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 : turboshaft (24)  

Feedback:   All (672)  |   Reviews (11)  |   Comments (13)  |   Replies (648)

Other:   Replies Received (233)  |   Trust Ratings (41)

All Activity A summary of all the feedback from this user.
Shown : 1-25 of 674 Page :    Next Page >

Type Site - Score Feedback / Review Date
Review
1
Visit ALS Scan

ALS Scan
(1)

97.0
Status: Current Member for over 1 year (at the time of review).
Pros: + Tons of exclusive solo girl content, almost all archived
+ Lots of hot, amateur ladies...all shaved (lives up to the name)
+ Models do a lot: big insertions, fisting, speculum, many do peeing, some anal
+ Girl-girl action
+ Daily video update, photo update every other day
+ Quick downloads
+ Newer videos are HD, 2 res available for newer photos
+ All natural models, few porn stars
Cons: They are minor, but...
- Many videos are just photoshoots or BTS (can get boring), newer masturbation vids feel very forced and often fake
- Site's being redesigned, but still needs a few tweaks
- Many older models have no vids, few photos
- A few too many European models
Bottom Line: If you're into young, totally shaven girls who are willing to get nasty in front of a camera, then ALS Scan could easily become your new friend. This site shoots some very hot girls, many who have never done any porn or modeling prior, and a few who haven't done any since (that's exclusive!). The focus here is not just quantity, but quality, and new pics are offered in two sizes (around 1300x1000 and 3000x2000), usually with good lightning and crystal clear resolution. New videos are also in big, clear HD (1280x720). The owner/photographer doesn't mess around, and models are quickly undressed and lubed up in the scenes, with lots of toys, fisting, speculum, along with some models who pee, or do some anal; but only what they are comfortable doing, and it pays off in the photos.

My only gripes would be that the videos can get boring, and the newer ones feel too forced if they are masturbation. Yeah, it’s porn, but their older vids would just introduce the model and let her go from there. The owner also frequently talks, even in the masturbation vids, and his voice can be quite annoying, and downright creepy (a frequent complaint by other users). They are also finally putting their old design out to pasture, but the new one isn't perfect (no searching, you can still end up doing a lot of clicking). But the content more than makes up for these things, and as older material is being rereleased and updated, you'll probably end up quite satisfied.

04-01-08  08:37pm

Replies (5)
Review
2
Visit ALS Scan

ALS Scan
(1)

91.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: + 250+ smiling, skinny, shaved, super-hot hot models
+ Still almost purely solo- or girl-girl action that stays pretty entertaining
+ Amazing quality:
• videos: HD up to 1920x1080 @ 300 kb/s
• photos: hi-res are roughly 3900x2600px
+ Great quantity too; archived vids back to Apr 2007, photos much farther back
+ Daily video updates, new photo set released every two days
+ Download speeds have a lot of ass; I normally got about 1.3MB/s with a DL manager
+ They donate some of their pervy profits to charity, in case philanthropy is a deciding factor
Cons: - Large percentage of videos are just BTS, and with photo sets the BTS is usually just mixed in
- Some models' content takes a long time to get released or simply stays unreleased
- Site design works well for what it is, but still has NO search function
- They are beginning to delve into boy-girl content, even if only lightly (read more in BL)
- Despite the fun some content can get predictable and routine
- 2 years since my first review and I still wish they would shoot more American girls or non-Euro girls
- I don't get to meet these girls in person! :-(
Bottom Line: What can I say that hasn't already been said so many times and so well about one of my all time favorite adult sites over the years--hell, over the history of much of the crazy web itself, seeing how these guys have been finding and shooting hot shaved ladies since 1996. And since they have been doing this for so long they know a thing or two about getting the goods; great photo and video quality, lots of content, fast access, and above all some very happy models, many of whom come back wanting more.

That last point, happy models who become 'repeat offenders' shall we say, is not something I take lightly when I am looking for a new site to join and it's something where ALS has never faltered. I may be in the minority when I say this, but I genuinely don't enjoy porn where the performers, know matter how willing, are abused, beaten up, disrespected, or at the end of the day just left dissatisfied and unhappy. Of course ALS being in the girls only genre probably helps keep things in check but it, like the majority of sites, is still owned and run by a male and caters to a primarily male audience.

And despite all of this male input the output for many years was totally female; female models with female assistants in most cases and a female co-performer or two in some others. But in the past few years they have, if ever so slightly, started to also use male assistants, or at least made them more visible in both photos and videos--not my cup of tea, thank you very much. Even more alarming--or simply the next logical step, depending on your view--they have just recently shot an actual boy-girl scene. It's yet to be released and is described as a blowjob scene with swallowing, but time will tell as to where ALS steers its content.

Generally speaking, and if you're not looking for hardcore content, there's a lot to love here and at least a little to hate. So take your pick; young, skinny, shaved, mostly white models who are not too shy, so don't be surprised by a single model performing many if not all of the following; peeing, fisting, speculum and other crazy insertions, anal, and near constant spreading. The site design may not be impressive to many, nor may be the large amount of BTS, but don't let it fool you--as girls-only content goes they do not disappoint.

I do wish they would be more consistent in releases though. They still have a habit of letting members vote on models' scenes to determine release order and this can mean months before a model's whole shoot is available, and some just never gets released at all. I guess this is a good thing--so much content that there's not enough time to release it all--but I would like to see it eventually. And as unique as some of their content is it can get predictably routine; toy A into slot b, and so on.

But damn if they don't make it look hot time and time again with each new model they find and corrupt. All these years and I'm still sold! :-P

04-05-10  12:20am

Replies (7)
Review
3
Visit Explicite Art

Explicite Art
(2)

88.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: + Lots of beautiful, happy, sensual, and mostly French, girls who love what they do
+ Large amount of content: claimed 1028 vids, 70,358 pics, 327 girls
+ Nice range of choices, from soft to hardcore, with quite a bit of anal, fisting, and pissing too
+ DL speeds of around 500 kb/s
+ Easy navigation, with quick and advanced search features
+ Newest videos are 1280x720 HD, newest pics are 3000x2000
+ Few, if any, American or Eastern Euro girls, tattoos, or implants (quite a few piercings though)
+ Billing through CC Bill
+ Discounted price of $25 through PU
Cons: - Older content is lower quality, and some scenes are quite short
- Some scenes that are both taped and photographed lose overall focus (see bottom line)
- Some models are not that hot, or just too hairy
- There is occasional camera work that some may find annoying, but it's not that bad
- Almost exclusively French, though site is offered in several languages (English, French, German, Japanese), so France-haters might dislike it
- Condom use may be a turnoff to some
Bottom Line: Ah, France: the women, the wine, the food...the porn? Yes, I had my doubts about an almost purely French site, especially considering I prefer German and British content when I think of European porn. It is not that I do not like the French; I do, but I think of them as purveyors of more erotic material, rather than the crazy, but bland, style of perverted arts we produce ad nauseam here in the U.S. But this is exactly what I like about this site.

It is neither a pure closeup/gynecological style nor a beautiful, but boring, glamour photography one. Instead it is a mix of hot young, almost all French, girls who do only what they are comfortable doing, never what they feel they "have" to do. Fortunately that covers a lot of ground, from the soft through the hard, and lots in between, including quite a bit of fisting and some peeing (if you are looking for any of this).

These girls seem to be more on the amateur side, though not so much that they have no clue as to what they are doing, or how to do it well and make it look good. Some are no doubt professionals, but there are few implants or models who sport the typical American porn look. There are a few tattoos, but mostly on the guys (maybe three or four very lucky Frenchman who get to really enjoy all these models), and there are more piercings than other modifications. Quite a few are hairy, even by our demanding standards, but it really didn't bother me because of the sheer enthusiasm they show towards their work.

My major complaint is the whole video versus photography approach. Both are captured quite well, but the overlap can be annoying. For example, a photoshoot with a bunch of pics of the cameraman/woman, or a video with the camera flash going off every few seconds. Somewhere in the mix of things the thrill is gone and I am too distracted by the other camera to fully enjoy the videos or pics. This hurt the videos more than the pics, since you can just delete the pics with the camera in them, but I think it keeps quite a few videos from being really good.

Others have cited the camera work, but I like it since it means videos that are actually edited (sometimes with music, instead of just plain porn "dialogue") and not just a single 20 minute take. They also use two or three cameras in some scenes, and it makes for some interesting and enjoyable videos.

There really is a loving and consensual passion to the content here, particularly the hardcore scenes (straight or lesbo). It is something that seems to be missing from most American porn of late, and I forgot how much more I could enjoy things when the sex is an act of physical love and not one of physical degradation. It makes the models more relaxed and comfortable in what they are doing, and to me that is truly erotic.

03-07-09  05:00pm

Replies (1)
Review
4
Visit In The Crack

In The Crack
(1)

87.0
Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: + A near literal translation of its name; this site can define the closeup genre.
+ Nearly 300 naturally beautiful models in 325 shoots.
+ Excellent use of technology; newer videos (shoot #114 and above) are offered in 1920x1080 @ 9MB/s .wmv.
+ Great photography up to 2400x1900; near perfectly lit, lots of wide angle closeups, great colors and details.
+ Model action is pretty diverse and interesting; girl-girl, toys, weird insertions, anal, peeing.
+ Fully archived content all the way to the very beginning in 2001.
+ Downloads are as fast as they are big: I have gotten speeds of up to 1.5 MB/s!
+ Little behind the scenes content, almost no off camera talking or interference.
+ Billing through CCBill.
Cons: - $35/month is high, and there are no recurring or multi-month discounts available.
- Graphic, screen-filling closeups and certain content (queefing, douching, pissing, etc.) may not be every member's favored approach to porn.
- First eight shoots are video only.
- Earlier photography is smaller, around 1024x800.
- Lots of wide angle lens used, and unconventional photo cropping done; for example, some photos are 1800x1800.
- Though navigation is simple and clean, the search engine may be too weak for some, and it only applies to videos.
- Ethnically homogeneous; few really 'exotic' models, vast majority are white north Americans and eastern Europeans.
- I still wish there was a little more girl-girl content.
Bottom Line: I have been a member of the 'Crack on four separate occasions over the last few years, and every time I am more than happy to fork over the money and fill up my hard drives some more -- they keep adding models but never stray too far from the close-is-not-close-enough approach.

Yes, this site is deep within the glorious chasm of the female nether regions, and it is more than happy to bring you along! I love a good girl models-only site, but they take things to a unique macroscopic level of enjoyment and seem to revel in it the whole time. There are more than a few times when video camera lens are fogged up or hit by flying body fluids...and if you have to think about this and still ask, then this site may not be for you. In a more technical way of putting it, lots of wide angle lens are used, and though you see plenty of models stripping and posing, the emphasis is below the belt at distances best measured in fractions of an inch.

That having been said, I love the presentation of their perverted arts. For the last four years they have offered videos in beautiful 1920 x 1080 .wmvs at very high bit rates. They are big files, but the payoff is eye candy that only a handful of current sites can reasonably rival. As I stated above, lighting is excellent, never harsh, and only occasionally do they use an obvious additional light source, like a small pen light when, say, a model is rocking a speculum (again, not everyone's type of porn).

They do not slouch on photography either. These are great photos with bright colors, the same professional lighting and care in details, which are pretty important in this closeup work. They don't really use conventional sizes in photos; there are numerous square butthole shots (the literal “Crack” of their title), and quite a few panoramic shots of models relaxing on a couch or bed. But photos are still big and never so Photoshopped to make models' corresponding videos have glaring differences.

I find it easy and fast to get to the content, as download speeds feel turbocharged. I regularly get 1.5MB/s, so even the biggest videos – say a 30 minute video at nearly 2GB in size – came in between five and seven minutes, if that. Combine this with no download limit and your hard drive may start looking for a new owner. The flip side is that there is a limit of twenty connections at a time, so as to discourage members from using download managers, or at least stop people from queuing up tons of downloads (I can just hear badandy400 cursing at this one), but you still get lots of downloading down in a relatively short period of time.

(Bottom Line continued below.)

08-23-09  07:36pm

Replies (3)
Review
5
Visit Zoliboy

Zoliboy
(1)

85.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: + Part of 21st Sextury Network for $30/month
+ Lots of hardcore content without going abusively overboard
+ Newest vids are 1920 x 1080 HD mp4s @ 6MB/s
+ Nice variety of girls; mostly eastern Euro, virtually no American
+ Download speeds rock for me; 1.5MB/s is pretty typical
Cons: - Oldest vids are tiny 400 x 300 wmvs and somewhat newer are just not very good quality overall
- Too many scenes are broken down into multiple videos without single download options
- This really isn't a photo site; older scenes use screen caps, newer ones use medium size pics (1280 x 850 max)
- Content may be too much for some; body fluid-phobics beware
- Despite the many hot models present, some of the girls are a little too homely for my tastes
- One new update every Thursday
Bottom Line: I recently joined the 21st Sextury Network of sites--25 "Instant Access" sites for $30/month--and Zoliboy was one of the first I checked out, and I was glad I did. Boy, what a lucky happy pervert! This is the dude I know a lot of men want to be; the young guy who picks up the pretty girls in the park or wherever they hang out, bring them back to his place, and then have a good ol' nasty fuck session with them--and catch it all on tape for the warm memories!

Okay, that's not quite how it really works but that's the 'story' and the setup for the earlier and admittedly very entertaining content on this site. Zoli never comes off as excessively douchey (like so many equivalents and copycats would) or too aggressive (like Mr. Hardcore, inmate #44902-112). Yes, he's pissing in a girl's mouth but she's not crying or getting choked or dolled up like a clown while he's doing it. It's all very hardcore without the typically overbearing wham-bam-fuck-you-ma'am tone and style of so many other sites out there.

The current version of the site still has all these older scenes but it's moved towards a blander hardcore Euro style. Zoliboy may be there in name only as his smiling visage is nowhere to be found in newer releases. Now the scenes are extremely well lit, in nice locations, in full HD (which look great by the way, even with the watermark), and with girl-girl and group scenes being released as well. You still get the earlier Zoli-type content--the toys, fisting, pissing, oral, and anal--but without Zoli doing it to one lucky (unlucky?) model at a time.

I love the HD and the content is pretty entertaining and not as repetitive as American hardcore (at least not yet), but they do like their fetishes and there must be a lot of mopping up to do after finishing these scenes as a result. Bottom line here: if you don't like watching the performers pissing all over the damn set you may want to check out the network's other sites first.

It's impossible to cover any of the other sites in detail here, but the network is a good deal for even just one month where you have your choice of perverted arts from the 25 "Instant Access" sites. There are 40 sites total, 21 of which are considered “exclusive,” and 15 that are “Loyalty Access” (i.e. you get to look when you stay longer than a month). From happy-go-lucky girl-girl stuff (Lez Cuties, Sweet Sophie Moone) to the harder piss/fist/fuck content (Pix and Video, Teach Me Fisting) there's is plenty of filth to explore, watch, sort through, and then watch again (because you know you want to...).

(review continued below)

12-31-09  01:27pm

Replies (1)
Review
6
Visit VideoBox

VideoBox
(6)

85.0
Status: Was a member approx. 3 months prior to this review.
Pros: + Great value, even with "DVD-quality" membership price
+ Huge number of videos
+ Lots of categories; plenty of hardcore, numerous studios, even a few classic titles to choose from
+ Easy to use site; simple and straightforward interface
+ Multiple DL choices for each video
+ No DRM: DL and keep vids forever (or until your HD dies...)
Cons: - Could be a lot faster, especially for high- and DVD-quality videos
- Quite a few good studios missing (Hustler, Seymore Butts just to name a couple)
- Almost no Euro content
- Some categories have few videos
Bottom Line: If you want lots (thousands) of American porn videos to choose and keep forever, and all for as little as $10/mo, this could be arguably the best choice.

I went for the full priced "DVD-quality" ($18) and still thought this was an incredible bargain. Assuming that this is the price that just 1 of this site's movies would be on DVD, and they have 4000+ videos to pick from, it's hard to go back to buying DVDs ever again...But there are some studios absent from here, probably because they want to offer their goods on their own pay sites. For example, if you just like Hustler vids, then keep looking. There are still tons of US studios on here, including quite a few you probably haven't heard of (and probably don't want to either).

A minor complaint about this site is that it is almost completely American. I lived in Germany for a few years and saw plenty of stuff that makes a lot of our porn quite tame and boring. This may not sound important, but considering how many US sites involve numerous Euro models, and create orig content as hardcore as the filth found overseas, it's worth noting.

Videobox's major weakness, and I why I ultimately left, was its speed (or lack thereof). If you like HQ and DVD vids, then get comfortable because it could take a while to DL them. This is likely due to its large customer base, but it's very frustrating. This site doesn't make you pay in $ just time. Still you should browse their entire collection before buying on disc again.

07-07-08  07:27pm

Replies (3)
Review
7
Visit In The Crack

In The Crack
(1)

85.0
Status: Was a member approx. 6 months prior to this review.
Pros: + CLOSEUP exclusive content! This site lives up to its name
+ Clear, well-lit photography, w/ newer vids in HD
+ Hot models (though they certainly don't focus on faces) who get creative: speculums, anal, peeing, toys, veggies...
+ Photos available to all members, and now, finally, all video as well
+ Some girl-girl
Cons: - Pretty high price
- More girl-girl needed
- Closeups this closeup may not be for everyone
- Took them way too long to drop their token video system
- Older models have smaller pics
Bottom Line: Love closeup photography? Well, this site is so far in the crack it's practically in the hole; this site takes the genre so far that any closer and these girls' cheeks and lips would be smudging the lens. Their bigger photos (1600x1200, some 2400x1800) are huge, and you can easily end up staring at a crack (or hole) bigger than your monitor, or even real life. You will probably spend a few hours just admiring the pics, or at least getting a detailed lesson on female anatomy.

It's a blessing that they finally dropped their stupid pay-per-view token video system, especially considering the price. The fact that they were doing this for so long - screwing over members who had already paid (and losing potential business) - is probably the biggest reason for not giving them a higher score. I first learned of this site after a friend showed me a video, but I was let down when I found out they were separate from the regular membership. Still, their photography can practically stand on its own, though their vids are also quite entertaining (queefing vags, winking assholes, masturbation, pissing). I personally prefer shorter clips (5-10mins) than longer, boring vids, but it does mean more DLs.

I think anybody who joins this site already likes this stuff, but there are a few who probably think this is aimed at gynecologists and dermatologists, so it doesn't have universal appeal, but few sites do. For those who do like their porn up close, then this really hits the mark (crack?).

04-03-08  02:01pm

Replies (6)
Review
8
Visit VideosZ

VideosZ
(3)

84.0
Status: Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
Pros: + Large quantity of DVDs (claimed 4700+)
+ Nice variety as well, lots of categories
+ Downloads were reasonably fast (around 500 kb/s)
+ Ability to stream videos quickly and easily
+ Scene breakdown with lots of thumbnails
+ Does not allow user comments/"reviews"
+ Free to preview their whole collection
+ Full access trial available for 2 days at $4
Cons: + Price is way too high compared to competitors ($30 monthly)
+ Inconsistent download standards: older vids are WMVs, newer ones are DivXs
+ Search feature needs improvement, many vids are tagged with content that they don't have, and many don't have actresses listed
+ Annoying watermark on all videos
+ Older WMVs are DRM protected, though free license is provided
+ Like all DVD sites, content is non-exclusive, and is not hi-def (max definition around 480x360)
Bottom Line: I have been a satisfied member of VideoBox before, the favored DVD site of PU, but I still wanted to check this site out. It offered a few videos that they didn't and I figured it was worth checking out. I was not disappointed, but nothing here really stood out or hints that they have the power to pass their top competitor. Why?

Well, price is simply not that nice -- $30, monthly -- twice what a PU discount gets you at VideoBox for 1 month of "DVD quality." If you use their slightly lower quality $10 membership, then VideosZ is 3x the price!

Dollars aside, the site is nicely laid out and organized enough to find much of you want. Unfortunately, many scenes do not have any actresses tagged, or labeled with content that isn't in them. Plus, the same problem I had with VideoBox, they don't consolidate and cross reference models' different stage names, so clicking on a girl's scene list will bring up other videos with different girls who used the same names -- irritating. For bigger actresses this isn't a problem, since they generally stick with the same name, but I like quite a few lesser known girls and trying to find their work got frustrating.

Downloads were generally fast for me; no bullet train speeds, but never slow. Streaming options on videos, both high and low, also started quickly for me. I usually ended up using the thumbnails to determine if I really wanted to DL a vid or not, and this worked out reliably. I use Free Download Manager and had no problems, but could never do multiple downloads, though there are no DL limits.

Since all these DVD sites use, well, DVDs for their sources, resolution is never great, at least compared to the massive 1920x1080 HD video many sites now offer. Their videos max out around 480x360 DivX, not quite the 720x480 DVD resolution, but satisfactory for my tastes. Format wise, they really need some sort of standardization here; they use WMVs, DivXs, and MPEGs. Many of the older WMVs are DRM protected, though a free license that you keep forever is provided. I hate DRM, so instead I just avoided these videos completely. I wish they would wise up and re-upload these videos once they had them DRM free, but it doesn't sound like it will happen anytime soon.

I liked what I found here, though it was never value priced, and I got bored pretty quickly, just as I did with VideoBox. Honestly, I would probably pay half the $30 monthly membership for half the time just because I lose interest in these DVD sites so soon. I wouldn't be spending any more money than I would at VideoBox, but I wouldn't spend a whole month there either.

For now, I recommend their 2 day trial, and sign up for a month only if you really have the money, and you end up finding a lot of stuff you cannot get elsewhere.

01-06-09  01:06pm

Replies (1)
Review
9
Visit Nubiles.net

Nubiles.net
(2)

81.0
Status: Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
Pros: + Claimed 647 models! Yes, they are quite nubile; very hot, in their late teens, early 20s
+ Newer full length videos are 1280 x 720 @ 3500 kb/s .wmv (smaller sizes available in .avi, .mp4, .mpg)
+ No download limits, no DRM, download managers are allowed
+ 3 to 4 updates every day, and 3 new models every week
+ Newer photos are 2400 x 1600, with zips for each photo set
+ Download speeds of at least 500 kbs/s
+ Some models do hardcore content
+ Pretty clear breakdown at top of each model's page of what she does; from "topless" to "sex"
+ "Interview" pages give some info on each model
+ Navigation is pretty straightforward, and search engine works well
+ Billing through CCBill, with special PU discount of $24.31/month
Cons: - Overall repetitive and boring feel, and hardcore in particular, at least for me (see Bottom Line)
- Virtually no girl-girl content (less than a dozen scenes, if that)
- Little anal or fetish content beyond vaginal and lots of toys
- "Bonus" content is negligible, and mostly to advertise other pay sites
- Navigation within photo set pages is a little annoying
- Individual video clips are not highest quality, only 1280 x 720 when you DL the whole video
- Photos are professionally shot, but a few look a bit too Photoshopped, or as if they should not have been been released at all
- Purely my personal preference, but a few too many European models
Bottom Line: I originally approached this site as a girls only site, even though I was well aware that it had hardcore content. But come on, it's not the guys that are nubile -- it's the hundreds of hot girls! That's the one thing that is indisputable: the models here are young (late teens through mid twenties) and very attractive. Quite a few are American and new, but there are also plenty of Europeans (mostly Eastern Europe, in particular a growing number from Russia) as well as models that have been on quite a few other girls-only sites (Franziska, Sarah Blake, Kacey Jordan, Angelica Black), but none I would really call bona fide porn stars.

For those who like some variety in their model choices, this site might be a tad bland. The focus is on the nubile and skinny females in this world, but not necessarily of all races and elasticities it seems. I would not call the models themselves bland, but I really could not find any variety of girls that would include those of Asian, African, or Central and South American descent. It really was not an issue for me, as there is every hair color to choose from, most are shaven bare, though some still have pubic hair if it matters, plus tattoos and piercings, but nothing over the top. And if these girls simply are not in your preferred age range, you might want to check out their sister (mother?) site, Anilos, which looks to be much the same setup and price structure, though noticeably smaller amount of content.

So, how are all these lovely ladies captured? Well, the equipment and technology almost matches the beauty of the models. Newer videos are 1280 x 720 HD, but only in full length. Videos are broken down into one to two minute clips as well, but if you only download these clips, it's lower resolution. I guess this is good if you want to check out the content of a video before downloading the whole thing, but a letdown nonetheless if you just want that special clip. Videos are well lit, relatively well shot (no "Blair Witch" shake-'em-up contests), and have basically no apparent off camera distractions, spoken or otherwise. There are some interviews where the cameraman speaks, but it's only in interviews where I could find this happening.

Here's where my 81 score starts to really come in; though well shot, videos just did not do it for me. I would say the site is still photo-focused (more on that in a minute) but the videos are not too special for me. These ladies are eye candy, no doubt, but often somewhat reserved in videos, even in the hardcore scenes. I felt it was as much a case as just keeping the models comfortable (the solo, as well as the hardcore, content is never abusive or degrading, if you were wondering) as it was not asking enough of them. They enjoy themselves for sure, but not as much as I was expecting, and it felt as if it was too formulaic and toy focused to really make things stand out.

(Bottom Line continued below.)

08-13-09  12:23am

Replies (9)
Review
10
Visit ALS Angels

ALS Angels
(0)

80.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: + ALS Scan quality: hot girls shot beautifully
+ Fast downloads
+ A bigger breasted version of their original site
+ Primarily solo girl content, but it's not soft
+ Girl-girl content is very nice too
+ Same insertion, speculum, Rocket, peeing, fisting standards
+ All Ladies Shaved: that makes them Angels to me :)
Cons: - Videos only archived since Feb 2007
- Updates are not daily, average 3-4 times per week
- Same prices as ALS Scan, yet far fewer models and content
- Too many Euro models
- Yes, content can be repetitive and clinical
- Continues bad practice of not fully releasing all of a model's content if she's not "popular," thus some models have very few scenes or videos
- Same director's blog as ALS Scan
Bottom Line: The bottom line is I love ALS Scan, but Angels...is just not the same.

I think the score of 80 is common because these guys just know how to shoot well, and make great choices in who they shoot. These are not bargain bin babes, or well-worn veteran models with decades under their garter belts, but gorgeous, and frequently amateur, models who only get as nasty as they feel comfortable doing. The action is not forced, and it helps to produce a fun and happy mood.

Despite their choices in models, I prefer the American ones over the Eastern Europeans. At ALS, about 1/3 to 2/5 of the models are Euro, but here, at least 50% of the 88 models are Euro. Don't get me wrong, these women are gorgeous, but I would love to see more Americans. It seems there should be plenty of choices in our 300 million+ population, but they still have a lot of Euro girls -- not nearly at the levels of other sites -- but still too many for my specific perverted tastes.

Newer hi-res photos get as big as 3800x3500, and new HD videos are available in 1280x720 DivX or MP4, or big 1920x1080 WMVs. Older pics and vids are considerably smaller, and sadly, they only started archiving their video releases subce Feb '07, so there is nowhere near the amount of video content as on their sister site, and the releases only come about 3-4 times per week.

Other reviewers have adequately explained the routine monotony of photo shoots, but these can still produce hot content. It's just that a lot of stuff is BTS and you can get lost in the repetition of it.

This site says it "presents the more mature looking models with generally larger breasts" in comparison with ALS Scan, but beyond that there is little difference, and "mature" is frequently only a few months more so, and the "larger breasts" are about the only thing that keeps these models out of the petite teen pack found at the original site.

Devout ALS fans have no doubt checked out this site, and it is worth it for at least a month to collect stuff from models only mentioned on ALS. Those who are brand new to the world of All Ladies Shaved may want to check out ALS Scan, unless larger breast sizes are an absolute must in a membership.

02-03-09  11:06pm

Replies (0)
Rating
11
Visit In Focus Girls

In Focus Girls
(0)

80.0
No Review.
01-06-09  10:44am

Review
12
Visit Simon Scans

Simon Scans
(0)

79.0
Status: Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
Pros: + Claimed 653 models, in 4200+ sets, 464,000+ images--all archived
+ If you like the solo girl niche they stick with it; no guys (except maybe in the BG in public nudity)
+ Healthy variety of British, Ibizan, and Eastern Euro models in many shapes and sizes
+ Newest vids are 1280 x 720 HD .mov @ 4.9MB/s
+ Navigation is easy enough, despite missing content
+/- Near constant use of toys; a pro for me, but I know some hate this
Cons: - Pictures overall are good but small; newest ones are 1850 x 1230 max, older ones can be quite small
- Basically no model info beyond what you can learn from the photos or videos
- A lot of sets are missing content
- Not very many videos; treat this as a photo site
- Photographic style may annoy some; Simon frequently uses short DOF (more in BL)
- Very little girl-girl content
- Lots of models are less than hot
-/+ Lots of models are less than fully shaved; a con for me, a pro for others
-/+ I don't think Photoshop is used beyond cropping and adding a watermark; beware this is not as good as it sounds
Bottom Line: I wanted to like this site a lot, I really did. It has all the right basic ingredients to make me happy: lots of young girls with lots of toys, while the guys stay behind camera with their mouths shut. Plus these are mostly British girls I have never seen with a few Euro ones I have seen thrown in. So what's the problem?

Well, sometimes even when you have all the right ingredients and follow the directions the recipe didn't turn out quite as well as you had expected. A lot of the girls didn't shave : ( and many more that didn't exactly just step off the runway in a Paris fashion show. I don't want to sound like a heartless asshole (that's what the forum is for) but there are quite a few models who could benefit from skipping the fast food. I am not saying any of the girls are really obese but don't expect to find one skinny little model after another here--as I said above, many shapes and sizes. It's really a matter of personal taste and I prefer the skinnier girls myself but that's just me. As far as the looks, well, that's personal taste too and I guess there's nothing anybody can do about that but there are plenty of hot girls--both skinny and not so skinny.

Besides the shape of its models the site could do some improving in terms of actually providing content that isn’t there. As other reviewers have mentioned there are models that have missing photo sets and videos; you see a link to a set on the model’s page (usually three medium sized thumbnails) but when you click it there is just an empty SS page with the banners and links at the top but no content below, and the same with some videos. Annoying because nobody wants to pay for empty pages and those thumbnails would frequently get my engine revving only to have it stall out when there was an empty set.

When I actually saw the content I noticed a couple of things. First, the photos, despite making up the vast majority of content, were on the small side; 1850 x 1230 is the newest and biggest resolution available. I looked for links to bigger zips or maybe a hi-res option all to no avail—these biggest photos don’t even fill my screen. Second, the photos themselves have some attributes that really divide us here at PU. I don’t think any Photoshop is used beyond cropping and watermarking but before you jump for joy be aware that not all girls are created equal, especially when you jam the camera in between their legs to check out what’s under the hood. Ass zits, razor burn, and stray pubic hair may be a turn on for some but not me and I really wished somebody had cleaned these shots up at least a little. There are plenty of models that really don’t need any digital work done on their lovelies but there are still many that do.

(Bottom Line continued below.)

01-31-10  10:14pm

Replies (7)
Review
13
Visit FTV Girls

FTV Girls
(4)

78.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: + Tons of content, all archived
+ Hot young models, most are unknowns
+ Some good videos, with masturbation, anal, toys, including some in HD
+ Pretty easy and simple navigation
+ Selected photos are available in gigantic sizes (2000 x 3000!)
Cons: - Normal photos could be a lot bigger and clearer
- Content can get repitive and boring, sometimes pretty softcore, even for a girl-only site
- Downloads could be faster
- Too much clothed and public nudity scenes
- Not every model has videos
- Better content descriptions needed for the model listings (it's not clear whether something is in a video or photo)
Bottom Line: First off, this is a huge site - lots of exclusive content, available to all users. Unfortunately, all this content was not created equal. A model could be doing some big insertions in a scene, but half the photos will just be of her undressing, or doing some stupid public nudity, and this gets frustrating very fast. The vast majority of these women are very attractive; it just takes too long to see them nude. The photos themselves are good, but really way too small (1100 x 800 max). There are huge photos available in a big pics section, but they are only available in zip packs, so you have to DL a whole scene (some 100mb+, a slow DL on this site) just to get a few good ones.

This site gets high marks for the sheer amount of content available, the beauty of its models, and its videos, but they seem to fail to reach the full potential of it all by not offering bigger size normal pics and more nudity (it is a porn site after all). Fortunately, navigating and finding the goods is quick and easy, though they are not always clear what is what on the model listing pages (whether something is in a video or photo), and some stuff I stumbled upon by accident, but it's not mentioned (a few pissing photos, for example). Still, this is not a hardcore site, so if you looking for rough hard content with guys, then this isn’t the place.

04-01-08  12:35pm

Replies (3)
Reply
14
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

I generally don't mind it, though it is a little weird to watch a video where Santa gets a blowjob and commits various sins to a horny lady elf (usually just a girl wearing a Christmas hat) with a candy cane. If any of your holiday childhood memories aren't already long dead, these scenes may put the final nails in the coffin.

12-20-14  05:53pm

Reply
15
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

No.

The only time I ever have was in the late '90s; my family and I were visiting some friends overnight in another state and they had pay cable, including Cinemax--aka Skinemax. :-) Needless to say, when I was skipping around channels one night (after everyone else had gone to be) I really got involved in the story!


12-19-14  05:38pm

Reply
16
N/A Reply of Drooler's Poll

No thank you; I find it about as nice as feet sucking--not at all!

And I assume it has to be done where the lickee (sp?) hasn't put on any deodorant/antiperspirant, since you really shouldn't be licking that stuff, and I'm guessing the natural body odor/fragrances of people, or at least their armpits, is part of the turn-on.


12-16-14  03:25am

Reply
17
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

Love it! But then again I find bukakke excessive, striptease glacial, feet unattractive, and Maxim bordering on the obscene, so my tastes may be a different from what the average porn viewer finds acceptable.

One of things I can actually account for my weird love and fascination with "pee content"/golden showers is this: I figure that since fewer women in porn will ever do it on camera, it's more exclusive. (Same is true in real life, but you might have to broach the subject with caution.) Beyond that, I figure it could be anything from interest in something considered taboo to mixed up brain chemistry.


12-08-14  04:55pm

Reply
18
N/A Reply of graymane's Poll

Slow and sensual blowjobs can be lots of fun in real life, but they get old quick on camera. Plus really sloppy, drooly BJs; stupid dialogue/forced "dirty" talk; and too much kissing all bore me pretty easily.

And, I would say most importantly, the girl rimming the guy. These are like blowjobs; way more fun to receive than to watch (and possibly perform, depending on the adventurousness of the girl), and almost always look way more forced than then when performed on a female. Like to the point where the guy is holding her head down there...and the audience doesn't want to be there either.


11-01-14  12:35am

Reply
19
N/A Reply of Cybertoad's Poll

"Other," since it depends so heavily on what the scene is going for; artistic, "reality"/gonzo, parody, etc. Obviously, something like a scene that starts in a shower should begin fully nude. You know: innocent girl already taking shower, boyfriend/stranger/passerby wanders in, strips almost instantaneously, coupling commences (door locks rarely seem to be functioning in the world of porn).

But I'm okay with those starting off fully dressed as long as the striptease is not overdone, or it's something other than one of those sites like Fully Clothed Pissing where they're wearing most of the items throughout. Also, my porn wardrobe pet peeve is the scenes where the obligatory high heels never, ever come off. I honestly don't find them that sexy to begin with, and at some point in the scene they just look silly, not to mention eye-gouging to the nearest co-perfomer.


10-27-14  10:53pm

Reply
20
N/A Reply of pinkerton's Poll

They have definitely refined (even if I have not!), especially as I become increasingly picky about quality in this age of broadband speeds and HD videos. They have somewhat narrowed in the sense that I'm even more focused on my preferred niche, with occasional diversions into other ones when the mood strikes me.

Sadly, as mine have refined the sites that I used to love have not. ALSScan is the most prominent example, as I use to really love it and its whole approach to solo/girl-girl material. Then I went elsewhere for a while and it jumped the shark into boy-girl material...for shame! Oh well, you don't get everything you want in life. :-/


10-26-14  01:10am

Reply
21
Visit VIPissy

VIPissy
(1)
Reply of rearadmiral's Review

Great review, rearadmiral!

Love how this site takes this fetish seriously, if that's the right word to use when discussing golden showers. Normally it's relegated to something only done at the end of scene so webmasters can just add another tag, and rather clumsily at that. Even better, it has long, hot, and enthusiastic girl-girl scenes which can be kind of rare within this genre. It's one thing to watch a pretty girl do a standard boy-girl or solo scene, but quite another to discover she's done work for this site.

As far as I'm aware this site is totally exclusive, if also appearing to be the hardcore side of Wet and Pissy, though the companies are different. A model seems to do W&P and/or Wet and Puffy, and then move on to this. Those sites' solo scenes are well done, but again, add a second girl and it becomes even better, IMHO.

Also, there has been at least one American performer on here, Tiffany Fox, who's also done solo scenes for both Wet & Pissy and Wet & Puffy. Still wish they did have more American performers though.


10-18-14  08:08pm

Reply
22
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

I wish they'd shut the fuck up!

But, somehow, even worse is the sleazy heavy breathing when the camera mic is set a little to high and you can just hear the guy's wheezing throughout the scene--think Phillip Seymour Hoffman in Happiness, and sometimes with much the same dialogue. But at least there it was funny.


10-08-14  06:32am

Reply
23
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

One of those lazy porn tropes I don't care for at all.

I guess some are into it; like it makes the scene truly "hard" or something, but I find it unnecessary and disrespectful. You can easily make a scene hot and nasty without so blatantly hating the women in it. And rough sex in general doesn't actually require such contrived name-calling to make it entertaining.

For my money, Kink.com is the biggest culprit of this practice, especially when they have a mini interview at the beginning where everyone comes across as happy and friendly...followed by an hour of stilted slurs and put-downs. Their whole schtick is consensual nastiness yet can't seem to give up the verbal abuse.


10-01-14  06:26pm

Reply
24
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

Except for the racially-focused genres (which I find to be part of the problem), no.

08-26-14  07:18pm

Reply
25
N/A Reply of Khan's Poll

Prefer the option of picking my own, especially if the membership goes on for a while--and this should be true of any site requiring a password.

If you're allowed to pick your own password (using a password generator) that's longer and more complicated, then the site's isn't necessarily more secure.


08-23-14  01:31pm


Shown : 1-25 of 674 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 1.37 seconds.