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 : mudman (36)  

Feedback:   All (40)  |   Reviews (29)  |   Comments (0)  |   Replies (11)

Other:   Replies Received (17)  |   Trust Ratings (18)

Replies Given

Your replies to other users's reviews and comments.
Shown : 1-11 of 11  

Type Site Feedback / Review Date
Reply
1
Visit abbywinters

abbywinters
(0)
Reply of roseman's Reply

Roseman

Not going to get into any details here. If you read my reply to qualsite, I think you'll see that I covered what you're saying. These 100's just bug me.

Mudman


03-15-07  05:29am

Reply
2
Visit abbywinters

abbywinters
(0)
Reply of qualsite34's Reply

Please don't think I was just picking on you. These 100's have been bothering me for a while and yesterday was my day to snap on it.

Unless you can measure it with some sort of ruler, when isn't it subjective.

Anyway, I agree, Abby Winters is the benchmark, standard bearer, leader of the pack, for amateur sites and I'd go further and included commercial sites as well. There's not a better site out there considering all things. They do some much brilliantly, but they're not perfect. You said as much in your reply and gave Abby a 100. To me it's a 98.

Perhaps the real issue is this cancer of grading on a curve. Sure made a lot of parents and teachers happy, but it is to education what the Ford Mustangs of the late seventies are to the Mustang line and cars in general. An ill conceived inflation of a good idea.

So forgive me, but I just couldn't take it any more.

Mudman


03-15-07  05:25am

Reply
3
Visit abbywinters

abbywinters
(0)
Reply of qualsite34's Review

100% Give me a break.

I've been a member off and on and on again for years. True, Abby's one of the very best out there, if not the best, but 100 %? I just can't agree with any 100 % for any site. Sorry


03-14-07  08:12am

Reply
4
Visit abbywinters

abbywinters
(0)
Reply of abbywinters's Reply

Dear Abby:

I'm with ya on the break ups. I have DSL and I'm fine with it. What really would have me complaining, is downloading something 2 or three times bigger and finding it to be something I really don't care about.

I also like the letterbox videos and the quality. You offer some of the best .mpgs out there.

You've remained a benchmark for sites everywhere.


03-14-07  08:08am

Reply
5
Visit Ass Traffic

Ass Traffic
(0)
Reply of roseman's Reply

Roseman:

Now I'm lost. Which cut in stone web site are you referencing. You've review 27 of them.

Every site needs to offer a basic basis of quality. Every member or potential member deserves this much. Videos need to accessible to all and photos need to be clear, seeable, large enough and somewhat appealing. This certainly places some constraints upon artistry, but not unreasonably so.

Are you suggesting that anything goes, if the particular site's subject matter agreed with your or whomever interest, is okay? Seems an insufficent standard to me. Everything out there need to live up to more, as the majority is falling way short. We user/members feed this beast with our subsciptions, our money, so we should get quality regardless of the site. So I find so problem on not addressing any one failing site over another. The problem is in the system. It wants us to accept too much mediocrity as some form of quality. "Here's a great site, now spend you money and be unhappy with it."

I don't think I'm opposing you, but we may not be being as clear with each other as would be desireable.

mudman


02-06-07  10:29am

Reply
6
Visit Ass Traffic

Ass Traffic
(0)
Reply of roseman's Review

Roseman_

You've hit me, so here's my inquiry.

What do you find wothwhile when it comes to photography? What size of image and what quality? Do you have interests in lighting or not?

Are there photographers you are impressed with or are you being ignored here?

With regards to videos, regardless of subject matter what isues to you have? Every site should offer enough formats for all to enjoy, and every video should be clear enough for anyone to see and appreciate. Since I'm even mentioning this, it's not something we've been burderned with. Which sites, in your opinion, serve us viewers as we should be served?


02-05-07  10:59am

Reply
7
Visit Hot Wives And Girlfriends

Hot Wives And Girlfriends
(0)
Reply of roseman's Reply

I mean just that. There's nothing to write home about here. It nice, as far as company flash camera work goes, but why should I care. It's not personal, not ground breaking, certainly not good and vertainly not excellent in the context of photographic skill. In fact, I'm thinking less of it the more I think about it. It's a psuedo-amateur site that needs members to buy into its pitch in order to have any chance at all. The more reviewed, the worst the chances for this site.

As regards the models...I wish lots better.


02-01-07  01:20pm

Reply
8
Visit I Shot Myself

I Shot Myself
(0)
Reply of BostonPJR's Reply

Boston:

Thanks for the compliment. Nobody need agree with me all the time, but to be apreciated just means so much to me and....oh dear, I said I wasn't going to do this. Give me a second.

Okay, as regards your question:

I never tried the lesser memberships with I Feel Myself or I Shot Myself or AbbyWinters. They are money savers, but you the user end up missing stuff. I'm not completely sure I understand why a site would offer partical memberships in the first place, unless it's their alternative to the trial membership. All of that group's Australian sites are good at what they do, including Girls Out West, though AbbyWinters is by far the most popular. And as regards Beautiful Agony, I doubt I'll ever check the site out. Though I like head shots as a part of the whole experience, I am a guy and there's more that i want to see.

With I Feel Myself, you get more. It's like an extention of AbbyWinter's Intimate Moments, but with multiple camera angles. Whereas AbbyWinter's using one camera top shoot the gal getting off, I Feel Myself typically uses three or more, including closer shots of the naughty bites action.

But anyway, with all these sites, I have never tried and wouldn't tried the lesser memberships. It would be too frustrating to long in and not be able to access what's being offered that day, so it's all or nothing for me.

Mudman


03-21-07  04:19am

Reply
9
Visit I Shot Myself

I Shot Myself
(0)
Reply of SnowDude's Reply

Snowdude:

I Shot Myself gets a an 84 from me, because it is shot by the girls themselves. It's unique and fun and suprisingly good. There's a wonderful fresh difference and honesty to the whole thing. So removed from the "oh Babe, oh babe" approach to porn or adult nakeness. The pictures and videos are clear, largely crisp and unigue.

The site also gets an 84 from me because it is shot by themselves and the photo option have their limits due to the lengths of the girls' arms. It makes for some fun and great close ups, but the varied of angles and distance is physically limited. The site is also relatively young and therefor doesn't have the volume of major sites, but it is a gas.

So, high on the imaginative and low on the limitations of one's reach. It's a good and fun site to be experienced at least once and for at least one month, just not a great site.

I think it could be considered a great site. if it actually partner up with it's sister site, I Feel Myself. If it were, I Shot and Felt Myself, that would be a 90's cool.


03-12-07  05:41am

Reply
10
Visit Teenrotica

Teenrotica
(1)
Reply of SnowDude's Reply

One correction here. I said it's up to 12 photosets per day. Actually, it's up to 16 photosets per day.

03-14-07  07:45am

Reply
11
Visit Teenrotica

Teenrotica
(1)
Reply of SnowDude's Reply

Dear Snowdude:

Yeah, it's just okay, much like dozen of other sites. I actually was thinking about the site the day before you wrote. There are 3 sites, Teendream, Teenrotica and Infocus. Actually, I confused my reviews. I'd said of Infocus, that the close-up rarely were infocus, but I was thinking of Teenrotica. Infocus actually fairs pretty well in using the camera.

The problem, especially with these 3 sites, is how indistinquishable they are from each other. The poses are so cookie cutter, that the photographer certainly must use index cards telling him what shot at what angle is next. The quality is generally quite skilled, but gets boring because there's so little imagination or effort in the shot.

All three sites do have volume, do have pretty girls, are shot in color, but simply seem to provide the expected same old same old. They don't need to go radical on every shoot, just do something creative once and a while, so there's a reason to get up in the morning and take a look.

So, for volume, pretty girls and a boring sameness, an 84. They fix the boring and a higher score. They lose their volume or girls and a lower score. They're good, not exciting, but not bad. A 5 page shoot, 3 pages of clothes almost off, 4th page naked 5th page money shot and see ya. ATK Galleria is a better chose for this, as you get unmatched volume, up to 12 sets a day.

Of the three, I'd say Infocus was the most interesting.

That's it.


03-12-07  04:55am


Shown : 1-11 of 11  

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.