Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!

E-MAIL   PASS  

Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
Feedback History A detailed history of activity from this user in all different categories.
User : Marcus (47)  

Feedback:   All (430)  |   Reviews (24)  |   Comments (19)  |   Replies (387)

Other:   Replies Received (164)  |   Trust Ratings (22)

All Activity A summary of all the feedback from this user.
Shown : 26-50 of 435 Page :    < Previous Page - Next Page >

Type Site - Score Feedback / Review Date
Review
26
Visit Ann Angel XXX

Ann Angel XXX
(0)

60.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Well known, established web model, now doing hardcore
- Lots of outdoors scenes in risqué outfits in very public places
- Billing by CCBill with no pre-checked cross-sells
- Discounts on softcore site ($15.95 recurring instead of $34.57)
- Good interaction via website comments system, Twitter etc
- All content is downloadable
Cons: Points marked * don’t personally bother me:

- The amount of content doesn't currently justify the price
- Hardcore scenes in a minority and seem incomplete
- Sure that a lot of content is recycled from her old site
- Preview section shows 'live' webcam... this is fake
- Slow download speeds compared to other sites
- Navigation is not very refined and rather inconsistent
- Most galleries don’t have downloadable zip files
- Some galleries you have to download the zip to get all pics
- Lack of download options on videos (one format, one size)
- Large watermarks on images
- Excessive Photoshop filters on images
- Automatically generated username/password*
Bottom Line: I’ve followed Ann since before she even went topless, so to say I was excited by the prospect of her going hardcore would be an understatement. Sadly, at the moment her website is currently pretty disappointing.

Joining is simple. They warn you to make sure your phone number is correct as they will call to verify you’re a ‘real person’ with the call possibly coming from Ann herself. At no stage is there even the option to provide your phone number, nor (of course) do you get any call.

NAVIGATION:

Unlike her old site, navigation is inconsistent and cluttered. It uses a Wordpress template, and the member’s homepage has the most recent updates featured. You can view photo updates by clicking ‘gallery’ at the top, but to view video updates you have to go and find them – easiest way is clicking ‘updates’ then clicking the ‘videos’ tag on the right.

Other options at the top include news (not updated since November 2012), contacts (web form), webcam (LiveCamNetwork video chat) and her Amazon wish list. Updates are tagged with keywords such as blowjob, toys, video, etc, but the layout isn’t as intuitive or straight-forward as you’d expect. To give a few examples of inconsistency:

Not all galleries have zips. Those that do are only ‘preview galleries’ meaning you have to download the zip. To get into galleries on some pages you can click the thumbnail, but on others this pops up with a preview of the gallery, and you have to click the gallery title instead.

Also, some galleries clicking the photo thumbnail doesn’t take you to the high-res picture, you have to click the thumbnail, then a slightly larger thumbnail to get into the full-size image. So that’s two clicks per photo just to get the high-res image.

It just seems quite cluttered, a problem that will surely get worse as the amount of content increases.

CONTENT:

Currently, there are 44 galleries of around 100 pictures. They’re arranged 12-to-a-page with a thumbnail and gallery number. Photos are downloadable and are 2048px on their longest side and are good quality. Some seem to have been overly Photoshoppedd, and there’s a pretty big (1000px wide) watermark in the bottom right of images regardless of whether it covers anything.

Content-wise, many galleries are shot outside, but the lighting is good and I love the sense of danger this gives. Ann has always been amazing in this aspect, and galleries are shot in broad daylight in extremely racy outfits in public (albeit quiet) parks.

Ann is a confident, charismatic and engaging performer. She has a great body, and her solo stuff is still her strength as her webmaster/photographer/videographer can do her justice in this respect as he’s also the stunt dick which limits his ability to film the action.

Videos are shot from multiple angles, normally from a single fixed camera angle, and then a POV. Although the POV angle is shot with an iPhone, I have to say the quality isn’t too bad.

All are downloadable, and the video is embedded onto the download page as a Flash video which you can skip to any point in while it still loads. The only downloadable format is M4V, and there’s no options for quality which is a bitter pill to swallow when some are over 1.5gb and download speeds are slow at best (150kbps)

THE HARDCORE ASPECT:

Obviously, the selling point of this site is the fact it’s Ann’s gone hardcore.

At the moment, the ratio of hardcore content is pretty disappointing. Gallery-wise, around 10% features hardcore, and there’s three videos on top of this. More disappointing than this is that the hardcore content even in the hardcore galleries is pretty minimal.

Most start off pretty conventionally with her posing, before a few dick-in-mouth style pictures towards the end. The most recent hardcore gallery, for example, has 109 pictures, only 5 feature a dick, then 11 of a few spots of cum on her stomach.

The hardcore aspect seems a bit half-hearted at best. Most of the videos don’t ever really end in a money shot or really any conclusion at all, they just peter out. It’s not even really a case of them teasing us, it just all feels a bit rushed and lackadaisical, although I have to say the most recent video, Street Walker, is a definite stride in the right direction. But one good hardcore video does not a hardcore site make.

UPDATES:

There doesn’t appear to be a published update schedule. In the main, updates are pretty regular and reliable, but at times it can be flaky. All updates are dated, and you’ll normally get at least one or two updates a week, although there have been periods where there haven’t any updates for a ten-or-so day period, and promised updates have been late by several days.

SUMMARY:

Beyond the excitement of Ann going hardcore, the site is bit of a letdown. Recent updates hints that things might get better, but the hardcore content is largely disappointing and makes up a tiny percentage of content. The cluttered navigation and limited download options also frustrate.

03-09-13  09:51am

Replies (7)
Review
27
Visit Sexy Pattycake

Sexy Pattycake
(0)

60.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Updated: 03-10-12  04:12am  (Update History)
Reason: Comprehensive rewrite as am a current member
Pros: - Good balance of photos and videos, all of which is downloadable
- Patty is a very pretty, young-looking blonde non-nude tease
- Gets very close to nude while leaving something to the imagination
- Website takes full advantage of her eternal youthful looks
- Features forum and blog, both of which are active
Cons: - Website seems stuck in the 90s in many respects
- Most videos are short and poor quality
- Photo galleries are tiny, normally with only 30-40 pictures
- Slow update schedule compared even to other sole tease sites
- Some content is 'limited time' so won't appear in archive
- Best content is saved for overly expensive downloadable ZIPs
Bottom Line: I must admit I have a soft-spot for Patty, but this a hugely disappointing website offering content that might have been acceptable 10 years ago, but is definitely a long way behind what I'd expect in 2012, even bearing in mind this is a solo website.

Membership costs $29 via CCBill. Do not get fooled by the offer of discounts for long-term members - you save only $2 for every six months you remain a member (maximum two discounts).

Frankly, the content and number of updates don't warrant a six-month membership, and if you do want to remain a member for several months, then you can save $22 by buying their 90-day membership.

Their preview area is probably a fairly accurate representation of their member's site. Once inside, you have options at the top for a blog, bio, photos, videos, webcam and forum.

The bio has full stats for Patty (height, weight, vital stats), favourite films etc, plus a short introduction. The blog is a relatively new addition to the site and is updated occasionally with thoughts from Patty and a few candid pictures.

There are around 200 galleries, but not a single gallery I viewed had over 50 photos. The photos themselves are only 1024px on their longest side, which is pretty low-fi nowadays, even on my little monitor. I can't think of any other website that consistently offers such low-res photos in such small galleries. The photo content is good, but you feel like you're only getting half of the story as there are so few photos.

Navigation-wise, galleries are arranged onto 13 pages with a thumbnail gallery of photos. You can save all pictures, but there are no downloadable ZIPs.

Content-wise Patty is a great tease. She must be in her late 20s now, but hasn't aged at all. Most galleries have her removing her underwear, there are handbras, implied nudity and often slips here-and-there. Sometimes she'll have a dildo or something, but from what I've seen there's no insertion.

They definitely take advantage of her youthful looks. Lots of candy colours, Patty wearing bunny ears, posing in front of cuddly toys, lots of Hello Kitty backgrounds etc.

Video-wise, there are around 250 videos, which - at best - are only OK quality-wise. The very best quality is 768px wide which, again, is very low quality for 2012. Most videos (and I mean around 200 of the 250 available) are 352px which, for videos released in 2010, is very bad (and I don't have particularly demanding standards, either).

Most of the videos are her stripping on a bed, playing in the shower or doing a strip tease to teeny bop music. She's pretty good, and there are nip slips scattered throughout the latter videos, but the quality is poor to the point there's little-or-no pay-off in that respect.

Most of the scenes are split into two-or-three parts. With other updates in between, along with a pretty pedestrian update schedule, it's likely to be several months until you manage to download the whole scene.

The videos are arrange chronologically, with a thumbnail preview and an option to stream a few of the newer ones. Only one format is downloadable (MP4 for newer videos, MPG for the majority), no indication of file size (although most are 50-200mb) or running time (most are 5min long), and no description other than the video title.

There is a section for webcams, which is an archive of screenshots from her webcams. Most of the webcams seem to just be the same as her videos or galleries, but there are hundreds and hundreds of small (600px wide), blury screenshots. No videos and no clue as to where her webcams are available or when the next show is.

The forum is active, and Patty clearly has passionate fans. No input from what I can see from Patty herself though, and although there's a 'Patty Tweets' thing on the membership homepage, I'm not sure if she's on Twitter or not as there's no link to it, so I think it's just a kinda member's only news feed. No sign of interaction here, either.

Unfortunately, the best content is saved for ZIPs which have to be bought on top of membership. There are discounts for members, but at $35, it's still hugely expensive and 'In Training', though hot, was hardly on another level to what's available on her site. Another cynical aspect by her webmasters is splitting member's videos into 3 parts, so with updates in between, you have to remain a member for months to get a whole scene.

To summarise, Patty is wonderful, but her website is hugely disappointing, particularly compared to other solo tease websites. A lot of the content is pretty samey, the update schedule of one update a week maximum is pretty disappointing, as is most of the content.

680x354 videos, 1024x680 pictures and 30 pictures per gallery might have been OK ten years ago, but definitely aren't in 2012.

Patty's site is a jack of all trades, master of none. The video content, pictures and interaction from Patty are all below average. Patty is great, but her website has hardly moved with the times.

01-01-12  09:12am

Replies (2)
Review
28
Visit Bryci

Bryci
(0)

60.0
Status: Was a member approx. 4 months prior to this review.
Pros: - Bryci is incredible hot with a great body
- Lots of content, good balance of pics and vids
- Good value with lots of other girls too
Cons: Awful webmaster. I had problems with my ADSL and my IP number was blocked. No problem I thought, and emailed the webmaster. He basically called me a liar and a thief and wouldn't humour me at all. I understand the need to protect content, but the way it was dealt with was totally over the top. I explained what happened, even listed the 10-or-so videos I had downloaded to prove only I had been a member but he wouldn't even listen. A huge shame as it's a great site
Bottom Line: An incredible website but let down by an incredibly arrogant webmaster. It was a huge shame because it was definitely the kind of website I could see myself joining and rejoining constantly.

12-31-11  07:10am

Replies (4)
Review
29
Visit Anna Angel

Anna Angel
(0)

55.0
Status: Was a member approx. 3 months prior to this review.
Pros: - Anna is incredibly hot with a fantastic body
- Large archive of content and videos
Cons: - Unable to save pictures as they're sliced up into mosaics - essentially you cannot save ANY pictures or ANY videos
- No 'new' content being added
- Anna has gone to ground - no updates or interaction from her now
Bottom Line: This website has had a high fall from grace. It was once one of the best at looking after members, constantly updating - it was a masterclass in amateur websites.

Sadly you are no longer able to save ANY content (not even photos) and Anna and the webmaster no longer seem to care about their members. A real shame.

12-31-11  07:32am

Replies (3)
Reply
30
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

There didn't seem to be an option for 'don't mind it'.

I wouldn't go so far as to say I 'like it', and 'don't like it' seems too harsh.


08-11-15  02:38pm

Reply
31
N/A Reply of atrapat's Poll

77.7

07-20-15  02:52pm

Reply
32
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

If they ask for it (eg, an exit survey), then yes, almost always. But typically I don't get in touch unless I have a problem.

07-18-15  02:01am

Reply
33
N/A Reply of Wittyguy's Poll

Probably a 50/50 split between hardcore and solo.

06-01-15  02:22pm

Reply
34
Visit Chica's Place

Chica's Place
(0)
Reply of Salvo's Reply

Ah OK, in that case I totally understand :)

05-31-15  03:59am

Reply
35
Visit Chica's Place

Chica's Place
(0)
Reply of Salvo's Reply

Yeah, her site's dead now in terms of updates. There's plenty of hardcore penetration so not sure why you didn't see any though.

05-30-15  11:06pm

Reply
36
N/A Reply of Monahan's Poll

Just the one, and it's not generally any more than that.

05-10-15  12:14pm

Reply
37
Visit Bangbros Network

Bangbros Network
(4)
Reply of Khan's Reply

Why does Porn Users still do business with Bang Bros? This page is full of people who have been ripped off by the network.

05-08-15  03:12pm

Reply
38
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

High heels initially, but then barefoot later. I'm not really a 'foot person' so I don't have very strong opinions really.

04-06-15  01:43am

Reply
39
N/A Reply of Wittyguy's Poll

I voted 'yes', but I guess a more accurate response would be 'sometimes'. I've definitely had problems resolved by webmasters here, even if it is just through complaining publicly about their sites.

03-13-15  10:24am

Reply
40
N/A Reply of Drooler's Poll

Not if it gets in the way of regular content/updates, but yes, sometimes I do. It's good to see a model's personality, and in my opinion a good sense of humour or intelligence can make a girl even sexier.

02-24-15  03:09pm

Reply
41
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

Beautiful, yes.
A turn on, no.


02-19-15  11:45am

Reply
42
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

I don't mind advertising on sites, but click-throughs are too intrusive and interrupt browsing too much.

02-12-15  01:09pm

Reply
43
N/A Reply of Colm4's Poll

I'm sure a handful are either lesbian or at least bi, but the majority aren't and it's just fulfilling fantasies or following a narrative (just like many aspects of porn)

02-10-15  03:16pm

Reply
44
N/A Reply of LPee23's Poll

Yep, I would join, and it seems like the fairest and most unobtrusive way of protecting content that I have heard of.

02-01-15  02:26pm

Reply
45
N/A Reply of jberryl69's Poll

Probably if they died as it wouldn't feel right.

01-27-15  11:30am

Reply
46
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

Most videos I download are well under 1gb - many are under 500mb, but a good proportion of them are between 500mb-1gb. I have downloaded several over a gig, but I'm very fussy when they're that big, and if I have better videos that are smaller in file size, I will probably delete it as diskspace is a precious commodity

01-21-15  11:17pm

Reply
47
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

I said yes, but it's been a case that it stops updating rather than shutting down altogether.

01-09-15  09:11am

Reply
48
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

Normally yes, I normally prefer solo sites or smaller networks as I normally join for a particular model. I prefer the softer side of hardcore generally, although if I like the model I will make exceptions.

01-04-15  12:32am

Reply
49
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

About the same. I do go out a lot during the Christmas season, but it also means I'm using up holiday and so while I might be out in the nights/afternoons whatever, I'll probably have the same amount of 'me time'

12-22-14  11:10am

Reply
50
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

Normally an hour or two a day, maybe an hour watching 'properly' and the other hour will be in bed as I'm going to sleep etc.

12-14-14  12:26am


Shown : 26-50 of 435 Page :    < Previous Page - Next Page >

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

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

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

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

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

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


Loaded in 2.03 seconds.