Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!

E-MAIL   PASS  

Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
Feedback History A detailed history of activity from this user in all different categories.
User : greg909 (2)  

Feedback:   All (41)  |   Reviews (3)  |   Comments (10)  |   Replies (28)

Other:   Replies Received (38)  |   Trust Ratings (11)

All Activity A summary of all the feedback from this user.
Shown : 1-25 of 41 Page :    Next Page >

Type Site - Score Feedback / Review Date
Review
1
Visit abbywinters

abbywinters
(0)

75.0
Status: Current Member for over 3 months (at the time of review).
Pros: - Lots and lots of content accumulated over the years, which is great if you're a first-time member

- The girls are young, natural, and generally very cute. Most have pubic hair like REAL young girls -- not shaved like the window dummies on most other sites

- The girls wear REAL (but still very sexy)clothes, not ridiculous costumes that distract you and make the experience unreal

- Lots of videos, with a choice of how to view them. Personally, I can't be bothered to spend an hour downloading a video that's the size of a postcard, but I quite like the style of some AW shoots.
Cons: - The majority of picture sets are a frustrating tease. Either the lighting and photography aren't up to showing the details (see below) you want, or the model doesn't pose very explicitely. Some sets DO get it right, and then it's a special pleasure

- My biggest complaint: image quality. Unlike several major sites these days, Abby Winters refuses to provide the option of large (e.g. 3000x2000 pixel) images on all sets. Instead, they only offer larger images on occasional sets, which means the ones you REALLY want bigger are only available in their "standard" size of 1472x981 pixels. The standard size wouldn't be TOO bad if the resolution and compression were handled well, but Abby's pics lack the fine detail of sites with similar image sizes, like ATK Hairy. I'm not sure what they do wrong to the images, because apparently the cameras used are professional Canon SLRs.

- Depth of field: Big problem on AW. They usually have the important "bits" out of focus.
Bottom Line: AW has some great content accumulated over the years, and the girls are uniquely natural and beautiful. If you're a first-time member, there's a lot of good stuff. But for returning members, I now find little new picture content worth saving; AW focuses far more on videos these days, with just one new picture set every couple of days. Of those sets, most don't have the resolution of sites like AVErotica.

Sadly, AW accepts feedback, but seems to not listen unless it is praise. I've given suggestions about depth of field in the past, and just get "maybe you should go elsewhere" responses. In most sets now, it's just page 5 on a 6 page set that offers some modest nudity. If they could at least offer higher quality images, then the few shots that are good would be golden!

Oh, and AW currently doesn't offer membership through the normal trusted brokers like CCBill, only through their own billing system... so some U.S banks refuse the transaction. Wake up AW!!

11-27-09  11:05am

Replies (6)
Review
2
Visit Zemani

Zemani
(0)

55.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Attractive collection of girls
- Good lighting and composition in most sets
- Site navigation is fine
- I guess the videos are OK, although check out other reviews for those... it's not my scene
- Pictures look OK at 1200 pixel resolution
- A few natural bushes, in addition to the usual dominance of completely shaved models.
Cons: - So-called "poster size" images (the "big" size option) are horrible quality with no fine detail in the vast majority of photosets.
Bottom Line: Sorry, but I just had to blow the cover on this site. The Best Porn gave Zemani's image quality an "A+" which is so, so misleading. (Misleading enough that I signed up in the hope that things were good there now, but I was very disapointed.)

You guys at The Best Porn should take a second look -- you said the images are so sharp even when you zoom in on the big images (which are 4000 pixels or higher.) Well that's because they've applied HEAPS of false sharpening. Maybe 1 or 2 percent of sets are OK, but the other 98% are full of digital artifacts like jagged edges and pixelation in the model's eyes that look like they upscaled the image from a smaller size. Last year I commented on the full-size sample images, and they have taken them off the site now, only offering small samples in pop-up boxes. I'm not surprised. Beware!

It's a shame, because if the images were high quality like Met-art (which they're not) then they'd have a great site because the girls, settings and compositions are just fine.

06-21-11  06:26pm

Replies (2)
Review
3
Visit Girls Dot Com

Girls Dot Com
(0)

50.0
Status: Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
Pros: Some pretty girls -- or at least they would be if you were able to see them clearly
Cons: Extremely poor image quality: they're the kind of picture quality you'd have seen back in early 90s internet sites.

Very limited content. The site boasts about having huge numbers of sets, but what they don't tell you before joining is that those sets are made accessible on a rotating basis. Only a few sets are accessible each month. So you can't even get to most of the old stuff.
Bottom Line: Don't waste your time! This site is paranoid about people downloading lots of its content, so it employs various techniques to prevent members from easily getting to everything. And trust me -- you wouldn't want to anyway, because the image quality is worse than that on most free sites.

11-27-09  11:34am

Replies (1)
Reply
4
Visit FEMJOY

FEMJOY
(1)
Reply of skippy's Review

One of the things that really annoys me about Femjoy is that the thumbnails they post to represent each set is VERY misleading. Many of the sets are poorly lit, not very sharp, have the wrong color balance, and the model is miles away from the camera. Yet the editors on Femjoy take the best shot in the set (there's usually only one that's any good) and crop it significantly to look like the model is much closer. Then they pump up the light levels (which they don't do for the photos themselves) and adjust the color to a more accurate balance. As a result, the set's thumbnail looks very inviting, but you're really disappointed when you see the set itself. Don't be misled by their Updates page -- the actual content is rarely like it.

09-01-14  05:09pm

Reply
5
Visit abbywinters

abbywinters
(0)
Reply of Parsnip's Reply

Let's make a distinction between "fine art nude" and porn. We are talking about porn in Abby Winters. Sure you could shoot f2.8 in fine art. But let's not deceive ourselves here.

08-24-14  08:34pm

Reply
6
Visit abbywinters

abbywinters
(0)
Reply of abbywinters's Reply

OK AW, here's the thing. I have posted reviews of your site before. But nothing ever changes. I really want your site to succeed, because the concept appeals to me -- natural young girls without silly makeup and silly clothes.

But endless shots of just a pussy (or more often, a hand covering a pussy) are not appealing unless you can see the girl who it belongs to... in reasonable focus. You so rarely get both clearly in the same shot.. unless she's 50 yards away. No, I don't want you to shoot with wide angle -- it obviously distorts the body and faces. But I think you should be shooting at f16 in acceptable ISO ranges (below 400). This, of course, means you need strobes. Oh, just think of it... the wonderful, natural girls you get with the technical clarity of Sean R. People would be signing up around the world!! But as it is, sure, you can quote some good comments, just as any movie publicists can quote a good review from at least somewhere. Use lights! It doesn't make the girls less natural -- it just takes them out of the grainy, murkiness and makes them more real.


08-24-14  08:29pm

Reply
7
Visit abbywinters

abbywinters
(0)
Reply of CatSteppings's Review

I suspect this review is a plant by Abby Winters. Either that or perhaps you've never visited many porn sites! The photography is absolutely awful; it lacks fine detail in most sets, and shot without decent lighting. It is true that the models are great, but that's not much use if the pictures are worthless. Often, the only clear in focus unobstructed picture of both face and pussy is the last one in the set where the model is standing.

From what I can gather, most of the photography is by ex-models from the site. They seriously, and I mean SERIOUSLY need some professional photographers on the site. If they did that, and increase new sets by about 400 percent, then they'd be a good site.

Great concept , poorly executed.


08-14-14  04:01am

Reply
8
Visit ATK Natural & Hairy

ATK Natural & Hairy
(2)
Reply of Loki's Comment

Yes, they're claiming that "there's a shortage of unshaved girls", which sounds absurd. I did read elsewhere that ATK weren't paying their photographers on time, so perhaps those contributors are now holding back their work. Of course, we don't know the full truth of this, but my guess is that photographers like Sean R have a whole stash of great new sets ready but won't send them till ATK hands over the money.

05-01-14  07:57am

Reply
9
Visit ATK Galleria

ATK Galleria
(0)
Reply of Denner's Comment

I'm guessing this disappointment comes mostly from the video perspective. As a photos man, let me give you a different perspective...

The image quality at ATK Galleria is very good (on average) and the girls are HOT with a wide variety of niches every month. There are also more galleries each day on Galleria than ANY site I'm aware of. What really confuses me is how Nubiles gets such higher ratings than Galleria, when Nubiles has fewer updates, lower image quality, and hands in front of the pussy on almost every shot. I guess it's down to videos again, but I'd prefer Galleria any day of the week.


03-26-14  11:29am

Reply
10
Visit Wet And Pissy

Wet And Pissy
(1)
Reply of LPee23's Review

I might add that for those of us more into the still pictures, they are mediocre quality at best on this site, and usually miss the best action. As for the videos, great quality, but far too much other stuff like dildos and glasses for my liking.

03-19-14  11:01am

Reply
11
Visit FTV Girls

FTV Girls
(5)
Reply of EverNight's Review

I did a subscription here recently. The HUGE turnoff for me is that FTV Girls is one of those sites where you can only download the bigger images as a zip file -- the entire gallery or nothing. So it's a loooong download, followed by unzipping, followed by editing and copying, etc. I gave up after a while -- far too much effort.

Also, as the reviewer said, every set is repetative.


03-19-14  10:48am

Comment
12
Visit ALS Scan

ALS Scan
(1)

WARNING: This site is affected by a Serious Virus

ALSSCAN is currently host to the Ransom Trojan (a.k.a. "Homeland Security" virus). Go there and you will pick up this virus! Be warned.

11-24-13  12:19pm

Replies (1)
Comment
13
Visit Club Seventeen

Club Seventeen
(1)

Mini-Review

OK, maybe I'll submit a full review when time permits, but I just did a signup after the recent "95" rated review for this site... and I am sorely disappointed.

Honestly, for a site that's been around so long, you'd think that certain basics would have improved. (I did an earlier subscription a couple of years ago.) My major disappointment: the photos are not just smaller than most top sites -- they are very lacking in fine detail and resolution. Honestly, you could take sharper, higher quality pictures with a cell phone these days. I really don't know WHY Clubseventeen manages to take such aweful, soft and blurry images. And it applies to almost every set. I just gave up after a while.

Other issues: the preview pages give the impression that tons of galleries are added across the many categories. But actually, it's only the main (white shaved teens) categories that get regular updates. Others like "unshaved teens" and ethnic teens only get a handful of galleries each year, if that.

Oh, and navigation sucks. You can't even tell which page you're on because the "1,2,3...Last" links don't highlight the current page.

The girls are truly hot. If only Clubseventeen photographed them in sharp, high-quality images, they'd have a much better site. But things never seem to improve there. Rating: 55.

11-07-13  04:36pm

Replies (1)
Reply
14
Visit abbywinters

abbywinters
(0)
Reply of s1vus1's Review

I would rate AW much lower than "81" these days. I did a month recently to see if things have improved, but alas, they're worse. Yes, they use a lot of "Euro-girls" now, many of which are very hot. It's just that every other site uses them too, so AW has lost one of the few advantages they once had: unique models. Furthermore, updates are very, very poor for the price they charge. They try to fill in with those (low res) behind-the-scenes sets, and recycled "one year ago" sets, but sites like met-art or ATK have more sets in one day than AW has in a week... and the photography's better on those other sites too. Now that AW has more sets in bigger sizes, it's much more obvious how aweful their photography is, riddled with poor focus, grainyness, motion blur, etc. And as always, the "goods" are only seen properly in those closeups where the girl's face is missing. There's usually a hand or a dildo in the way. Sorry, AW, never again.

04-24-12  07:42am

Reply
15
Visit Karup's PC

Karup's PC
(1)
Reply of Karup's Reply

Good to hear. I hope you will also use a low enough compression that it doesn't strip all the fine detail out. This is a problem on many sites where they boast about big sizes, yet the actual detail is no better than smaller sizes due to too much filtering. I look forward to checking the site out in the future.

12-01-11  09:48am

Reply
16
Visit Karup's PC

Karup's PC
(1)
Reply of Karup's Reply

Well it doesn't say what those concerns were. But the biggest concern for most of us is when exactly will Karup increase your images sizes to meet today's expectations (i.e. 3000x2000 or higher)?

11-30-11  06:26pm

Reply
17
Visit Nubiles.net

Nubiles.net
(2)
Reply of messmer's Review

The thing that keeps me away from Nubiles the most is that all the girls are completeley shaved. I mean, even if they had 1 out of 5 models that were natural then it would be nice. But there are none. It's another ALS if you ask me, but with inferior photography.

10-21-11  10:50am

Reply
18
Visit Cosplay Deviants

Cosplay Deviants
(0)
Reply of tangub's Reply

I'll second that. 900 pixels hardly even qualifies as "small" today. Wake me up when you have 2000 pixels or higher.

10-03-11  04:40pm

Reply
19
Visit ATK Exotics

ATK Exotics
(0)
Reply of monty4321's Review

I'd have to agree with your review. What you say is also true of ATK Galleria -- despite the larger image sizes that they now offer, ATK's images often lack detail and look processed. I think at least part of this is due to over-compression.

ATK Hairy is probably the best quality, but it's still a mixed bag, some photographers being pros, while others are clearly amateurs.


07-19-11  08:15am

Reply
20
Visit ATK Natural & Hairy

ATK Natural & Hairy
(2)
Reply of messmer's Review

Well said, Messmer. I hope that ATK are reading this, because so many of us loyal members of their site are now pretty pissed off that so many of the girls are like circus freaks with gorilla hair everywhere, tattoos and piercings all over their bodies,too. ATK have a category called "Scary Hairy." These types of women should appear there only.

While we're on the subject, one GOOD thing about the new comment feature is that ATK gets to hear how bad its members feel about the amateur quality of the photography (Sean R excepted.) So much of it is badly lit, badly focused, and not especially well resolved, despite the larger image sizes now.


06-21-11  10:37am

Reply
21
Visit 21Sextury.com

21Sextury.com
(9)
Reply of RustyJ's Comment

I checked out 21sextury this month, and the biggest (and most annoying) surprise was how small all the easily accessible images are. I mean, the ones you can view or download individually are tiny by today's standards. The only way, it seems, that you can obtain larger versions is to download an entire zip file of the gallery -- and that's only available on a few sets. It took AN HOUR to download one of these zips on broadband, then a further 30 mins or so to unzip it, etc... and all I wanted was about four shots in HD. Totally unacceptable.

And the content? Well, I don't know what all the fuss is about. Of all the bizzare categories, there's not even one for regular gals with bush.


05-07-11  11:57am

Reply
22
Visit ATK Natural & Hairy

ATK Natural & Hairy
(2)
Reply of The Bishop's Reply

Yes Bish, I've seen those gals, and agree that some are gorgeous. It's just that in the last 3 months or so, they generally haven't been, or else it's someone we've seen far too much of already. But I look forward to when there are!

04-26-11  02:06pm

Reply
23
Visit ALS Scan

ALS Scan
(1)
Reply of messmer's Reply

I, too, checked out this site recently since it gets good ratings here (and like messmer says, there are so few natural pubes sites that one is forced to these shaved-like-window-dummies" sites to get any variety.)

Anyhow, to give ALS some credit, a lot of the images are quite good quality. But the thing that struck me the most was that every single model (aside from all being shaved) has almost exactly the same figure and face. Sure, some are brunettes and some are blondes, but as I looked back through their catalog, I kept thinking that I'd already seen each new model because they are all interchangeable. So boring! This was pretty much confirmed in a couple of sets called "Prague Auditions" (or something like that) where the site posts models that auditioned for the site, stating which were rejected or hired. It seemed that only the ones who fitted their tiny range of looks got through... and all the ones that I found interesting and a little different got rejected.

Oh well, nice if you like that exact look repeated over and over, but it wasn't for me.


04-26-11  01:53pm

Reply
24
Visit ATK Natural & Hairy

ATK Natural & Hairy
(2)
Reply of The Bishop's Review

Yes, I think that Sean R remains the only true professional photographer used by ATK. Sadly, most of his more recent sets are either of models that we've seen a million times already, or they're tattooed slags with makeup like a hooker. I'm hoping he gets some fresh, young, unspoiled talent again soon.

Oh, and I find it strange when people refer to hairy content as "niche", since most of the women in the real world have pubic hair. It's only niche in the porn world where models feel they have to be shaved like window dummies -- that's the REAL niche as far as I'm concerned. But everyone to their own fetish :-)


04-08-11  11:28am

Reply
25
Visit Club Seventeen

Club Seventeen
(1)
Reply of spazlabz's Reply

Oh, one other thing... much, much more unshaved girls please. The category is so neglected. I don't know why you even have a "shaved" category because almost all the girls are shaved anyway in every other category.

02-11-11  03:44pm


Shown : 1-25 of 41 Page :    Next Page >

Home - Sites - Users - Reviews - Comments - Categories - Forum

Contact Us - Announcements - FAQ's - Terms & Rules - Porn Review - Webmasters

Protecting Minors
We are strong supporters of RTA and ICRA, two of the most recognized self labeling organizations. Our site is properly labeled to assist in the protection of minors accessing inappopriate content. For information about filtering tools, check this site.

DISCLAIMER: ALL MODELS APPEARING ON THIS WEBSITE ARE 18 YEARS OR OLDER.

To report child pornography, go directly to ASACP!  We're proud to be a corporate sponsor.
Have concerns or questions about porn addiction?  We recommend this helpful resource.

Copyright © 2007 Ranks.com, Inc. and its licensors. All Rights Reserved.


Loaded in 0.34 seconds.