| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1
|
Wow Girls
(4)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from RLane:
(cjd2004's Reply)
I just found that out, It was confusing that they put Original and not 5616px.
|
03-01-13 12:01pm
|
Reply
2
|
Action Girls
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from PinkPanther:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Yeah, and it looks like they added some original material on Feb 13 & Feb 15 - then decided they were tired and needed a nap and haven't updated again since then. On their last legs, that's for sure!
|
02-27-13 10:24pm
|
Reply
3
|
Alison Angel
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from tangub:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Thanks for the reply. I couldn't get your wayback link to work at first until I changed the https to http, anyway it seems to confirm that they are posting old content masquerading as recent updates. Comparing the number of covers in the old tour to the latest one I would guess they've removed something like 50 sets from the site to rotate as new updates which makes me even less likely to join than if they were being honest and simply leaving the entire collection online available to download in a membership.
|
02-27-13 03:18am
|
Reply
4
|
Glam Deluxe
(1)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from lk2fireone:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Some photosets at Erotic Beauty do have the metadata "date taken", other photosets do not.
The Avril photoset does not have the "date taken" metadata.
The same thing for Metart. Some photosets have the metadata "date taken", others do not.
It would be nice if more of these photos had that information.
|
02-12-13 07:28am
|
Reply
5
|
DDF Network
(4)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from timeac1:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Yes that too...
At least the only want the number not the expiry date or CID number.
It is sad a site with decient content would resort to crap like that and what I complained about.
|
02-01-13 09:19pm
|
Reply
6
|
Holly Randall
(1)
|
Reply of
cjd2004's Comment
from Drooler:
Holly Randall has good content, but for me it hasn't had the same draw as MetArt. Hopefully, this affiliation will give the Holly Randall content a boost. Two things would help in the process. One is to make sure that the HR site (or sites) are as web-friendly as the MetArt sites are. Just look at the difference between them. MetArt has a nice, subdued visual approach, whereas the Holly Randall site is garish and cluttered. They clearly speak in two very different visual languages.
The second is to make the approach to the photography, especially the types of poses, more consistently like MetArt's as well.
|
01-26-13 04:00pm
|
Reply
7
|
Holly Randall
(1)
|
Reply of
cjd2004's Comment
from luv lickn clit:
Thanks for the link cjd. Holly Randall is definitely something different for Met-Art. It will be interesting to see how they redesign the site. Did you also see they are now managing ALS Scan and Viv Thomas? I had never heard of xbiz.com--very cool site.
|
01-25-13 05:27pm
|
Reply
8
|
FEMJOY
(1)
|
REPLY TO
#9
from Drooler:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Why, yes! Funny, I hadn't noticed the connection. Well, it isn't as though they've cornered the "joy" market. ;) Thanks for pointing that out.
|
01-25-13 05:00pm
|
Reply
9
|
Holly Randall
(1)
|
Reply of
cjd2004's Comment
from lk2fireone:
I'm currently a member of Metart. Years ago it was just Metart and Metmodels. I knew they had added a few other sites recently, but didn't realize how many they have added. I hope it increases the financial stability of the Metart site itself, which is my favorite site for softcore photography. A lot of sites fall on hard times, and either go out of business or become archive sites that no longer update.
And now, Metart is not just a mega-site by itself, but is becoming a mega-network.
|
01-25-13 07:41am
|
Reply
10
|
Holly Randall
(1)
|
Reply of
cjd2004's Comment
from otoh:
Interesting news indeed! I've been a member of her site before, and whereas it's more glam-porn-y than my usual taste, I do have a fondness for it. Seems Met Art are definitely branching out into more racy material... which can only be a good thing IMHO, given the banality (purely subjective!) of the main site.
|
01-25-13 06:29am
|
Reply
11
|
FTV Girls
(2)
|
REPLY TO
#8
from exotics4me:
(cjd2004's Reply)
I'm not for sure on that one. But it's the point I was making. If he's going to just have one update per week, what does it hurt him to post the high superpics of every set instead of the 1600 high end ones? Would it really hurt his profits to offer past members a slightly lower price knowing he only updates once per week and there wouldn't be much new for them to download? As it is, I'm bumping it back to joining maybe once every two years. I do know the webmaster can be a jerk. If you haven't seen that look up how he talked about Eufrat and complained about her "poor English" knowing good and well when he hired her she wasn't a native English speaker. He went as far as leasing that set to other sites and went on a rant about how he would never hire another Euro model, seems like he called them "fake, plastic, robotic". His comments on Danni Yeager's sets were also bad. He blames the models when the sets don't go how he thinks they should go.
|
12-10-12 03:27pm
|
Reply
12
|
Erotic Beauty
(2)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from lk2fireone:
(cjd2004's Reply)
You're right. I wasn't aware of it, or didn't think of it. And they do call it the MetArt Network of sites.
Thanks for the correction.
And if I hadn't already given you a positive trust rating, I would give you one now!
|
11-28-12 04:43am
|
Reply
13
|
Met Art
(8)
|
Reply of
cjd2004's Reply from cjd2004:
Oops - I meant upscaled.
|
10-13-12 08:13pm
|
Reply
14
|
Twistys
(6)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from Micha:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Thank you cjd2004 for your reply. It did no help to log off and then log back on. I tried to delete history with cookies un-checked, but that didn't help. Twisty's tech support guy was helpful and seemed more knowledgeable than most. He said all cookies must be deleted, so I bit the bullet and deleted them. Email, Facebook, TV listings and every other site that requires passwords or stores my personal info in a cookie, was affected. Every time I log on to them, the cookies are reset, only to be deleted the next time I wanna see a thumbnail. My browser is the latest version of Firefox.
I have nothing bad to say about Twistys content, it's great. So good that I will struggle through for the remainder of my month, but I will not renew or return. The CAPCHA bullshit is insufferable. These tired old eyes cannot work out their puzzle.
micha
|
10-04-12 12:04am
|
Reply
15
|
Pornstars Punishment
(2)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from marcdc1:
(cjd2004's Reply)
That sucks. I had them on my list of must sees. I guess that's what I get for procrastinating. Thanks for the info!
|
07-30-12 05:18am
|
Reply
16
|
Sinful Goddesses
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from Drooler:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Yes, I've noticed that, too. Sinful, indeed.
|
07-14-12 12:04pm
|
Reply
17
|
Twistys
(6)
|
REPLY TO
#6
from tangub:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Great tip cid2004, I've always found the search engine on CCBill website absolutely useless with a search for Twistys there bringing up zero results but Googling it as you suggest gets the results.
|
07-12-12 04:14am
|
Reply
18
|
Twistys
(6)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from Claypaws:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Thanks cjd2004. The ccbill search found me three different forms with three different prices, one of which was £13.53 (which converts to $20.53). Though if I click the dollar pricing on the ccbill signup page it does show $19.95.
I might give it a go sometime though I am not at all sure there is enough there for me to justify a month's membership. Twistys is kind of a site where I might get a couple of dozen photo sets from a week every two years. i.e. from their updates, about one photo set per month might interest me.
|
07-12-12 03:38am
|
Reply
19
|
abbywinters
(5)
|
Reply of
cjd2004's Comment
from abbywinters:
Unfortunately, Maddison Yong and us did have some problems when she came to shoot with us.
Maddison's report above is accurate, though does miss out some aspects (She had several grooming issues, including a rash, an allergic reaction to sometimes). We engage models well before their shoot date to discuss how seriously we take grooming matters (several emails, and several phone calls), and make it very clear that we will not proceed with the shoot if they do not meet the standards our customers require and expect.
We do this, because we do not allow models to wear makeup (our customers tell us again and again, they want no makeup), and we never photoshop images (to remove blemishes). Ms Young alluded that in her previous work with other companies, makeup and post-production work had solved these problems, and she was mystified as to why we could not use the same tools. We explained that this was one of our selling points, but she was not satisified with that.
We prefer to simply wait until the model is looking her best. Most of our models appreciate this, and let us know in advance if they have any issues (for example, by texting us the night before, or emailing pictues of the affected area from their phone).
Unfortunately, Ms Young had a pressing schedule, and was unable to wait a few days for the blemishes to go away.
In our emails to her, we apologised for our harsh rules, reminded her that we did make this very clear that it was a condition of working with us, complimented her on the excellent shoots she did do for us, and invited her to return to do more shoots at her convenience. That invitation is still open.
We have shot around 1500 models over the last 12 years, and never had a model so upset about our grooming requirements as Ms Young was. We reviewed our procedures in several meetings afterwards, to idnentify where we "went wrong", with a view to improving our processes, and identified that we made every reasonable effort to communicate clearly.
At the end, we resolved that we just "rubbed eachother the wrong way".
|
07-10-12 01:11am
|
Reply
20
|
Humiliatrix
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from humiliatrix:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Guess who loves Humiliatrix? Sissies. I know, crazy.
Lol seriously I told my twitter followers I had a sissy mission for them, and posting some new reviews here was one of their tasks.
https://twitter.com/humiliatrix/status/218390172608376832
|
07-01-12 09:19am
|
Reply
21
|
Humiliatrix
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from rearadmiral:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Yeah, but in fairness to these guys if Tanner Mayes had a site and told me to review it, that would be the first score of 200 ever awarded on PU.
Seriously though, there might be some bias in these reviews...
|
06-29-12 08:23pm
|
Reply
22
|
Twistys
(6)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from Gazette Risque:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Darn!
Well, you mentioned it! Thank you. ;)
|
05-14-12 07:48am
|
Reply
23
|
Twistys
(6)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from atrapat:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Thanks for the info. I see Manwin is the company that owns both Brazzers Network and Twistys.
|
05-10-12 11:02am
|
Reply
24
|
Twistys
(6)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from atrapat:
(cjd2004's Reply)
The Brazzers Network from a couple days ago was her first released b/g, wasn't it?
|
05-09-12 03:17pm
|
Reply
25
|
Sex Art
(2)
|
REPLY TO
#10
from Abel Semen:
(cjd2004's Reply)
I've seen bits of their stuff, they often get recommended in the same breath as sites I know I like. Unfortunately I don't find the ladies they use as attractive, on average, as those at a lot of other site. Still, they might be worth checking out.
|
05-03-12 11:48pm
|
