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 : RagingBuddhist (63)  

Feedback:   All (886)  |   Reviews (30)  |   Comments (88)  |   Replies (768)

Other:   Replies Received (501)  |   Trust Ratings (64)

Ratings & Reviews

All the reviews and ratings from this user.
Shown : 26-33 of 33 Page :    < Previous Page

Type Site - Score Feedback / Review Date
Review
26
Visit The Female Orgasm

The Female Orgasm
(0)

68.0
Status: Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
Pros: + All exclusive content
+ Decidedly amateurs (opinion of the reviewer, not necessarily yours)
+ THE fastest server I've found on any site
+ Files in 5 formats - mpeg, mpeg-2, ipod, wmv and streaming
Cons: - For some reason, you need to login twice
- Expensive considering update schedule
- Updates come every 3 days - if they get around to it
- Pictures sets on the site are small with small pictures and low resolution - a la 1992 or so.
- Pictures have random names like psg, q7a and r32 - nonsequential and not alphabetical - no rhyme, no reason
- Some of the worst navigation I've seen (some details below)
- Older files in clips that are somewhat hard to find all the pieces to
- The tiniest thumbnails I've ever seen
- Streaming quality? Skip it.
- NEWEST FILES HAVE AN ANNOYING, LARGE, TOP TO BOTTOM WATERMARK!!!
Bottom Line: Yet another review that's hard to put into print. The picture quality on the wmv and mpeg files was more than adequate, although the larger mpeg files didn't look any better than the wmv's. And, as I said above, the server is lighting fast. Using a download manager, I was getting 100 meg files in under 30 seconds.

BUT -
The navigation is so haphazard, it's hard to tell what is where. I had to stumble onto the dropdown menu to find the following categories: Closeups, Girls, Masturbation, British Orgasms, Other Stuff, Squirtzz and Video on Demand. Some of the categories don't appear to have been updated since the last time I was here, which was over 2 years ago. Some have had only a few files added since then.

There's an alphabetical model list, but clicking on a model name takes you to the chronological list of all models.

I found links that didn't match the file (i.e. joan 4-7 is actually joan 4-4)

There are what they call "extras" but even those sucked. Like an offer, as an "exclusive member", to buy DVD's for $2.95 from a site that they even tell you updates every 4-6 weeks.

All in all, I doubt I'll go back to this site. They're slow to update and it's hard to get around the site. If they aren't just another site trying rake in dollars without putting money into it, I think they definitely need to revamp the whole thing. But, since I didn't run into a download limit, it might be worth a one-time join if you're a masturbation fanatic and haven't seen their content yet. Download the site and move on.

06-23-09  03:04am

Replies (0)
Review
27
Visit Overdeveloped Amateurs

Overdeveloped Amateurs
(0)

65.0
Status: Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
Pros: + Yes, there are a lot of very large tits on this site
Cons: - With the exception of a few very small details, site design has never changed

- Severe lack of content

- Video quality is horrible - 320x240 mpg only

- Except for special features, everything is in 40-second clips

- Updates are almost random - every third or fourth day?

- Picture gallery is all dated material - from 2001 and 2002

- Content replaced every month
Bottom Line: Each month starts out with a dozen or so sets, a "set" being ten 40-second clips or their "special features" which are roughly a 10 minutes long. Then, every few days or so, either a new set of clips or another feature is added. It's almost random, and hard to get a fix on what the update frequency actually is. The only thing I know for sure is that the "features" are rotated out weekly. In the end, after my month was up, all I wound up with was 2.55 gigs of video that looks like it was shot with a VHS camera and that I had a lot of clip joining to do.

On their Q&A page (where for some reason they decided to use Java based popups that sometimes pop up 2, 3 and 4 times), I saw this:

Question: Why did you decide to make this a monthly issue?

Answer:
"I built this site to be the way i wish all websites were. fresh material all the time without looking at the same stuff each time i come back to the site. so i decided its better to give fresh material each month, then to just keep updating leaving lots of material that you've already seen."

That's not the feeling I get. I picture someone running a niche site who wants to minimize server usage and maximize profits. I can also easily imagine that whomever's running this site figures there are enough people who just decide they want to see some huge tits every once in a while, that they don't need to update the site design. It shows. (Bottom line continued in replies)

03-16-08  09:04am

Replies (1)
Review
28
Visit Body Parts.biz

Body Parts.biz
(0)

63.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: + Lower than usual cost - $19.95/month
+ Frequent Updates
+ Streaming on newer content
+ Alphabetical model list
+ 164 Models (as of this date)
+ Longer videos have been added (compared to comments in earlier reviews)
+ Pictures available in 2 sizes - 1200 and 2400 long side
+ Video available in HD wmv, Mobile m4v and Hi-res mp4
+ Easy join/ cancel through CCBill
+ $9.95 discount offered at cancellation
Cons: - A high of ~350-400 kb/s downloads (usually lower, in the 100's) - slow page to page
- Streaming video buffers almost constantly due to slow server speed
- Poor navigation
- Only latest updates are dated
- Camerawork issues - movement & focus
- One small thumbnail preview for video
- Several instances of different clips with the same file name
- Some models' files download under different names
- Mislabeled files
- A good many washed out looking pictures
- Very repetitive picture sets
- Inconsistent image quality
- Not download manager compatible (FDM)
- Hidden bandwidth cap
Bottom Line: Layout:
Like a lot of sites, the main page presents you with tabs.
>Home - Goes to the home page (duh)
>Updates - Latest stuff (more duh)
>Photos - Broken into Softcore, Hardcore and amateur sections, each further broken into sets of 20 pictures taken from a scattering of models. Sets have zips available.
>Videos - Also broken into Softcore, Hardcore and amateur sections, also random models. Five videos each on the first page, then 35 per page. From here, they're labeled with time and length. On the model page, they aren't.
>Models - Alphabetical list with "click on letter bar"
>DVD/Books - Upsells
>Frannie Adam's Red Bush Blog - link to free blog site
>Best Friends - trade link sites
>Frannie's Reviews - Quick reviews (advertisements?) of several (mostly) well-known sites
>Support - HELP ME!!!

Updates:
Once a week: Hardcore Photos
Two times a week - Softcore Video Clips, Hardcore Video Clips, Softcore Photos and Blog/Reviews
Three times a week - Amateur Photos, Body Parts Photos and Amateur Video.

Things that make you go Hmmm:
Since nothing beyond the first page of updates includes the date, it's hard to tell when they started to go beyond the 1-2 minutes clips mentioned by mbaya. But there ARE some longer scenes up. Most of what I've seen are in the neighborhood of 5-6 minutes, with some running around 15. As I'm still the big amateur video fan, that was the first section I hit. I took me a while to figure it out, but it seems a lot of the shorter clips in that section are taken from longer scenes found when you use the model list. All I get out of that is wasted bandwidth on the clips and a site with an inflated video count.

The picture sets and videos are labeled with categories but they aren't clickable links. You have to manually type a listed category into the search box to get to them.

In the photo sections, it would be nice to be able to move from set to set without having to go back in the browser. Multiple page hops in the browser are made difficult as every page is labeled "Body Parts Members area - the closest close-ups on the web!"

You can't set picture viewing preference. To see the large size, you have to click a link on each picture. Not too fun on a slow server.

If you're browsing the update section, videos list file size and time. In the models section, some thumbnails are marked 'streaming', with a link to a page where the file sizes are listed. Where there is no streaming label, there's no way to know whether the file you're looking at is a short clip or something longer.

I noticed quite a few instances where the files used a different name than the model name - in one case, two model names between two videos of one girl.

Videos listed as hardcore have the same categories listed as those in softcore. One cumshot is hardcore and another one is softcore?

The pictures, in general, seem to be of inconsistent quality, even within one set. There are frequent pics that are the digital equivalent of film photograpy's overexposure. As I didn't see any sets worth keeping in their entirety, I downloaded one zip file to see what's what. They're the larger file size, but the files had a different model name. (I saw the different name thing with some videos, too.)

Things that make you go WTF!:
While the overall quality is somewhat better than sites with user contributed material, I expect something more when it's studio generated. The frequent shaking camerawork is annoying, as are the lighting shifts. It appears that there's only one cameraman here - and it literally looks like he's either nervous as hell or in the early stages of Parkinson's disease. When you've set up a site dedicated to closeups, I would figure you'd at least take the time to get cameras that can be steadied. Image stabilization technology isn't expensive. Worse yet, there are times when the camera is moving around, back and forth, up and down, like the cameraman lost his center and couldn't find it. On top of that, there's the lighting issue. Some clips appear to have been shot under totally different lights. One section natural looking, goes to an orange tint, then back to natural.

EDIT: Just downloaded a video with no picture! Tried twice to make sure. Nope - no picture!

The bandwidth cap is now a curiosity. It kicked in when I'd downloaded 9 gigs the first day. But, even though I'd gone over 9 gigs on a later date, it didn't pop up again.

The wrap up:
I really wanted to like this site because it looked like a new source for amateur content for me. The girls look like everyday people, not the "dolled up" models types found on InTheCrack. For that, I'd have given this site much higher marks. Unfortunately, the execution leaves a lot to be desired. But, if you like closeups, and can overlook the shortcomings I've outlined here, it might be worth the $20 cost of admission. Me? I don't know that I'll go back until I see a review that says things have changed.

03-03-12  03:04pm

Replies (4)
Review
29
Visit Voyeur Tan

Voyeur Tan
(0)

62.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: + Unique, exclusive content
+ wmv files offered in three resolutions - 176x144 @ 96k/bs, 320x240 @ 351 kb/s and 640x480 @ 763 kb/s
+ 31 weeks of content at the time of this review
+ easy navigation (see cons)
+ $19.95 for rebills (see cons)
Cons: - only one update a week, consisting of two tanning bed shots and either one shower or one peeing scene
- from *one* to ten pictures of each set and they're video screenshots of the medium resolution video
- at some point, content must be rotated out (see botton line)
- navigation is easy because there's not much to navigate to
- some scenes are non-nude
- watermark is large and distracting
- $24.95 a month is high for what's here and $19.95 is steep for a month's worth of updates
Bottom Line: I wish there was a way to wrap this site up better. What some might consider a pro, doesn't strike me as either a pro or a con. Along with the 31 weeks of updates, there are 3 pages of "old style content", meaning before they got a higher resolution zoom camera. But each page is only 3 scenes with 10 screenshots of each scene. There are also 4 pages "blow job cam", 1 "sex cam" and 1 "hand job cam", each with the accompanying screenshots. Even with all that, this site is, at best, a one-shot join. A month's updates amounts to only 12 scenes, averaging 8-9 minutes each, per month - maybe 15 scenes if you join at the right time of the month, as they update every Monday. I don't see that as $20 option either

The possible rotation of content is a curiosity. I know I've seen scenes in the flash sites that aren't offered here, but nothing has rotated out while I've been a member. I'm also pretty sure they've done more than the 9 episodes of "old style content" that's online - but where are they?

I'm pretty sure this is all staged, which really isn't too much of a bother for me, but a few eye contacts among the scenes kinda killed the fantasy a bit.

Taken directly from their FAQs:
**********************************
Question - Why does your site look so unprofessional or plain compared to others?
Answer - This is not my specialty. I just do this on the side. This is not a big production company producing allot of fake content. I mostly work with Photography. I am not a professional web site designer. But 96% of my members are happy with the content. If you are one of the 4% that is unhappy then go get a life because you may never be happy. Sucks to be you! All this came by accident when I seen how many girls wanted to lay in the tanning bed. So that is when the hidden camera idea cross my mind. In time I have made very many improvements to the camera position and quality.

Warning! Stupid questions will go unanswered.
**********************************
All in all, I think this is just another low maintenance, money maker for the people running the site. A unique little niche that's "just there" if you want to see what they have.

09-24-09  10:52am

Replies (0)
Review
30
Visit Girls Out West

Girls Out West
(1)

60.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: + Lots of amateur content
+ Different file types available
+ Tabbed navigation
+ Pictures: 1026, 1280, 1600 pixels long side, Some available @ 2000
+ In browser flash video
+ Bonus material from Yanks and ATK Hairy
Cons: - File types are ridiculous to figure out
- File naming is another pain
- Split files in 2013?
- Minimal previews/ descriptions on videos
- Picture/video quality varies, often for the worse
- Site crashes while using Opera browser
- Not compatible with FreeDownloadManager
Bottom Line: I'll preface this by saying that this will be, without a doubt, the most disjointed bottom line I've ever written. I'm just going to call it, "Issues". Joining this site was a major disappointment and what follows might tell the story.

I will say that the speed issue I commented on was somewhat resolved. I still can't use FreeDownloadManager, but the "Save As" speed is up to 1.2 mb. Not great, but certainly better than the 200kb I saw in the beginning. Other than this being a strictly amateur site which I absolutely love, that pretty much ends the positives. Here we go...

Normally, I would go into detail about the various file types. GOW seems to go out of their way to make that confusing as hell. You get columns labeled mp4, mpg+wmv and wmv. Then, quite often, you face a cryptic list like this: Source MP4 1080p, Source MP4 720p, High (1024x576 @ 3200k), High (1024x576 @ 3200k), HD (1280x720 @ 4700k), HD (1280x720 @ 4700k), Low (512x288 @ 600K), Low (512x288 @ 600K). On top of that, there are sometimes 5 links that say the same exact thing (e.g. Medium (1920x1080 @ 1500K)) Seemingly duplicate links that link to different files? Same file with slightly different names? I have no clue. I'll just leave it as this - I tried to download only the highest resolution video and was frequently disappointed in the quality of even the newest scenes. Lighting quality, especially on the outdoor scenes was hit or miss.

File naming. Fine on pictures as the name of the model and the set are used. On video? Another nightmare. A lot of the B/G and G/G videos download using the couple's names with no mention of the scene/episode. So, even though a couple has done more than one video, each one has to be renamed so you can download the different videos.

Opened a solo girl video that showed it was the second of 3 parts. Went to the model index to get the other two parts and there were only two videos listed. WHERE'S THE THIRD? Guess I can browse the entire site to see if it's there.

Clicked on the thumbnail for part 3 of a video and the flash preview shows part 2

Picture sets showing up in the video section.

Thinking there might be a browser issue in how the site was displayed, I tried Opera. That kept crashing so I went back to Firefox.

It's pretty bad when the bonus sets are better quality than most of the host site's material - higher resolution and better lighting.

Preview thumbnails for several full length videos open to a page with no download links.

*********************
I actually got a headache trying to figure out how to write all of this, so I'm going to stop writing and just leave it at this - For such a well known site, it's a mess. If you really like amateurs, in all their non-glamorous glory, and don't mind digging for files and renaming almost every video, go for it. Otherwise, avoid this site.

06-01-13  12:41pm

Replies (1)
Review
31
Visit Strip Game Central

Strip Game Central
(0)

60.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: + Unique Content
+ Reasonable download speeds @ >500 kb/s (see bottom line)
+ Newest files in high resolution (see cons)
+ Choice of four resolutions for newest video - FHD @ 1920x1080, HQ & HR @ 720x576 and LQ @ 352x288
+ No upsells splashed all over the site
+ Trial at $16.95 for ten days, renewing at $9.95 a month until cancelled. Regular $29.95 sub also renews at $9.95
+ Easy join and cancel through CCBill
Cons: - Somewhat haphazard navigation
- Erratic and slow in coming updates
- Picture quality roughly that of a dated point and shoot camera
- One format - mp4 - except for a few oldest files in divx avi format
- Search function lacks categories - search by keyword without a list to choose from
- Motion blur in Full HD video
Bottom Line: Always on the prowl for new amateur content, this seemed like a novel concept, so I took the plunge. I'll have to say that I was entertained for a bit but not completely happy I joined. It's rare when I don't stay on a site almost constantly after I join to download all I can. I did save most of the higher resolution video but didn't bother with the older stuff and the pictures. As of the date of my trial subscription there were 10 Full HD, 32 HiDef, 11 High Res videos, the rest being 1990 looking files. By the time I got down to the low resolution videos, I stopped downloading. There are also 92 Picture sets running from ~60 to ~100 pics. Zip files for SOME picture sets are available, but removed after a year. As I said in my earlier comment, I just don't understand a site, especially a smaller one, removing their better material, or worse yet, completely removing something they've put up.
*******************
The Member home page brings you to links for eight sections, all of which are pictures, except videos, of course (Item count in parentheses): Games(92), Videos(174*), Auditions(51), Girls(28), Ranking(16), Clothed and Naked(10), Best Pics Gallery(48) and Zip Files(14) *Counting different resolutions of the same file.

> "Games" - Links to all pic sets

> "Videos" - With only nine videos per page and ony one file format, I see no need for a click to get to the download link. For picture sets of a game, there are only six thumbnails, thankfully large, but centered on the page with wide wasted borders on both sides. Navigation would be greatly simplified by using the open area to decrease the number of page clicks needed to view an entire gallery.

> "Auditions" - Links to 51 picture sets

> "Girls" - Expecting links to her photos and videos, and got a thumbnail pic of her face. A wasted page, in my opinion, considering the home page has a list of the players with all of her links.

> "Ranking" - 16 models thumbnails, linking to five SMALL (500px) pictures of her face, breasts, pussy, legs and bottom.

> "Clothed and Naked" - Ten thumbnails that link to ten pics - on two pages?

> "Best Pics" - 48 pics (1280px) on 6 pages

> "Zip Files" - Links to 15 zip files from recent updates, removed after one year
*******************
Download speeds are adequate considering the amount of content and size of the files. There's not much here that doesn't take but a minute or two to download.

I noticed some motion blur in the Full HD movies. The GSpot codec appliance seems to indicate that files have been upscaled from 1440x1080 to 1920x1080, resulting in the blurring.

With no ability to arrange updates in order of date, there's no way to get a fix on what resolution picture you're going to get. Most pics I saw were 1280 pixels on the long side.
*******************
The bottom line for me is that this site needs a lot of work to bring it up to speed. There haven't been any updates in the week I've been on the site, the pictures are small by today's standards and the video quality is average. All that, with the navigation sitting on the haphazard side and the removing of content, I wouldn't re-join until I saw news of major changes here.

02-04-12  01:31pm

Replies (0)
Review
32
Visit G Queen

G Queen
(0)

60.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: + Exclusive content
+ Some seriously clean shaven Asian teens
+ Mostly cute models
Cons: - A navigational nightmare
- Expensive as hell
- 640x480 resolution wmv files only
- Majority of videos don't have live sound
- Pictures only 835 pixels on the long side
- Not download manager compatible
- Everything is right click and save - buttons aren't really buttons
- daily download limit of 1.5 gigs - yeah only 1.5 gigs
- Limit of 2 downloads at once
- a pathetic 190k/s download speed
- weekly? updates of ? videos (I don't read Japanese) - seemingly erratic schedule at best
- Pictures have a ridiculously huge watermark, videos a large watermark that jumps around to all the corners
- As of this week, they've added non-asian models
Bottom Line: Another site that's hard to wrap up, mostly due to the fact that the English site is still mostly in Japanese. You hit the tabs to see where it takes you and hope you can remember which tab is which. Unless I couldn't find them, only the older videos have accompanying picture sets. Newer videos can be previewed on another page with only four pictures. As nothing is dated, it's hard to tell where the dividing line between old and new is.

This site definitely leans towards the Japanese sense of erotica. That could be either a pro or a con, depending on whether or not you can appreciate the deviations from Western porn. There are strange masturbations, off camera men prodding and probing the models, some peeing scenes and even some hint of the Japanese art of bondage. There are some girl/girl and multi-girl scenes, most of which are limited to what is best described as prodding and probing - no real sexual contact involved.

Most models do sets of four separate scenes, each running an average of 10 to 15 minutes. There are models who have done more than one set, but the awkward navigation and my inability to read Japanese makes it next to impossible to post any numbers. For some reason, the girl/girl sets are mostly a one or two video deal. The resolution leaves something to be desired. All of their videos, even the oldest, are 640x480 at 1600 kbps. That might have been cutting edge when the site started - in 2010, they're falling behind the times.

There's some kind of VIP club - special content for people staying with the site for 3 months or more. But, considering the site updates so infrequently and costs $50 to join and renews at $44 a month, I can't imagine any content worth putting out almost $140 to see.

Adding non-Asian models on a site that's supposed to feature "shaved Japanese pussies" is just plain wrong. You can go to plenty of other sites to see shaved models - for a lot less money.

In the end, if you don't care about how much it costs, the bandwidth limit or snail slow download speed, it IS a unique site with unique content. It's that uniqueness alone that prompted me to give them a 60.

04-25-10  10:03am

Replies (1)
Review
33
Visit Maya's Hand Jobs

Maya's Hand Jobs
(0)

55.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: + The high def 1280 wmv files look very good
+ Did I mention that the high def 1280 wmv files look very good?
Cons: - Although somewhat expected, it's very repetitive
- Limited content and (supposedly) weekly updates
- No rhyme or reason to what kind of file comes with an update - might be "standard def" or hi def, wmv or avi
- Page layout looks like 1990
- Navigation isn't difficult but still clunky as hell with all the scrolling (Hard to put into words)
- Most pictures are only 450x600 - found a few sets with 800x600 (livin' large!)
- Not enough description/tiny thumbnails for video files
- The forum page looks like an ad page with 10 banners to 10 different sites
- At least a dozen duplicated updates
- More than a few episodes where she looks bored
- The guy is hung so as to make me look like John Holmes
- DVD page seems to want to sell you $35 DVD's with a bare minimum of description of the content
- Forum is loaded with links to sites that made Firefox's NoScript add-on work overtime
Bottom Line: Have you ever joined a site where you knew you'd be disappointed but had to check it out anyway? I caught a clip from this site while browsing the flash sites and thought she was just interesting looking enough to have a go at it. Interestingly enough, the clip I saw isn't even on the site.

There's not much good to say about the site. The 1280 wmv files look good, the rest are 640 avi and wmv files. And, apparently, they couldn't decide what codec to stick with. Some played in Winamp and Media Player Classic, some I needed to use VLC. The page layout is another 1990 throwback. A small window with 3 headings for pictures, and a small window to scroll down the updates for movies. The file names for the movies don't match the heading on the site. They all begin with "hand" and it wasn't until I thought I'd seen one file before that I realized that some of the updates were duplicates. Different file sizes, but the same flick.

I took a hit for the team :laughs: Save your money.

Oh yeah - to aesop7 - The guy does get laid in one flick. Considering how under endowed he is, it's no wonder she's into handjobs.

09-06-09  07:26am

Replies (0)

Shown : 26-33 of 33 Page :    < Previous 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 0.64 seconds.