Yes, they're the same. Since I only want a few of the "hi" sized pics, I've resorted to opening the pic, looking at the browser title bar, and using that to get the photo number and just typing it in in place of the super long goobledegook default file "names."
Another weird thing I hadn't mentioned before is that for some reposted sets, the medium and hi sizes are identical, though they are labeled medium and hi (or high, can't recall off hand). So you can download a zip of each and they're really the same size pics.
Anyway, I've liked the photo quality and babes (mostly) at ALS Scan, but with these new changes, along with the addition of hardcore, it's become less appealing.
I'll probably go back some time, but there's no hurry.
I'd have my 'druthers on this one, meaning "Others." The others above the other, that is, with the exception of "cool" design. It needn't be cool, just tasteful and easy enough to "process" with the old visual cortex.
For cool, I'll settle for the Miles Davis Quintet, the one with Shorter, Hancock, Carter, and Williams.
Lack of info is a basic problem. A site should let you see what it's got. TorridArt is a good example of a site that does, as are MetArt and Hegre-Art. You can browse the content as a visitor and they tell you the specs on video and photo sizes and video formats available. AND they mention that they got this stuff in zip archives.
Sites that fall sort of such features in their tours are hard to trust. One wonders if they're hiding something or not.
I use a download manager when it is more than I can manage on my own, but like some of the respondents above, I like to pick through things, "by hand," as it were, and just keep what I want.
I'd hate to see that my hard drive is 80% full and I wouldn't know where to start my spring cleaning.
I guess it comes as no surprise that it's hard to define something that is not real.
Had a good chuckle over your comment about Demolition Man, or whatever it was called. (Wonder if there has been a porn parody of that. They could call it "Fornication Man.")
Put "virtual" in front of any word and it can only mean "not really." Virtual reality is not reality, and virtual sex is not sex. Whether it will be a virtual wave of the virtual future is something that is yet to be virtually seen.
I guess I must be a boyey boy, 'cause I like girly girls who are more into cock than Glock.
Actually, weapons of any kind have no appeal to me when there's peeling going on. Sex, to me, is a cooperative activity, without any big hints of dominance, coercion, or rejection.
BTW, I second what RagingBuddhist said. Those worn-out cliches ought to be stuffed into a landfill somewhere.
Nothing wrong with pregnancy per se unless it's because, well, you can probably guess. I'm thinking of one woman I know who I've seen pregnant. Yes, she was lovely in a new way.
But porn and pregnancy are to me like (sex) oil and (when she breaks) water. Preggers just doesn't fit into the overall "gestalt," ironically enough.
RagingBuddhist's comments pretty much match my own experiences and decision processes about porno spending. If the site's a bit dodgy, a shithead will definitely keep me away. But if the site's primo, then Mr. Turd for Brains just won't be pocketing as much as he would have otherwise.
I've been discovering new irksome quirks in the "update."
Now, if you switch photo size on say, page 12, you are taken back to page 1. (This was not a problem before.)
If you try to download a single photo, the file name is this lengthy gobbledeegook nonsense with no file number. (So how are you supposed to find out the file number if you want it? Not a problem before. And just stop expecting the system to work for humans.)
Try downloading a zip, and the file name stretches out like an interstate highway. I just downloaded one, and the file name was EIGHTY-TWO characters long.
I have a term for this that goes way back to the days of Netscape version releases: It's a "fuck-up-date."
I'm the same as the Cap'n on this. It isn't like the only thing I have trouble remembering is what I like. I also think that people can recall what they like, but usually rely on the ability to recognize something they don't like. There's probably a lot of research on that, huh?
I tend to put "erectile dysfunction" in the same basket (wastebasket) as all of this recent "low T" hoopla. Hey, when you're hot you're hot, and when you're not, you're not. I'd rather age naturally and stay healthy through diet and activity and enough sleep, and simply accept the fact that although I can still get it up, I rarely have to manage Eager Mr. Johnson as I used to when I was less than half my current age and the girls were prancing around in their summer clothes ... uh, excuse me ...
Depends on the girl and on the shape of those lines. I've seen them and really disliked them, but other times it's been quite the opposite.
If I can remember this right, I've seen Daisy Marie with some nice ones. And also that Fibby from MPL Studios/FemJoy (yes, there are other names that got lost in a nerve cell exchange).
Generally, I don't like big differences between the tanned part and the rest. A more subtle gradient is preferred.
But, when I think of a really tanned babe pulling down her jeans and her white ass plops out, it's nice! Something perhaps from Jynx Maze some time ago. (Yes, she's not "white" white, I guess, but ... who needs those hangups about the "shades," anyway?)
I'm not into softcore video, but I'd say that the photo sets at RH are pretty disappointing, too, overall. I've been a member a couple of times over several years, and after the first time, I just went in hoping to get a few good things from months and months of content.
In a single gallery, there are so many photos that are nearly the same pose that I wonder if there is some kind of intended Andy Warhol element to it. Whatever. It certainly isn't my can of soup.
I've looked at things like actual date photo was taken and other not-so-technical info, but seeing as how the XMP is a bit lacking in the TnA, I don't pay much attention to it.
I had no idea, or noticed then forgot, that the user can change the icons of individual folders. In 7, I've found the collection of options (in "properties," of course), but even the transparent ones (there are a few) show that curving shortcut arrow. Still, it's a neat trick.
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.
