I'm looking at the previews to these two sites (wowgirls.com and 18onlygirls.com) and the images and videos are almost exactly the same, but they do not appear to be part of a network. Anyone have any info about that?
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Many top-notch and popular models
Excellent quality videos
Most videos are full 1080 HD
Good photo sets
Wide variety of models
Lets and lots of masturbation...
Pussy classification system is a hoot!
Lots of details about many of the models
Not much variety of activities or sets
5 point voting system seems a bit off
Sort order on many pages seems random
no extra large images (2800x1867 max)
Not much depth (i.e. most models in only one set)
Models are often a little...un-made-up.
Many models don't interact with the camera much
Well, the best way to describe this site might be "Forget the foreplay, let's get to it!"
There is very little posing, no glam photography (i.e. not much make-up), not a single "naked girl in the woods" just a whole lot of "Here's a girl. Watch her masturbate!" And masturbate they do! Every single girl! Usually with multiple devices in each photo or video set.
This is also one of those sites where you are so drawn in by the masturbation scenes that you won't notice some of the other features right away. There are a lot of interview transcripts that seem reasonably genuine, but the translation from Russian seems a little too perfect to be 100% correct. They are entertaining, though. There are both "bonus" and an "extras" sections that contain additional sets, some of which are from other sites. Ah, yes, there is a LOT of cross selling advertising going on, but thankfully the webmasters have kept the ads to small banners except at the very bottom of some of the pages. The sites that are advertised are all quality sites and a few have "special offers" that one would not get if one were to go straight to, say, Twisty's. (The offers are about the same as the discounts the PU.com...)
There are a couple of bonus sites: "We like to Suck" and "Wet and Pissy". If that doesn't paint a picture for you, quit sniffing glue. Thay have basically the same layout and quality but are a little more specialized. Not really my cup of....whatever.
The webmaster and photo teams do a really good job of creating a genre and sticking to it. The scenes are well lit, well focused and generally good quality. They are all entirely indoors, apparently in a hotel bedroom or bathroom with a few scenes in a home someplace. In some of the sets, one of the videographers, who I'm pretty sure is not exclusive to this site, gets into the action a little by putting a finger in various orafices of the models. I'm not sure I like this style and can't tell if the models do either.
The models are for the most part, right out of ALScan or Twisty's. The top models here are on those other sites, too. Generally pretty, with maybe a few that are not. Oh, and the "real factor" is pretty high here. Make-up is minimal. Lot's of very shiny faces and plenty of pimples visible just about everywhere you can imagine. One girl has a boot shaped bruise right across her butt! If you like "real" this is the place for you!
The "acting" is OK. Female orgasms in porn is like watching professional wrestling. Is it real? Who cares! It's entertainment!
The stats, curiously posted across the top on th ehome page to make it really easy for me to reference, are:
That is not a lot of material compared to some other sites and it doesn't take a math wiz to see that over three quarters of the models only have one photo set and one video. The price isn't bad, though, so I would say it is worth it.
Navigation is pretty straightforward. You can sort models alphatically or on popularity...but the order of the models seems to change and the ranking system, wich goes to 5, seems a little narrow and somewhat inaccurate. There are two image download sizes and a handful of video format options. There are also a few page preferences like number of thumnails on a page. I would like to see larger image options and the ability to download things directly from the model or scene summary page.
OK, bottom line: If you are into solo mastubation videos, this site is certainly worth a visit.
For me, it's a toss-up. Random username/passwords aren't bad IF your browser is allowed to remember them. (That way, you only enter it once and don't have to remember it.) If not, random username/PW are the worst. It is why I dropped my Watch4Beauty subscription...because they do not allow your browser to keep the info. Capcha is rapidly becoming the most annoying as it becomes more widespread, though. What is the purpose, exactly, to make sure you are not using a download bot? You already paid for the material, right?
Looks like I need to keep looking around. There is one bonus site that isn't bad called Ariel Rebel. Although I don't recall seeing the girl before, the solo site has Recent updates, decent vidos, etc.
I joined this site because the Girl they call Katie Fey is a personal favorite. Katie was Jenya at Met Art and was in Playboy as a Russian by the name of Yevgeniya Diordiychuk. I never expect much from these solo sites, but there was a lot of material here from between 2004 and 2008. I counted 300 sets!
Apparently, she is either retired or is no longer updating this site because the last sets were from 2008. Although she is smoking hot, she is not a porn model and most of the images were barely nude. The resolution of the images was 1000k or smaller.
There are some other sites that came with the deal, but they were of nobody I'd ever heard of, were very old (i.e. small and pooor quality) and most were not nude. I may have saved maybe one set from the other sites.
If you are "Katie Fay" collector, this site is worth it. If you hang around on the sign-up page long enough, you will get a "chat" pop-up and doing so will reduce the cost by $5.
Well.... think I get the question. Or maybe I'm interpreting it in a particular way. There is sometimes a distinct period of time between the orgasmic groan (or virtual groan if yours is silent) and actual ejaculation. The question is how long can one hold that sensation that causes the groan before shooting off? Well, for me, maybe a couple of seconds the first time. Longer, but less intense the second or third times, probably because there is not as much left to hold back....
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Very unique, playful style - a true "indie" web site
Unique look and feel
Fairly exclusive European models
57 of the girls are French according to site
A few popular models
True High resolution images to 4000k- crisp images
HD videos for most models
Newer site so no old low res material!
Great search options
Model mouseover summary and "exposure limits" very helpful
Newer models/sets are very good
Coolest "Shop" area I'v ever seen.
A good deal for the price!
Collection is not that large, but growing
Information is sparce once at the model pages
Rating system is confusing (model or set?)
Can't search by model score.
Many Models are not very engaging
Many models are pretty but not knockouts
Many models/sets are not nude
Navigation/viewing options are limited
(i.e. 10 models per page, 18 sets per page)
There are a few minor navigation issues (page back does not work so you have to reload a lot)
A few broken/incorrect links (might be in the middle of upgrading )
Set dates are not universally available.
This is the type of site that reminds me how incredibly difficult it must be to run a popular, successful porn site. They do many, many things really well here, but the overall package falls a little short, overall score-wise, of the big players.
This is currently a nude and non-nude modeling site. mostly passive, candid, single model, photography. No sex, nothing kinky in any way with the exception of a very small number of VERY light B&D sets. In this regard, it is kind of like the local strip club....the girls you WANT to see more of are not the girls you ARE seeing more of, if you catch my drift. If you have an appetite for sex scenes, toys, bondage, close-ups, spread legs, anything more than passaive nude modeling photogrpahy, this may not be the site for you at the moment, but check back as it looks like the folks here are making some very positive improvements in both the site and the collection. If you are the type who likes passive scenes, dressing room shots, that kind of thing, then this may be an EXCELLENT site for you. Frankly, there is a lot of variety here and my tastes, admittedly, run toward more engaging solo scenes.
Here are some basics from what I can tell...
About 100 models
About 350 sets
1 new set every 2-3 days
Sets have between 30 and 60 images
Models all seem to be 18-24
Model are, as the name implies, petite.
Most sets are in studio.
The design of this site makes it fun and different. I think the webmasters were trying to incorporate a Moulin Rouge kind of feel, and they came very close to pulling it off. Model thumbnails are shown full sized and they go nude with a mouse-over. Saw the technique in a french body study years ago and it is VERY effective here at showing you exactly what the models look like. Clicking on a model brings a pop-up that shows all of her sets. Once you select a set, you get about 36 images per page, a "stars" score, and a thumbnail slider that allows you to go to other sets of the same model. Very nice concept. In execution, though, the name of the model does not show up on the model page anywhere, only in the hard-to-read thumbnails, the stars scoring is not immediately clear (model or set? SET!), the model bio is not available from here, the sets are not dated here, the cover images are included for sets scheduled for up to a month away (so you click on a model and a set and THEN find that the set isn't on the site yet). Some navigation options are missing, but don't hit back-page here (or ANYWHERE) or you will have to reload your browser. (I also clicked on something once or twice and got dropped into a shell directory where I shouldn't have been...looks like they are in the middle of upgrades.) I love the navigation style here, but it could be much better with a few small tweaks.
When you first look at the site, it really does give a Moulin Rouge feel. The sample images are representatative, so you honestly see what you get.
The photography, though competent, is sometimes a little weak. There are some excellent studio sets, but many sets are passive, so you feel like you are following the model around through her apartment or something. There is a little model interaction with the photographer (and therefore the viewer), but not much. This may be more about the models,as the more popular models are more interactive (it is part of what makes them popular) than the neophytes. But the incongruity between the playful feel of the site and the passive feel of many of the sets is what makes things a little...off here. They need a little more of the sexual energy you find at Twisty's or ALSscan...you usually only get that with the hyper-confident pro-models or with a photographer/shoot team that is ungodly talented. I noticed that many commenters like the passive stuff and frankly have no idea how one would balance the two styles. I have to say, though, that the newer photography is much, much better in terms of interaction and content than the older stuff, so clearly somebody here gets it.
I really want this site to be a success. It is different. It is unique. It is not a formula web site. It deserves to be successful. I could easily and rightfully compare it to an Indie in the movie industry. But the problem with indies is that, although they are often critically acclaimed, they just as often don't get the popular vote simply because they are not following the popular formula or because of one or two faults. This site COULD be a Kill Bill, a Pulp Fiction, A Quentin Tarantino kick-ass example of a web site. Unfortunately, it isn't quite there....yet. Clearly, I am rooting for it, though.
Bottom line: A very unique site that is worthy of a look. With a few tweaks in the site and content, this could be among the top players and it seems as though the webmasters here are figuring that out. I will absolutely be back in a year or so to see how things have progressed.
I just joined this site a few days ago and so far, it isn't bad at all. It is an "Art" or "Nude" site, mostly what I call "Girl in the woods" stuff, but many of the models are exclusive. The non-exclusive models are top-tier (perhaps from before they were mainstream), and all of the models are, for the most part, absolutley flawless.
I definitely see the granularity, mentioned elsewhere in feedback, in many of the larger images, even brand new posts. This leads me to believe that the host is drawing on older images that are previously unreleased..or he just doesn't want anybody zooming in or printing razor sharp, life-sized images of the models and thinks the grainy look is artsy. (Remember when the images in Penthouse Magazine had that odd glow/fuzz effect?) It's distracting but not terminal.
I'll do a full review in a few days once I 've had a chance to look around.
It is amazing how convenient digital media is. I"ve collected over 2 TB over the past 16 years or so, almost entirely images. Of course the old stuff is like 8mm film and you can hardly even see the videos on today's screens. Those old videos are laughable.
Apparently they WERE telling me to screw off since future sign-up is "no longer an option". Here's the final message I got from the webmaster. You have to wonder what people are thinking in terms of marketing when there are public review forums like this. Was it retaliation for writing the comments? I don't know. It's just very dissappointing. And I'd bet that they never even try to replicate the problem I outlined.
No disrespect intended and no justification is necessary on either end. Our site is not a good fit for you. We both recognize that. Your $19.95 has been promptly refunded
Future signup is no longer an option. As I said earlier, we're sorry it was so difficult for you. Login authentication is not supposed to be a complicated, frustrating experience.
On 2/8/2013 5:22 PM, skippy99 wrote:
Well, Iím more than a little disappointed that you just closed my account and refunded my money, but I suppose that is your prerogative. The reason I contacted ccBill and not you was that I really wasnít expecting anyone to respond to me from your site at 1:00 in the morning. Usually, ccBill can reset locked passwords and even change them and I know they are there 24/7.
From: Webmaster at MPL Studios
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2013 12:53 AM
Subject: Re: Your login process is a nightmare!
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Some of the models are really beautiful
Most are at least good looking
Most are natural, not enhanced.
100% original content
Exclusive models as far as I can tell
Reasonable variety of body dimensions
Sets are not dated.
Unknown update frequency.
Can't tell if sets are recycled.
No HD found so far
Images and zips are 1600x1067 MAX!!
Navigation is a little clunky
Site is mostly bathing suit and lingerie shots.
Models are not very animated (most just standing)
Softer than soft core...really a bikini site with extras.
Not a particularly good value at $29.95.
About 210 models and 1475 sets.
Very few videos but all are decent quality.
Sets have between 30 and 120 images.
Vast majority of sets are bikini/lingerie sets.
This is an odd, sort of misidentified site and I just can't understand why they didn't define it better. (Sorry TBP...) Probably 97% of the girls are NOT NUDE! This would be a classic tease or bikini site if it were not for the occasional nude set. Even the nude sets, most of them anyway, are not particularly revealing. I've seen more on the Chive, Maxim or free web sites. Much more. But then, oh wait, there are two or three models that get naked and provide extreme close-ups. Waaaat? What's THAT about? No wonder TBP had such a hard time defining the site. It's like the sock drawer of nude sites! Most things in there match up with a specific genre ou would expect, but rogue loners to make you wonder what's going on....
Maybe the next best way I can define this site, besides as a tease site, is outdated. Navigation is good but not ideal. You can filter the models by odd preferences like "wet" (as in water),"fishnet", "see-thru", "blond" and, oh yea, "nude" and even "extreme close up" which is just wierd compared to the rest of the site. You can't select multiples, so no way to see wet blonds, etc. And "see-thru" applies to a top worn over a bathing suit as often as something you can actually see parts through.
When you select a model, you get a list of her sets. The sets have tags like "fishnet", bathing suit", "nude", etc. that match the search parameters. These are site defined. Select a set and you get the first batch of 30 thumbnails. If there is nudity, it is often very late in the set. Some sets have over 300 images, so you have to go through 10 pages or more to see everything. You can also navigate directly to a page. Or you can download the entire set in a zip file.
The sets are not dated, so you have no idea how old they are. You also don't know how many images are in a set until you look. The image or file sizes are also not listed. The tags are helpful, but "nude" in this case might mean a nip slip. Ad if the model is nude, chances are pretty good that they superglued her legs together. Many of the girls that are nude are all crossed up like they have to pee! Some are only topless. One kind of interesting thing is that the girls may go nude but cover up everything with thier hands....until they turn around. That all of a sudden you'll get this beautiful standing rear view. The photographer seems to have a knack for these rearview shots as they occur pretty consistently in clothed and nude models.
Oh, yeah. The photography. Competent. Nothing special. No photoshopping. Some studio sets. Since most of the girls are clothed, it looks like the photographer often takes the models to a local hotel pool or maybe some gardens someplace. You can tell that many of the model sets were shot on the same day with the same locale. Nothing even remotely exotic in the locations.
Now if you are LOOKING for a bikini site, this one is probably not bad, but the occasional rogue naked close-up model kind of messes up that niche.
If this were my site, I would probably break it up into a "network" of three sites that might include bikini, lingere and nude sites. The price I paid, $29.00 was probably about $10.00-15.00 high considering comparable sites with tens of thousands of high-resolution images and HD videos.
Bottom line? If you are looking for some exclusve non-nude photography and don't mind a little nudity mixed in, this is a good site for you. If you are used to the top softcore sites, pass on this one...at least until the price comes down.
This is one of those cases where I read the review and did not quite get what you were saying. I was thinking the site has probably changed a lot since you signed up 5 years ago. Guess what? It hasn't.
Wow, now I just read the entire message from the webmaster and read the email he sent me. Although I can't really tell if he's telling me to screw off or not...the message was pretty polite...I am a little dissappointed that he just closed the account.
I'll try again some other time. Knowing what I do now about the login issue, I should be able to get around it without getting locked out.
I absolutely agree that ccBill is perhaps the best billing system. The problem, though, is that the site determines policy and ccBill abides by it. The random password is the site. Login attempts is the site. the tab issue is probably a comibination of site and ccbill as niether seem aware that it is an issue.
The reason I went to ccBill is because they are the site's wallet. If the issue comes from ccBill to the site, chances that it will be addressed are sometimes better than if it were just a little old user.
And lastly, I've had a few instances lately where login servers have been down and I was unable to get into sites. The login servers belong to ccbill. In those cases, you need to complain to both ccBill and to the paysite. There are usually quality of service clauses in the service level agreement between them and you want both parties to think at least a little bit about whether those clauses have been broken.
Interesting response. No "Sorry" message. No possible way that the web site could have done anything wrong. Operator error is the only thing it could have been. (Did I mention that I've been in IT for 20 years?) Kind of arrogant and politically incorrect, don't you think? The ONLY way to accurately enter in a cryptic username password combination like the one you assigned to me is to copy it from the ccbill site and paste it into the host site and that is exactly what I did. About 20 times.
YOUR site locked me out after multiple attempts based on the IP address I was using. When I loaded an anonymous browsing client that uses a proxy server, I was able to get in, but was unable to download more than a few images before, within 60 seconds of logging in, I got a message from YOUR site that said I was accessing the site from an unauthorized IP address (i.e. the proxy server) and tossed me out again. I clicked on the download button for the ZIP, but did not get the file. Probably an issue with the proxy server, not yours.
It's kind of too bad, too, because I liked the little bit I saw of your site.
I'll tell you what. I'll try again tonight to get in. If you look at my other revews for similar sites you will see that I write fair and in many cases glowing reviews. If I get in I will write a review that is untainted by this incident. But in return, you need to secret shop your own site from outside your facility on a typical IP connection. Use Internet Explorer. Buy a subscription. Click on the link in the "Approved" page that ccBill provides and watch as a tab within IE opens. See for yourself that it is physically impossible to get back to the ccBill login page (in an IE tab) once you click login and your website login pop-up appears. Try it a dozen times like I did and see if your site locks you out. Then get back to me and either say "Yes, we can see how this might be a problem" or "No, we tested this exactly as you described and were able to toggle tabs once the login pop-up appeared and were not locked out.
Your call. Actually replicate the issue as I carefully described above, or continue to be a defensive sysadmin who refuses to beleive something an intellegent, experienced customer tells them about their site.
Here's a letter I just sent ccBill within 20 minutes of joining MPL Studios. PU Sysadmin, there isn't really a forum here to discuss account management systems, so I'm dropping this on the related website in the hope that both companies will notice. CCbill is generally MUCH better than the other account managers, but lately, I've had a lot of problems with them.
Here's the letter.
Iíve been happy to use ccBill and have been trusting you as a billing provider for years. Check my email address and you will see a history that is as long as your business has existed. But lately, service has gotten so poor that I am uncertain if joining a site that uses ccBill is worth it.
Tonight I joined MPL Studios for the first time. Not only did ccBill generate a RANDOM password and username, which I hate enough to cancel subscriptions over, but the lsgmodels login pop-up prevented me from toggling back and forth from the ccbill username page to the login. When I finally opened ccBill in a different browser and was able to get the insane user name and password info, the MPL Studios site would not let me in. I can only assume that I exceeded some kind of login attempt limit imposed by you.
Look, you guys are among the better account administrators out there, but I recently cancelled my subscription to met-art because I attempted to log in on several occasions and was unable to because YOUR login servers were down. I cancelled a subscription to Watch 4 Beauty because the random password was soo damn difficult to deal with, I gave up.
As a 20 year IT professional, I understand the importance of security, etc. You are going to tell me something like ďthe host web site required...Ē Bullcrap. As a leading service provider, you are in a position to explain to the host that random passwords cause them to lose customers. And a lockout after a certain number of attempts should redirect me to YOUR site to reset the account, not leave me mad enough to cancel the account immediately. In the end, any web based service must satisfy two needs to be successful. It must be convenient and it must be reliable. Random passwords make your service incredibly inconvenient and the inability of a user in good standing to log in to a site he/she paid for makes your service unreliable.
PLEASE FIX THESE ISSUES!!
And while you are at it, unlock my account on MPL Studios so I can use the account I JUST PAID FOR!
Now, after I wrote this letter, I went ahead and called ccBaill. They told me that MPL Studios will not allow them to reset passwords that get locked out and that only they can do it. So now I'm sitting here witha paid subscription I cannot use. I will be sneding a letter to MPL Studios, as well, and I have already cancelled my brand new subscription because no website should subject thier customers to this kind of nonsense.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Incredibly large collection of porn video segments. (65,000 of them!!!)
Wide variety of video types.
Just about every major porn star out there for the last decade or more. (10,000 of them!)
Navigation is not bad considering the size and nmumber of sites.
There is SO MUCH stuff that it is a challenge to sift through if you have specific tastes.
Videos are porn movie segments, so the quality of video and performacne varies a LOT.
Much of the material is standard def and really old.
Many of the videos are very poor quality.
Only a few of the videos I've seen so far are HD, making them hard to watch on a large screen. Most of these have OK quality and fair content. (You can search for 1080 in advanced search)
The videos are not dated, either for video release date or publication on the site. (But you may see the release date at the very beginning of the video....as far back as 2001!)
It is impossible to determine the quality of a video before clicking on it as there is no resolution data.
There are a lot of industry "veterans"...only a few of which still look good, if you catch my drift.
OK, I have to start by saying that I am not a traditional porno movie guy. I have a huge collection of solo softcore and hardcore images and HD videos created on sites like Twisty's, Ron Harris, Digital Dream Girls, Passion HD, ALSscan, etc. Typically, videos on these sites are created especially for the sites and are studio grade and HD. I'm only trying to establish a baseline here so you know where I'm coming from.
Pornstars Network is like a day on Haulover beach, a nude beach in Miami. There is a whole lot to see, but you have to sift through a lot of really mediocre and a moderate amount of really bad stuff to find the real gems. There are some gems, though, which makes the visit worth it at least once.
The first thing that struck me about this site is the incredible volume of videos. There are 65,000 of them spread out across 52+ sites. And the different sites include almost every taste. All of the videos are segments from a DVD lasting about 10-25 minutes in length.
The 52 individual sites include niche sites like:
My MILF story Hostile Fucking
Black dick, round ass
My first sex video
Jizz Mouthwash Only DP
And a bunch of sites dedicated to indivdual male or female porn stars.
Navigation is pretty good. The sites are listed by both name and type. Once in a site, the thumbnails show a few screenshots of the video and once you click on the video, you can see an entire set of screenshots before watching or downloading the movie. You can also search by pornstar name to list all of a pornstars videos. That's nice if you happen to like, say, Tori Black, and want to see all of her stuff. The site also lists, in order of popularity, every model they have. The list starts with Sasha Grey at number 1 and some girl named Krystal at number 10,057! Really! 10,057 pornstars! And, like I said before, the site lists 65,000 videos! So, if you are into porn videos, this place is a treasure trove.
OK, now for the more critical stuff. Like porn movies themselves, the vast majority of videos here just aren't that great. The video quality is marginal, direction is poor, the camera jitters or the angle is bad, the acting is awful, the performers are not appealing, etc. Pretty much ALL of these videos are not HD. Again, there are 65,000 videos! So even if 60,000 of them sucked, 5,000 would still qualify as good or better. That's way more than a lot of other sites, but the challenge is sifting through the junk to find the gems.
There are some other annoyances, too, but some of them are more about my tastes than the site. A LOT of these videos are really old by Internet standards. Number 1 on the pornstar list is Sasha Grey. Damn, she is hot, but she stopped doing porn in 2009. Jenna Haze, #4, has videos from 2001. I can understand how several of the top 20 can be, um, veteran porn starts, but none of this material is in HD, making it really hard to watch on a computer or bigscreen.
Much of the material is very, very raw. I realize that is the point in some cases, but many of the pornstars that are goddesses on sites like Twisty's or Digital Dreamgirls are just kind of cute at best in these videos. Tori Black, for example, does some terrific stuff on Twisty's and looks about as badass as any girl I've ever seen on that site. In the videos here, she's almost plain. That's more than a little dissapointing.
And then there are the European models that show up in niches like "Auditions" and "First time Videos". You've seen a lot of them on other sites and many are beautiful enough to stop a 747 in mid-flight. One of the reasons I sometimes prefer images to videos is because many of these girls are ungodly beautiful until they move, walk, talk or act. Some European and latin women tend to exagerate their expression as part of the culture. This site is the best example of this that I've ever seen. Some of these girls acting is so hideous that it is actually embarrasing to watch! I never thought that was possible before.... (Exception: Bambi)
There is a lot of other schlocky stuff too.
I know anal sex has been popular in porn for many years, but does it have to be included in almost every sex scene?
It also seems like, although they have nearly every pornstar out there, they DO NOT have those pornstars best work. Instead its the star's early work or off-beat or fetish stuff. There are 57 Sasha Grey videos on this site. Sasha was a pretty kinky pornstar but I KNOW she did some really nice one-on-one stuff as I've seen it elsewhere. Not here. Most of her videos here are gangbangs with 5+ guys, group sex scenes where she gets totally creamed or odd fetish scenes. Not a single straight sex scene with her on the whole site. Too bad.
OK, I'm out of space...
Bottom line: If you are into porn videos, you simply must visit this site, but be prepared to do a lot of sifting to find the stuff that really floats your boat.
I see a lot of interesting comments about guilt here. Really? If your significant other walked in while you were masterbating to a porn video, you would not feel guilty, but if it was a live cam-girl, you would?
Cheating, mutually agreed upon with my wife, is me sticking my dick into another girl or another guy sticking his dick into her. Grinding to orgasm at a strip club doesn't count. Masterbating under any circumstances, live girl, booth girl, strip-club, cam-girl, Waikiki hooker, whatever..not cheating, just release. Heck, she's even given me money to go to clubs when I'm travelling for work.
So don't confuse feeling guilty with cheating unless you feel guilty because your sexual organ smells like somebody other than your significant other's sexual organ. That's cheating! Anything short of that, in spite of what others may think, is pretty much just for fun.
I have preferences, but there are always outliers that I will join once in a while. In the grand scheme of things, the benefits of trying something different far outweigh the risk of being dissapointed...especially when your only talking $20 or so.
Thanks! I try not to use DL managers because it tends to...dilute the best stuff with a whole lot of just OK stuff. I already have nearly 2 terrabytes of stuff collected since these sites first started appearing on the Internet and that's after I archived the oldest stuff.
That would make a good survey....how big is your collection...
Nearly all of the videos are behind-the-scenes sets of the photo shoots and are pretty short. A few were done separately at the photo shoot site with nice POV. It seems like the girls that have their own sub-sites have slightly better videos...Monika, for eexample. Nearly all of them are 2-3 minutes or less, probably to keep the size down. I think they are all 720p but a very few older sets, like some of those of the beautiful but retired Marketa, were remastered from lesser resolution. Most of the soundtracks are music and there at least a couple of older videos that have distracting animations or effects in them. Largest video file size I see is about 150k.
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.