont want to surpass the 30 percent we pay in for our bandwidth.....for my ONE RELEASE A WEEK.

yeah, i can see where it is upsetting BUT, its like business in the world around us. having a mcdonalds next to a five guys burgers.....one is better than the other as far as quality. one is more expensive adn MUCH better but who is gonna have the biggest line? the shitty one. it always will. we have to have those businesses for others to thrive as well. The need will always be there for them so if they KNOW where they stand? i have to respect them for playing the game and understanding business. not getting so caught up in our fetish that they realize their slot in tthe whole "sales" part of it.
I have found myself getting so caught up in my love for certain scenes? I have released things first that I should have waited on and released some of my otther stuff....to be smart. If im going to sell my sex life? we should be smart about it. having the actual fetish can make that difficult sometimes bc we are excited!
we need to remember tthat maybe that producer honestly is happy with what they are seeing! who knows! but i do know? that we need all walks of production for this place to thrive!

Ah sorry one of the pictures from the first post I did to go with disclaimer picture had nudity in it so it was removed (it was that same quality as the first picture I posted, but also with the black border shown in the lower picture from the "dvd" video i bought also.)

The videos I was referring to were not from the UMD store but from the subscription part of clubmpv. They are not streamed but downloaded. I assume the ones on here are full quality, the same as the paid single scenes on clubmpv.

I do understand that there is quite a few videos for free on there but after using the same subscription that I had in the past I expected the same quality.

Note that the website uses a rotating video format (oldest videos drop off and new ones come on). So the number of videos I used to have access to is the same, but just way lower quality, and in some cases, the same videos being re released in lower quality.

At first I felt bad for even bringing it up, but after the reply I got from the producer, I am not.

I had a subscription so long I ended up seeing the same videos come back in lower quality, and larger file size, so I do not think bandwidth is the issue. I could be wrong, but I am too "on drugs" to have it explained to me, so we may never know.

Also I do know for the money it is a fair few videos but years ago it used to be tha same amount of videos, same price (or cheaper) and better quality

okay i just read where you said it was club mvp....

wait whatt??? are you watching it on a low res computer maybe? bc they have been KNOWN for HIGH END productions. i was going to go there and play in ttheir mud and beg for THEM to shoot me....bc their stuff is really fabulous! are these from older scenes maybe? shot in the early 2000s? bc maybe that is why?

but they have like, a really , really amazing buncha vids and they take a lot of time, effort and sincerity in the quality of their work....im so confused! but i mean....sincerely, what type of computer are you watching them on? maybe the video looks distorted bc of the screen type....? i am not sure! but i am very shocked at who you say it is.....also? are you watching their stuff here on the umd or from their actual site?

In the interests of balance, I've bought a few individual downloads in the past from MPV's UMD download store and have been delighted with them. They are priced in the upper range - but this is quite warranted in my opinion as the content and media quality is, overall, outstanding. The videos were certainly full frame and the price included a zip of high res stills. Reviews from other customers tend also to be on the highly positive side.

i have had the same experience! matter of fact? i was driving tto get my morning coffee last night. it was dark and i swear! before even seeing this forum? i drove past this glorious mud pit i have been BEGGING tthis construction company to let me use. even had my lawyer draw up a "no liabilty" paper for them here recently so if is still there by spring? they will let me use it! its right off a main road so i was considering night scenes. its freezing cold here right now so....but all i though of was mvp and their amazing night scenes! how there isnt a shadow in sight. how they look so incredible and thought of how on earth i could do it !

honestly? maybe your screen resolution is different? maybe you can download a different player?? bc they have such a great production team. this is a shocker to hear. just trying to help! not saying you are on drugs, at all.

Another thing i think would help is to know rather or not the resolution of the videos are posted.

I dont know about Club MPV personally (because I do not fall under the financial class of being able to afford fancy things like paid subscription memberships )

But i do know that alot of places that offer video downloads oftentimes offer standard definition AND high definition options depending on what your preference is.

I normally don't get involved in these kinds of posts, but am making an exception.

First of all, adding a touch of humor, NO PRODUCER is going to get any onions from me!


OK, now onto what I really want to say. I have been a subscriber and purchaser of video content from CLUB MPV on a several occasions over the years. Here is what I experienced:

1. The 'member content' was quite good. Fairly high resolution video clips at decent lengths, and nice images, though it was the videos I was interested in.

2. They also had a 'token' system, where you could purchase tokens and spend them for very high-res (and usually longer) versions of the member material videos.

I had no problem with this system and the settings used, the models hired, the number of cameras, all indicated a very expensive production level, not to mention the remote locations that still required power and transport of people and equipment. I could see that their material was expensive to produce, but worth it.

So in one sense, you might say the member content was samples for the high res videos you could download. On the other hand, the member content material was a high enough resolution and length to be worth the membership in my opinion.

So, for me, I enjoyed the member content and found it worth the cost of membership, AND I was able to purchase high-res, longer videos of the scenes that I really liked. It was a win-win situation.

I would certainly not call it unethical by any means - it was a two-tier system that provided a 'normal' membership site experience, but also a pay to view hi-res download store at the same time.

Ideally, all of the high res videos could be made available for members, but this would put the cost up to the point where it would not be sustainable as a business. Remember, this isn't a guy with a camera bringing chicks to his apartment to get messy in the bathroom. This is a camera crew, lighting, sound, boats, cars, etc. and unique sets such as the deep pits of clay or peat, bleck, etc. that don't come cheap. The reason MPV has been around so long is because they know how to cover their costs to stay in business in a niche market. They were here before the web was even here, and they ran a BBS for image downloads.

So that's my take - it's the way they operate and they are still here to provide the content we love. It costs them more to produce, so they have to find ways to make a few more bucks. Nobody is forcing anyone to purchase the higher res videos, or to join the site either. But if you do, you have that second option to download very high res videos of the scenes we love. If they were at all unethical or unfairly priced, would they still be in business for all these years?