Can Anyone Explain What The Hell Is Going On At Sean Cody?

Posted August 17, 2017 by with 74 comments

sc54Just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse, Sean Cody does it again! Case in point: Today’s scene with Arnie and Blake.

scrVirtually every Sean Cody scene released in 2017 has been unwatchable, so today’s disaster is no surprise to anyone who’s been following the decline. Early this year, the studio admitted to some sort of “4k camera” problem that was making their scenes “awful,” and they promised that things would get better. With the exception of one scene in April (which was probably filmed well over a year ago), things obviously never got better, and in fact they only continue to get worse. Rather than dwell on this for the millionth time, I’m wondering if readers have any explanation or theory as to what, technically, is actually going on at Sean Cody?

By “technical,” I mean look at this screencap from today’s Arnie/Blake scene, and note the picture quality:

Screen Shot 2017-08-17 at 1.12.40 PM 1

Then, compare that to this screencap from a 2013 Sean Cody scene, starring Brooks and Cain:

Screen Shot 2017-08-17 at 1.18.58 PMTechnology and video has only gotten better and more advanced over the last four years, so what in the world is going on?

sc1Why do Sean Cody scenes filmed today look 50 years older than scenes that were filmed four years ago? Is it lighting? The camera? Something else? I know nothing about videography or cameras, but I’m really curious, so weigh in below if you have a theory.

And here are two videos, for an even clearer comparison. First, it’s Brooks and Cain in 2013:

And here’s Arnie and Blake, in 2017. Yikes:

Any suggestions or advice for Sean Cody? Let them know in the comments below!

  • Ceecee

    Posting Brooks and Arnie side-by-side like that you cruel, cruel man. Reminding us of what we’ve lost.

  • nick

    personally I can’t see any difference in picture quality, but I see a good increase in beard content.

    • Zachary Sire
      • nick

        I don’t see it, where should i be looking ?

        • Ceecee

          Probably with the fact that Arnie and Blake have the skin tone of Homer Simpson.

          • Xzamilloh

            Homer’s not pink.

    • AJ

      I can’t either. Especially on an iPad. As long as the fucking is good, I don’t mind sub par picture quality. They’re not hoping to get an oscar for cinematography. It doesn’t look like a VHS did so it’s fine. Maybe it’s the white guys agaisnt beige walls and neutral decorations that’s a problem. Needs more contrast!

      • nick

        I’m on an ipad too.

    • Hari Kalyan

      I don’t see a HUGE difference in quality either. The screencaps don’t really portray any difference… but I do detect a more granular picture quality in the 2017 video vs the 2013 video. So yeah I guess there’s something.

    • McM.

      You don’t see it?

      Are you watching SC vids on a phone in 270p?

      • sxg

        I don’t have a laptop so for me my answer is yes lol. But I can still see a noticeable difference in color quality.

  • erexshawn

    and here I thought you were referring to the shrinking cock sizes.

  • doodlebug

    The overall quality declined after Mindgeek bought them. Anytime a conglomerate swallows up a mom and pop shop quality goes down. It’s not just the production values, it’s the models too. Has there been anyone really special introduced in the last couple of years? When big business is running the show, it’s all about the bottom line. They’re just not going to to put the time, money, and dare I say love that someone like Sean Cody, whose name was on the product, would.

    • pje821

      I completely agree, except I have to say Shaw and Nixon are two of the hottest men working anywhere in the gayporn industry today, and they’re both relatively new. And Jack, Randy and a few others are the very best in the business. I don’t see much difference in the picture quality (although the yellow paint vs. the grey-painted room makes a difference in the crispness of the flesh tones): I do see a huge difference in how these scenes are photographed (less skillfully), and the fact they no longer capture the cumshots from two very distinct angles and replay them in their entirety, which for me was always a major factor in my considering SC the top studio in the U.S. (No longer; that goes to Corbin Fisher, but they could use some new models and more variations on their sex scenarios, too.) SC used to engage hotter men; there must be a new person in charge of recruiting. A lot of their hottest only do solos, whereas Corbin Fisher seems to get more of the hot ones to at least let another model give them a blowjob. Bottom line: Since SC was sold, it’s gone downhill. What a shame.

      • nbtx27

        Totally agree with everything you said.

  • danny

    I haven’t really noticed any difference in the video quality. My main complaint is that the models now don’t even come close to those from a few years back.

    • nbtx27

      Many of the models are simply terrible, and some of those are recurring!

  • Pertinax

    A good image is important, but nowadays the major problem with porn is the fact that it is made like people take a bath : Pure routine without any ‘ passion ‘, any audacity, petulance, … any sauciness.

    See ? Bad images, but good porn. Today, creativity is to show a gangbang in a fake dirty room or made ” artsy ” porn.

  • Scrapple
    • Mike Julius


  • FrenchBug

    As far as I am concerned this was the wrong choice of screencaps for this comparison. Coz all I could look at was the top’s dick in both and well…

  • amitch

    It looks like they’re not white-balancing the cameras before they shoot, which is a *baffling* and amateurish error. That yellow-green tone is what fluorescent lighting looks like through a camera that hasn’t been told that temperature of light should be read as white. White-balancing cameras is, like, video production 101.

  • Badger

    I find Blake more unwatchable rather than picture quality.

  • Zealot
  • sxg

    Forget the bad picture quality, what the fuck happened to Blake?!?!?
    He used to look so adorable, but now he looks generic and doughy, similar to how Curtis looked like when he came back with a shaved head and extra weight.
    Don’t get me wrong, Blake is still handsome and doable. But as far as what we used to expect from SC, he is subpar.

    EDIT: just saw the preview his body doesn’t look bad at all. That haircut just makes him almost unrecognizable.

    • nbtx27

      Blake is much better looking than Curtis. Haircut in the pics isn’t good, but really not much you can do about his hair at this point.

  • Xzamilloh

    I thought this was one of those “When you order it on the Internet vs. When it arrives” memes

    Oh, Sean Cody…

  • Maximus

    I don’t need my porn to resemble a James Cameron movie. This story should be about the decline in the hotness of SC models. Blake looks ten years and two kids older than he did when he debuted. Arnie is just…well, it doesn’t really need to be said.

    Come, let us all mourn the passing of the sexiness that once was.

  • emercycrite

    Mmm Brooks. That is all.

  • WhimsyCotton

    The issue here isn’t picture quality. It’s Arnie. If anything, the lower the picture quality in his videos, the better.

    • nbtx27

      I can’t disagree with that statement.

  • Tim

    I don’t notice the picture quality in the moment, but I don’t want to be bogged down by keeping subscriptions long term most of the time and I don’t always have internet access so for space sake i use the lower quality vids.

    My big problem is the shots they don’t take–they don’t do as many it seems, and the ones they take are filmed from far away. I really like Arnie in theory too, but given his proportions his dick simply isn’t big enough to be seen unless you get right up close. I could see a number of other studios doing him more justice by getting the close up shots and the like. a lot of their models are like that.

    I keep hoping Tanner will go to another studio and film now that he’s available and on twitter and all. i hope that Randy and Sean and Shaw and Blake and Lane and Joey will eventually fuck for other studios. There is so much more they could do if they were filmed better. I’d love to see Next Door’s approach to any of them, or hell, even the whole RFC approach to raunch would be a lot better.

    I still like a lot of Sean Cody’s content because they still get guys I like. but they need to fire the entire camera crew and hire the ones they had even in the early mindgeek days back.

    • Farm Guy

      Having spent some time with digital video production, I think that the fault
      is in the encoding, several years back the files sizes got SMALLER! You
      just can not have good picture quality if the files is compressed so
      much. Sad that it is probably another one of their cost saving ideas,
      less bandwidth, from smaller files cost less money… :-(

  • Connor Basilomar

    Screen resolution is the least of SC’s video problems. They continue to grind out the dullest, most formulaic snoozaramas in the industry and have for years. Wait, I take that back. Men holds that title. Firmly. But SC is a close second. I’d gladly put up with degraded resolution if anything they posted was even remotely erotic.

    • nbtx27

      Three years ago Sc was clearly the best. Now, I agree with you. Let’s see, what do MEN and SC have in common? Maybe that is the problem.

  • NTNT

    Bad Sean Cody!!! It seems to me that a lot of studios are using filters or something on their videos to make them darker and maybe vintage looking. I HATE IT.

  • badgamer1967
  • GN

    Yes, my suggestion if you have a stand-out business model is to not sell out to conglomerates with assembly-line mentalities and a less-than-keen eye for quality.

  • Jason Lord

    You would think that being owned the same company that owns Brazzers the video quality At Sean Cody would be outstanding. My theory is they want to dismantle loyalty to promote MEN. I looked back through their videography and I haven’t watched a new scene since April. Ouch. They’ve ruined Sean Cody.

    • nbtx27

      You are absolutely correct!

  • theredviper

    It’s obviously the hideous room decor. The terrible picture on the wall, the unmade bed, a white lamp against a white wall?? …culminating with the pointless tiny ass plant.

  • Scot Esty

    Does anyone know who the guy in this gif is? So yummy. Thanks!

    • gaysiantwink

      It’s Brooks. He’s in the original article. Same dude.

      • Scot Esty

        Thank you so much! Do you also happen to know which (solo?) scene is that gif from?

        • Adam

          Brooks only has one solo scene – that gif is about 4 minutes in.

          • Bio

            He had a few cam shows I believe. I don’t remember where from or how to obtain them, though photos of them exist.

        • moondoggy

          Skip the solo. Every fuck Brooks gave was awe inspiring. If you knew what I was willing to pay to see him fuck Daniel, you would have me declared incompetent and appoint Britney Spears’s dad the executor of my estate.

  • Adam

    A number of things that are diluting this once pretty solid “amateur” brand:
    1) Poor money = poor casting: They don’t seem to offer enough money to entice the hottest models to perform and then once their performers are there, not enough money to keep them coming back and experimenting. Years prior, however they managed it, Sean Cody models had a “look” – now, even hot ones look haggard and like shadows of themselves. Now, from what I understand from rumours, some less than upstanding ways were used to do so, but the quality of models definitely dropped. It’s pretty sad when you can predict if a model will come back by how hot they are (hot = 95% chance of not coming back after getting easy and less embarassing solo money).

    2) Poor direction: A few of the other posters posted about the technical issues and I will just add that there is not an understanding as to how to emphasize a model’s assets during these shoots. Two hot guys having sex is not hot if the camera angles are awkward or not enough cameras are around to capture the hottest parts of the sex from multiple angles. We do not need every studio to attempt the semi-art house look that Cocky Boys strives for in their biggest releases but I distinctly remember hot vintage porn or slightly more current older porn scenes like “His Lover’s Son” (which I still hold up as a great example of marrying hot sex with an actual script), the legitimate ‘buddies trying it out’ such as in SC’s Bailey’s Fuck Buddy, when Chance had sex with Johan Paulik in Bel Ami, or when Sean of Sean Cody was teaching Luke how to bottom for Zach because there was an attempt to tease out a connection between models and to maximize the potential for fans to re-watch the scene after the initial release. Strangely enough, Reality Dudes often has very weird camera angles but they achieve hot scenes with their set up of “reluctant straight guy (often gay4payers who have never bottomed) bottoms in exchange for cash” and they even have hot scenes with Leon Lewis following the fraternity hazing formula…but if all a porn site does is film the models sitting on a couch and the models really aren’t that special, then something else is needed to elevate the performance.

    3) Overall malaise in the industry: There are five overall issues I see diluting the hotness of gay porn right now –
    a) the use of cam site links on sites with established brands when those brands have no link to the quality of the models on the cam sites – Randy Blue was the only established site that actually used Randy Blue models…the rest use links going to flirt4free, camwithhim, or similar boring sites;
    b) the use of eastern european models that do not match the brand’s aesthetic (Randy Blue is now very guilty of this) – Eurosex has a look that often conflicts with the “hot American guys” brand most of these brands push;
    c) Mindgeek itself does not seem to employ enough gay men or straight men or women that understand what hot sex is;
    d) “Sharing” models across sites is more of a business issue, but it is better for a model to be an exclusive rather than have them appear once or twice on SC or Active Duty, but have most of their actual scenes be on a site like Sketchy Sex or Fraternity X…it actually leads to less of a need to subscribe or to stick to a brand;
    e) obviously the money has never been that amazing in porn but it is a shame when the hottest models understand that there is a lack of investment in their overall well-being from studios so that the most sexy make ten or so amazing videos and then go over to escorting or cam sites…it’s pretty sad when the money isn’t even good enough to guarantee a great scene or that a model preserves a hot body.

  • nodoubtfan

    “Technology and video has only gotten better and more advanced over the last four years, so what in the world is going on?”

    The men got bigger and the dicks got smaller?

  • Not that I am eager to help SC out or by any means an expert. But. It looks like their new cameras use a Flat Picture Profile that is common in new higher end 4k cameras. The sensor deliberately films in a way that apparently gathers more raw data. With this flat looking file, in post, you can really alter video to be very vibrant. You should have total control or the video. To me, it looks like a video editor problem, one that is unaware of how to do color grading. Zack, head over to YouTube, search on ‘correct flat picture profile’ and maybe the samples there will match the samples you provided. Just don’t tell SC. 😉

    • nbtx27

      Thanks Bryan. Side note: Hey, you had a very good week of updates this week! Please keep it up and I’ll be back.

    • Scrapple

      Now while we might call you to the carpet for certain things, CM’s camera work has never been an issue. Your scenes always look crisp, and they’re not butchered all to be damned in the editing room like you see at certain studios which shall remain nameless…

      And good on you for sharing a tip with a competitor. Maybe one day SC will return the favor. Indirectly. By letting a wasted model fall by the wayside before you snatch him up and put him to better use.

  • Jay

    Won’t someone, anyone(well maybe not anyone), track down Brooks and just throw money at him to come back if he looks decent?
    C’mon! Studios… LOOK at his work. Get him back in the game.

    Also, Zack shame on you for constantly showing his gorgeous, tall, toned body and that huge delicious cock ALL THE TIME.
    I can only stay hard so long before I need to go to hospital. xD

  • cluelesswitness

    Sean Cody’s new content looks out of focus and poorly color corrected. I bet the “new management” switched the better equipment for cheaper models.

  • cluelesswitness

    I think they should shoot in a flat profile, but I doubt the people filming this shit even know what that means. They can literally learn this basic shit on YouTube. SMDH

  • Peter Wells

    One significant factor I have noticed is that the images get a lot better and more color saturated if you change the mode setting on you panel display. Mine has a “photo” setting that is very good for this but I have also tweaked the “movie” setting.

  • Jon

    It’s really NOT that serious. Who cares if the porn is in 240p if it’s actually hot?

    I’d focus on the bigger issues at SC, which is that they seem to be running out of hot new models and some of the pairings as of late have been yawn inducing.

    If they were actually still churning out hot vids, I literally couldn’t care less if it was shot in greyscale.

    And I’m not a size queen, but jeez Arnie is small.

  • pje821

    Excellent analogy. SC needs to hire directors who know how to photograph the male body to highlight the muscles and sweat and most importantly, the cum. I hate SC no longer employs the guys who brilliantly captured the cumshots from two angles and repeated them in their entirety: That would be what Lexus would do.

    • Russell47

      Agree. On a tube site run by MG I found the Landon tops Shaw scene. Now being that they own both, you know MG put it there. Unless they butchered it purposely to tempt viewers to join, that was awful. Twice Landon came. In the 1st he supposedly Creampied Shaw. The 2nd he came on his dick & balls, then half halfheartedly put it back in. No closeups! The scene where Shaw lays half on the floor & Landon plowed him was reminiscent of Landon topping Blake, one of the hottest, Blake shoots in his own mouth, & Landon creams him & keeps on plowing. They should have repeated that with Shaw in some manner. What a depressing scene

      • pje821

        They’ve been pairing Shaw with the “C Squad” at SC of late. What a waste of the hottest man in their library.

  • Scott

    It’s not the video quality – it’s the model quality. I know Blake is hot. But Arnie? Plaaazzzzzzee

  • Star69Me

    and here I was thinking the article was gonna be about the cookie-cutter half-mast straight-from-the-factory performers this site constantly churns out…

  • Andrew Ortega

    i have a question, i was thinking of joining both Sean Cody and Corbin Fisher, however I still live at home and i wasnt sure if they send catalogs or other porn related things through snail mail

    • Zachary Sire

      They definitely do not, and even your bill (if you pay by debit/credit card or check/bank number) will say something vague and innocuous (“A&P Billing”) and not have the name of the studio.