Jump to content
Existing user? Sign In

Sign In



Sign Up

Recommended Posts

  • 6 months later...
Guest CwalkPinoy
On 1/7/2017 at 9:38 AM, WetKatyHill said:

 

Idk how to unquote so IMA leave it there.

Vr content is sparse and shitty, tbh. Haven't seen a single omo video.

There's a trick I use that really immerses me. I got an android, so I use magic vr player.

I download some omo videos, pop em on the SD card, open up the app and set it to mono.

Earbuds add extra immersion. Then just lay back and relax.

Anyways the app is free with no ads on google play. I did have to get a cardboard profile. Basically look up your phone and cardboard profile on google.

I don't see the point in omo vr. Current vr just self inserts you in a 3d setting with no camera control. Current cameras are just as good at getting bankshots, and videos are plentiful.

Hope I helped some.

Link to comment

CzechVR Fetish has some pretty good pee VR clips, czech them out.

TVGuy - big fan of your work. Have you considered the Insta360 Pro? Just released, it's what I've got my eye on and shoots up to 8k 360° 3D.  Their software seems to do a better job with stitching than some lower-end ones. Bit of a high price point for that one, but for easier entry, there's the new Vuze 360 camera.

Link to comment
5 hours ago, TVGuy said:

I've been experimenting with VR at HD Wetting for some time now.  However, there are several obstacles that are preventing a really great VR wetting experience.

The ideal VR wetting experience would be totally immersive.  You would feel like you are standing in the presence of someone as they wet their pants.  They would react to you being there, and you would hopefully forget that you are experiencing a video.  However, currently accessible VR video technology doesn't accomplish this sense of immersion.

The most common form of VR video right now is 360 degree video, or dome video.  Video is recorded from the area surrounding the camera, and in VR that video is projected onto a geometry that surrounds a viewer.  This can be quite a bit more immersive than a traditional video.  There is no edge to the screen, so you can look around and see everything in a scene.  It can transport you to locations in a way that regular video can not.

However, we interact with people differently than we interact with scenery.  A personal interaction, including watching someone wetting their pants, is a much more intimate experience.  Who cares if you can turn around and see the wall behind you?  The point of a VR wetting isn't to experience what it is like to be in a room, but experience what it is like to witness a wetting in person. 360 degree video doesn't capture the intimacy of this experience, at least not in my opinion, and lacks in several important ways.  

While viewing 360 degree video, you become acutely aware of its limitations once you focus on small details, like what is happening on the crotch of someone's jeans, or the expression on someone's face.  The geometries use to project the 360 degree video are usually spherical, but seldom are 360 degree cameras using true spherical lenses.  The result is some small distortions.  When taking in a scene as a whole, these distortions don't matter, but when you are drying to enjoy minute details you notice them.

Another problem is the lack of depth.  Most 360 degree cameras do not capture any depth information, so you are really just wrapped in a 2D projection.  Trying to record an intimate experience in VR, this becomes a major obstacle.  There is no difference between the person in front of you and the background behind them.  they are all at the same depth.  Projected onto this sphere, they are the wrong shape, they are flat, and it feels less like you are standing in a room with someone, and more like you are standing in a room with a weird projection around you.

The last big problem with immersion in 360 degree video is resolution.  Detail is somewhat important when capturing a wetting, as you want to see every little drip, every little tiny wet spot, and the small details of the wetter's expressions.  Even shooting 4K video, when stretched around you, is horribly low resolution.  The result is the wetting itself has very few pixels showing it, so things can be obscure and difficult to see in a way that is satisfying.

So, that is the state of things right now.  However, there are solutions to these issues-

One thing that might work is to forget about using real models.  Have a game type experience where in game characters interact with you and do the wetting.  This removes all of the capture problems, and lets you fully move around the scene.  You aren't just watching a recording anymore, but can fully interact.  Of course, you are giving up the experience of watching a real person wet if you do this.

It is possible to capture full 360 degree video in accurate 3D.  However, this involves using an expensive and complex multi-camera rig.  However, the result is video that accurately captures depth where you can look around.  This removes the feeling of a projection and creates a much more intimate immersion.  The problem is the cost- Such rigs cost thousands of dollars, and they just provide mounts for the cameras.  Many more thousands of dollars would need to be spent on the cameras for such rigs.  Right now, the profit margins for HD Wetting are much, much too small to justify that kind of investment.

These 3D 360 degree video rigs also help address the resolution problem by using multiple cameras combined into an array.  However, to get a truly sharp VR video experience, you would need to record at a resolution of 20K, which is obscene.  Even today's high end work station computers can't handle the real time data throughput of 20K video at 60fps.

A better approach for an immersive experience with a VR headset might be 3D video shot from a first person perspective.  You wouldn't be able to look around the scene, but you would have accurate depth and high resolution.

I love when you make posts like these. You're commitment to the community here is so valuable. I almost wish this site had a dedicated "Thank TVGuy" button xD

Link to comment
Guest CwalkPinoy

OH but Tvguy, i did just have an idea that might work.

there could be a lewdfraggy approach where the model is dancing on the spot but you can get a better view of her breasts and crotch by looking at them yourself. she could be closer to the camera since you don't need a full shot to get focus, and the user could look around at her as she danced and eventually wet herself.

it wouldn't be 360, but rather a 180 l/r approach. that's what most of lewdfraggy's videos are. it works very well.

Link to comment
  • 3 months later...
On 7/27/2017 at 12:37 PM, TVGuy said:

Even today's high end work station computers can't handle the real time data throughput of 20K video at 60fps.

Yep, the horsepower required to crunch that data at all, let alone make editing it an experience you won't tear your hair out over, is not something you come across everyday.

Luckily, given how far things have come over the years, it's entirely possible this type of production will not only be possible with (relatively) affordable HEDT hardware, but maybe even with high-end mass market chips, probably sooner than we think.

With MSFT jumping into the arena too, and existing VR headsets already dropping in price, the future of the platform as a whole looks promising.

Link to comment
On 7/27/2017 at 9:37 AM, TVGuy said:

I've been experimenting with VR at HD Wetting for some time now.  However, there are several obstacles that are preventing a really great VR wetting experience.

The ideal VR wetting experience would be totally immersive.  You would feel like you are standing in the presence of someone as they wet their pants.  They would react to you being there, and you would hopefully forget that you are experiencing a video.  However, currently accessible VR video technology doesn't accomplish this sense of immersion.

The most common form of VR video right now is 360 degree video, or dome video.  Video is recorded from the area surrounding the camera, and in VR that video is projected onto a geometry that surrounds a viewer.  This can be quite a bit more immersive than a traditional video.  There is no edge to the screen, so you can look around and see everything in a scene.  It can transport you to locations in a way that regular video can not.

However, we interact with people differently than we interact with scenery.  A personal interaction, including watching someone wetting their pants, is a much more intimate experience.  Who cares if you can turn around and see the wall behind you?  The point of a VR wetting isn't to experience what it is like to be in a room, but experience what it is like to witness a wetting in person. 360 degree video doesn't capture the intimacy of this experience, at least not in my opinion, and lacks in several important ways.  

While viewing 360 degree video, you become acutely aware of its limitations once you focus on small details, like what is happening on the crotch of someone's jeans, or the expression on someone's face.  The geometries use to project the 360 degree video are usually spherical, but seldom are 360 degree cameras using true spherical lenses.  The result is some small distortions.  When taking in a scene as a whole, these distortions don't matter, but when you are drying to enjoy minute details you notice them.

Another problem is the lack of depth.  Most 360 degree cameras do not capture any depth information, so you are really just wrapped in a 2D projection.  Trying to record an intimate experience in VR, this becomes a major obstacle.  There is no difference between the person in front of you and the background behind them.  they are all at the same depth.  Projected onto this sphere, they are the wrong shape, they are flat, and it feels less like you are standing in a room with someone, and more like you are standing in a room with a weird projection around you.

The last big problem with immersion in 360 degree video is resolution.  Detail is somewhat important when capturing a wetting, as you want to see every little drip, every little tiny wet spot, and the small details of the wetter's expressions.  Even shooting 4K video, when stretched around you, is horribly low resolution.  The result is the wetting itself has very few pixels showing it, so things can be obscure and difficult to see in a way that is satisfying.

So, that is the state of things right now.  However, there are solutions to these issues-

One thing that might work is to forget about using real models.  Have a game type experience where in game characters interact with you and do the wetting.  This removes all of the capture problems, and lets you fully move around the scene.  You aren't just watching a recording anymore, but can fully interact.  Of course, you are giving up the experience of watching a real person wet if you do this.

It is possible to capture full 360 degree video in accurate 3D.  However, this involves using an expensive and complex multi-camera rig.  However, the result is video that accurately captures depth where you can look around.  This removes the feeling of a projection and creates a much more intimate immersion.  The problem is the cost- Such rigs cost thousands of dollars, and they just provide mounts for the cameras.  Many more thousands of dollars would need to be spent on the cameras for such rigs.  Right now, the profit margins for HD Wetting are much, much too small to justify that kind of investment.

These 3D 360 degree video rigs also help address the resolution problem by using multiple cameras combined into an array.  However, to get a truly sharp VR video experience, you would need to record at a resolution of 20K, which is obscene.  Even today's high end work station computers can't handle the real time data throughput of 20K video at 60fps.

A better approach for an immersive experience with a VR headset might be 3D video shot from a first person perspective.  You wouldn't be able to look around the scene, but you would have accurate depth and high resolution.

Wow, a very well considered and explained post, just wanted to give you a thumbs up and some love. Your work and the thought that you put into it is incredible!

Link to comment
  • 4 months later...

Having played around with VR for a couple of years now I agree with TVGuy that to get the fully immersive experience at this stage the video content needs to be modeled and rendered, rather than filmed in a traditional sense. Especcially if we're talking some form of cardboard/daydream/gear VR. However, the mind is a funny thing, and can indeed be easily fooled into a sense of immersion. I have vatched a few VR porn videos on my HTCVive, and even if the resolution is bad, and for most content there is no depth to the film whatsoever, I still feel that it makes most other forms of porn uninteresting. 

Pee fetish porn has an additional challenge with the fact that we're obsessing over the little trickles running down someones legs, or a small wet spot growing on a pair of jeans, and the displays of current VR headsets just arent there yet. However, a more up close and personal film like having a model squat and pee at or towards a camera at close range(like HDWetting did with an action camera a few years back), now that WOULD be an experience.

I do of course understand that making VR fetish porn is likely to be a financial dead end for now, since the number uf users with decent VR headsets who also have a pee fetish is a subgroup of a subgroup, but I'm hopeful for the future, as VR hopefully gains more traction and the industry in general gets more experience with creating content for the platform. 

Thank you TVGuy for providing your insights here on the forum. I always find it interesting to see what you have to say. Keep up the good work. 

Link to comment

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...