Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!


Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
Feedback History A detailed history of activity from this user in all different categories.
User : otoh (54)  

Feedback:   All (754)  |   Reviews (27)  |   Comments (84)  |   Replies (643)

Other:   Replies Received (336)  |   Trust Ratings (39)

All Activity A summary of all the feedback from this user.
Shown : 1-25 of 754 Page :    Next Page >

Type Site - Score Feedback / Review Date
Visit Petites Parisiennes

Petites Parisiennes

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Updated: 05-23-11  01:30am  (Update History)
Reason: Added another point for dropping the frame-based navigation, which was a bit awkward and glitchy. Revised navigation is much easier!
Pros: - Great clothing and strips
- Wonderful lingerie
- Beautiful models with personality - good mix of shapes and types
- Good lighting and sets
- Outdoor shoots are fun and voyeuristic
- Great quality - most videos 1080, most pics up to 4000px
- Interview videos are fun and sexy
- Daily updates
- Consistent quality as the work of just one photographer
- Much sexier than most art-nude material
- Helpful and responsive webmaster/photographer
Cons: - Navigation enhanced since I reviewed! Now more than enough options for the size of the site
- Would be nice if zips were named uniquely
- I'd be happy to see more late 20s models
- Would like more girls with at least strips/triangles of pubic hair (but there are some!)
- Studio/nude only shots are a little bland to me
- Some interviews in French are missing english subtitles (some have them)
- Update schedule is centred around specific models
Bottom Line: I've been a collector of erotic photo books for a few years now; I like the tactileness of flicking through them, and there is some good material around that's more evocative than most porn (although porn does have it's own attractions, as I'm discovering online :) ). Such books come in two basic varieties:
- Those depicting the curves of the female form; or naked, shaved (and photoshopped) young girls cavorting on beaches
- Those that are actually arousing

From what I've seen of the well-known art photo sites - Hegre Art, Met Art etc - they fall more into the first camp and so, although featuring very beautiful girls and excellent photography, don't really work for me. This site - at least for me - is different and quite erotic, thanks to a number of things:

- Models - mostly natural girls, 19-28, most in early and mid 20s. Sophisticated French girls, glamorous eastern European models, and quirky girls with eg, tattoos, piercings, mops of curly or dyed hair. The photographer makes the most of them all; I've found sets to interest me for every model I've looked at so far.

- Clothing - the girls look great, comfortable and relaxed in what they are wearing (even if only briefly). And the lingerie... it's expensive, smart, sexy and different... in most cases the kind that girls themselves like and would buy, nothing gaudy or tacky.

- Lighting - the scenes are all well lit - but not harshly so; it looks natural, and the colours aren't oversaturated as we so often see.

- Premise - the shots are centred around various themes, eg: waking up, showering, trying on lingerie, getting dressed - a bit voyeuristic and quite sexy (somehow dressing more so than undressing). The settings are either modern, smart hotel rooms, actual apartments (more voyeurism!), and quite a few outdoor scenes - some quite risqué stuff in Paris.

About 50 or so models, each with, approx 8 photo sets (80 each?) and 6 videos of 5-10 minutes. The videos are worth mentioning - similar in tone to the shoots, and some fun truth-or-strip interviews; for once I don't mind a guy doing the interviewing, maybe his French accent gets the best out of the girls.

It's not all perfect; each model has a couple of fully nude and/or studio shoots - for me these fall into the arty category and don't work as well without the atmosphere of clothing/premise/location. These are spiced up a little, though, with some shibari (Japanese-style rope bondage) and liquid latex (!)

Content is quite soft, maybe too soft for some folk; you will see:
- Pussy close-ups, stroking with fingers, hands slipped into panties and tugged aside
You will not see much (although a little) of:
- Fingers/toys inserted, spread open shots

Also, some minor cons as above; and I find a few glitches - eg thumbnails linking to the wrong sets - but they've been corrected as I've mentioned them on the forum.

But these are minor gripes and not really important. Overall, a really great site that sets the bar for me.

01-08-11  01:51pm

Replies (9)
Visit The Life Erotic

The Life Erotic

Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Daily updates
- Good range of models
- Good streaming player that lets you skip in the movie easily
- High production values; great photography and videography
- Genuinely erotic; interesting scenarios
- Browse by model and photographer - and all updates dated
- Transparent preview - you can see what you will be getting
- Attractive outfits and lingerie
Cons: - Music is overdone on some videos
- Some sets too big
- Limited search (there's a keyword search, but no browsing by age/hair/ethnicity etc)
- Some very low light sets
- Archive material is uninspired
- Regional pricing bias (but easily avoidable)
Bottom Line: The Life Erotic is a site which has been on my radar for a while now... I had been put off in the past by the comments and reviews, which made it seem uninspiring. But when browsing through some TGP sites I visit to keep er, abreast of what's around, the shots from TLE are always the ones which grab my attention more than any others, by being atmospheric and interesting... so I eventually got round to trying it.

It's tricky to review, as it's almost two different sites, having changed direction about a year ago - and tangub's review very accurately reflects the site it was, before then. The pre-2012 material is very lacking in inspiration - a few raunchy photo sets, with the model masturbating or opening her pussy - but they are cookie-cutter softcore glam and the others are dull, Met-Art style posed beauty shots, with little atmosphere or erotic appeal. The videos are sometimes more raunchy, with some masturbation - but in most cases they are ruined by insipid music drowning out any sound of the model, and with it any atmosphere.

But then it becomes exactly the site I've been looking for. A surprise, as it's part of the Met Art network, the main site of which I find a bit dull - TLE uses some of the same photographers and models, but here, free of the constraints of their absolutely-no-naughty-business rules, they shine. This is the site Met Art should be, and it's telling that almost all the material I have downloaded is from this more recent face of the site; which defines it as largely solo (occasional girl-girl) nudity and masturbation.

I liked:

* The models - mostly European, some American, some South American - many I have not seen elsewhere, but some popular models. Ages up to late 20s which works for me as I find most younger models unable to carry off real seductiveness; there are also a fair number of unshaved models too, which is my preference. A quick scan through the models list shows approx 400 here.

* Atmosphere - most sets here are subtly lit, with no glaring studio lights. Some sets feature models in attractive, casual clothes - which come off to various degrees, but generally enough to see everythng. Others feature nice, sophisticated lingerie... which again, luckily, comes off.

* Sets - no faux-lux neo-regency stuff here. Sets are in a variety of locations, from subtle indoor shoots, to abandoned buildings - all of which let credence to the scenario.

* The level of explicitness - none of this artiness comes at the expense of detail. Many sets and videos feature explicit masturbation; some with toys and often closeups which most photographers manage to do here in some detail but without it seeming gynecological.

* Quality - videos are available in a few sizes and formats up to 1080p. Photos likewise - the upper resolution depends on the photographer and is up to 5K; otherwise they all have 2K and 1K.

* Daily updates, probably 1 in 3 or 4 of which are movies. Prior to 2012, they were maybe half as frequent. So very roughly - 2012 onwards, 300 photo sets + 100 videos; prior to that, maybe 400 photo sets + 100 videos.

Some things I didn't like:

* Some of the newer videos are still ruined by daft music. Don't do it!

* Some sets are just too dark, and there's little detail to be seen - and I suspect many PUers' tolerance will be lower than mine.

* Some sets are huge, both in terms of number of images, and in file sizes - I like tightly edited sets and too many here are over 100 pics. Some zips are 500Mb which is daft - even at 5K they could be compressed more aggressively. When the next option is 50Mb of 2K pics, I want something in between.

* Some scenarios miss the mark; but it's good they are experimenting a bit...

The scenarios being the most important part of the site. They are inventive and creative; many have some kind of story to them and it makes them both more voyeuristic and believable - without eschewing action. Some videos I liked include the model:

...In an abandoned building, eating an apple, letting the juice run down her as she masturbates
...Walking into an hold house, getting vaguely ghostly echoes of a past occupant... then reenacting it by masturbating
... Returning home to find a note left by a secret admirer... getting worked up over it, and masturbating
...Getting dressed up for a night out... then getting a text cancelling it, proceeding to undress, and masturbating
...Shaving per pussy with a bowl of warm water... then gulping more from a jug, letting it spill from her mouth onto her breasts while masturbating
...Chatting on IM with a lover... him suggesting she undress... which she does, and proceeds to masturbate on cam

There is a recurring theme there - and many of the videos come with matching sets, so the photos are as good and explicit.

This site genuinely earns it's name and is recommended for erotica fans; and to help emphasise the new direction of it, I have given it the benefit of the doubt by basing my score largely on that aspect.

02-07-13  06:05pm

Replies (4)
Visit The Mosh Room

The Mosh Room

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: * Incredibly beautiful model
* Great lingerie, nylons and glam fetishwear
* Sets from some of the best pinup/fetish/alt photographers
* Low price
* No regional pricing
Cons: * No zip sets
* Varying pic resolutions
* Currently transitional - not all content in one place
* May be too tame for some
* Videos infrequent
* Limited interaction
Bottom Line: This is the first solo model site I've ever joined - I don't often fixate on models, instead following photographers more - for me, they define the ambiance/eroticism of a scene more than the model (although the best sets obviously involve both!). But Miss Mosh is an exception, being absolutely my favourite model; and I eventually got round to joining her site.

The lovely Mosh is actually a pinup/fetish model and burlesque performer, and what you will find here are pictures sets in all those genres - some specifically for websites (eg Office Erotic, High on Heels, Alt Exclusive, Action Girls, Stagg Street, Holly Randall); some shoots for latex and lingerie makers; some magazine shoots; some burlesque performance candids. Themes include nylons, vintage underwear, sheer lingerie, retro dresses, heels, hotrod/custom cars, mild bondage and plenty of latex (of the more glam kind) - all things which definitely are my thing, having been so since before getting into actual porn.

As Atrapat mentions in his recent review, it's arguably more artistic than erotic... but I would actually argue that a little. Although Mosh does do - and you'll see plenty of - full nudity here, it remains tame, with little to no legs spread or touching... however, she's definitely at the top her field and is incredibly beautiful, glamorous and alluring. She has amazing poise and flexibility - in some sets you'll see her use it to the extreme, but in others more subtly, lending an eroticism to what may otherwise be a more ordinary pose.

Atrapat's recent review is excellent, and covers all the facts and figures of the site, so I won't repeat them. However, since then, the gallery section has been updated, and pictures moved into various categories (glamour, fetish, girl/girl etc), at least; it's still in progress with some galleries still in the old page-through interface, but I'm sure this will be resolved soon. There are still no zips of sets - but it's very trivial to download whole sets with eg DTA, so I only count that as a minus if sites go out of their way to stop you downloading.

There are reasonably frequent picture updates - I'd say one per week on average - but otherwise site is relatively basic, which is understandable given that it's an aside to what Mosh does - she's probably the most popular model in the genre and is in great demand. It's therefore a bit tricky to score - sure, there are plenty of more feature-filled solo model sites, and I'd like to see a bit more interaction there, news updates coming only every month or so. But Mosh has such an allure, such a timeless, star quality, that it would be criminal to score her any less than 90, so I'll match Atrapat's - and go one more since I'm such a huge fan :)

10-02-12  05:42pm

Replies (5)
Visit Juliland


Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Original, glam-fetish style content
- Lots and lots of fishnets, lingerie, boots
- Many well-known porn stars
- Fun and varied videos
- Tightly edited, concise photo sets
- I discovered B&W can actually be raunchy and erotic
- Frequent updates - approx 5 per week
Cons: - Very basic search and no tagging
- Some material out-weirds me
- Older videos are not HD
- Many videos rely too much on music soundtrack
- Max pic size of 1600px could be better
- Many will think the photo sets too small
- A few more enhanced boobs than I'd prefer
Bottom Line: This is a site which had been on my list to try for quite some time; I kept sidelining it since it kind of scared me, but I was eventually won over by the presence of many fetish models I like - eg Jade Vixen, Emily Marilyn, Darenzia and even Dita von Teese. And it turns out that I really shouldn't have worried since it has some really great, original, and sexy material.

A look at the site will probably reveal what scared me about it - there is some heavy makeup, sometimes tidy, sometimes smeared over the model's face and hands; some with their faces fully painted or their whole body covered in glitter. As haagar mentioned - be sure to read his review too - it gets weirder, with some sets focused around the toilet, peeing, or models covered in blood (!) But that's only part of it; and there's just as much material at the milder end of the glam fetish theme - there are lots of heels, nylons, fishnets, boots, corsets and lingerie and the models look in control, assertive, and sometimes dominant... all things that appeal to me. As does the softer material here - more typical glamour shots, beds, lingerie etc - but still in the photographer's same style.

There are roughly 1000 photo sets here, going back to 2006. They are lean, with an average of maybe 25 photos per set; many folk would find that too small, but in the hands of a good photographer, as Richard Avery certainly is, I consider it a plus; they are pruned, tightly edited to leave every shot a good one. Many of the pictures are quite stark, and I think that 100+ pics in a set would lessen the impact; but it's a shame they are only offered at 1600px, which for me is the bare minimum; I'd rather have seen 3-4K.

Some sets have the context of a location but quite a lot are on plain studio backgrounds, some are grainy and many are black and white - themes I usually dismiss as being too arty and boring, but here there's a rawness that makes even these far more interesting. Although there's no hardcore as such - an occasional set featuring the photographer's hand, perhaps - it's otherwise quite explicit, with most sets featuring masturbation, and there are a lot of upskirt shots - usually without the skirt, but you get the idea/angle. The models have a big part in making it so interesting; About 100 or so, including a lot of well-known porn stars (I particularly liked Bobbi Starr, Zoe Britton, Michelle Maylene & Tori Black), but not quite as you've seen them before; there's a quality of it being obviously more glam and staged; but somehow also more real, than typical porn.

Videos have a similar theme, although there's quite a variety - again plenty of quite explicit, raw masturbation, sometimes with toys; some girl-girl but also some BTS and interviews - recently they are shown in a very professional-looking chat show format hosted by Lexi Belle (who incidentally has a lot of material here, if you are a fan). As with the pictures, some are B&W, some grainy, some even with a night vision camera; but not at the expense of being too arty, it's still very erotic. There are about 500 videos from maybe 3-15 minutes - the older ones are quite small, at 640x360 - they are actually pretty sharp considering and look good; but many of them have no sound, just a music soundtrack. It's a mixture of ambient/trippy/grungy/spooky music, which is far better than the supposed sexy music we get elsewhere; but not having sound doesn't really work for me. The approx 100 most recent ones are HD720, but apart from the size, they emphasise more on the model talking/groaning etc and are far more interesting.

Although the style is very different, I feel this has a lot in common with Ed Fox's Foot Factory - another great photographer who shoots porn stars with a quirky, slightly underground-y style; but although I like the material at both, the quality and updates here make it by far the better site. Even if I didn't like the material as much, I'd still score this in the 80s, since it's good to see somebody doing something so unique and fresh. But as it is, although perhaps only the tamer half of it works for me, work it does, hence the score - just the lack of a better search and bigger pictures keeps it from being higher in the 90s.

The update thumbnails should give you an idea of what to expect; if the style appeals, this comes very highly recommended.

12-12-11  02:26am

Replies (1)
Visit Girls Out West

Girls Out West

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Good filtering options
- Bio details for each model
- Active forum
- Interesting and varied locations
- Natural, charming girls
- Good range of ages, body types
- Plenty of unshaved models
- Great quality videos
- Good download speeds on huge files
Cons: - Site is a bit dated, in looks and operation
- G/G and G/B are separate 'models'
- Some inconsistency in video formats
- Only recent 1080 videos streamable/previewable
- Pics have one resolution, basic slideshow
- Some picture sets too large
- Poor preview area
Bottom Line: I'm usually into the slightly more glam side of things, but for some reason had a hankering for some amateur, real-girl type material, and perhaps just a little G/B - hardcore isn't really my thing, but occasionally I enjoy it. Having seen clips from both Girls out West and Abby Winters, it was a close call - but I opted for the former, it seems a little more raunchy and one price gets you everything here, as opposed to the different site areas at AW. I suspect the material is similar - and reading some of the comments, it looks like some models defected to GOW after AW moved production from Australia - but either way I'm not disappointed with my choice.

There is a huge amount of material here - the preview area is sadly very basic and doesn't really do justice to the site. Near-daily updates going back to 2004 results in around 1400 videos and 1200 picture sets from about 600 models/pairs; and very roughly I'd say a 40/40/20 spit between Solo/GG/GB. The site is a bit retro-looking, and could do with a facelift; but is still easy to navigate and with good filtering options. There are separate lists of updates for videos and pictures; videos can be further split into Solo/GG/GB material. Models can be browsed by name or recency; and filtered by various options such as figure/broad age range/ethnicity/level of action/hair colour.

Once you open a model's page, we have the standard list of sets and videos; usually with bio details, and a mini-interview which is generally fun to read. One minor quibble is that GG and GB material is treated as a separate model - eg Evie is one model, then Evie & Kara another... so when looking at Kara's solo material there's no obvious link back to some of her GG material. Most models are in the 18-30 age range, with a few older; and have various looks/body types but all are real, natural girls - many unshaved, which is my preference - and mostly Australian, with a few US/European girls too.

The videos are probably the main draw here. The more recent ones, from the last two years or so, are in 1080; then 720 & DVD for the two years before that, and smaller going back to 2004. And there's some really great material - the videos range from interviews and behind-the-scenes, to stripping, dancing, toy play, and hardcore action, and are pin sharp with good direction and camerawork. Sometimes there's a premise or plot; suitably daft, but it just makes things more fun. The locations are varied and interesting; some in models' own (I guess?) rooms and places; and quite a lot outdoor - some in the great outdoors, others in risqué public places and abandoned urban buildings. Most feature the models talking; either chatting, talking dirty, or playing out the scenario - these are real girls and it makes the videos a lot more fun and interesting to hear them and let their personality show through.

It's worth noting that most video come in anywhere between 2 and 7 parts, but that's not really an issue; each part is a good 10-15 minutes long and good in it's own right; they've recently started adding combined videos at the end for those of us that don't mind downloading a massive 3-4gb video lasting an hour or so.

There are almost as many picture sets too; although strangely - since I generally prefer pics to videos - they didn't work quite as well for me. Many of them seemed a little too posed, the models a little-self conscious; the natural, easygoing charm and personality of the girls is the star of this site and for me, it shows bettter in the videos than the pictures. I also found some of the sets a bit too gynaecological, and some too large - a gallery of 150 or 200+ pictures really needs editing down, I think. Still, these are quite personal opinions and despite them, I still found plenty of sets I liked.

The picture setup is fairly basic, recent pics are 2K, and opening a gallery takes you to a simple slideshow where you can download the zip or click on a thumbnail to take you to the full-size image - fine for me, but some folk prefer different resolutions.

Overall this is a great site, with a huge amount of fun, original, raunchy material featuring really lovely girls; they may be amateur but the quality of the work is anything but. I've got a lot of great material and I'll probably go back to something more glam next - and I may try AW sometime - but suspect I'll be back here.

11-01-11  02:13am

Replies (10)
Visit Joy Mii

Joy Mii

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Attractive, mostly natural models
- Good mix of US/European models, broad-ish age range
- Clean, modern design
- Videos and photos come in matching updates
- Consistent updates - 2 photosets + 2 videos per week
- Modern, tasteful, interior locations
- Atmospheric, well lit and creatively shot videos
- Some cute interviews
- At least as yet, no anal material (could be a con for some)
- 4 sizes of pictures, up to 5K+
- Quality improving
Cons: - Needs better filtering options
- Regional pricing
- Would like to see a few asian/ethnic models
- Some fake boobs
- Site too AJAXy - a bit glitchy with back etc
- Volume resets to max for each video
- Picture sets lose something that the videos have
- Video is 720; some folk may want 1080
Bottom Line: This site is a bit of a departure for me - I'm usually into softcore photography but every so often I have a hankering for a bit more action. However, I prefer something a little more... arty is the wrong word, because we're still talking about smut here - but perhaps balanced. There are a few of these contemporary, tasteful (again, previous comment applies) sites around now, such as X Art - I went for Joymii since at least to me it somehow seemed to have a bit more character, and focused less on the 18-21 models, I prefer a broader range.

A roundup of the content: this is hardcore/midcore content; a mixture of solo, GG and GB scenes. Each scene has one movie update - generally about 10 minutes, available in a few formats up to 720p - and one photo update, consisting approx 50-70 pics, a good online viewer and 4 sizes of zips up to 5K or so. Updates come fairly consistently at about 2 pairs per week, and there are approx 150 of each, featuring perhaps 70 models. The models are both US and European, with many popular girls - the former including Holly Michaels, Marie Macray, Dani Daniels, Shyla Jennings, Karlie Montana, Celeste Star (a favourite); the latter including Caprice, Eufrat, Ariel, Connie (Josephine here, another favourite).

The site itself is generally good - although note it has regional pricing; $20=£20 does not compute. It's odd since sister site Femjoy doesn't seem to; either way, I was somehow able to circumvent that - I have no idea how! The form just suddenly decided to offer me the $ price. Once joined up, the site has a clean, contemporary design; which actually hides a few shortcomings. It's a bit too AJAX-heavy (pages which change without the actual URL changing), which leads to glitchy back button behaviour and the like. Links time out so if you have a page open for a while you need to refresh for the download link to work. The filtering is also quite lacking; the only real choices being 'Popular' and '2-3 some' - the latter including B/G and G/G material, which for some folk is quite a big distinction; it could do with a few more options there.

What sets this site apart, though, is the quality of the videos. Although they don't go up to 1080p, they are really sharp; but over and above that, they are just so well done. Gone are the gaudy colours of most porn; these are well lit, bright, but muted and subtle. The videos usually start off with a little music; it's fairly unobtrusive and fades out after a few minutes. The camera angles are often creative and interesting; lending a bit more context to the scene; showing closeups where necessary - but not necessarily of the obvious bits, but better for it!

The locations too are good - I don't mean to come across all metrosexual, but I find the interiors (not *those* interiors) in most porn really offputting; all those chintzy bedspreads, or faux-deluxe regency-type interiors... here we have bright, spacious rooms, nice contemporary furniture, lots of natural light. And similarly, although the models tend to be naked more often than not, where they do undress the clothes are nice, casual and flattering - nothing tacky or faux-glam.

None of which gets in the way of the explicitness - there's plenty to see, but the hardcore is done to make both partners seem to genuinely equally enjoy it; if you had a likeminded partner, this is something that's easily couples-friendly to watch. And on top of all that, they seem to be getting better at it; the newer videos have more character, and although they still use toys, they are relying less on them than the earlier videos.

On the other hand, the photos, although I can't quite put my finger on it, are missing something. Technically they are good - the same locations, models etc, sharp pictures, well-lit and high resolution. But somehow they don't have the same atmosphere; they don't have the same creative angles, selective focus and closeups that the videos do. For instance, I like a bit of context, something that helps put myself in the scene - in one video the model is masturbating while on a steamy phone call, it's very exciting; the corresponding picture set features the same model, outfit, location; but no phone, and mainly just posing for the camera. The photos are obviously shot separately from the videos; I just feel they could could bring a bit more to them. But again, they are technically good and I found plenty to keep.

This, then, is an easy one to score, agreeing with both TBP and the previous reviewers; although let down on a few small fronts, I really like the content, and I may well be a convert to the genre. Suspect I shall find myself at Orgasms.xxx sometime soon!

05-25-12  05:19pm

Replies (0)
Visit Breath Takers

Breath Takers

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Good mix of British, French, US & East European models
- Mostly natural models
- Some nice outfits and plenty of good lingerie
- Some fun outdoor shoots
- High-res pictures and zips
- Good update schedule, 3 sets + 1 video per week
- No daft BGM in videos
Cons: - Some navigational oddities
- Pictures often not sharp @ 100%
- Some sets and videos a bit too tame
Bottom Line: This site has been on my list to join for a while, and and April's reduced pricing was enough of an incentive to bump it up. It's a little close to the kind of art-nude material that does little for me; but there's enough material with some context (situations, strips, voyeur etc) to take it into my preferred erotica genre.

The photo sets are good; although the same locations crop up often, there is plenty of variety with some cheeky outdoor upskirt shots and the like. Many feature strips, from fully dressed to completely nude; and when the clothes do come off, there is some really nice lingerie to be found, ranging from cute and girly to sophisticated and lacy.

Lighting is natural, with associated shadows; and a lot of bokeh (selective focus) is used - both really work for me, but perhaps not to everyone's taste.

The content itself is relatively tame; many photo sets feature the models teasing with panties, slipping their hand inside before removing them, but inserting fingers/toys is rare. But perhaps a bit less so than since the last review here - there are some closer shots and some more recent videos do feature masturbation - which for me, is a welcome change.

Videos themselves are HD, and I really like that there is no background music; the photographer isn't afraid of a little silence or rustling sheets, which then - sometimes - gives way to the preferred sound effects of the models themselves as they, er, get to work. The videos sometimes suffer under natural light, but are overall of good quality.

My gripes are minor. Navigating is odd; from the updates list you can view the sets, but not download zips; you need to click through to the model's page then to the set again to find them. And although the pics are 4000px, they are often a little grainy when viewed at full size; this is perhaps the photographer using a higher ISO so as not to use too much lighting. But 4000px is more than enough so this isn't a big deal.

Overall, this is a good site that's just a little - not quite as much as I'd like, but close - more erotic and sexy than some staple art-nudes. As such, I find myself with a similar score to anyonebutme's.

04-29-11  01:35am

Replies (3)
Visit X-Art


Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Many very attractive models
- Sensual hardcore scenes and solo
- Mix of European and US models
- Great photography and videography
- Good update schedule - 3 per week
- Login doesn't time out
- Material improving in terms of quality and creativity
Cons: - $=£ regional pricing
- Short on ethnic diversity
- Likewise for ages - most models are very young
- A few anal scenes, not really my thing
- Likewise for group
- Basic browsing/searching facilities
- Could do with a just little more tease
- Arguably a bit formulaic
- Not all videos and photosets correspond
Bottom Line: I've never really been much into hardcore; but following an enjoyable join at Joymii, this new-fangled artcore genre is growing on me (something is growing, anyway) - although a bit idealised, I like the portrayal of sharing sex between couples - and taken with a pinch of salt, I find it very arousing.

So I figured I'd take advantage of a good offer I received and try it out.... speaking of which, I'll get the main negative out of the way. This seems to have joined the ranks of sites who think that $1=£1; so the price for those of us in the UK is about 60% higher. I'm skirting over this since the offer I received seemed to work in $, but UK/Euro users may want to try joining via eg Tunnelbear.

The basic stats of the site:
* Approx 150 models
* Approx 300 photo sets, dating back to 2008, approx 60 shots in each, in zips, up to 4K
* Approx 200 videos, from 2009, approx 10-15 mins, in combinations of WMV/MPEG/MOV, up to 1080

The look of the site is clean and modern, but the navigation is fairly basic; there is a model index; then just a list of updates, either all in one page, just all videos, or browsing all updates by theme: GB/GG/Group/Solo. They have enough material here to invest in a bit more ease of use; but it's nothing to complain too much about. Clicking into each gallery allows you to rate and comment on the gallery, which is a nice touch - although there are plenty of daft ones there.

The sites's tagline - and the theme - is Beautiful erotica, which I guess sums it up; hardcore sex, but more tender, realistic and creatively/artfully shot than regular porn sites. Actually, looking at the earlier material, they seem to have started out largely with solo photoshoots - I found them a bit clinical and dull, but they have got into their stride - it's good to see a site where the material is getting better as opposed to going downhill like so many.

It's very, very similar to Joymii - I think Joymii started afterwards so I suspect it borrowed heavily from X-Art - imitation and flattery, etc. It is therefore very easy to compare the two; so I'll expand on a few differences/similarities:

* Models: both sites have a mix of US and European models; many popular girls appear there, and there is large overlap between the two. But X-Art focuses more on the 18-21 range; I prefer a slightly broader range, but either way they are all stunning.

* The photography and videography in both are without fault. However, I find a little more creativeness in Joymii's camera angles, colour and sets; X-Art's sets are a bit over-idealised, tropical cabanas and the like. OTOH, some recent videos at X-Art have a bit more of a story - although there's no dialog, they have lent it a very cinematic feel, which is interesting and adds to the atmosphere. In particularly a couple of voyeuristic scenes which - with the subjects implied consent/collusion, is very exciting - more of this please!

* Each site has a fairly similar split of solo, girl/girl and girl/boy material; all of which works for me, although I'm more interested in the actual sex scenes here. X-Art goes a bit further with some group sex scenes and also some anal; neither of which really work for me.

* Joymii has the better site design (over-AJAXing it notwithstanding); I also like the fact that all updates are paired - one photo set and one video per scene. Many videos on X-Art don't have matching sets.

* Both sites could do with just a bit more of an element of tease. The clothes come off just a bit too quickly, and whereas I can understand they don't want to feature girls dolled up in tawdry lingerie, some more undressing wouldn't go amiss.

Overall, this is a great site; and although possibly one of the originals, it is good that other sites in the genre - as listed in Elephant's post on the forum - are keeping it on it's toes - some of the newer material there has very high production values to keep them in the running. I slightly preferred Joymii, but purely as a matter of personal taste; so I'll score this only slightly lower - but it loses another point or two for heavily biased regional pricing!

09-01-12  12:24pm

Replies (8)
Visit Watch 4 Beauty

Watch 4 Beauty

Status: Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
Pros: - Lots of beautiful models
- High res, high quality photos
- Contemporary, modern feel to the site
- Contemporary themes - decor, clothing etc - to the sets
- Interesting magazine section
- Good TBP price
- Frequent updates - apprx 4/week
Cons: - Would prefer a bit more age/ethnicity variation
- No zips of highest res photos
- Most videos aren't exciting
- Most videos have music track with no live sound
- Regional pricing
- Dictates username and password; times out quickly
- Search is very basic, just the set name; no filtering etc
Bottom Line: W4B has been on my list for a while - I've always liked their cover shots, being a bit glam/arty/sexy - and the TBP price made it too hard to resist - it has a regional pricing discrepancy, but at 50% off I figured it was churlish to avoid it on principle.

The first thing you notice is that the site design is very clean, modern, contemporary; like some of the more arty sites around etc Joymii etc; it makes you feel a little less sordid about browsing online porn and, although admittedly I passed that hurdle some time ago, it's still nice to use an attractive site.

There are the usual listings available; namely:
* Models - approx 300
* Photos - approx 1000
* Casting - about 100 more photo sets, but very plain with no scene
* Videos - approx 200

Given that the site is a reasonable size, it's a shame there's no other browsing modes; it would be good to search sets by theme, or models by age, figure, etc... but it's just about manageable.

The models are all very attractive, and natural - there are few, if any, fake boobs here. It is, however, almost exclusively an East European site, with the large majority of models being Czech - but it is what it is so although I'd like to see a bit more variation, it's not really a complaint as such. Each model has some basic stats, links to their galleries, and some of the more popular ones have bios. There are lots of popular and well-known models there, including Ariel, Tess, Caprice, Melisa - but plenty more new to me.

Each picture set consist of about 70 pictures, and are available in 1K, 2K and 5K. As others have noted, there are no zips available for the max 5K size - however, I don't see why they bother with the restriction since it is extremely trivial - 2 or 3 clicks - to fetch the full 5K set with a manager like DownThemAll. Some of he pictures don't actually warrant that resolution; but many do and are generally very sharp.

The material itself is a bit more glam, a bit more raunchy, than you'd see the same models doing at eg Met Art; partly in the level of explicitness with plenty of close up shots and some sex toys; and partly just in the attitude of the model. This is what tempted me to join; and although I still feel the same, I think they very much choose the best shots for the cover - I was expecting a bit more glam-fetishy, like some of the milder material at Juliland, but some of the sets are are a bit too drawn out (I'm actually a big fan of the 25-pic sets at Juliland; there's no filler). And I'll echo tangub's suggestion that all the clothes usually come off a bit too soon; would be good to have a bit more teasing. But these are still fun, sexy sets, with a bit more character than some other art-nude sites - featuring lingerie, and some unusual indoor and outdoor locations (some very public!) Most of the newer sets have an accompanying BTS videos, which are interesting.

Videos I found less inspiring; including general pouting, and some more explicit with masturbation - but they tend to be short, 5-6 minutes, and mostly have a soundtrack all the way through, with no actual sound; there is some clever, arty editing in some of them, but although I like that sort of thing, it's a bit style-over-substance - there's a reason we are watching this stuff, after all, and I found I kept fairly few compared to the photos.

The other part of the site is an aspiring-to-playboy-type magazine area; consisting of articles in categories such as other porn stars/sites, erotic art & photography, and luxury life such as cars, boats and the like. I actually think this is quite a nice feature; it lends to the classiness of the site ('I only get it for the articles, really') and I found some good links and material there. Some may dismiss it as filler, but I think it's good to see a site adding a little extra value.

Overall this is a good, solid site, and although not quite as different/unique as I'd hoped, and left me a little cold, it's still hard to fault - especially for $15 (or a bit more). If you like this kind of site, and if what you see on the tour (pictures-wise, at least) appeals to you, it's recommended.

07-31-12  01:34am

Replies (5)
Visit Holly Randall

Holly Randall

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Updated: 08-26-11  05:51am  (Update History)
Reason: Minor score change in light appreciation of hardcore material
Pros: - (Almost) daily updates
- Zip sets
- Recent videos are 720p
- Most photo sets have matching video
- Good quality photography
- Many well-known models
- Notes on shoots, and links to models' sites
Cons: - Picture resolution of 1600px could be better
- Style arguably a little generic
- Some overuse of retouching and/or makeup
- Inconsistent/unhelpful naming of zips
- Often daft music in videos
Bottom Line: Here's another site that's been on my list for a while and was accelerated - this time by getting an email from them with reduced pricing. The Randall name is familiar - I remember seeing Suze Randall's name on many photoshoots in, er, reading material procured in my youth, and while still going strong, Holly has been continuing very much in her footsteps.

The members area - although a little busy with a few too many ads and affiliate links - is good and informative. We have the expected timeline of all updates, model index, and separate photo and video lists, as well as searching by categories in each. It looks like there are approx 350 photo sets and 250 videos, and growing quickly with maybe 5 or 6 updates a week.

Some other features I like include:
- notes from the photographer on each set/video
- matching photo/video sets for each shoot, it's good to see both sides
- the model index has links to the model's sites - although I see quite a few missing there
- a fairly active forum, a good dialogue with the photographer

There are also links to the other sites in the network included in the subscription; about 15, a combination of solo model sites (including the ubiquitous Faye Reagan) and live/recordings-of-live videos of interviews and photo shoots. They may have some appeal to some; the one that mainly grabbed me was Forever Vamp, which I'll review separately.

So, generally, a good site, although I have slightly mixed feelings about the content. It inevitably draws comparison to Stagg Street, which I reviewed recently; both are sites of female glamour photographers, and in fact there are many of the same models and porn stars featured on both sites - including a few popular fetish/pinup models which was one of the main lures for me here.

On one hand, this is the better site; I found Stagg Street lacking in many areas - mainly fairly low-res pics and lack of zip downloads, the only videos there are low-res behind-the-scenes - fun in themselves, but of limited appeal.

On the other hand is the material - here is a bit more explicit, which is certainly no bad thing; we see sets and videos of masturbation, with fingers and toys; and some hardcore material which, although generally not my thing, is enjoyable, well-executed and well-balanced between the guy and the girl involved - likely as a result of being the work of a female photographer.

But at the same time, to me it's a mainstream, centrefold style of glam, that's arguably a little generic - admittedly with very good photography. To my eyes, Ms Stagg, although less explicit, takes many of the same models and gives them more personality, uses more inventive lighting/clothing/sets, and focuses a little more on the alt/pinup/fetish genres. However, that's very much a personal preference and this is still a good site - recommended if the material appeals to you, and as such I find myself scoring it a little higher.

03-13-11  01:30am

Replies (2)
Visit Stagg Street

Stagg Street

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Really, really good photography
- Good sets, locations, lingerie
- Some well known porn stars (that even I've heard of)
- Many well-known alt/fetish models
- 2 photo and 1 video update per week
- Having 5 thumbnails of each set is surprisingly useful
Cons: - Low res pictures
- Blog format of site is not particularly user-friendly
- No zip downloads
- No movie downloads
- Some posts do not have matching sets
Bottom Line: I'm a big fan of glamour, and specifically pinup, photography; but I like some kind of angle to it, eg any combination of:
- Retro-style pinups (but more explicit than actual retro ones!)
- Girls with tattoos and/or piercings
- Nylons - stockings or tights
- Retro lingerie
- Mild fetish wear - latex etc
- More creative/subtle lighting and style than typical glamour

I follow a number of active models and photographers in the genre, so I was surprised to discover Ellen Stagg, who I'd not heard of before - because her work is exactly the kind that works for me.

Her photography is really, really great - ranging from well-lit, centerfold style (seems she does a lot of work for Penthouse), to more subtle, naturally lit shots and some more moody, grainy film shoots. And the models are second to none - some well-known porn stars such as Aria Giovanni, Jelena Jensen, Jenna Haze, Adriana Sage; and some popular alt and fetish models like Mosh, Masuimi Max, Angela Ryan, Joanna Angel, Darenzia and more.

The site itself is basic however; there's no members area as such - logging in gets you to the same blog format that the public see, the only difference is access to the sets and videos previewed in posts. On the plus side, there is a model index and everything is dated; but some posts are a single tantalizing preview snap of a magazine shoot that we never get the set for.

Sets are small - on average perhaps 16 pics - but I don't see that as a negative, since they've likely been pruned ruthlessly and every one is spot on. What's more a negative is the resolution - only 1080px on the longest side, so portrait pictures just fill my relatively modest 22" screen, and landscapes definitely lose detail in full-screen. It's a bit disappointing not to see more from a professional photographer.

Also, there are no zips; inconvenient, but if you are reasonably adept with a manager - I use dTA - you can set up a batch descriptor to download sets for you. Similarly there are no downloads of the weekly behind-the-scenes videos - not necessarily stuff you want to keep, but you can download them if you put your mind to it.

This is tricky to score; it's a blog with with photo set access for subscribers and not necessarily fair to compare to a pay site... but you do have to pay. I like the photography so much that if the site was a bit easier to navigate and offered eg 3K pics and zip downloads, I'd score it over 90; on the other hand, if the material wasn't as spot-on, it would be closer to 70 for lack of features. So in the low 80s it is.

Nevertheless, it's good value. Not enough updates to warrant a continued subscription, but $15 is good for for what's on there if it appeals. Even better value is the $5 for 4 days access that I took; but given the trickiness of getting sets, you need to work a little for it in that time. Either way, what you see on the public side is very much what you get as a member, so you'll easily know if it works for you before signing up.

02-25-11  12:04am

Replies (0)
Visit Figure Baby

Figure Baby

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Exemplary site layout and navigation
- Bargain price, excellent value
- Pretty, natural girls
- Good range of ages and types of model
- Nice outfits and fun strips
- Decent update schedule: seems like 3 sets per week
- Zips in 3 sizes, favourites list
Cons: - Photography and lighting variable; sometimes good, sometimes off
- Plain studio backgrounds, well, plain
- Could do with some more sets/locations
- Not all models will appeal to all folk
- Style is arguably not one thing or another
Bottom Line: This site has been on my list to join for a while; as if the bargain price wasn't enough incentive, a friend of mine who's a member very kindly bought me a subscription (no affiliation, it was paid for! ;) ), figuring it was something I'd like - and, on the whole, he was right.

A quick look at the tour will let you know what this site is about: natural, girl-next-door type models, in fun shoots - some against a plain studio backdrop, some relaxing on the sofa, in bed, around the house. Some of the girls appear on other sites, and others are probably actual amateurs - these are real girls, and may divide opinions; on the whole, I like all girls :) but some folk may find some of the models not as glamorous as they are used to. But there are also some no-argument very pretty girls there too.

The members area is exemplary for a site of this size - the layout and design are simple and easy there are good search criteria for the approx 50 models, who have maybe 5-10 sets each. Sets are available as zips in 3 sizes, the largest a respectable 2400px. A great feature I've not seen elsewhere is your own list of favourite sets - you can add a set to your list and review it later. There are a handful of videos, some interviews, out-takes etc - these are fun but not a large part of the site.

The standard of photography here is generally good, although some of the shoots don't get it quite right in lighting, composition, etc. Maybe half the sets are against a plain studio background, which doesn't really work for me; although some exceptions are the really nicely done pin-up type shoots with retro underwear, make up etc. The other sets show the girls undressing at home, teasing a little before showing everything, albeit sometimes relatively coyly; I preferred these, although would like to have seen a few more locations.

The style almost works for me, but not quite; I find myself wishing it was either a little more glam and erotic - or that it was a bit (and I mean a bit, not hugely so) more explict in the context of the amateur-girl theme. For me, it's a bit on the fence - but looking at more recent sets, I do think they are starting to find the right niche/identity. But having said that, I still found much to enjoy here - some great, real girls (hopefully) enjoying themselves for good, clean fun. Maybe just a bit too clean - but it's nevertheless recommended, especially for the price.

02-12-11  02:35pm

Replies (4)
Visit We Are Hairy

We Are Hairy

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: Frequent updates
Good diversity in models and photographers
Exemplary site layout/features
Live cam shows
Cons: Perhaps too hair-oriented
Mostly amateur themed
Pics often less interesting than videos
Photo sets need tighter editing
Bottom Line: This is a tricky one for me to review, as I'm not necessarily the target market; nevertheless, I'll do my best.

Firstly, compare and contrast: I am very fond of any content featuring panties and nylons - especially tights - the longer they are teased/toyed with the better. I will gladly concede that things I could do with/to them, either on or off their owner, puts this in fetish territory.

OTOH, I also like pubic hair on a model. I think it makes the girls look womanly, sexually mature, and inviting; it is a thrill to catch a glimpse of it, or even to know I will do as the underwear (cf above) comes off; and although I've got used to shaved models, it is still a bit of a disappointment when there's only skin revealed. Pubic hair is natural and sexy thing, and I don't quite see why it's regarded as a fetish; and I do not further fetishise it by way of insisting there is LOTS of it (everywhere), playing with it, or drawing more attention to it than it creates itself. I just prefer it to be there.

Anyway, the above disappointment sent me in search of a suitably themed site; but it appears that there aren't sites for folk like me who just like hair - only for those who worship it... but beggars, choosers etc. The two obvious sites, therefore, are We Are Hairy and ATK Hairy. I looked at both of them and they seem very similar in style, content and even in model roster - WAH seemed a bit more glam, a bit better organised and with a more manageable amount of content to get through within a month's membership.

The mechanics of the site are exemplary; one of the best I've ever joined. There are the usual features:

* Dated updates
* Separate video and pic lists
* Model index
* Browse by category or tag
* Advanced search

As well as novel features like:

* Your own favourites (although oddly you can't favourite a model, only specific sets?)
* Browse by photographer (I tend to follow photograhers more than models)
* Custom zip downloads
* Webcam shows (I never got round to viewing any, but there seem to be a couple a week)
* Forum and comments on sets (albeit with the usual complement of spurious/disrespectful ones)
* Personal settings (how you view pictures, and what tags/categories to exclude if eg you don't like hairy legs etc)

And although not as vast as ATK, there's a good deal of content; generally 4-5 updates per day (3 photo sets and 2 videos), and with about 4 years worth of updates I make approx:

* 400+ models
* 3000+ photo sets, 3K, 100-150 pics each
* 2000+ videos, most 720p, 10-15 mins

Models are reasonably diverse in age - 18-40 and some beyond - and there there is probably just a little more ethnic diversity than on an average site. They can be broadly split - with plenty of exceptions - into 3 groups:

* East European (mostly Russian) account for maybe two-thirds of the updates - most girls are young, with pubic hair and otherwise neatly shaved. Some pretty girls but many do not let their personality or sensuality show; it would be nice to hear them talk more, even if their English was not good, or even in Russian etc.

* UK models - as above, most have pubic hair only - but get more chance to show their personality, with interviews, various dirty talking in masturbation and stripping videos, etc. These were the ones that worked best for me.

* US girls - tend to be more of the hippy type, with many more having hairy armpits, legs, etc. Again, they get interviews and some fun videos; some of the girls are very alluring but the extra hair isn't necessarily for me.

Photo sets are a bit too big for my liking; I prefer them more tightly edited, large sets get a bit repetitive. The style is relatively amateur (and I do mean the style, rather than the quality - which is generally good) - without much in the way of mood or evocative lighting - but still some fun sets.

Likewise for the videos - they are generally plenty explicit enough, most featuring masturbation with/without toys (also some GG and GB videos but much fewer). Many are a bit too samey, but some have a bit more of a theme - eg the very lovely Fawna Latrisch getting predictably wet and soapy when washing a floor; or a couple of models stripping out of some sexy officewear.

So, overall, although a great site, it doesn't quite work for me. It's only this that dictates my slightly lower score; if I was more of a hair and amateur lover this would easily be in the 90s.

I wish there was a site like eg The Life Erotic, or Joymii, that featured more unshaven girls; until that happens, I guess I'll stick to picking and choosing the limited amount of unshaven content such sites have.

09-03-13  10:00am

Replies (4)
Visit Nakedby


Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Creative photography
- Lovely, varied models
- Interesting links section
- Good, sharp 3K pics
- Easy to browse galleries and zip downloads
Cons: - Very sporadic updates
- Limited browsing options
- Videos rare and mostly behind-the-scenes
- Lately more plain-background studio sets
- Short timeout on login
Bottom Line: NakedBy will obviously draw comparisons with Petites Parisiennes - both French softcore erotica/nude sites featuring the work of a single (or in this case sometimes two) photographers. In fact this site appealed to me because it featured a few favourite models from PP; and for me, French smut has a certain - dare I say it - je ne sais quoi (sorry) that really appeals to me; it has sophistication, but not at the expense of being too art-nudey, which I always find a bit dull.

I was prepared to like the photos as much as I do at PP; it turns out they they don't work quite as well for me; they don't have quite as much atmosphere, but there is still some good work here. Where it lacks the consistency of the former's day-in-the-life theme, it makes up for it a little in diversity. There are a number of outdoor scenes, which are quite exciting - one recent one shows one of my favourite Asian models hitching her dress up and taking her panties off on the train; another with a different model similarly cavorting on an escalator. Quite a few of the shots are fetish-themed; some with bondage which I can take or leave, but there are quite a few nylon-themed sets which I most definitely take. Lately there are a few too many plain studio shots for my my liking, and others relying on simple bed scenes - I prefer a bit more context.

There's a great selection of models here too; mainly French (including the popular Marlene) but some other familiar European models too, such as Ariel and Lorena G. A good diversity of ages and body types, and although largely caucasian, a fair few black and asian girls too. And it shares about the same level of explicitness with Petites Parisiennes - plenty of pussy closeups, but not much in the way of fingers or toys - although a little.

There are about 80 models here, and about 600 photo sets; they can be navigated by date and there is a model index; each model has a page with some bio details, but it would be nice to see their age and other details. There is a keyword search and tag cloud but it would be nice to have a tag or category browse option. The date browsing does reveal though, that updates are very sporadic here; on average 3 per month this year.

Note that videos aren't the strong point here. They fall into two categories; firstly, regular porn/erotic clips - about 40, maybe 5 mins on average, not HD, quite fun for what they are but none for over a year. The majority of the videos, though - maybe 200 - are behind-the-scenes; the most recent 20 are HD although again, they dry up as of about a year ago. I know some folk like these, but I find them a bit dull.

There's also a very useful link section, through which I've found all kinds of interesting stuff; although this is available to guests as well and not a subscriber benefit as such.

Despite the cons, I do like the photography here - the thumbnails of the models and galleries are indicative of it, and will be enough to tell you if it will work for you. If it does, there's more then enough material here to warrant joining; but the slow updates make it unlikely I'll join again for a while.

07-04-11  12:39am

Replies (3)
Visit Twistys


Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Huge amount of content
- Great TBP price
- Pretty much every well-known US model featured
- Multiple daily updates
- Some well-known glamour photographers
- Most videos have no music
Cons: - Members area dated, a bit glitchy
- Advanced search offline
- Zip file names could be more helpful
- Content arguably uninspired
- Fairly short login timeout
Bottom Line: I joined Twistys as a snap decision; it's a bit more glam than I usually prefer but it featured a number of models I like and the TBP price of $10 for the first month was too good to refuse.

To login you have to endure both a captcha and some cross-sells, but once there, the members area is fairly uncluttered. It proclaims 3,800 models, 3.4m photos and 100K video clips. I can't confirm this since my own figures were going to be a metric gazillion of each - there is lots of stuff here, going back over a decade. There are typically 3 pictures sets + 2 videos per day, which indicates the size of the site.

However, take the above with a pinch of salt - most picture sets are 100-150 pictures, with zips available, and recent sets from approx the past 3 years go up to 3K size. Similarly most videos are split into 5-8 clips - but you can download the whole scene (anywhere from 10 mins for solo videos to 25 mins for hardcore) as a single file, in sizes up to 720p - again for about 3 years - before then the quality is typically half that.

It does feel slightly dated, though, and is slow to respond - I actually resorted to the public site for browsing models, since it was faster than paging through the model list on the members area. There is a free text search, but no advanced search for finding models by age/hair colour/build etc - it does exist but is broken and has been for some time. This is a shame since it is a necessity on a site this large.

My comment about it featuring models I like - probably applies to everyone here - I wouldn't know where to start when reeling off names, since pretty much every US model is here; along with some of the more popular European and UK models too.

The style is very centrefold glam, such as you'd expect to see in Penthouse etc - the models made up, studio lit with typically sexy lingerie. In some cases it's ordinary; in others it's very good, and Holly Randall - one of the best photographers in the genre - features heavily, as does Tammy Sands, who's work is similar. Also quite a lot from Digital Desire - the soft-focus style is quite distinctive - and most of the UK models featured seem to be shot by APD Nudes, so this site can give you a taste of that also.

Material features full nudity (well, not actually full, depending on your definition; sometimes something stays on, and often - infuriatingly - the high heels) and the majority (not all) feature masturbation, probably roughly evenly split between fully manual and with toys. The focus is largely on solo material - but I'd say - and this is just a rough guess - that maybe 20% is girl-girl, and 10% hardcore. But with the size of the site, that's still a lot if either is something you are after.

This is slightly tricky to score; I found the content a bit uninspiring, as I generally prefer something with a bit more subtlety, or a theme, such as voyeurism - anything that can put me in the scene rather than just looking at a girl posing for the camera. So that's probably why I got more from the videos than the photos here - quite a few feature some fun dirty talk from the models - and almost all of them are devoid of the usual cheesy music track, which was very refreshing.

So if my review seems utilitarian, it's because the site arguably is - it is what it is, a huge site of glam US model content - but with the quantity here there are some good bits and the price is great. If the centrefold style is your thing, this is definitely recommended; for others, you are still likely to find stuff from models you like.

05-27-13  11:00pm

Replies (3)
Visit Babes Network.com

Babes Network.com

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Good interface, easy to navigate
- Good quality videos
- Pictures decent size and well compressed
- (Almost) daily updates - photos and videos
- Photos and videos come in matching sets
- Plenty of undressing
- Camera angles
- No anal (a plus for me!)
Cons: - Some videos have music track throughout - no voice - others have bland music
- $==£ regional pricing (use TunnelBear to sign up)
- DMs don't work on videos
- Captcha on login
- Some fake boobs and tans (but not too many)
- Short login timeout
- Bit too much of the guy finishing himself off
- File naming a bit off
Bottom Line: Although I generally prefer softcore sites, I have grown fond of the kind of tender, sharing, intimate and realistic (if somewhat idealised) sex scenes that the relatively new heartcore genre presents, and babes.com was next on my list to join.

Signup is relatively easy, but with the following caveats:
a) signup and cancel is through their own billing, not CCBill etc
b) they are a proponent of the grossly biased $==£ regional pricing setup - eg $20 in the US, £20 in the UK, over 50% more, but I am pragmatic and this is avoided with TunnelBear
c) You need to enter a captcha to log in
d) After which they do try to cross-sell to you other sites

But with that in mind, the site is nice, clean and easy to use when you get there.

The site has been around for about a year and updates with one scene daily - both a video and pictures, a setup which I quite like. During my membership this actually changed to 5 per week rather than 7 - but there's still quite a lot of material, about 300 sets & videos with approx 50/30/20 split between couples, solo and girl-girl scenes.

There is the usual browsing by videos, photos and models; and when going into a scene you get:
- For pictures, a browser-based slideshow, and download of approx 100 pics at a fairly respectable 2.5k
- For videos, a responsive streaming player, and downloads in 4 sizes up to 1080p (I went for 720 and they look very good)

Each model/set/video page also has user comments, and you can follow/like them within the site, and - if you are suitably unashamed of your smut proclivities - do so on FB, twitter and the like.

Most models are American, with some popular girls such as Malena Morgan, Lexi Belle and Hayden Winters; and some of the popular European models like Connie and Ariel. Not much ethnic diversity, although there are some nice latina and asian models; but there is a fairly broad range of ages, including some lovely milf-type models like Nikki Daniels and India Summer.

The theme here, as I suggested, is heartcore - like Joymii, X-Art etc, the focus is on couples scenes, but done in a loving, sharing way. The previous reviewer made some good points, but I think was a little unfair in criticising it for not being hardcore enough - you wouldn't join it if you wanted facials, DP and other more typical porn-y content. The scenes are fairly explicit, though, with closeups of penetration and oral sex, so it does deliver on that front.

That said, it's not without its issues. A commenter suggested that this is what Digital Desire would be if it did hardcore - and it's spot on. The girls are beautiful, the scenes are dreamy and idealised, the focus is soft and videos start with mood music, which fades out about a third of the way in to the sounds of the action. (The music is a particular peeve, actually - if you look at the previews, they have some good, brave choices of interesting music; this does not carry over to the actual videos which have more insipid/nondescript soundtracks which they would be better off without).

And, Like Digital Desire, they are fairly formulaic. It's not a bad formula, but most scenes (or at least the couples ones, which I was most interested in) play out the same way; the guy slowly undresses the girl, there's oral from both of them, there's sex with him and her on top. It's good, and well done, but could do with a bit more variety - and ideally, within the constraints of the genre, a bit more raunchiness.

But conversely, they have hung onto some porn tenets that don't really fit the genre. In far too many scenes, the girl ends up naked, apart from the high heels - I quite like heels in a pinup or glam context, but if I'm trying to imagine a realistic encounter, the shoes would definitely go! And similarly, in almost all cases the guy pulls out and finishes on the girl's belly/boobs/ass - again, there's definitely a time and place for a prominent pop shot but it does take away from the believability of the scene. Also see my comment about photoshopping - wholly unnecessary in the genre.

Despite my misgivings, this is still a good site in the heartcore genre and there's plenty of good material. If I were in the US, I would score this maybe 85 or 86; but there is no excuse for their heinous regional pricing policy, which has to cost them at least a couple of points.

But, pricing issues aside, Joymii remains my favourite - they are more creative with scenes, camerawork, and manage a bit more raunch while still being a bit artsy and trendy.

04-30-13  05:06pm

Replies (9)
Visit Ether Nudes

Ether Nudes

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: * Very low price
* Good range of models
* Small galleries
* Great, atmospheric photography
Cons: * Infrequent updates
* Small collection
* No zip sets
* Small galleries
* Fairly tame, and little tease or lingerie
* Regional pricing
Bottom Line: Ethernudes has been on my radar for a while, and I finally got round to joining for the bargain price of $5 (or ostensibly a little more - regional pricing kicks in even at this level :|). It's the nude photo site of photographer Olivier re Rycke, so there is a consistent style and quality of work here that you get from a single photographer site.

It's a photo-only site with currently 116 galleries; seemingly about one new one added per month (just one while I was a member). Picture sets are anywhere between around 5 and 50 pictures at 3K size, with perhaps 30 being the average, and more recent sets are larger. They are presented with a stock gallery package (coppermine in this case) so not really any fancy features - notably zip sets are nowhere to be found but it's extremely trivial to grab the set with a DM so I don't take marks off for that.

I've noted the small galleries as both a plus and a minus since although most folk would feel hard-done-by, I like smaller sets; by subscribing to a site, we are buying into the vision of the photographer and part of that vision is knowing what to get rid of! 200+ picture sets bore me, it's hard to know where to stop; 20 well-chosen pictures are better every time, as long as the photographer has the skill to take and choose the best ones. (Stagg Street and Juliland are other sites which are benefit from ruthless editing.)

And in this case, he does - the photography here is excellent. It's not particularly explicit, about the same or even less than you might see at Met Art; but with somehow more depth, atmosphere than what I found at MA. The locations - both indoor and out - and framing are good, and different; and the colours are really nice - they seem a bit processed, but it's done to set the mood, eg to give it a subtle vintage tint, rather than interfere with the models.

The choice of whom is also very good - European models from 19-30 rather than just the 18-21s on many nude sites - including some familiar girls such as Ariel, Suzie Carina and Melisa but most I suspect are exclusive here - but all stunning and natural. And although it's perhaps a bit too art-nude-y for my taste (I'd prefer just a little more undressing/tease/sleaze) - the photographer gets the best out of all the models and they somehow just seem sexier, more relaxed, more intimate than they do elsewhere.

The fact that the site is so small is balanced by the price, I feel - and although it's left me wanting something a bit more explicit again, I still enjoyed the evocative models and locations. Definitely recommended to anyone who likes Met Art, Femjoy etc; you'll get through the small collection in no time, but I also think you'll get a taste of what is missing from the bigger sites.

10-05-12  10:06am

Replies (0)
Visit Digital Desire

Digital Desire

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Good camerawork, lighting
- Great quality pics, and HD videos
- Multiple video formats
- Lots and lots of very pretty girls
- Large archive of material
- Frequent updates
- Many well-known models and porn stars
- Excellent value
Cons: - Slightly random selection of codecs for past videos
- Too many thongs
- Some fake boobs
- Not enough teasing
- Possibly too slick
- Slightly formulaic material
- Tagging and search sometimes lacking
- Not really any model details, stats etc
Bottom Line: The esteemed tangub's recent review is excellent and gives you a good idea of the stats and type of material here, so I'll try not to repeat that and instead be quite subjective.

I joined mainly for the videos here, which have the level of explicitness that I like; some teasing, undressing, before masturbating; either with fingers or toys. The lighting, camerawork, atmosphere of them is very good (some may find the shadows too arty, but I don't mind), but my main problem is that they are a little too formulaic. The large majority of the videos go like this; ambient music as the model cavorts/gyrates in lingerie; often backlit and/or wind blowing through her hair; slow-motion and crossfades; then the music dies out and the model takes over, showing no shyness at all about pleasuring herself for the camera, underwear discarded (but heels inexplicably still on, why do they keep doing that?).

It's actually not a bad formula - they are produced very well and the girls seem fairly genuine, but I'd like to have seen a bit more variety; more teasing, more undressing from clothed, different lingerie styles, a bit less slow-mo and soft-focus. The category of videos I enjoyed the most were the flirt - where the model talks to the camera and teases; and perhaps also the toys - not generally my interest but it provided an angle.

The girls themselves here are stunning; a mix of well-known US porn stars and models, some familiar East European girls, and some amateur first-time models. Again, it's subjective, but I found myself pining for at least a little imperfection; although arguably guess I found it in the ones that have fake boobs - the focus is on natural girls and enhancements aren't in the majority, but still more than I'd expect given how often Mr Hicks states in the shoot notes how he prefers a natural look.

There's also, of course, a huge library of photo sets, going back many years. Although the models are biased slightly towards the 19-22 range (I prefer at least a little older) I found more sets that I liked than expected. The Flashback section is quite amusing, showing his earlier Penthouse era pics of girls with lip gloss and big hair; a contrast to the more subtle style and more natural looking girls Mr Hicks employs now. I did find a few inaccuracies in the search; eg when looking for unshaved models and finding shaved sets; but overall the search/browse options are useful. One minor niggle though, was in the models's profile page there is no info and sets don't seem to be in any particular order; some models are popular here with material from multiple shoots; it would be good to see it in date order.

So, a tricky one to score. It's an excellent site and great value; the material has a good level of explicitness and if I was being more objective, this would get a 90, and higher if I really connected with the content. As it is, it didn't grab me quite as much as I'd predicted; I do like glam material, but with an angle of some sort, which - other than lots of stunning girls - I don't see much of here. If I had to compare it to any other sites I've visited, I guess the centrefold glam theme places it closest to Holly Randall; DD is possibly more slick, but Ms Randall gets a bit more flirt, a bit more cheekiness from the models, so she keeps the edge for me.

But it's still excellent value and worth a visit.

08-10-11  11:49pm

Replies (5)
Visit Karup's Older Women

Karup's Older Women

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - A lot of material
- Daily movie and gallery updates
- Reasonably good navigation options
- Most models in 30s & early 40s, which works for me
- Good movie quality; streaming, download options and screen caps
- Some good/protracted strips from casual and business attire
- Would prefer a camerawoman rather than man for the interview/chat movies
Cons: - Age of models (some under 30) may stretch 'OW' for some
- Slightly retro design (although front end has been updated; am sure member area will follow)
- Very typical lighting/sets/premise for all scenes
- Many models a little too enhanced for my taste, and relatively few unshaved
- Very little girl-girl content
- Could use a few more navigation options
- Older movies are lower quality and split into parts.
- Some daft fake uniforms and hackneyed outfits (newer sets are redressing this, thankfully)
Bottom Line: Looking for girls up to around my own age (40), it was a choice between this, Anilos and All over 30. They all look similar and suspect they offer similar content; the quality of samples I found on TGPs just tipped the scales in favour of Karups OW. (Interestingly, they include bonus content from, and link some models to, the other two sites.)

There is a lot of material here, it's a bit daunting at first! On top of that, they add a new movie AND a new photo set 6 days a week, so it is growing at a good rate. Navigation is fine; 4 categories of pictures and two of movies - although with the amount of material, we could use more, and/or the ability to sort each list by model name or date added.

Most of the material is soft, with maybe a quarter hardcore; the latter isn't really my thing, but actually the scenes are relatively well-positioned and I enjoyed them. Of the softcore, it's probably about 50/50 between toys and fingers; and there are some good strips and teases before getting to that point. Only a handful of girl-girl shoots and movies; I'd like to see more.

Movies are good quality, sharp and well-lit (even if slightly saturated) - 720p and each page shows a few download options and screen caps of the action, which is useful. This format goes back about a year and a half (a bit less for the screen caps); before that, the movies are mostly SD and many are only available in parts. Image quality is OK; available in 1024px and 1500px which is just about acceptable; I'd prefer 2000px.

I was quite disappointed that so many of the models have fake:
- boobs (I'm no expert but could spot these a mile away)
- tans (and the lighting makes them look even more orange)
- smiles (only the minority of models show their personality and a range of expressions)

Natural is always better in my book, but it seems this is endemic in the milf genre. Similarly, I like a mixture of pubic hair arrangements; shaved, trimmed or natural - although I do prefer the latter and there are very few unshaved girls here. Am hoping it tells them something that the hairiest girl I found is their 4th top model! (Am planning to join We Are Hairy at some point to redress the balance.) OTOH, it's a little churlish to complain, given the quantity of material here.

Overall, nothing groundbreaking here but a good site nonetheless. Although I'm only staying one month, I've definitely got my $30 worth; I will likely join again sometime, but will probably try the other two sites beforehand.

01-07-11  09:31am

Replies (6)
Visit New Nude City

New Nude City

Status: Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
Pros: - Good diversity of models; most (if not all) natural
- Plenty of unshaved models (a pro for me, at least)
- Lots of nylons and sheer underwear
- Interesting mix of amateur and glamour styles
- Good value with no regional bias on price
Cons: - Undated content - no idea if updating (suspect not)
- Pictures fairly low res; videos derisorily so
- Some sets continuations of a previous one
- Some models' sets mixed with others; or some duplicate sets
- Bad lighting may be a turn-off for some
- Quite a few teen models (I know a pro for many!)
- A couple of fetishes which don't appeal
- No zip sets
Bottom Line: New Nude City is the last of a few sites I've been meaning to join for ages, and finally got round to trying it. It features the work of Richard Kern; one-time underground filmmaker, latterly occasional music video director and more often nude photographer; I'm quite a fan of his photographs, owning a couple of his published books, and so wanted to take a look at his site.

There are approx 170 models here, almost all of them exclusive, amateur girls; I only happened across three I recognised - Joanna Angel, Karlie Montana and a very young Sasha Grey. Roughly 700 photo sets of 20-120 pictures, maybe 50 as an average; and resolution is fairly low at 1400px. No zip sets, but downloading a set with a manager - I use DownThemAll - is very straightforward so I do not penalise the site for that. Sets are not dated, so there's no way to know if the site is being updated - I suspect not since the total picture count on the home page did not seem to change while I was a member; but the material stretches back over ten years; I recognise some from the books I have. The material is only moderately explicit; there are plenty of spread legs, but only a few sets feature fingers or toys being inserted. There are also some girl-girl sets, but most of the content is solo.

The theme of the site - the city - sees the sets split into categories named after New York areas - Soho, Greenwich, Wall street, etc. I apologise to Mr Kern if I'm missing the point here, but this seems entirely a conceit; I couldn't see any commonality within each category and some sets continue a single shoot but in a different category. There is a model index, though - with a brief bio paragraph of each girl, which is interesting - and a more traditional theme index allowing you to search on eg panties, nylons, blondes, etc. There is a very clear divide into two broad themes, though, even though the site doesn't define it that way; it is probably a by-product of Kern's magazine work - photos from which I suspect feature heavily on this site - having, I believe, shot for Barely Legal and Leg Show.

The first theme, then, is younger amateur girls. Normally I prefer older models and there are a number of models here who are just too young - and too young-looking - for my taste. Having said that, they are interesting; we see them not only posing for the camera; but in the kitchen, brushing their teeth, eating or drinking. Combined with the locations - very ordinary apartments, perhaps the models' own (some are quite messy!) and hotel rooms, there is an intimacy that you don't get with more slick material. All of the models look engaged, as if they are having fun - Kern definitely gets the best out of them. Most sets feature clothing of some sort - again, usually prosaic, apart from the fact that (like me) Kern has a fetish for and fixation with panties, especially the sheer kind - you'll see lots here. Sometimes the lighting is not good; but because of the nature of the pictures, it's forgiven, this isn't a sight that you judge on mere technical prowess, and it fits in with the underground/amateur feel.

Then there are the more glamorous sets; featuring girls with a bit more make-up, perhaps a little older, usually a a bit better lit - and focused more on legs, nylons and lingerie, and more pin-up style poses. There are also a few other fetishes in the mix - eg bondage, smoking, peeing; these don't necessarily work for me but are in the minority. Although they are a bit more glam, they retain the same feel as the amateur girls - the girls are still natural, and engaged with the photographer... and still fixated on sheer bras and panties. Granted, some are a bit dated and look like retro magazine shoots - likely because that's what they are - but that's not necessarily a bad thing. The split between these two themes is roughy equal; I saved a similar number of sets in each - and although some models appear in both kinds of set, the majority are either one or the other.

I haven't yet mentioned the videos - the site states 136 available. The theme is similar, although there are some slightly more explicit ones featuring masturbation and toys. I like the feel of them, the way they are shot... but they are let down technically even more than the pictures, being only a couple of minutes long, and just too small - some at approx 640x360, some at 400x300. The graininess of them fits in with the theme of the site... but they really need to be bigger.

This is another tricky one to score; for me it's very much like Ed Fox's Foot Factory - I love the material, it's unique, quirky and appealing; but let down a bit by low resolution pictures and lack of updates. I'll therefore give it the same score; and say it's definitely recommended - but if you do want something a bit different, I'd suggest Juliland first, which wins over mainly in technical quality and update frequency.

11-27-12  01:01am

Replies (4)
Visit Met Art

Met Art

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Lots of beautiful young models
- Good search options/tagging
- Browsing by photographer is useful
- Lots of good lingerie/outfits
- Most sets good resolution
- Amusingly pretentious set names
- Massive archive and approx 4 updates/day
Cons: - Would prefer a few more mid/late 20s models
- Age search option is daft
- Lingerie doesn't necessarily suit the models
- Some older pics quite low res
- Massive archive is bewildering
- Annoyingly pretentious set names
- Some sets too large
- Lacking in erotic content
- Videos uninspiring and soundtracked to death
Bottom Line: Met Art has been vaguely on my list of sites to try for a while, mainly because it features work from a couple of photographers I like (I tend to follow photographers rather than models), and last month's special offer gave me the incentive to sign up. There are plenty of other reviews, including TBP, which detail the specific stats on the site, so I'll be a bit more subjective here.

Firstly, the site is vast; there is so much material, so many models, so many photographers, that it's hard to know where to begin. Fortunately, the search options are good; sets are tagged so you can just type in any particular keyword - eg nylon, stockings, etc and get a number of results. Sadly this doesn't work well with multiple keywords, getting sets with any of the words rather than all, but it's still useful. Search is also available on height, age, ethnicity, country, photographer - all useful, although unlike height, where you can search on a range, age is done purely on a single year, so you can only find eg all 25yo models... but it is smart enough to find sets where the model was 25 at the time of the shoot, as opposed to now - potentially a big difference in a site that's been running for a decade or more.

My biggest issue, though - and this is quite personal - is that the material here just isn't exciting. The girls are all stunning but - although there are some exceptions - have little sex appeal to me; the concept of the site seems to be to emphasise the beauty of the models at the expense of any sexuality. Even the models who do hardcore elsewhere seem uninspired here - and the same for the photographers, eg there's quite a bit of material from Michael White and Roy Stuart, both favourites of mine, but it's a toned down version of their other stuff.

Similarly, I'm quite keen on lingerie and nylons; there is actually a lot more nice stuff here than I thought, but most of the models are too young or inexperienced to carry it off; they look dressed up, posed, in it rather than comfortable and sexy.

Reading between the lines of some of the blog posts there, I suspect both model and photographer are constrained by strict guidelines MA put on what can and can't be shown - with a veto on any kind of lascivious behaviour, so there is little teasing, no touching, and rarely even a lewd glance. They may even be getting stricter, since of the sets I did enjoy, most seem to be going back a few years. Even though the photos are of course fully nude, I've genuinely been more turned on by some of the better lingerie catalogues & sites.

As others have noted, the videos here are also insipid; drowned out by supposedly sexy sax music and the like; and unlike the photo sets I didn't really find any worth keeping.

Scoring this puts me in a bit of a quandary. It's a good, well-organised site, with a vast quantity of solid photography and frequent updates; so it would be really unfair to give it less than 80. However, this is PU and I struggle to see it as porn, or even particularly erotic or arousing - It's just too... wholesome, like a glamorous naturist site and I kind of agree with hugow that if you wanted to cure your porn addiction, this could do the job. I'm not even sure about art - to me, art is doing something unusual, creative, pushing some boundaries, which MA doesn't really - but by that definition, my last reviewed site, Juliland, is art, so maybe I'll skip the whole subject :| Anyway, a (very generous) 80 it is.

12-30-11  01:48am

Replies (7)
Visit Foot Factory

Foot Factory

Status: Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
Pros: - Unique, interesting themes
- Good, unusual photography style
- Wide variety of models, some well-known
- Good descriptions of videos
- Good value full trial available
Cons: - Low res pics and videos
- Sparse updates
- Set names obscured & unhelpful zip names
- No tagging or categorisation
- Some sets too big
Bottom Line: Yet another infuriating site!

I'll start with a couple of disclaimers. First, I'm not really a foot/leg fetishist as such; however I seem to have become a one by default since the genre (particularly legs) seems to cover eroticism, undressing, nylons and lingerie etc - in short, the whole picture - more than most porn. Second, I'm slightly biased since I'm familiar with the photographer, Ed Fox; I've just had his second book delivered and like his work in Leg Show magazine - which I get occasionally, one of the few printed magazines still worth a look with all the online porn around.

Anyway, at FF, you'll find a good selection of foot-oriented material; sets and videos cover various themes, such as:

- candids of eg girls getting dressed, putting on shoes;
- masturbation scenes, sometimes starting with the girl eg rubbing lotion onto her feet
- quite a few with sex toys
- some girl-girl scenes and a few b/g scenes
- scenarios, eg I liked a couple involving undressing/masturbating during phone calls
- behind the scenes
- some not explicit at all, purely focused on feet
- outdoor or other unusual locations
- plenty of dirty feet

Some themes I didn't like; smoking is common but has never worked for me, and some weirder S&M stuff, eg unseen strangers whose gloved hands abduct or molest girls. And many videos have music whereas I prefer without; however it tends to be ambient/electronic/experimental stuff which although sometimes offputting, is far preferable to the corny faux-sexy music we get so often.

It's worth noting that this is material that leans towards foot fetishism but doesn't focus solely (rimshot) on it - hardcore foot folk may find it strays a bit too much but it's a balance that works for me. And largely I really like the style; it's not as brightly lit as most porn so it may not appeal to some folk; but there is a documentary/voyeuristic style to it which is quite unique, and even the magazine type shoots have a starkness and realism that sets it apart from most glam. The light and shadows make it very erotic - but not at the expense of being too arty, which it's not, or too tame - although there's not much hardcore, there's plenty of explicit midcore.

And there are a great selection of models featured. Some I'm familiar with from the pinup/fetish genre, eg Angela Ryan, Emily Marilyn, Dita von Teese; some porn stars, such as Aria Giovanni, Ryan Keely, Jelena Jensen; and plenty of pretty amateurs that perhaps only appear here.

Roughly 570 photo sets and 230 videos going back to 2004; maybe 150 models. Photo sets are split between 'photos' and 'features' - I think the former are meant to be more candids, and the latter more glamorous, magazine shoots and the like - but it's a vague distinction and there seems to be quite an overlap. Updates are quite sparse at 1-4 per month; but this is clearly stated on the tour so I don't have a problem with that.

Site navigation is fairly standard; a general updates list, photos/videos lists in date order, a model index. Given the number of themes involved it would be nice to have some kind of tagging, but sadly there is none. The layout of the site means that the names of photo sets are obscured which is annoying, especially as zips do not have meaningful names; but at least zips are there and easily accessible. I found some sets too large, maybe > 200 pictures, and really could have been edited; more is not necessarily better. Videos are mostly WMV, some QT, and whereas there's no info about photo sets, most videos have a long and explicit description, particularly discussing the feet - Mr Fox is quite a fetishist.

The biggest issue, though, is the resolution; all pictures sets are just 1024x768 (or less on the shorter side). I'm really not a resolution fiend and don't expect the somewhat daft 80 megapixel sets that Hegre Art is now offering; but Ed Fox is a well-known published photographer and it baffles me that he can't/doesn't/won't muster more than even 1 megapixel. I'd at least like to look at them full-screen and 1024x768 is well under half the size of mine - at least 2000px would be far more appropriate.

Similarly, videos are fairly low; many are DVD size, but older ones seem to be about 450x300 px - although for me a video survives upscaling a bit more than a photo so I don't mind quite so much. But still, a bit of HD would be appreciated and hardly technically challenging to produce now.

As some others have pointed out, once you go to leave the site you get offered a link to a $3/3 day trial; I took this and felt a bit guilty since I did get some good content. But I'd really need a month to comfortably go through everything - I like the material so much that it's only the resolution issue that preventing me from buying a full subscription. And similarly that's what prevents me scoring this higher; even with all the other cons I would happily give this 90+ - but it's still good size archive of great material and hopefully 80 reflects this.

09-12-11  12:39am

Replies (0)
Visit Nena Blue

Nena Blue

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Great, very original, erotic content
- Varied styles
- Good browsing options - date, model, photographer, theme
- Some well known photographers and models
- Photographer interviews
- Decent update rate, albeit patchy
Cons: - Flash-based navigation is daft
- Update list semi-broken
- Videos section largely pointless
- Daft pricing model
- Fairly low-res at 1280px
- No zip downloads
- Some models listed with no sets
Bottom Line: This is a fairly unique, interesting site, that had slipped under my radar until BradlyH mentioned it to me a few months ago. Being fond of erotica and European sites - this one is Spanish - I finally got round to subscribing... and as with so many of my subscriptions, it's a difficult one to review!

Although I don't see a specific line that divides erotica and porn, and like both, some material is definitely one or the other and this is erotica. Prior to buying online porn, I was - and still am - a keen collector of erotic photo books, and this site contains similar material; I particularly tend to follow photographers more than models, and I see a number here that I've seen elsewhere online and in print.

And there really is some great erotic content here. Models in seductive poses, in and out of various lingerie, fetishwear and nylons, on location and in the studio. Some is a bit too artsy for me; I don't really like black and whites, 'bodyscape' type stuff - I prefer a bit of context - but there's plenty of that too, and although it is arguably all a bit arty, there's plenty of variety. Fetish photographer Christine Kessler has a lot of fun, colourful sets, including Apnea, Emily Marilyn, Masuimi Max and Stoya. And some European photographers I didn't know; eg the elaborate studio sets of Eccehomo; seductive glamour of Atila, UK corset designer/photographer Morgana - and some more typical glamour material from Viv Thomas.

In terms of stats, there are about 500+ sets of about 150 models, by about 20 or so photographers. Pics are only 1280px and there are no zip downloads, but it's no more than a minor inconvenience to have DTA fetch whole sets. Generally solo softcore, although there is some mid and perhaps a little hardcore too, and a good smattering of girl-girl sets.

The big but is the site itself, which has various niggles. The entire thing is flash-based, so despite looking pretty, it's slow and glitchy to navigate. Updates come approx 8 per month which is OK, but although the calendar shows the current month, the years only go up to 2008, so you can't browse recent months (although the sets are, of course, present in other browse modes.) There were a few interesting models I saw in the list, but clicking through to them revealed no sets; and there are no model bios - partly understandable given the focus on photographers, who each have an interview page, but it would have been nice to have some model details too.

There is a videos section, containing about 30 videos, but the last update was a year ago (and in another glitch, downloads are broken on the main page, the join email sends you to a temporary replacement). It's a bizarre selection; about half are of one particular model (including some BDSM, peeing and hardcore content); a few arty videos of Apnea (which I liked); then the most recent are fairly generic masturbation clips of some 18-21 models which could have come from anywhere. I found it pretty pointless, and haven't really let it influence my score.

Oh, and then there's the price - $30 for 2 months, which they call a 'trial' although it's a full membership; then $30 per month if you continue. WTF is the only word that springs to mind :| Given the fairly unique nature of the material, $20 would be a fairer price, especially as eg my favourite slightly arty European erotic site Petites Parisiennes is less than that, and has daily updates.

The idea of a genuine erotic photography pay site is a good one, there aren't many; this site could be much more than it is. But still, I appreciated the content, hence the score; although it would be high 80s or more if it was a bit more coherent.

08-22-11  02:40am

Replies (3)
Visit Forever Vamp

Forever Vamp

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Great models
- Lovely fetish wear
- Good quality photography
- Fairly unique content
Cons: - Not many sets/videos yet
- Low-ish pic resolution
- More daft music on videos
- Perhaps needs to be more defined in direction
Bottom Line: This is a follow-up to my review of hollyrandall.com - it's included with the membership, and was actually of more interest to me and one of my main reasons for joining. Functionally it's very similar to Holly's main site - it has the same updates/photos/videos/models indices that you'd expect.

First the bad: it's still a very new site, and with updates perhaps once or twice a week, there's not much material - looks like about 30 photo sets and 25 videos, and some of the earlier ones are borrowed from the main site. Format is the same as newer material from HR - 720 video and 1600px pictures - the latter being slightly disappointing for the site of a well-known photographer.

I do like the material, though. I found HR, although technically good, a little too mainstream/centrefold glam; I like my smut with an angle of some kind, which is lacking there. Here, though, with Ms Randall's skills applied to the fetish/pinup/alt genres, her glamour style works very well. There's a great selection of models, including Mosh, Vanessa Lake, Ancilla Tilia, Darenzia - dressed and undressed in a variety of latex, leather and regular lingerie.

Not all of it appeals; there's some S&M and smoking fetishism, neither of which really work for me; I prefer the milder fetishwear and alt pinups. So, perhaps at the moment it doesn't quite have a direction, but on the other hand, some content content is a bit more explicit - masturbation, some strap-on etc, than in other glam fetish sites, which is welcome.

Another tricky one to score. It's hard to recommend on it's own merits, purely because of the small amount of material. On the other hand, this is fairly unique content - and if it can just grow a little quicker, it will be a great site. Because I like the direction and the concept, I'll go to 80 - but do look at the preview area, a glance will tell you straight away if this is your kind of thing, and if the content justifies the current lack of material.

03-19-11  01:39am

Replies (0)
Visit Alt Exclusive

Alt Exclusive

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Genre-leading models
- Genre-leading photographers
- Genre-leading fetishwear
- Subscription includes access to PDF of magazines
Cons: - Relatively slow updates
- Videos are short and BTS
- Some glitches, a few zip sets missing
- HD videos are streaming only; downloads are lower res
- High-res pictures are additional cost
- Regional pricing
Bottom Line: Been quite excited about joining this site ever since I first saw it... so much so that I half knew I was letting myself in for a fall.

What's good is the content - although I'd argue that Alt Exclusive is a bit of a misnomer; Alt makes me think of Suicide Girls, God's Girls, Joanna Angel etc - whereas this is more fetish/pinup, which is exactly what I like. I think Holly Randall hit on the best description for this kind of content with her Forever Vamp site - it's subtitled 'Ultra Glamour Fetish' which pretty much sums up what we have here.

Anyway, names aside, Alt Exclusive is a fairly new magazine, and the site features more, and more explicit, content than makes it into print. And somehow they've managed to get the best of everything in the genre - models like Mosh, Darenzia, Jade Vixen, Angela Ryan, Masuimi Max... and more. Similarly with photographers - new sets are shot by Viva Van Story following some great sets by Shannon Brooke and more. And all in and out of a great selection of retro lingerie, custom latex and nylon - even the plain background studio shots, which usually do little for me, look great in this context.

It's fairly new and there's not much content, about 70 sets of about 20 pictures each and 30 or so 3-5 minute videos - the latter being short and behind the scenes, but again in the context, this is what works. It's really great stuff, and fair at $15 (or a little more here in the UK, grrr!).

The problem arises from something a bit of a bait and switch when joining. We're promised zip downloads of sets, HD videos, downloadable videos and 3500px photos. Once a member, the videos stream at 720p, but download quite a bit smaller... this is annoying but actually not a big deal since with a download manager, you can easily grab the HD swf. Similarly, some zip sets are missing, but point a download manager at the page and it will grab all the pictures no problem.

The biggest one, though, is that zips are 1200px pictures. The promised 3500px versions are only available to buy, $1.99 each - each picture, not each set. I could be missing something, but nowhere is this stated in the tour and I didn't see any terms stating it. This is such a shame since photography this great really begs to be seen at high resolution.

So, as always seems to be the case with me, a difficult one to score. If the high-res pics were included, I'd score this 90 for the quality of content - regardless of the limited amount of it or other minor issues. If they'd made it clear that the high-res pics were an additional cost, I'd still probably give it 85 - I really enjoyed Stagg St, where the pics are only 1080, at the same price of $15. As it is, I think they are pretty cheeky... for which I feel it has to be less than 80, amazing though the girls look.

04-10-11  12:08pm

Replies (0)

Shown : 1-25 of 754 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.


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 1.45 seconds.