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 : BubbaGump (18)  

Feedback:   All (62)  |   Reviews (11)  |   Comments (4)  |   Replies (47)

Other:   Replies Received (61)  |   Trust Ratings (30)

All Activity A summary of all the feedback from this user.
Shown : 26-50 of 62 Page :    < Previous Page - Next Page >

Type Site - Score Feedback / Review Date
Reply
26
Visit Jugg Master

Jugg Master
(0)
Reply of Capn's Reply

Yeah, I understand that it could be frustrating for a lot of people. I like the tease elements, however. I also like it when models have some clothing that complimenets the anatomy and it stays on. I like skirts hiked up and tops folded down to the waist, etc..--those types of things do it for me. Also, for me, nothing like seeing nipples sticking through lace bras or drooping out of a corset :)

01-29-12  01:54pm

Reply
27
Visit Jugg Master

Jugg Master
(0)
Reply of Capn's Reply

Hi. Yes. If consistent full nudty is a requirement, this site won't be for you. I would put thise site more in a softcore tease category. There are some full nudes but they are not common and when they exist, they are very conservative. For example, you won't find any images of legs spread eagle or close-in shots of genitals, etc. When it is shown, it's more like full nudity with a flash of bush. This site is R rated and would be something that would pass the censors on HBO.The most hardcore image I saw was a model holding a dildo off to the side. No blowbangs and ATM here.

01-29-12  01:44pm

Review
28
Visit Jugg Master

Jugg Master
(0)

85.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: + Unique fetish content.
+ Creative photography.
+ Good nostalgic value.
+ Low subscription price.
+ One-month non-reccuring costs the same as ongoing monthly subscription rates.
Cons: - Low resolution images only.
- Primitive site navigation and layout.
- Site does not appear to be growing much.
- Videos are just a novelty.
Bottom Line: I can give all the reasons why you might or might not find this site attractive. However, If you know who hese models are without Googling, my guess is that there is a high probabilty that you would enjoy viewing the models at this site--Maria Moore, Denise Davies, Bunny De La Cruz.

If you don't know these names but have a breast fetish or enjoy viewing images of women with truly oversized and natural breasts, meaty nipples, and saucer-sized areola, this site would also be worth a one-month subscription.

If none of the above is true, you should look elsewhere. That's it in a nuthsell. This is a very simple site oriented towards photography. There are videos, but they are simply small low-resolution clips. The videos serve more as a novelty of sorts and really are not worth commenting on.

The site is entirely sofcore. Most of the photosets are of the slow tease variety. They start with the model fully clothed and proceed to various states of undress, with the emphasis always placed on the breasts. You see a lot of images of huge boobs jutting through bras, dangling in the air, or spilling out of clothing items. Many of the sets were taken in natural lighting, outdoors and in pools.

I did come across some full nudes, but this is the exception, not the norm. This is conservative, old-school erotic photography. It is the opposite of today's in-your-face erotica, although there is a section called juggs-eye view, where there are many images of breasts dangling in front of the camera, as if in your face.

IMO, the photographer does a wonderful job with posing. You can tell that he is into the subject. He is just not going through the motions. The photographer has a talent for bringing out the best features of the models and does a good job with angles. The natural lighting and the lack of intense post-processing adds to the natrual appeal of the models. Many of the churn-it-and-burn photographers in this genre simply have the model strip nude and take straigh-on shots of breasts. Post-processing is overused and images suffer from harsh artifical lighting. The approach is very forumlatic. If you've seen one photo, you've seen them all. The photographer here is always creative and uses various angles to capture and profile the breasts-- from the side. the rear, the front, arms in the air, etc.. These won't be the most professional-looking images in terms of lighting and studio backdrops. However, this is more than made up for with the way that the photographer deals with the models.

You will see many of the mdoels elsewhere at the classic breast sites. The sets themselves are all unique, howeve. I know many of the models well from my years of viewing this genre and have never come across these images. Many of the photo sets contain images of popular Big Breast models in their younger years-- Maria Moore, Denise Davies, etc. If you are a fan of these models, you might think this is worth the cost of admission, simply for their nostalgic value.

Where content starts to drop in quality is in image resolution, and this is my only beef about the galleries. This content represents a very unique and sometimes nostalgic cdollection. The photographer should offer these images at higher resolutions. They appear to max out at around 11100x710 and many of the older sets appear to be old chrome scans of low resolution around 700x400. As this is primnarily a photo site, there should be high-resoltion images available.

The site design and navigation is very primitive and has an amateur look to it. I never had any trouble getting to content I wanted to view but the site should be cleaned up a bit to supply it with a more modern interface.

This site obviously wont be for everyone. Unless you can find a way to place natural-looking, ten-pound each breasts on the frame of a ninety-pound runway model, you are left with finding them on women of the voluptuous and BBW variety. If this turns you off, you will likely not find the content appealing. Also, if you cannnot live without high resolution images, you also will be dissapointed.

It was somehwat difficult to provide a score as this site doesn't claim to be a slick and professional studio and is basicallty the work of a single photographer displaying a photo collection that has been accumulated throughout the years. Please take this into consideration when viewing the score. I ended up rating it based on what it meant to me as someone with a breast feitsh and lover of voluptuous women. I would rate it even higher if the not for the relatively low resolution galleries. As a one-month only quick stop for those with a fetish for oversized breasts, its worth a try, especially given the modest price and the unique content.

01-29-12  01:34pm

Replies (9)
Reply
29
Visit Jugg Master

Jugg Master
(0)
Reply of Jutti24's Review

Hi. Thanks for the review and info. I had actually came upon this site last week when browsing through the niche link. Signed up for a one-month non-reccuring to replace my Score sub. Will add my review in a bit after I have had time to really go through the site.

I agree about the cost. It's the main reason I signed up. I have always been a collector of boob-mags over the years--Juggs, Gent, Score, Voluptuous, etc.. Considering that the price is only $16.99 and a single magazine today costs about $12, that's not a bad deal, especially when you can download all the galleries. Many of the models here I have seen and know quite well from the past. I have seen photo sets never seen before I so I think this material is pretty exclusive to the site.

It won't be for everyone, however. The models are of the thick and plump variety, and if you're not into BBW, it probably might not be your thing. If you like those huge, natural breasts with those saucer-sized aroela, this is quite good and the photography actually impressess me--much better than I thought it would be based on the rather rag-tag appearance of the site itself. Also, like you said, no hardcore and seeing genitals is rare. The photos are more of the classic, conservative variety and full nudes are rare. It seems to be all about the breasts.


01-26-12  04:23pm

Reply
30
Visit Just Nips

Just Nips
(0)
Reply of Capn's Review

It looks like something I would enjoy viewing. I have bookmarked it for future reference.

How would you rate the overall quality of photos? Are the images clear and crisp or somewhat lacking? I looked at a few of the sample images and they looked a little bit like scans of 35mm film. Or perhaps that is simply due to the lower quality of the samples and them not giving away the best.


Thanks


01-18-12  06:15pm

Reply
31
Visit Just Nips

Just Nips
(0)
Reply of Capn's Review

Nice review.

What is the percentage of different model figures? Is it mostly models on the thin side and a few voluptuous women or distributed all around?


01-18-12  04:41pm

Reply
32
Visit Reality Kings

Reality Kings
(7)
Reply of rearadmiral's Reply

Hi. I think people probably download a lot but not a lot on average, by day. I don't know how the sites manage their bandwidth or what the user stats are like. I would just assume the average user probably doesn't download a large quantity after the first few days of excitement with the new site. The average user probably wouldn't go past 10 GIG a day after that, I suspect.

It's not that the sites don't want power users--money is money. But a limit forces the power users to accept the limit and alter their DL behavior, if they want to subscribe. It would help with detering some types of piracy, as well--I think.


01-17-12  03:35pm

Reply
33
Visit Reality Kings

Reality Kings
(7)
Reply of rearadmiral's Reply

Hi.

I am not really sure how each site manages their sales. I assume they have hired consultants that analyzed the bandwidth requirements and how this effects the profits.

You are what is termed a power-user. This is neither good nor bad. But I assume that sites prefer not to retain such customers, even though they wouldn't ever publically say so. More DL traffic means you have to purchase more servers or people will complain about slow connectivity etc..

I don't really think anyone would offer this upgrade stratification as the extra charge probably wouldn't justify any possible increase in revenue for offering this.

To me, a site that has DL limits is basically saying they do no want power users who are going to be downloading a lot of content in a short amount of time. Very few sites do this but I think more would like to. They probably don't want to drive away people who think they might be limited, even though they may never really reach daily limits. For sites with DL limits, power-users are certainly welcome to apply, but your requirements are not going to not be met.

Again, everything i offered could be complete BS. That's just my take.


01-15-12  04:57pm

Reply
34
Visit Reality Kings

Reality Kings
(7)
Reply of rearadmiral's Reply

Hi.

If you are a high-volume user then download limits are certainly something negative.

As far as streaming and downloads, they are two different animals. Both, done in high volumes, can slow down connectivity and they both take the same bandwidth in most cases. However, one takes an active time commitment, the other does not.

I suspect you would be hard-pressed to find users who stream entire videos from start to finish in front of their computer, and do so 3-4 times a day. Most people probably only stream certain sections they find interesting and the bandwidth used is probably quite small. Streaming videos real-time requires a large time commitment.

With downloads, you can simply set a number of them going and move on and retrieve them later. No time commitment is involved and you don't sit there watching the download. Most people are probably going to download and watch later. The sites all have to know this and understand it is downloads that consume most of the bandwidth. Streaming probably accounts for a small fraction of useage.

Unlimited downloads are kind of like an all-you-can-eat buffet. Most people probably won't make more than 1-2 passes to the buffet table in a single sitting before they have had their fill. There will always be people who keep going back, however, and I suspect that most site owners don't really care if such consumers move on to other pastures. It is profitable to retain the ones who only make 2 passes.


01-12-12  03:57pm

Reply
35
Visit Reality Kings

Reality Kings
(7)
Reply of Cybertoad's Reply

Hello. Thanks. I tried to be fair and objective about it. never reviewed a porn site before.

01-12-12  03:43pm

Reply
36
Visit Reality Kings

Reality Kings
(7)
Reply of rearadmiral's Reply

Another possibility is connectivity. Users downloading hd content all day can slow down the server for other members.

This is a business that I assume caters to the avg user. Volume is key to profits. I am sure such a business does research using industry data and historical data gleaned from past user behavior when it comes to download figures. The number is likely set based on the needs and behavior of the avg subscriber to such a site. You don't want power users because they are a drain. You want the power users to leave so setting a cap serves a purpose in this regards as well. You make your profits off the avg consumer. Limits likely are set accordingly.

I am not minimizing your frustration but this is probably just what a consultant felt represented the most prudent decision based on profit margins vs retention.

Then again, everything I just offered could be complete bs.


01-12-12  07:39am

Reply
37
Visit Reality Kings

Reality Kings
(7)
Reply of rearadmiral's Reply

Hi. Thanks.

I like to know contexts when I read reviews, whether for cars or movies. It's often hard to tell where people are coming from. Everyone has preferences and varied experiences and this can slew opinions.

As far as the reason for having a limit on dl but not streams, I can only surmise that perhaps this is a means of preventing individuals or networks from easily pirating content? Since bandwidth charges are the same for both methods, this might be the case.

Then again, it could be a way to keep subscribers from bailing after a month-long frenzy of downloading all videos for future use. This would also be a valid explanation.

The last possibility would be related to technical specs. Perhaps there is some odd technical reason. I would not be inclined to think this is the case.

My guess is its a combination of the first 2 above. This would be something I couldn't fault a business for implementing. You want to keep a customer base around and piracy is a big issue for any online media outlet. However, you also have to take into account the competition. Apparently, the owners do not see such a limit as stifling sales or they wouldn't make such a move.


01-12-12  06:11am

Review
38
Visit Reality Kings

Reality Kings
(7)

80.0
Status: Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
Pros: -- Large Amount Of Content, both in quantity and variety. Enough to satisfy many interests.
-- High Quality Videos.
-- Sexy models. Model-types range from bra busters to thin and petite.
-- Good number of sub-sites with decent content(mostly)
Cons: -- Streaming and Downloading can be hit or miss.
-- No High-Resolution Photos.
-- Repetitive photos in sequences.
-- Downloading Limit of 10 G daily.
Bottom Line: A little background to put things in perspective:

My erotic interests: I am a breast guy. Curvy Women, Slim-and-Stacked or Voluptuous, Natural Women, MILF, Shapely Behinds.

I am primarily a photo guy, as well. I enjoy streaming videos but my primary taste in erotica is photography. I also travel quite frequently, so much of my viewing takes place on an Ipad, after transfer of data. Keep this in mind here.

With that being said, I have found the site to be somewhat lacking for my preferences, not in content or quality of the presentations, but in the medium available.

If you are looking for sexy models and high quality videos you will not be dissapointed. If you have a bias for high-resolution photography, you are likely to find the site lacking a bit in terms of photographic standards. However, given that I do view many of the images on an Ipad at times, this hasn't been a show-stopper. When viewed on a high-resolution flatpanel monitor, the images are lacking, simply due to the smaller formats and low pixel counts.

The videos themselves are of high-quality and the camera work is fairly decent. Many of the scenes start with the model fully clothed and do not jump right into the action.

Navigating the site is very simple and straightforward. It is designed quite well and is not lacking here, IMO. Jumping from one site to the other is seamless. Getting to the downloads is also seamless and straightforward. Everything is a click away.

As far as DL and Streaming speeds, this is where I give the lowest marks. At times, it was difficult to even stream videos at standard quanity. Most of the time, I was getting nowhere near the claimed DL speed and bit-ratre transfer when I did attempt to download videos at standard resolutions. The times I did try a HD download, I would often timeout and have to restart. On weekends, the problem was particularly noticeable. Slow connections are quite understandable at this time of the week. However, the server seemed to slow to a crawl and would often become asburdly slow.

To sum up, if variety, quality content, and video presentations are your primary interests, it's a safe bet that you probably will not be dissapointed. If transfer rates and streaming connectivity are of paramount importance, I would take this into consideration.

Cancelation: Just a note on this as I know this is one of my concerns when I sign up over the net. When I read reviews, I sometimes hear of extra charges taking place after an order has been canceled. I experienced no issues and giving notice of intent to cancel was no issue and took place as requested.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Grades: (obviously subjective calls, so take that into consideration as well.)

Presentation and Site Navigation: A
Overall Quality of Content: B+
Subject Matter Variety: A +
Content Variety for Varied Interests: A
Standard Video Quality: B
HD Video Quality: A
Scene Content and Videography: B+
Photo Gallery Compositions and Content: C+
Photo Resolution and Image Quality: C-
The Models Themselves: A
The Action: B
DL Speed and Streaming: D-

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My favorite sub-sites within the URL--relative to my interests and not quality:

Dangerous Cuvres, Big Naturals.

Least Favorite: Pure 18 and Cum Fiesta. (Models too thin and young-looking for my tastes)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Other things to note: There is a download limit of 10 GIG daily. This was of no concern to me as I stream videos mostly and did not download much in the way of videos. If you are a massive user of downloadable HD video content, this very well might be soemething to consider. If you aren't downloading HD more than twice a day, it shouldn't be a problem. In fairness to these guys, you would have to be downloading a lot of content every day to hit the max.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Suggestions for improvement:

-- Address concerns with streaming connectvity and download speeds. Slower speeds are to be expected on weekends but not weekdays.

-- Add high-resolution image galleries. The days of CRT monitors have long since passed. 800 pixel-width images images no longer cut it in the day of 2800x1900 high-resolution monitors.

01-11-12  06:08pm

Replies (15)
Reply
39
Visit Scoreland

Scoreland
(0)
Reply of malikstarks's Reply

Hi. Thanks for the info.

Just an FYI:

I have not heard a reply from Scoreland regarding my questions. The form said they would respond within 24 hours. Maybe they are just busy or maybe they don't want to reply, or maybe they just don't care. Either of these could be true. I will just leave it there. Readers can draw their own conclusions.

I did notice that I got a truckload of promos from Scoreland yesterday in my E-Mail box, offering me an additional site if I stick around, and special deals on other sites. I signed up for one month, non-renewing. I also noticed something odd. Twice now, I have received emails telling me my password was reset as they have noticed suspiscious activity on my account. This happened the week after I signed up and also yesterday. My guess is they do this to make password sharing on the net more difficult and make sure it is the person who signed up that is using the account. I haven't used the site in a week.

I have no interest in renewing--not because of the HD issue itself, but I have seen what I wanted to and downloaded the photo sets I liked.


01-28-12  02:37pm

Reply
40
Visit Scoreland

Scoreland
(0)
Reply of messmer's Reply

Hi. No Problem. It's good to get straight info from others. To be honest, I have always been supiscious of porn review sites because I always felt they were stacked and bisaed towards certain studios--my opinion is a lot of them really are. It's good to find a place where you can feel confident you are not getting some covert sales pitch or slanted reviews by editors. I wish I would have had straight opinions like this in the past.

Never been into online stuff until recently but mainly was a collector or softcore erotica and photography--Score was one of them. If they write me back with a response to the inquiry, I certainly will post the reply.


01-26-12  04:13pm

Reply
41
Visit Scoreland

Scoreland
(0)
Reply of BubbaGump's Comment

FYI..I contacted Scoreland through the members area. I also asked if they would add a comment here(if they know about this place).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I am a subscriber to Scoreland and was wondering why HD videos cannot be downloaded? Also, older video content is not available for download either. Are HD videos available for download at Score HD?

I am not asking for a refund as I felt I got what I came for. However, this seems to bit deceptive, as the homescreen displays a HD logo and there is no plain information when signing up regarding what is and is not available for video downloads.

There are also a number of comments and questions about this subject at Pornusers.com and people are wondering what the straight scoop is on this. Is there any way you could leave a reply over there, as well?

Thanks and Regards


01-25-12  04:29pm

Reply
42
Visit Scoreland

Scoreland
(0)
Reply of messmer's Reply

Hi. Thanks.

I cannot really say for sure if Score HD allows the HD to be downloaded. I would think they would or people would get really upset. I do not have access to that without a subscription so can't check for you. I also do not know how far back in time you can download, but I suspect there are similar date restrictions as can be found at Scoreland.

As far as my review and the comment I added, I agree a lot of people will not like the fact that they don't allow any HD downloads at all at Scoreland. All of the videos on the home page have a HD logo on them and you can indeed stream them in HD. Technically, I cannot call this a fabrication as the movies can be viewd in HD --they just refrain from telling you about the download stuff. There is no statement anywhere when you sign up as to what can or cannot be downloaded. My view is that it is indeed a bit deceptive, however, and I think most will be inclined to see it that way. This will eventually upset people and they won't come back.

To be fair, I think the site should, at minimum, put an asterik next to the HD logo indicating this information. At best, they should include full information in plain view on the signup screen. You will just succeed in upsetting people if they feel like they got deceived, whether or not that was the intent.

I am a bit surprised as, over the years,I have purchased from Score in Miami before--mags and even a couple videos. I had dealings with customer service and they were always helpful and even refunded a purchase once. They never struck me as the kind to play games. As I said before, I will always give the benefit of the doubt unless I have reason to believe otherwise. Without hearing what they have to say, most will conclude this is deceptive.

As far as my opinion, I felt I got what I wanted from the site as I am primarily a photo guy. I mention this in my reviews so people know how to judge my opinions on content. I won't be re-subscribing after my 30 day sub has run out, however. I do like many of the photo sets and others into the genre probably will, as well. However, there is really not a big reason for me to stick around longer. The lack of HD download sealed it. Again, I don't view or DL a lot of video content but I like to do so when something really nice catches my eye.

I did not lower my review score even further as in all honesty, I did enjoy the photo content and felt like I got what I came for in that regards. HD video lovers, however, should definately consider all that has been said on this subject of download limits.


01-25-12  04:00pm

Comment
43
Visit Scoreland

Scoreland
(0)

HD Downloads Not Available.

One comment I would add, in addition to my review:

I noticfed Sunday evening that when I did download a video, HD is NOT available in the download section. I believe you need to subscribe to Score HD and this is where the HD video downloads are housed. You can stream the videos in HD but cannot download them. I checked a number of recent video updates to make sure this was the case.

As I am not a big Video guy, this is not an issue for me(mostly). However, I believe this might some people might be rubbed the wrong way, especially if you are used to HD quality downloads. I also think that if this is true, the site owners might make this more clear on the members signup screen and advertising. The HD label appears on the videos, but it does not say you cannot download HD video but only stream them.

I would advise those interested in HD video to subscribe to Score HD if HD video is your primary interest.

Given the cost of subscriptions, HD should be available. IMO, this is a bit misleading but I will always give someone the benefit of the doubt. My opinion is that this is a cross-sell marketing strategy but that is just my opinion. I won't knock them for doing this as it is a good way to cross-sell their sites. I just wish they would be upfront in the member area at Scoreland that HD is NOT available for download there.

I have also adjusted my review to indicate this.

01-24-12  04:22pm

Replies (7)
Reply
44
Visit Scoreland

Scoreland
(0)
Reply of BradlyH's Reply

Hi. Thanks. It's a nice site for at least a one-month subscription.

01-17-12  03:27pm

Review
45
Visit Scoreland

Scoreland
(0)

80.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -- Huge amount of content.
-- Large variety of model types within the 'big-boob' genre.
-- Fairly decent DL speeds.
-- Photography and xxx videos are not over-the-top and the style is classic (think Playboy or Penthouse.) This is either a pro or con, depending on perspective. Will appeal to more classic consumers of erotica.
-- Galleries and vidoes do not jump right into the action. Plenty of tease photos and slow undressing.
-- Images are of high-quality, although sometimes can apper a bit plastic.
Cons: -- Not the most user-friendly site when it comes to navigation or finding content.
-- Photoshoots sometimes seem to be heavily air-brushed. Can sometimes appear 'plastic'.
-- A little pricey compared to competition.
--- Although the content amount is huge, it is easy to become a bit overwhelmed by it when trying to decide on selections.
-- Might not be as explicit in terms of xxx content as some would prefer. Either a pro or con, see above.
-- No HD Video Download Option--Only Streaming.
Bottom Line: Background:

My erotic interests: I am a breast guy. Curvy Women, Slim-and-Stacked or Voluptuous, Natural Women, MILF, Shapely Behinds.

I am primarily a photo guy, as well. I enjoy streaming videos but my primary taste in erotica is photography. I also travel quite frequently, so much of my viewing takes place on an Ipad, after transfer of data. Keep this in mind here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Pros and Cons:

-- The amount of content here is huge. I used to subscribe to Voluptuous and Score back in the 90's. The models represent the type of women I find attractive. You can find content dating back to the 90's on the site.

-- Streaming and DL speeds seem to be up to par and there are no problems to report here, so far.

-- The photography and video presentations are sexy and alluring without being too in-your-face. If you are into things like ass-to-mouth, pile drivers, and things like that, you are not going to find it here. This is either good or bad, depending on your own preferences. About 80% of the photo and video content is softcore posing, either solo or girl-girl. hardcore content is typical fare-classic oral, missionary, doggy, etc., although the scenes usually end with popshots on the breasts rather than face--it's a breast site.

-- It can be a bit difficult at first to navigate around the huge of amount of content in the archives. More user-friendly options would be nice.

-- Photography could use a little diversification in poses and sets. The photosets often to seem to follow the same script. The photographers could also tone down the airbrushing a bit. Sometimes this pervades the images.

-- Subscription rates also seem to be a little bit higher in cost than the typical site.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Conclusion:

This is definately a niche site that will appeal to fans of large-breasted women, especially of the voluptuous and/or curvy variety. Models can range from thin-and-stacked to soft and voluptuous.

The site is a mix of photos and videos. If viewing softcore images of chesty, well-endowed women is your thing, you won't be dissapointed. There is a fair amount of xxx video action to be found, but the majority of presentations, both photo and video, are softcore solo or girl-girl.

Update 1/24/12-- HD Video Downloading is NOT an option. One can only stream HD videos. I discovered this recently. One must subscribe to Score HD to download HD.

IMO, who would like this site:

Photo lovers and those with a breast fetish who enjoy a variety of body types and those who enjoy a more classic conservative style in their photos and explicit videos.

Who won't like this site:

Those who rarely view photosets or solo video action or those who enjoy more extreme hardcore action.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Grades(obviously subjective):

Site Navgigation: C-
Video Presentation Style: A
Video Quality: A
Photo Presentations: B+
Photo Content and Quality: A
The Models Themselves: A
Streaming and DL Speeds: A
Quantity: A+
XXX Action: C

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Suggestions for improvement:

Improve the site navigation utility and add options to make the user experience a bit easier.

01-15-12  12:04pm

Replies (9)
Reply
46
Visit Steve Bones

Steve Bones
(0)
Reply of Capn's Reply

That site is pretty different, too, Cap'n.

I wonder how they deal with the 'money shot' on the skeleton. Maybe they shoot dried-up mayonaise flakes out of the dildo onto the models face.


02-01-12  11:36am

Reply
47
Visit Steve Bones

Steve Bones
(0)
Reply of otoh's Comment

I was trying to figure out what I was looking at as the screen was loading slow at their home page. I guess there are all kinds of fetishes out there. Can't say I ever thought about having sex with a medical school skeleton as something that would draw enough interest for a pay site to stay in the green.

02-01-12  11:18am

Reply
48
Visit Top Heavy Amateurs

Top Heavy Amateurs
(1)
Reply of gaypornolover's Reply

Thanks. I usually try to supply whatever info I can to try to help people get an honest opinion. In this case, there was only so much to supply and it is all negative. I honestly can't think of a positive.

I really feel bad for anyone who actually signed up on the 3 or 6 month plan. I just signed up for the 30 day and always do this as I will cancel it right away if I find it is not for me or not what was advertised. In this case, I got burned for $23. Certainly not the end of the world and it is much better than getting taken for $60 for the 3-month plan.

IMO, there should be something like a warning list that sites like this put together to let people know that people are reporting questionable practices or content. Sites certainly can't ban a site just because one person like me says so and I wouldn't expect them too.

I couldn't write anyone and demand money back because their is nobody to write. No customer service or contact info. I am partly to blamew. I should have paid more attention that this info was missing and with any business, I always like to know someone will field an inquiry.

It is technically difficult to call thease guys crooks as they did not falsely rerpresent what you will see at the site--busty amateurs. However, the total lack of qualtiy of the material and the problems with access is such that it is hard to not believe you were taken and that there is someone accepting the payment from CCBill and thinking, "Enjoy, sucker."

I could let CCBill know but obviously the sensitive nature of this and the stigma makes that unpalitable. What do you say? "The nude photos of boobs are mostly small images that are out of focus and grainy shit" ?

IMO, these kinds of vendors do a disservice to the legit vendors out there and gives the business a bad name. It also causes consumers to lose trust. It just reinforces the stereotype that some people hold that porn is run by crooked and unethical cretens looking for a quick dollar. I do not aggree with that opinion for the entire industry but regarding this vendor, it's hard not to make that judgement.


06-02-12  01:03pm

Review
49
Visit Top Heavy Amateurs

Top Heavy Amateurs
(1)

50.0
Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: None
Cons: -- Photo quality is abysmal.
-- Photosets are largely screen captures of grainy videos and are saved with high JPEG compression.
-- Video quality is even worse.
-- Site frequently freezes.
-- Advertusing bares no resemblence to actual site content.
Bottom Line: Anyone who has read my reviews in the past knows I am pretty fair and impartial. In an effort to maintain this reputation, I will limit my comments to the facts.

I am hard-pressed to say anything positive regarding my experience at this site.

The site design and layout is extremely primitive. When I was able to access the content, I was exceedingly dissapointed with the content and quality of images and videos.

The vast majority of images are small resolution photos that are saved with extremely high JPEG compression. The Pixelation is severe in the majority of images. Sets that are displayed as HD image quality consists of one or two images saved with 1400x800 resolution, with the remainder at 700x400 or below. I did not come across an image that did not contain compression artifiacts. More than half the images are blurry enough to be useless and appear to be nothing more than screen captures of videos.

The video quality is, in many cases, worse than the photo image quality and at times appears to be video captured with an older cell phone.

Connecting to the site is problematic. I frequently locked up and often could not access video content.

The advertising images are high-quality, but this kind of content is nowherre to be found in any of the actual content in the members area.

In short, I could not in good faith reccomend this site to anyone interested in this genre, whether it be photos or videos. I would even go so far as to supply an entirely subjective opinion, which is that sites like this give online porn a bad name.

06-01-12  01:01pm

Replies (2)
Reply
50
Visit We Are Hairy

We Are Hairy
(1)
Reply of Basil's Reply

Hi. Thaks for the reply.

Thanks for the offer. I wouldn't bust your butt just over me, however. I can get to the afternoon Saturday show when I am inclined. I would think most people would prefer evening shows(After 6PM Local) on weekdays. But that is obviously hard to accomodate, given the diversity of memberships on different sides of the pond.

Maybe it is a just and fitting punishment, as the US Porn Industry is responsibile for starting the whole shaving craze in the 90's. Thankfuly, Europe never fell completely under this spell and kept their senses about them. :)


02-06-12  08:24pm


Shown : 26-50 of 62 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 0.54 seconds.