Jump to content
Existing user? Sign In

Sign In



Sign Up

Oldest wetting stuff ever found?


Recommended Posts

Here's one from the 1920's where a janitor (must be the cable guy of the 20's, lol)  spies through the crack in the door (staged voyeur) to watch a woman pee in the toilet with a visible stream.  Really interesting how pee was a sub-genre that long ago; amazing....even through these are just solo peeing and not omo-related.

1920's Staged WC Spy.mp4

WARNING: Contains nudity.

Link to comment

I hate to rain on everyone's parade, but I fear that the vintage films shown here may be fakes.  Produced in more modern times, but designed to look like older films.  

My degree is in television and film production technology.  Adult entertainment has been a significant driving factor of motion picture technology, so a significant amount of what I studied had to do with how adult material pushed the technology forward.  Especially before home video, adult films typically lead the way with mainstream films using what was successful.  I also became extremely familiar with the technologies, techniques, and styles of different eras.  To me, the videos that have been shared here, purporting to be vintage film, are highly suspect.

On 2/8/2017 at 0:59 PM, ragtime said:

I have no idea if this is really from the 1970s, as the title of it implies, but maybe it is. The title (schmalfilm) also implies that it is on either super 8 or 16 film, which seems about right. I got it from this vk page.

That user also has a video called "vintage pi and other..." that is a scene from "Wet Weekend" by Danish pornographers Color Climax, which I believe is from 1981. There is a panty-peeing scene over a chamber pot, but I'm not uploading on account of the excessive amounts of fellatio, etc., which is against the rules here, I think.

 

schmalfilm_1970.mp4

This first film, I can promise, is almost certainly a fake, originating on digital video with filters used to make it look like film.  There are several clear giveaways- One is the colors.  Old film, unless stored extremely well at a constant temperature in a humidity free environment will deteriorate, especially blue and green colors.  8mm film was especially bad at this, and didn't have that great of blue/green presence to begin with.  The colors, as seen in this video, would almost certainly not be there if this was a film shot in 1970.  We can see blue and green objects in the shower and at the endgue of the frame that are still fully saturated.  The girls shorts also still appear to have a bluish-purple tint to them, which likely wouldn't have been picked up by the film to begin with.

The magenta in the skin tones is a major giveaway though.  These high magenta skin tones were never that present in 8mm film- The hyper sensitivity of film to reds and magentas tended to make skin tones appear overexposed and washed out.  What we see hear was known in early 2000's video production circles as the "Panasonic look."   Specifically the DVX100 camcorder, but also some of their pro cameras that followed, tended to capture these high magenta skin tones.

Another major giveaway is the film artifacts.  The dust and scratches are simply too uniform, and consistent.  Actual film would have much more variety, and would feature distortion around the damage, which simply doesn't exist here.  The colors remain constant, right up to the edge of the scratch.  The only way to account for this is that the scratches were added in post, layered on top of the video.  

Also, suspect is the stabilization.  Any film, as it is run through a projector time and time again, will have its register holes slight stretched.  This leads to imperfect stabilization as it runs through the projector, causing the image to shake or bounce slightly, or sway around. 8mm film, as a consumer product, wasn't even produced to that wonderful of specifications in the first place, so it almost never would be this steady.  Now, it is true that modern software could stabilize this after it had been digitized, but that usually results in some warping or stretching.  Another problem with stabilization is it needs some static, high contrast point to lock onto.  This video appears too softly focused, with no point offering enough contrast to get that kind of perfect stabilization to remove film judder.

The final nail in the coffin of authenticity for this video, for me, is the zoom.  Few 8mm film cameras had zoom lenses.  A popular solution was to have lenses of different photo lengths on a wheel.  The camera operator could rotate the wheel to select a focal length, but you couldn't do an on camera zoom.  The lenses that could actually zoom in were manual zoom, so you had to rotate a zoom ring to zoom in.  Typically these were not parfocal lenses, so zooming resulted in the loss of focus, but more significantly is that it is next to impossible to do a steady, silky smooth zoom with a manually zoomed lens.

Modern video zoom lenses use a servo motor driven system to provide smooth zooms.  You simply did not have that on 8mm film cameras or their lenses.  Yet, that is the style of zoom you see here.

On 2/9/2017 at 7:21 AM, BudTX said:

Here's one that's been kicking around for awhile.  Not sure where I found it originally, but according to the filename it's from 1923.  Nice to know folks were interested in women peeing back then in those ultra-conservative days...women had only been allowed to vote for 3 years, lol.

 

Vintage 1923.flv

 

Warning:  Does contain nudity (penis).

This looks much more authentic- The film judder and damage is consistent with what you would actually expect from something that originated on film and was stored under less than ideal conditions.  The blown out highlights, the vignetting, artifacts, and motion rendering are all consistent with a 1920s era hand cranked 16mm film camera.  From a technological perspective, this could be real.  There are just a couple things styalistically that don't feel right to me.

The biggest issue is with the title cards.  For short silent films of this era, especially ones of erotic nature, used hand drawn or painted title cards.  These title cards also typically had some kind of framing or border, to help the camera frame them properly.  The uniform typeface here, and lack of frame, is somewhat suspect.  Also suspect is the date.  While short, silent erotic films were being made in the 1920's, they were mainly French or Italian.  The title cards would not have been in English.  This style of short erotic film hadn't really made its way into predominantly English speaking countries until the very late 1920's, and even then only a couple films are known to have survived until today.

In the late 40's and early 50's we started to see an influx of short "nudie comedy" films.  Often low budget, these films were the forerunners of much of today's pornography. Frequently they were shot in a style as to appear vintage and older than they actually were, and presenting them in the style of an old silent film was definitely popular.  Film makers fearful of obscenity prosecution believed that if they could pass their films off as not being contemporary, but from a previous generation, that they may be shielded from criminal penalties.

Based on the title cards, and overall style, I think it is much more likely that this film dates from the era of "Nudie Comedies" and not the 1920's.

2 hours ago, BudTX said:

Here's one from the 1920's where a janitor (must be the cable guy of the 20's, lol)  spies through the crack in the door (staged voyeur) to watch a woman pee in the toilet with a visible stream.  Really interesting how pee was a sub-genre that long ago; amazing....even through these are just solo peeing and not omo-related.

1920's Staged WC Spy.mp4

WARNING: Contains nudity.

Much the same as the previous film, this appears more in line with the "Nudie Comedies" of the 1950's.  Again, the title cards are not consistent with what you would expect of short films from the 1920's.  Also, at 25 seconds into the video we can see what appears to be a security door, with a narrow slit window in it.  This style of door, common in schools and other institutions, did not exist in the 1920's.  A patent for such a door, was filed in 1947.

Also, the title card reads "A Warmer Bruz Stinkaroo," which I think we can probably assume is a parody of, "A Warner Bros. Cartoon."  However, this phrase didn't actually appear in front of Warner Brother's animated short features until the mid 1940's.

It isn't likely that these films from the 1920's would have survived.  Aggressive obscenity prosecution and censorship made owning or producing films with nudity a very dangerous prospect, at least in the United States.  The only known surviving short erotic films from the 1920's are Uncle Si and the Sirens, Forbidden Daughters, and Hollywood Script Girl.  If these films truly dated from that era, they would be incredibly significant from a film history point-of-view.  However, far more likely is they are from the 1950's, where there were countless "Nudie Comedies," many of which survive today.

Link to comment
  • 1 month later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...