I rejoined EB as part of a special with Watch4Beauty. The EB site has had a slight freshening, but I'm not terribly impressed with the most recent content. First, it is all "B" roll! It seems as though these are sets of slightly less attractive models or, if mainstream models, slightly lesser quality sets. So they may not have been good enough for the main site, Met Art, when they were taken. Second, it is an odd collection of old and new sets. I recognize several models that retired back around 2008 or earlier and here they are in "new releases" this month with different names and the exact same look. A few models have sets from 2007 and new sets in 2014 and they look exactly the same...because they are old sets just being released now. (To their credit, EB lists the age of the model when the sets were taken, but I don't think those ages are accurate.) That usually only happens because the set was not rated very highly back when the model was popular but now, what the heck, who cares, release it! Fourth, some sets of once popular models might be a bit off because when these sets were taken, these models were very near retirement. There are a few sets where I looked at the model, recognized her and although she was still very attractive, she was several years older than she was at her peak. My typical male reaction was "Wow, what happened? She used to be really hot!" There is nothing that reminds you that YOU are getting old more than images of a favorite model showing that SHE is getting old. Depressing. There are also a few sets from the time before a popular model perfected her look. A lot of eastern European girls took a little time to perfect their looks and some of these sets are the "before" pictures. And lastly, releasing a set in 3 parts is positively annoying. There is no reason for this other than to string us along and get more money. Many Met Art sets have 120-160 images in them. These EB sets usually have 40-60 images spread over 2-3 or more pages of 20 images a page. They either do that to minimize load on their servers, or to make it look like there are more images. Either way, its a really cheap trick!
This site is still better than a lot of others out there, but it is really unfortunate when a good site goes mediocre.
I'm with you on the anal thing. I can't think of her name, but there was a beautiful tall, athletic dark haired eastern European model that appeared on the scene a few years ago. First saw her on Met Art, I think. Then she popped up everywhere and soon had her then perfect boobs enlarged. Next time I saw her (not on Met Art, of course), she's doing anal. All I could think of is "awww". You can't unsee stuff like that.
So...the reason I wrote the survey is to see what people think about seeing certain models EVERYWHERE and their thoughts on models that just don't seem to have the same, um, bounce that they once did. The girl named Malena/Maria seems to be everywhere these days. Caprice and Melissa Mendini are very, very popular models that, although beautiful and versatile, just seem, uh, a little over exposed. Malena Morgan is another very popular bombshell that I have seen in some sets lately where it just doesn't look like she's having any fun. I don't know if they are just crappy sets or what.
I just joined Twisty's for like the 10th time on a bargain sign up. There are a lot of great models there (including 35 sets of Malena, 31 sets of Caprice and 41 sets of Melissa Mendini), but also some older (30+) models and porn stars that I would prefer to think of from...kinder years.
Some models look great forever, some are one-shot wonders (pun intended) and a lot kind of evolve or devolve from the pressures of the business.
In the end, though, there are models we like no matter what, models we don't like very much and a whole lot of models that we will gladly look at until somebody more interesting comes a long.
Eufrat is a great example of somebody who has been modeling for a awhile but still has a great attitude and appearance. Lorena is another really lively one. There will always be great models that will look good well into their thirties or until they retire (Like Marketa Belonoha).
Yes, I had a chance to look through things in more detail and agree that it doesn't seem to be as good as it used to be. The advertising alone seems like it has doubled and I complained about that in 2012. It is funny that you mention score rigging as there are a lot of new , pretty average videos of pretty average girls rated 9.6 or higher, something I've never seen in any site. Now I know why. It is remarkable how many good sites have been destroyed by new owners that are just out to recoup their investment. This is probably one of them. Probably still worth it for $10 once every couple of years or so.
They are running a promo for $10! (watch out for the cross-check) I just re-joined so I haven't seen much, but so far it looks about the same as it did in 2012 with more content. They still don't display sets on one page. Videos are 720p max and images are 3000 across max. Many very (too) familiar models here. Very easy to download zips. A lot of advertising...
For $10 I don't know how you can go wrong! (Read my old review.)
I wrote a review back in January of last year and am very happy to say the old login/password issue is gone! The photography is even better than it was last year and the collection is simply excellent, among the best soft core on the Internet. Now if only they would update once or more daily....... If you have never been to this site, I highly recommend it!
My level of remorse depends on how much I spend on a site and how it misses the mark. For $10, I'll try anything that looks interesting and won't be too upset if it is not all that was promised. For $20, I'll be a little more critical if it misses the mark. For $30, the site had better perform as good as or better than promised. I generally will not join a site that is more than $30 although there seem to be a growing number of fetish sites out there that exceed that.
Also, I will generally not join a site that doesn't have good reviews here and will brace myself for disappointment if I want to join a site that has no reviews here. Still, once in a while I get taken..or at least feel like I did.
I just remembered...I have experienced remorse a couple of times for reading bad reviews here and joining anyway! Read the reviews!
Oops. Starting writing and the edit timer ran out...
I'm thinking I used to spend about $20-30 a month on magazines and videos back in the...80s, plus an Atlanta, Dallas, Houston or Fort Lauderdale strip club once every couple of months or so. That was maybe 40 images per $5 magazine and one crappy video rental a week. When you consider Moore's rule of technology (doubles every 6 months-2 years), and you throw in inflation, I'd say on-line porn is about the same or slightly better value than porn of prior years.
And although I know where there are some really, really...um...satisfying strip clubs, it is hard to compare that to having a private video chat with any one of about a million girls, some of whom are popular models on your favorite porn sites, with the ability to ask her to do just about anything you can imagine right there in living color...probably for less than you would spend at a strip club.
And if you think that is cool, just wait until you see POV and real-time role-play porn on an Oculus Rift! This technology will blow your everything!
So I guess the value (and budget) is about the same but the technology makes it all much better.
A good value compared to what? Magazines? Old VHS? DVDs? Strip clubs? A date? A girlfriend? A hooker? A wife? (I'm mostly kidding...) :-)
I agree with Pat and RearAdmiral about the volume and variety available on-line being unlike anything else, ever, but I've also experienced what Greymane mentions with rip-off sites. It amazes me that some of these sites can be in business at all.
In the end, you often make a decision based on the sales pitch you are given. Sometimes the result is all that is promised, but often it is not. Thankfully, there is a community here at PU, "The community-based Consumer Reports of porn", that helps us by providing timely and accurate reviews so we know what we are getting into.
OK, I know what you mean, but I really think they have improved a LOT at Femjoy in the last 4 or 5 years. I keep all my images by year (10 years worth for Femjoy) and I just went back and opened some zip files from 2007. They are good, but sometimes these images are a little darker and sometimes the emphasis is on the overall locale with the model included in the image periphery someplace. This was pretty common in softcore several years back and was a technique made popular by Holly Randall and others from the days of Penthouse magazine (the "artsy" dark hazy look, the halo look and the High Dynamic Resolution look sometimes still used by Michael Ninn and others can go straight to hell as far as I'm concerned.) Honestly, a panoramic shot with the model in the image can sometimes be very beautiful, but it does not appeal to everyone, it should be used very sparingly and it distracts from the reason for the set, which is the model. Dark sets do crop up occasionally and I too get very frustrated with them. Fortunately, those sets are very rare. Digital cameras are much better these days, too, so the softness we used to see sometimes is also rare.
One thought....sometimes they mess with the thumbnail image to brighten it up for the text they are adding, not simply to improve the image. This may be why you sometimes see brighter thumbnails.
These days I download and unzip the zip files of entire sets instead of just individual images. I also have a single folder where I keep the very best high-resolution images because of the model, the pose and the image quality, not because of the locale. If an image I want to keep happens to have a little too much space at the bottom or top (often they are formatted portrait but could easily be cropped to be landscape), then I just load up Adobe Photoshop and crop it myself. I just looked at my jumbo best-of collection, about 1000 images, and I've probably cropped 75% of them, but I've only messed with color balance and brightness on about 10% of them. These are the cream of the crop models and images across about 30 sites, but they still required a little cropping to suit my tastes and emphasize the model over the locale. I imagine that may be the case for others as well.
Photographers these days need to be all things to all people. That means they need to do panoramas, full body shots, close ups, hands and feet, face shots, coy shots and open shots, all with both direct eye contact and averted eyes. A little of everything. Amazingly, probably 80% of the Femjoy sets and 60%-80% of the images in those sets for last few years are keepers for me. That may not sound like much, but that is an incredibly high percentage compared to the average soft core site I visit. Of course, your mileage will vary, but I think the photographers at Femjoy do a very, very good overall job these days of keeping their audience happy.
Current Member for over 3 months (at the time of review).
Some of the best European models
Wonderful sets and lighting
Top notch photography
2 sets a day
Models generally are not shy
Good site layout
3 image file/zip file sizes for each set.
Images up to 5500 x 3700 pixels(a 6 foot poster)
Excellent value for the money
Navigation not up to par with the best sites
Videos are a bit snoozy
Image/zip file sizes are odd/archaic
Site is not quite as reliable as some others.
I've been a member of this site 5 or 6 times over the years and keep forgetting to write a review. It keeps drawing me back.
Here's the good and bad (absolutely no ugly).
This is a site with photography that ranks up there with the best in this genre...perhaps THE best. The photo sets and models themselves are generally spectacular. In fact, there are a few exclusive models here that are the absolute pinnacle of beautiful female form. Translation: They have perfect, perfect bodies, pretty faces and bright eyes. The models are 18 to mid-20s, fit, clean, totally natural, mostly clean shaven and just drop-dead gorgeous. Very few piercings and next to no tattoos. The more recent models are very open. I've never used this word in a review before. Delicious.
Lets talk about content:
The site has been around since 2004. I can't get a good read on sets, but it is at least 3000 or so, plus about a video or two a week for at least the last few years. Of course the older sets tend to be a little more "observing a naked girl in the woods" but for the past few years, the shooting formula has been damn near perfect. Great mix of full body and close-ups in various poses. Sets and outdoor locations are great. Interaction is great. Lighting is consistently terrific. Posing is great. Nothing awkward or uncomfortable anywhere.
The videos are sometimes of the photo shoots and sometimes shot separately on the same set. The girls start naked or disrobe and are usually undressed by the halfway point. Any close-ups, etc are reserved for the last few minutes of the video and there is rarely any masturbation. These are not bad videos, but they are not terribly exciting unless you really want to see how a particular model moves. They come in multiple sizes and formats from standard definition (272p) to 1080p. Older ones are in 720p.
Just a reminder that this is soft core. There is no guy/girl sex, no toys, no insertions, etc., with maybe a little bit of masturbation and few girl/girl sets just touching and leaning. (If you want that in this format, go over to Joymii.) At Femjoy, you just get beautiful unobstructed view.
So..what's not to like? Well...I know the webmasters are working on improvements, but there are a few things that keep me from rating this site right up there with the best. I know they will be reading this so forgive me if I direct some of my points to them.
First, the navigation is a little off. there are a few too many clicks to get where you want to be and not enough new-window options. When you click on a set from the home or updates page, a new window opens for that set and then all actions happen in that window. Click to see images, and a limited number of images appear in a gallery. Click on "show all" (nice pun, I guess) and all of the images appear. What, are we still in dial-up times? Just show me ALL the images when I ask to see ALL images, please. This doesn't sound like much, I know, but it is a little odd to navigate through. ..Then there is selecting a picture. When you click on an image from a gallery, it opens up in the same window that the gallery of images was in. Click back and you are taken back to the top of the gallery page regardless of where the image was that you clicked on. This may also seem like a little thing but when looking through many images, it is unnerving. What SHOULD happen is that each set should open a window/tab and each image within that set should open a window/tab. Or better yet, the whole thing should be user selectable like several of the other top-tier websites are. To their credit, the navigation options once looking at an image are pretty good (larger image, next, previous and back to gallery).
And my last little nitpick is with the file sizes. There are three image size choices: "Quickview Edition" images are 800k wide. "Collectors Edition" images are 1200k wide and "Poster-Size Edition" images are 4500-5500k wide. Wait, what? (Insert captain Piccard meme here) Who the fuck looks at 800k images anymore? Even iPhones are 960 pixels wide/tall! My smallest computer screen is 1900 pixels wide. So the two smallest images sizes are waaaay too small to fill my computer screen and the only other option involves 5500 pixel, 2 meg images and a zip file that is a third of a gig! There is just something seriously outdated with this thinking. I appreciate the larger images, but they are a little too large to be loaded and kept exclusively. What is needed is a 1200, a 2000 and a max resolution (4500+) image size. I have been told they are working on fixing this and will happily report when it is fixed.
Bottom line? If you are into soft core and like young, OMG beautiful girls, don't hesitate. Just join this site. This is one of the few sites that I would recommend for an annual membership because of the terrific soft core content. There is enough here to keep you entertained for months.
I've been to japan and the things girls do for money in clubs and parlors there are unbelievable. When it comes to fetishes, they might even top the US. I knew a top-tier American stripper who went over there for a year because the money was almost double what she made in the US. Paid for 4 years of college in less than a year! (Somebody paid her $10,000 cash to be a blindfolded, glass topped table for 2 hours including breaks.) I'm guessing this is why a lot of the great oriental porn actresses won't leave Japan to shoot a video without blurring...they probably make more and expose less by staying in the country.
So, yes, the double standard is very frustrating. But there probably isn't much we are going to be able to do about it.
I think part of the problem is the demand on photographers and models to satisfy different tastes. I happen to like full-body shots where the model is looking at the camera. Not everyone does. I don't like shots of just hands or feet. Many others do. Front, back, top, bottom, close-up, full-body, stand, sit, closed, spread, etc. Just rattling off the different types of shots takes me to about 40 images. So if there is a "formula" checklist of shot types and positions that photographers must follow in order to get top dollar for their sets, it probably automatically includes about 50-60 shots.
Keep in mind also that photographers often hire models by the day and will shoot multiples sets in one venue or in different room in the same rented house or hotel room...or that webmasters often break up photo shoots into multiple sets to save money. And if they happen to have a very popular or very exclusive model, the images get rationed out like diamonds by DeBeers, sometimes appearing years after the model has retired. So for me, it is somewhere between 30 and 100 images. I'll pull the whole set down and cull anything I don't want anyway.
I have a long term subscription to Met Art and although a few sites in their affiliation group are discounted or sometimes free for trial periods, many of the sites that were once $10 a month to Met-Art members are now full-price. So ED is $29.00 as of the date of this note. That's really too bad as I used to join an extra site in the network every month or so. At $10 or $15, I wouldn't think twice before joining. At $29.00, these sites are competing with literally every other site on the Internet and this network usually loses out on the opportunity to earn my subscription money as I'll chose some other site I have not been a member of before. If anyone finds a discount, publish it here!
This is kind of a funny question because it is probably based on what we WANT to see vs. what we ACTUALLY see. In the US, with our weird views toward nudity, there are very few topless and nude beaches, but no matter where you find them, they are not the eye-candy havens you would think. Most are filled with much older men and women that you don't particularly want to see naked. You just can't un-see some of it. Then there are the gawkers who don't get that nude/topless beaches are not exclusively for the 20-something crowd. The few good looking men and women that do show up at these beaches are often (not always) just exhibitionists looking for a venue. South Beach in Miami is probably the best topless beach in the US and it is a lot of fun to visit, but be prepared to see a few things that will....well...spoil the view.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
High quality videos
Top rated models
Decent photo sets
Good lighting and sets
Site is small
Must pay extra to access "network"
Far too much cross-selling
Site is oddly generic
1 New video released every other day or so.
No scoring system, just "likes" Really?!
Acting reminiscent of 16mm porn movies
Almost no model interaction with the photographer whatsoever.
Very little chemistry...either between models or between models and crew.
Nobody is having any fun!
Note: I think it is possible that they reworked this site since 2013 as I can't find some of the features mentioned in prior reviews. This is not the same babes.com website I was a member of 10+ years ago.
Well, here's another one of those sites that looks good from the outside, but it leaves you oddly unexcited when you finally buy in. It has all the right components, top models, great quality videos, nice settings, but there's something just a little...um...off about it. You would think that a video, for example, of Ariel and Caprice getting each other off in every way possible would be pretty heavenly, right? Well, it is nice, but the acting (and moaning) is a little artificial, the rhythm is a little too slow, the chemistry is lacking, the music is a little too 80's cheesy and the sex is just so-so. There are lots and lots of videos like this. Maybe the best image I can conjure up is this: These are like porn versions of Met-Art videos. Beautiful women but really, really boring videos. I have NEVER seen a boring Angelica video....until now (the fact that she is moaning while on her knees jerking the guy off doesn't add much). The more I think about it, the more I think it is just really bad direction. Really bad.
The photo sets are OK, but each follows the related video very closely and I can't tell if they are shot together or not. My guess is that they are. Some of these shots are at odd angles and a little off center like the photographer is standing beside the videographer.
This odd photography and video quality and the way the site is laid out makes me think these webmasters are much more about making money than they are about making quality product. They've put all the elements in place to make masterpieces, but every video I watch is a disappointment. I'm a jaded old guy who has seen a lot of porn, though, so feel free to think I'm crazy.
So, here's the kind of odd money-hungry thing I'm talking about. Across the top, you have options to join Fuck-now, Brazzers, Twistys, Digital Playground, Reality Kings or MOFOS. You can join ANY of them with what they call UNLIMITED ACCESS, for $69.00! Like any Ronco ad, they show that a lifetime Twisty's membership, for example, as a $349.00 value! I'm thinking, woa, that's a great deal! Ah, but of course, THERE'S A CATCH! It is unlimited access for AS LONG AS YOU MAINTAIN YOUR MEMBERSHIP IN BABES.COM! Wait..what? No, I would not keep my membership to babes.com for more than a month (not enough content), so the unlimited membership would be pretty useless. They do have $10 off deals on the monthly rate for these other sites, but again you have to remain as a member of babes.com
Bottom line: Sorry, with so many other great sites to choose from, I can't recommend this one. This is the porn version of that movie with all the great actors that you ended up falling asleep in. My apologies to the webmasters.
Absolutely true about the fish eye. What is interesting about this site is that many (not all) of the videos are a mix of go-pro on the head and tripod-over-the-bed-behind-the-guy video. This method avoids the shake-as-you-bang effect. There are also a few seconds here and there where one of the cameras is visible. One of them is a small, decent quality HD video camera with internal stabilization. And there almost always seems to be a 2nd person involved in the shoot in one way or another. So these guys are not out to make cheap videos, they are out to make a lot of money by spreading their collection over as many sites as possible. That strategy will work once their collection is a little larger, but right now it is just frustrating.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Very nice high quality videos
Generally very nice looking models
Good lighting and sets
A few minutes of amazing POV footage in every scene
Navigation is simple
Mostly US models that sometimes talk a little
Considerable variety of girls
Very little content
Some video is very distorted (think go-pro)
Many links to other sites you have to pay for
A few videos FROM other sites.
Inconsistent access and download speeds
On the face of it, this is a pretty interesting site and I joined because of their amazing POV videos peppered around the Internet. I knew the content would be small, but not THIS small. There are only about 40 videos TOTAL that are native to this site as of 5/15/2014. Fortunately, the site owners take pity on you and give you limited, rather inconsistent access to a few other sites.
This site is actually part of a network, but you don't have full access to the rest of the network. Instead, you occasionally get to watch one of the other-site videos and maybe download that content, but you don't always have access to the other sites...maybe there is a view limit to external material or something...I'm not sure. I am thankful, though, that the site owners recognize that giving away some content from their other sites is a good idea, but there really isn't enough content within this whole network to compete with some of the bigger sites out there. If you DO want to join the whole network, it will set you back $69.00 a month or so for a monthly subscription. Thanks, but no thanks. I've been a member of some of the other sites, and they are also very small (Passion-HD, Casting Couch-X, Fantasy-HD, Pure Mature and ExGF) although the video quality is usually very good. I get that these guys have to make money, but Geeez.... explain the rules to me, please.
This site is a video site so the images are secondary and mostly just from the video shoot. Some are screen-caps but it seems that there is somebody taking pictures as well and many of these are not bad.
Download times seem a lot slower than average and downloads time out a LOT and once stopped cannot be restarted. I can't tell if this is due to a download limit or something else. Again, it would really help to know the rules.
The videos themselves are generally very good and all are 720 or 1080p. I have no idea why it has taken so long for POV videos to take off. There is nothing quite like a virtual scene where you are looking down at a totally naked girl who is on her back with her legs in the air as your virtual dick rams into her. And you get to see it from your POV for pretty much every sexual position. There is one scene where "you" are lying on a bed and a girl sits on your face, but then as the camera angle changes (you tilt your virtual head a little), you see another girl bouncing on your dick. That just seems like the pinnacle of virtual sex to me....at least until they start creating porn for an Oculus Rift!
There are a few nitpicks that I am not fond of, but other people may really like. For one, the male actor in many of the scenes is into licking assholes. A POV close-up of somebody licking a girls asshole is something you can't really un-see and I prefer not to see another tongue going into an asshole from that close....ever again. Also, there are a couple of girls that, although generally very attractive, just are not ready for their close-ups when you are talking about being a couple of inches away from their snatch in the glory of high-def. Fortunately, only a few girls fall into this category. But the most disturbing oddity is that occasionally the POV switches to that of the woman. It is sometimes interesting when the girl is in the shower or something, but this is really, really weird when the girl is getting fucked. There you are drawn into an amazing scene imagining you are screwing the lights out of this awesome girl and suddenly, the POV perspective changes, you are the girl and YOU are getting screwed! Sorry. HUGE NOPE! Same thing happens occasionally while the guy is getting head. I suppose when it comes to POV, there is "give and take", but I am not a taker in this regard. Some Day I'll fire up my Adobe Suite and edit all the junk out of these...some day...maybe. My suggestion to the camera crew and website owners is to take that stuff and create a separate girls POV site. One hetero and one lesbian, even. How about gay POV? You never know who might show up....well, except it won't be me. Sorry.
Bottom line? There are a few OMG videos here that make it worth it to visit, but try to do it at a discount and don't sign up for more than the minimum time-frame....at least until they get their video count up quite a bit. The quality is great, but the quantity is just too low for now.
I've recently started subscribing to sites for a year at a time because, after doing the math, I realize I spend that much at my favorite sites anyway and the longer memberships are usually great values. Usually...except...not with nubiles.net. A 1 year membership with Nubiles WITH the PU discount is $209.00!!! $209??? Wow, that is a lot! A regular, undiscounted 1 year membership with Met Art is $99. Femjoy: $99. MC Nudes: $99. Twisty's: $119. Als Scan: $139. There are a couple of sites that charge $150 or so for a 1 year membership, but very, very few that charge $209. Since there is no real incentive for me to sign up for a year (3 months free compared to others 6 months free), I guess I will have to join for a month or two and then quit for awhile like I used to do. Oh well... A pain for me and a loss of revenue for them.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Easily one of the top 5 softcore sites on the Internet.
Models are 18-25-ish, generally petite Europeans.
Lots of popular European models plus a bunch of newbies and exclusive models.
Very nicely done sets and videos.
Set management is among the best in the business (make-up, lighting, wardrobe, location, atmosphere and composition are all superb.)
Most of the models are beyond beautiful. Some could stop a 747 in mid-flight!
Models are generally not shy.
Model Eye contact with photographer is generally excellent.
Nice mix of full-body and close-up shots.
Outdoor sets are the best I've ever seen (no stalking-style girl in the woods sets here!)
All of the models appear to be enjoying themselves!
Navigation, search and voting all pretty good
Customer Service was prompt and courteous.
Really not much to list here...I have to dig deep to find things:
A "User settings" option would be nice. (Image size, thumbnails-per-page)
I'd like all set thumbnails to be on one page. Typically you have to click through 4 pages of thumbnails to see all of them in a set.
Navigation could be a little better (browsing is single thread from updates page to model-set page to individual images. No new windows for sets, thumbnails or images.)
Page back sometimes takes you back to unexpected places like the log in page.
These are all REALLY minor things, though.
I had some minor issues with IE-11. Chrome is fine.
Some might not like that there is no comment section for each model, but seeing how that tends to get abused at other sites, I don't blame the webmaster for that decision at all.
I promised that I would try again to get into this site and I'm really glad I did. It is simply top-notch. Gorgeous models, really well done sets and excellent overall. Customer service when I contacted them was prompt, helpful and courteous.
This site has been around since 2003 and the collection is pretty massive. About 195,000 images and 395 videos. 1 set a day would put it at around 3600+ sets. Older sets are very well done but not quite as revealing and the resolution is not quite as high. (A few sets prior to about 2008 are non-nude or partially nude.) There appear to be about 250 models, the vast majority of whom are simply stunning. Al of the models are completely natural. I see a lot of sites where the model ratings are artificially inflated to 9. Not here. Here they are almost all 9s...or better.
Images come in three sizes both for viewing and in zip files: 4000, 2000 and 1200 on the long side. Older sets are at least 1600 and 1200.
As I mentioned above, the sets are generally excellent. In fact, I can't really recall seeing anything I didn't like. The girls are happy, friendly and open. Lighting, focus, composition, etc. are excellent.
This is generally a solo-girl softcore site, but there is a toy occasionally and some of the video sets include masturbation. Girls usually start out clothed or partially clothed but many of the outdoor sets start out completely nude.
Sets are usually about 30-40 images each. Some older sets are a bit smaller. Older sets are also a bit more conservative, although the imagery is just is good. Some older sets are also continuations (I.e. 30 shots in one release and 30 more from the same set sometime later), but it isn't enough to be a bother and they don't seem to do that anymore.
The videos, though not as common, are somehow better than many of the comparable sites. I think this is because the girls tend to interact with the camera more. In many of the videos, You get this little "you like?" look once in a while. Why yes, yes I do!
All sets are properly dated and there is NO recycling. Every set all the way back to 2003 is unique as far as I can tell. Some sets seem like they might be a little older, but they are otherwise unpublished. And the girls in those "new old stock" sets are gorgeous enough for you not to mind at all.
Another really nice thing is that the highest resolution of each image is native. An image displayed in 4000 was actually shot in 4000 or higher. (Occasionally you may find an low-light inside set shot near the ISO limits of the camera, which tends to make the largest images a little grainy, but that's not because of resizing.) Older shots at 1600 or 2000 were shot in that and not resized. there isn't a single fuzzy or up-sized image on the entire site as far as I can tell! Kudos to the team for that!
About the only negative I can find on the entire site is the single threaded browsing. No new windows open when you drill down. This is probably to keep the website traffic down, but I prefer the met-art or FemJoy style where either sets or images appear in their own windows. Yes...I can type a key while clicking to open pages in a new window, but it seems like it should be a preference setting. Otherwise, navigation is good. Once in a set, you have forward, back, thumbnail and open image in any available size options.
There is another option I discovered eventually that makes navigation a little easier...there is a flip-book on the lower right side of the main page for each set. You can flip through it to an image you would like to look at and click on that image. When you do THAT a new window opens starting at the first page of thumbnails (not the image or page of thumbnails you clicked on). This little flip-book is actually pretty nice because you can quickly flip through all the thumbnails in a set. Not sure why it doesn't just take you to the image, though...
Bottom line: If you like the Met-Art or Erotica Archives sites, you will also really like this one. It easily rates up there with the best.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Decent collection (about 1000 sets, I think)
Generally very attractive models
Many familiar models
Excellent value for the money
Photography is generally very good
Images available up to 3200x4800
For the price, you will not be disappointed!
Navigation is extremely basic
Site formatting is also very basic
Only a couple of videos (it is a photo site...)
Only 2 zip file sizes (but good choices)
Only 2 image file sizes (but big enough)
For less than $10, I figured I didn't have much to lose and I ended up getting MUCH more than I expected.
This site has several years worth of about 5 updates a week. The models are generally Eastern European. Many have been in Femjoy or MetArt, but there were also many, some quite beautiful, that I had not seen before. Some of the best European models on the planet are on this site, although most have different names. If you like Dominika, Katya or Mila on Met Art, they are all here. There are even a few nice sets of the now-retired but forever revered Marketa.
Neither the site nor the sets are quite as polished as some of the more expensive softcore sites, but I guess that is to be expected in this price range. There are many models that I've seen elsewhere and I just cant tell if the sets are from when they were younger, or if the girls just aren't wearing make-up. The tendency here is to use less or no make-up, so if you are not into the glam look, this is another treasure-site.
The sets are generally good quality, both indoors and outdoors. Lighting is good. The amount of "reveal" depends on the models, but most sets start out in lingerie or fully nude and about half have close-ups. There are no toys, insertions, etc., although there are a few scenes with two girls. This is not an "in your face" site...more of a girl-in-the-woods or girl-in-her-bedroom thing. Interaction with the photographer is generally very good, depending on the experience of the model, and many look like they are having a pretty good time. Kudos to the photo crew for that.
All sets are dated on the main thumbs page for each year. File names are reasonable for both the images and the zip files, so you don't have to go through hoops to save them. Since each set is listed since the site was created, you can tell that there is no recycling going on like at some other sites.
The navigation on the site is very, very basic. The update page is not formatted, so the update thumbs just go down the left side of the screen for ever. The two choices under each thumb are "screen sized" (currently 934x1400) or "print sized" (currently 3930x5988) older images are slightly smaller, but still pretty big.
So for navigation, you click on an option under a set image (screen or print) and then click on an image. To get back to the main page, you back out with your browser. There are no pop-ups or viewers. Once in a set, you can also download a zip file of images in the size you chose to get into the set (screen or print). NO toggling between image sizes or even choosing multiple zip file sizes once you commit to screen or print for the image sizes. No forward or backward movement once you chose an image to look at. Just page back and pick another image (or shift-click to open a new window). This works, but it seems so 1990. Perfectly acceptable, though, for the no-frills price.
I would have scored this site a little higher if it were not for the navigation. It is an honest site that is in the business of providing quality softcore images. They don't fluff it up and they don't steal your money. That is a rare and terrific thing in this industry and I will be back both for the images and to help ensure they stay around.
Bottom line? This site is a terrific deal! If you are tired of paying $30 to get into a new site only to be disappointed with quality or quantity of content and you like the softcore genre, then this site is a must-visit. C'mon! for under $10, you've got absolutely nothing to lose!
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Attractive, fit and flexible models
Images and videos all the way back to 2000
About 65 models
5-30 sets per model
All sets are dated
Probably 60+ HD video clips
Sets are nicely done (all studio)
CCBill generates a random username and password, (at sites request) but the site allows it to be saved.
Best site that I know of for the genre
Good honest site in a tiny niche
Image size is 800x1200 MAX!!??
No image size options. What you click is what you get.
Navigation is truly awful!
No zip files of sets!!!??
File numbering is 001.jpg, 002.jpg (making file management diffcult)
Older vids are tiny
Older images are REALLY tiny (800x524)
Many of the models are only partially nude
Some are not nude at all
Updates maybe 2 times a week with partial sets.
Simply too expensive for quantity of material.
I tripped over a video from this site on Dailymotion.com and, after looking and leaving several times because of the high price, finally decided to see what was there. I was not really disappointed, but it was immediately apparent that this site is not run by any of the big players.
All of the girls are fit, which I suppose they have to be to be flexible like they are. Many are very attractive...some even beautiful The sets are all very similar, with the model starting out clothed in a dance outfit or something similar and then paring down to whatever their personal minimum is. Some of the sets start out with the girl nude. The sets are well done and the girls seem to interact well with the photographer. (suggestion: get a ladder! A full-body straight-down shot of some of these girls would be amazing!) Sets are generally between 25 and 50 images. These are all Eastern European girls, I think, and I have never seen any of them on any other site that I can recall. Kudos to the talent scouts for that.
This site does not have any sex, insertion, masturbation, etc. The models simply flex in incredible ways and give you a nice view. This webmaster has another site called perfectflex.com where there are toys and insertions. Personally, I'm more into the view, but I may and up over at the other site at some point. Clearly he's got models that are willing to pose nude. He needs to up the volume with those models here.
It looks as though there are a few "regular" models that have 20 or more sets. It looks as though this is the "stable" now, as the updates are dominated by these girls but I can't tell for sure because updates only come twice a week.
Now....on the down side...
That collection of 60 mnodels dates all the way back to 2000, so you can get some idea of the volume and frequency of updates.
The images on this site are much too small for today's monitors. I'm downloading 4k images from other sites, so 800x570 is really unacceptable. And as good as some of the older sets are, I'm going to have a hard time keeping images that only fill 1/5 of my screen and are grainy at full-screen. The webmaster really needs to go back and post the larger master images.
Navigation is pretty basic. Click a model, click a set, click an image, click "page back" to go back to set, click another image. No forward or backward, etc.
No zip files???? Come on, really? That makes no sense whatsoever...unless the server can't handle it...
Bottom line: I really like the type and quality of content, but the site really needs a lot of work to attract and keep subscribers in this 2-updates-a-day for $20 world. $39 to sign up? Somebody needs to take a marketing class to learn about elasticity in marking, not just modeling. I would be recommending the site like crazy if it were $19..but have a hard time telling anyone to check it out for $39.
So....my apologies to the webmaster...but if you are interested in this site, keep your money until the price comes down or they offer a mega-pass for all of the super-flexi sites for $39. After this month, that is probably the only thing that will get me back.
Protecting Minors We are strong supporters of RTA and ICRA, two of the most recognized self labeling organizations. Our site is properly labeled to assist in the protection of minors accessing inappopriate content. For information about filtering tools, check this site.
DISCLAIMER: ALL MODELS APPEARING ON THIS WEBSITE ARE 18 YEARS OR OLDER.
To report child pornography, go directly to ASACP! We're proud to be a corporate sponsor.
Have concerns or questions about porn addiction? We recommend this helpful resource.