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 : lk2fireone (194)  

Feedback:   All (1974)  |   Reviews (83)  |   Comments (263)  |   Replies (1628)

Other:   Replies Received (1115)  |   Trust Ratings (75)

Ratings & Reviews

All the reviews and ratings from this user.
Shown : 51-75 of 97 Page :    < Previous Page - Next Page >

Type Site - Score Feedback / Review Date
Review
51
Visit Squirting Virgin

Squirting Virgin
(0)

89.0
Status: Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review).
Pros: -No DRM.
-No download limit.
-Content is dated.
-4 format choices for each video download: WMV, MKV, FLV, MP4.
-The models are Eastern European, but there are English subtitles.
-There are a number of attractive models at this site, which is part of the teen mega world network (also called the royal cash network or the s&s royal limited network).
-The search engine is integrated with the entire network, so if you find a model you like, by entering her name, you will see all the videos she is in(at the entire network), and can transfer to each video through a hot link. The software team has upgraded the search and made it much easier to use.
-Zip file for each photoset.
-Choice of downloading or streaming videos.
Cons: -Small site. Started January 2011. Only 25 videos (and matching photosets).
-Each video follows the same basic plot: stunt cock stimulates the model until she squirts, then he continues stimulation and fucks her semi-roughly. Not full-blown roughness, but the sex is not gentle or loving or affectionate. The stunt cocks are treating the girls like a piece of meat, but the girls all seem to lap it up.
-Navigation is good, but could be improved. Put a hot link at each model's listing, to make it easier to search for content with that model.
Bottom Line: The basic setup is a guy stimulates a girl, with a vibrator, a dildo, his fingers, his mouth, or some combination, the girl gets so excited she
squirts out her sexual juices, then the guy fucks the girl in different positions before finally coming on her face. The site has a strong bondage
element: the girl is usually tied, and a cloth or rubber piece is stuck in her mouth. Also, by doing the girl on a chair, or on the floor, or in some other uncomfortable position, the stunt cock is demonstrating his mastery of the bitch getting fucked. The girls moan and groan and whimper as their face is pressed against a wood floor and the stunt cock reams their vagina, ass, and mouth. The girls are real love slaves.
Some girls sound so fake with the moans and screams that it's a turnoff. But some girls are better actors and sound like they are sexually excited.
Squirting is not my fetish. To me, it looks like the girls are peeing when they squirt, which I don't find erotic. It would be smelly as hell having sex with a girl who has just peed all over herself.
But if you are able to think of the squirting as a sign the bitch is in heat, and so excited by the masterful stunt cock, then you could enjoy the action even more by the squirting, the whimpers and moans, the bondage and whatnot.

Number of videos at site: 25
Video runtime: 25-30 minutes.

Download options for videos:
High Quality (WMV)
Medium Quality (MKV)
Medium Quality (FLV)
Low Quality (MP4)

The high quality WMV files are about 958 MB for a 28 minute clip.
Frame width x height: 1280x720.
Total bitrate: 4736 kbps

The technical quality of the videos is excellent: very high definition, good lighting (made easy because these are indoor scenes); the camera is
steady, not jerked around; good framing of the model before and during the sex action. The colors are good (because of the good lighting).

The dialog and script are stupid. But the girls are attractive, and there is solid sex action in the videos.

Update rate: when the site started in January 2011, they updated with 1 video each day. By the end of January and continuing through March, they updated 1 video every 5-8 days.

Number of photosets at site: 25 (same number as the videos).
Each photoset is a video capture of a video shoot. The photos are basically screen captures. So the photo quality is not high. The photos don't appear to be photoshopped or airbrushed. They can be slightly out of focus. Each photoset has a zip file.
Number of photos per photoset: 200+
Individual photos are about 100 KB in size, 1280x720 pixels, 300x300 dpi.

Squirting virgin is the newest offering at the teen mega world network. Joining teen mega world gives access to 27 teen sites. A huge number of hardcore videos.

I'm giving the site a score of 89. You are paying for network access. Scoring the site as a stand-
alone would give a much lower score.

The network access is a bargain at $19.95/month.
See Reply #1 for $10 price saving.

03-21-11  09:42pm

Replies (3)
Review
52
Visit Vika Nymph

Vika Nymph
(0)

80.0
Status: Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review).
Pros: -Easy log-in.
-No DRM.
-Actively updating.
1 new video every 10-14 days.
1 new photoset every 3, 4, 5, 8, or 15 days (very erratic update rate for photosets).
-Very nice quality for videos and photosets.
Good lighting, good camera-work, good sound control. Sometimes you will hear extraneous noise like an overhead airplane or hiss/rumble, but the soundtrack is basically the sounds the models are making as they make love. No annoying music soundtrack.
-watermark on videos: small watermark, bottom right corner, appears intermittently, not intrusive.
-No download limits.
-Long time before site timeout.
-Zip files for photosets.
-Navigation is easy.
-Can stream or download all videos.
-Choice of WMV or MP4 format for downloading.
-Search engine.
Cons: -Photosets and videos do not name the models.
-There are no model bios.
-Search engine could be improved.
-Only 1 size for photos.
--The photosets are ok to good quality, but they have a tendency to appear washed out in color (the colors need to be stronger, brighter, and you would have much more attractive photos).
-The HD video files can be large, 1+ GB for a 15 minute clip.
-Photosets download with the default filename of "photos.zip". So you have to manually rename each photoset to identify what the photoset is. And since the models are not named, trying to organize the photosets into some kind of order is not simple.
-Slow software system for viewing individual photos in a photoset.
Bottom Line: Site is loosely based on the solo teen model idea. The main model is Vika. But there are plenty of sets and videos without Vika.
The action is varied: stripping, masturbation, solo girl, girl-girl, boy-girl. There is also very mild group sex, some kink (peeing). By group sex, I mean you have three or more people having sex. It's not a rough gangbang where you have a bunch of guys pounding away on one girl at all her holes.
The site (and the parent Diesel network) takes a casual, softcore approach to porn. By softcore, I don't mean limited sex; instead, I mean the sex
is presented in a basically gentle or friendly way. You don't get gonzo hardcore where the action is rough, abusive, or contemptuous. This site/network shows sex as good, clean fun to be enjoyed.
The peeing videos are very short, about 1-3 minutes runtime, which is great for that niche (which I'm not a fan of), because it's right there, wham bam, pee! No waiting around for the action to start. You can see a girl peeing. I guess that's porn, but it's just a girl peeing. She's not masturbating or having sex or anything, she's just peeing.
The search could be improved. You enter "peeing" as the search term, and only get 1 video. There are other pee videos at the site. You can find
another pee video by entering "urination". Someone who is into this niche can search more extensively and report their results to the PU members.


number of videos: 155
Most videos have a short runtime, 10-20 minutes.
Download formats for videos: High quality WMV file, medium quality MP4 file, low quality MP4 file.
The high definition WMV video files go up to 1280x720, 19160 kbps total bitrate.

Number of photosets: 176
Number of photos per photoset: about 80-112.
Can view individual photos, or download the entire set as a zip file.
Zip file is one size only (no choice of which photo resolution).
Maximum resolution of 1333x2000 pixels.

I really wish the site listed the models in the videos and photosets, because it would make organizing the contents so much easier. What
collector wants a large bunch of photosets and videos where you don't know who the models are?

The models are real teens, mainly attractive, very little tattoos or piercings. The girls are from Eastern Europe. Most girls are small-
breasted, as usual, but there are some models with medium or large natural breasts. You don't see the oversized, plastic breasts found at Playboy or many adult porn sites.
As part of the Diesel network, the site is definitely worth looking through to see which videos/photosets appeal to your tastes. But if the site were a standalone, at $29.95/month, it would be overly expensive.

03-20-11  03:37pm

Replies (0)
Review
53
Visit Policeman

Policeman
(0)

63.0
Status: Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review).
Pros: -Easy site log-in.
-No DRM.
-No download limits.
-Zip file for each photoset. (The site has 2 photosets total. That is not a joke.)
-Small amount of site contents. With a fast Internet connection, you can download the entire site contents in 1 day. And then review the contents at your leisure.
-Some attractive models.
Cons: -Archive site. No updates since 2006.
-Small site.
-The site has only 2 photosets, which are a low-quality photographic record of a video shoot. Even though you can download a zip file for each
photoset, I don't know who would want to keep a zip file of these photosets.
-Site contents are not dated, except for the two photosets, which are from 2006. Apparently the last update for the site was in April, 2006.
-Most videos have only one download option, a low-quality WMV file. A few videos have a choice of download as low-quality WMV or low-quality MPEG file.
-The default option for filename of each video downloads as 001.wmv, which means you have to manually rename each file, to avoid overwriting with the next download. And also to separate the files from one another, because a bunch of files with the filename of 001.wmv are hard to distinguish from one another.
-No bio for the models. They don't even bother to name the models.
Bottom Line: CONS (continued):
-Navigation is basic. You get a list of the videos, in apparent chronological order (but no date is listed). That's it.
-No search feature.

BOTTOM LINE:
Site contents:

This is a small archive site that has not been updated since 2006. It has 25 videos, and 2 photosets.
The 2 photosets are a photographic record of 2 video shoots. The photosets are poor quality photographs, more like screen captures (or maybe they are screen captures).

videos: 25
Sample video file size: about 250 MB, for a runtime of 34 minutes.
Total bitrate: 1017kbps (very low bitrate, indicating poor quality of video).
Frame width x height: 400x300.

photosets: 2
photoset 1 has 115 photos.
photoset 2 has 100 photos.
Individual photos have a file size of about 60-80 KB, 1024x576 pixels.

This site is supposed to be a reality porn series. The site theme is 2 cops who play practical jokes on women who are applying for a driver's license. The two cops, one who is dressed as a doctor, make the women applicants undress and then have sex as part of the medical exam. This is a very stupid idea, and the two "cops" are sort of acting like an updated
version of the three stooges. But the women go along with the idea, and have sex with the two cops: bj, vaginal, maybe anal, whatever. At the end, because the women had sex with the two guys, the women are told they passed their medical exam needed for a driver's license.

One model asks: What does a gynecological exam have to do with a driver's license?
The cop dressed as a doctor answers: We have to make sure you don't wiggle around on the seat when driving.

(There are subtitles, because the models are speaking whatever European language they use.)

Some of the models are attractive. I wish the quality of the videos was better. The camera-work is ok to good, the lighting is ok to good (these
are indoor scenes shot in a small room), but the definition/clarity of the videos could be greatly improved.

This is part of the Diesel network. If you joined this site by itself, you would feel that not only the models were getting screwed, but that you had been screwed as well.

But if you get this site as part of the Diesel network, then the site is worth glancing over. Many of the models are cute. I only wish the videos were better quality (higher definition, mainly).

03-18-11  12:11am

Replies (4)
Review
54
Visit Tricky Masseur

Tricky Masseur
(1)

67.0
Status: Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review).
Pros: -A number of attractive female teen models.
-Update rate: 1 video and photoset every 5 days, until recently. Last few weeks the update rate has slowed. The photosets are a photo capture of the video shoot.
-No DRM.
-Long period before site timeout.
-Videos have subtitles for the Russian language. But once you see a few videos, you realize the words spoken are mainly very low-grade conversation that is better ignored. The idea of subtitles is nice, but the models say very little that is worth hearing.
-Most models have very little tattoos or piercings.
-Streaming option to view the videos.
-Can easily view single photos in a photoset, or download the photoset in a zip file.
-Content is dated.
-No download limit.
Cons: -The main stunt cock can be really annoying. He is arrogant. He is supposed to be playing the part of a masseur, but the massages he performs are so poor most amateurs could do a better massage. And the stupid bullshit he speaks to the girls is really annoying.
-In contrast, the stunt cocks at Fucked Hard 18 and Massage Room Seduction are giving what appear to be sensual, real massages to the girls, making
the videos more believable and enjoyable.
-The videos at tricky masseur appear to be shot by a amateur camera-man who often can't hold the camera still and has trouble framing the scenes. He is poor framing the pre-sex scenes, and even worse framing the sex scenes.
-A small site that just started December 2010, currently has 34 videos.
-Watermark bottom right corner. Larger than necessary, but not overly intrusive.
-No model bios.
Bottom Line: Tricky Masseur is part of the Teen Mega World/Royal Cash network.
The site is a collection of videos of a guy who's supposed to be a masseur who seduces teen girls during the massage. The same idea is done 100 times better at Fucked Hard 18 and Massage Room Seduction. The main tricky masseur stunt cock is an arrogant jerk who does a shitty job of giving a massage, and his line of bullshit to the girls is stupid and unbelievable.
The videos at Fucked Hard 18 and Massage Room Seduction are much better because the stunt cocks are more believable as masseurs, they come across
as less arrogant and less bullshit-talking, and the videos are shot with greater care and skill.
To improve the videos at tricky masseur, replace the stunt cock and replace the camera-man with people who know what they are doing.

Number of videos: 34
Video runtime: 30-40 minutes
Multiple formats for download: high and medium quality WMV, medium quality FLV, portable device format (iPod mp4).
File size for high quality WMV file:
runtime 30 minutes: about 1.1 GB
runtime 40 minutes: about 1.5 GB

Number of photosets: 34
Number of photos per photoset: around 200
The photoset is a visual record of a video shoot.
The photos are better than a screen cap, but do not have the quality of a professionally shot photo: the photos can be blurry, out-of-focus, or just lacking in erotic or sensual appeal.
The site has spent a lot of time and effort posting these large photosets.
It would be smarter to just post 20-30 photos, or less, instead of 200+ photos, of a video shoot, because the quality of the photos is not good.

The network/site offers a free live cam/chat show, that is the same offering at the Diesel network. This live cam/chat is basically a waste of time. To see any nudity in a private show or as part of the "public" show can get expensive fast. The real free show is no show, just different models waiting to be paid for a private show, who do almost nothing while waiting.

Bottom line: As a bonus site that's part of your network membership, the site is worth looking over. But the site itself is a poor version of the much better massage sites like Fucked Hard 18 and Massage Room Seduction.

03-15-11  01:02am

Replies (6)
Review
55
Visit Young Legal Porn

Young Legal Porn
(3)

80.0
Status: Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review).
Pros: -DRM: none.
-Site timeout: Very long period before timeout.
-Download limits: None.
-Model listing is name of model with a nice-sized thumbnail and a listing of her photosets and videos.
-Many of the newer videos are nice quality: clear video, good focus, good lighting, good sex action, very attractive models,
great skin tone, good color of background and foreground, good sound control.
-Most videos have a choice of 3 download qualities to choose from: low, medium or high quality.
Cons: -Navigation is basic. For a relatively small site, the navigation could be
easily improved to make moving around and finding the photosets/videos of each model faster and simpler.
-Search is limited. You can search by model's name, but for little else.
-They should junk the software system they use to view individual photos.
-No model bios or other information on the models.
-Many of the older videos are very poor quality in terms of clarity, lighting, colors, annoying background music.
-The content is posting dated, but the significance of the date can be low.
Some material was made years before it was posted at this site.
-The free live webcam chats with models are a waste of time. The models basically do nothing
on-screen except wait for someone to pay for a private chat.
Bottom Line: Site stats:
-Number of models: 303+
-Number of videos: 1,000+ (No easy way to estimate number)
-Number of photosets: 1,000+ (No easy way to estimate number)
The newer videos are mainly good quality: good lighting, good colors (skin tone, background, foreground), ok to good camera work.
video stats (newer videos):
frame width x height: 1280 x 720
total bitrate: 8572 kbps - 15459 kbps
frame rate: 29 frames/second
photo stats:
photosets: 30-100 photos.
file size: 200-400 Kb (newer photo size).
width x height: 2250 x 1500 pixels.
resolution: horizontal x vertical: 96 dpi x 96 dpi.
Photosets can have from 30 to 100 photos. The file size of an individual photo can be large, up to 400+ Kb, but the photos are not high quality in terms of appeal or photographic technique.
The photosets are more in the style of an amateur-shot photo series done at home, except that I have seen many amateur photos that have much better photo technique than the photosets at this site.
The two primary sites in the dieselaccess network that have the most value are YoungLegalPorn and 18OnlyGirls. There are some other sites in the
network that are also worthwhile, but the most value is in those two sites.
YoungLegalPorn and 18OnlyGirls are very similar sites: same type of content, same layout, same models, etc. And it appears that some content is shared between the two sites.
YoungLegalPorn takes a softcore approach to porn. By this, I mean that the sex is gentle, not rough or abusive. The sex is caring, affectionate, or friendly, with no slapping, spitting, hitting, name-calling, etc. The sex can be hardcore in the sense there is female masturbation, lesbian activity, boy-girl sex.
I appreciate the overall quality of many videos at this site. But some PU members might think the site is too tame, and would rather watch a harder, edgier type of sex that is featured at many hardcore sites.
The free Diesel cam shows are not shows, but a waste of time where the model does almost nothing except sit or lie on a bed, waiting for someone
to pay for a private show. There is also a mode where the "public free show" turns into a show which is still "public", but you have to pay 1 euro per minute to watch. Supposedly there is some stripping or other action in the non-free public show. The private chats are 3 euros per
minute. So it could get very expensive to watch.
It would probably be cheaper to go to a topless bar to see some stripping, instead of watching it over the internet.

Note: hugow wrote a review of this site on 2011-01-02 and gave it a 50 score because he said the servers were very slow. Most of the files I downloaded from this site (and the other sites in this network) had speeds of 620-630 KB/s, which is my maximum download speed. So I did not experience the poor download speeds hugow reported.
(I recently upgraded my DSL connection, which used to have a maximum download speed of 150-160 KB/s.)

03-08-11  01:18am

Replies (4)
Review
56
Visit 18 Only Girls

18 Only Girls
(1)

83.0
Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -Videos: Small watermark appears briefly at different times in a video.
Not obtrusive.
-Photos: Small watermark.
-No DRM.
-Videos and photosets have posting date.
-Site has a models list, which is a an alphabetical list/pages of the models, with a nice-sized thumbnail of each model, with the number of photosets and videos for each model.
-Very long period before site timeout.
-Can watch videos streaming or download. The streaming option is not very good. You get a small window to watch the video. Much better to download the video and watch it on your PC. Streaming option is OK to watch briefly to see if the video will be of interest. But trying to fast-forward the streaming video does not work well: the video stops playing, and it's hard to get it to resume at the place you want to try next.
-Zip file for photosets.
-Large number of models (320+).
Cons: -The software for viewing individual photos is clunky. There should be an easier way to view individual photos.

-Navigation is basic. It should be easier to browse through the photosets and videos. The videos and photosets are split into two separate sections, but it should be easier to browse through the site contents.

-The search is basic, and could be improved by being able to search for the title of a photoset or video, or being able to search for a specific
type of content such as type of sex action, etc.

-No model bio or information on the model is offered.

-One size only for each photoset. No choice of low, medium, high quality photosets.
Bottom Line: There are a number of attractive models at this site. The site theme is young teen girls who are amateurs. These are not girls being naughty, but
attractive young girls who are filmed on camera enjoying their sexuality: by themselves (masturbation), with their female friends (lesbian), less often with a boy. It's good clean enjoyment and fun, not dirty, not abusive, not rough.
-Large number of models (320+). The models are teen or early twenties, white Eastern European girls. Mainly slender, mainly small-breasted.
Number of models at this site: 320
Number of photos per photoset: 40 - 100 photos.
videos:
number: 800+
runtime: 15-20 minutes
size: 200 MB - 1 GB+, depending on which quality you choose.
Format: WMV
Definition/quality: medium, high, HD (the best, highest quality)
Photosets:
number: 1,000+
Photo dimensions: 1000 x 1500 pixels width x height.
Photo size: about 200 KB.
-Update rate:
1 photoset per day, average.
1 video every 2 days, average.

I don't know why the the photosets at 18 Only Girls are so unsatisfying.
The quality of the photosets is far below what you find at a glamor-style site like Met-art or MPL Studios, in terms of definition, appeal, etc. The style of the photosets is like what is shown at sites like Teen Stars Magazine (an archive site) or My Precious Virgins. Except that what
is shown at Teen Stars Magazine and My Precious Virgins is done much better. The photosets at 18 Only Girls are like a pale imitation of the
much better photosets at the other two sites. And compared to glamor photo sites like Met-art or MPL Studios, the photosets at 18 Only Girls are
almost worthless. The photosets are like snapshots from the 1960s or 1970s. Even though they are nude photosets, the 18 Only Girls photosets lack sexiness. My guess is that the lack of sexual appeal is due to the washed-out appearance of the colors in the photos.

Content appears to be shared between the 18 Only Girls site and the Young Legal Porn site. This is true of photosets and videos. I am looking at a
recent photoset at 18 Only Girls, titled
"Horny_coed_girl_striping_and_toying_her_snatch_1295819441_only_674", with the model named Drew. But even though the photoset is posted at 18 Only
Girls, each photo has a YoungPorn.net watermark.
There seems to be some confusion in naming The Young Legal Porn site: The Young Legal Porn site is called both Young Legal Porn and is also called Young Porn. The site is advertised as Young Legal Porn, but the address bar of the site itself uses YoungPorn instead, and the watermarks on the photosets show YoungPorn.net.

The videos, unlike the photosets, have value. The videos are professionally shot, and are very high quality: Good to excellent lighting, focus, definition, camera-work. There are a large number of videos at this site worth watching, as long as
you are satisfied with a softcore approach to pretty young teens: the sex is solo, or lesbian, or some boy-girl, but it's not hard-edged or abusive.

01-23-11  06:51pm

Replies (0)
Review
57
Visit The Sperm Lover

The Sperm Lover
(0)

50.0
Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -Easy login.
-Long period before site timeout.
-No DRM.
-Zip file for photosets.
-No download limits.
-No watermark on the videos.
-Videos are short runtime, often split into 5-minute clips.
Cons: -Archive site. Last update January 2007.
-Quality and feel of individual photos is amateur. More like a home-shot photo than a professionally shot photo. Nothing approaching the photo quality available at a glamor site like Metart or MPL Studios.
-Medium sized, obtrusive watermark on photos. Only a true fan of site model would want to keep any of these photos. Or someone who wants a very
complete collection of any of the models that might be a visitor shown in the photos.
-OK to low resolution on the videos, which are shot like amateur videos.
-No search engine.
-Very basic navigation.
Bottom Line: -This is a small, solo-model type site. A waste of time and effort. If they had kept the site alive with updates and improved the video and photo quality, the site might have had some value, but it's hard to see any value in this site.
Anyone paying a site membership fee for access to this solo site will probably kick himself for stupidity or carelessness.
-This site is basically a waste of time and hard drive space. I didn't save a single video or photo from this site.

Small site.
Videos: 47
Photosets: 73
Short runtime: Videos run 10-20 minutes, often split into 2 clips.
Frame width x height: 852x480
Total bitrate: 4258 kbps

With that high a bitrate, you would expect much higher definition video and sharp focus. But the camera-man does not take advantage of the large data-size of the file: the focus is not sharp and clear and is not often centered/framed on the action. The lighting is not sharp and crisp.

The site is designed as a solo-model site of a girl who has friends (male and female). The sex action is spread around: The main girl masturbates, has sex with 1 or 2 boys, has sex with some of her female friends. The female friends have male-female sex and female-female sex.

-If you get access to the site through the network, you can glance through the site contents (videos, photos). But it's doubtful you will find
anything of interest. Unless you happen to be a true collector of a few of the models that visit the site briefly (such as Dasha or Lay the Cat). But the visiting models are not clearly identified in each set they appear in, so you have to study many of the sets to guess the identity/name of some of the models in some of the videos and photosets.
The number of visiting models at this site is very small, less than 10. Few of the visiting models are well known.
None of the photos or videos are worth keeping. This site is of slight to no interest. A true collector of some of the visiting models might want to have some photos and videos where their most favorite models appear, but no one else would be interested, except to see an example of the low quality that porn sites have tried to sell online to members.
The site is like a an amateur, home shot photoset and videolog of some amateur girls who are playing at sex. It appears they are having fun at times, and really enjoying the sex as well. If you are a true fan of the girls/models, that would add some interest to viewing the photos/videos. But otherwise, the site is boring.
Very basic navigation. Files are divided into two groups: photosets and videos. The files in each group are listed in descending chronological order, most recent listed first.
A nice-sized thumbnail shows you who the model(s) in the photoset/video are. Many of the models are not specifically listed for many of the photosets and videos.

01-11-11  01:00pm

Replies (13)
Review
58
Visit Teen Sex Reality

Teen Sex Reality
(0)

78.0
Status: Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review).
Pros: -Large amount of site contents: About 275 video clips.
-Models listed for each clip.
-Content is dated.
-Updates: Currently 1 video about every 10 days.
-DRM: no.
-Easy login.
-Site timeout: no.
-Models are real teens: a number of attractive teen girls, and the boys are clean-cut teens (few tattoos or piercings).
-Multiple choices for download formats:
--WMV: high, medium, low quality.
--MPEG.
--QuickTime.
Cons: -No streaming option.
-No photosets.
-Only 4 tiny thumbnails and a larger thumbnail to illustrate each video. And the thumbnails are not enlargeable.
-No bios for models.
-Limited amount of information on video clips: does not show runtime, file size.
-Watermark: Yes, small to medium sized watermark bottom right corner on videos.
-Pages listing the site contents are cluttered with adds for other sites.
-Basic, limited search: can search by name of model, or by date video was posted.
Bottom Line: The site theme: Hidden cameras capture the hardcore action of real teen sluts.
The idea of spying on teens having sex is supposed to add spice to the sex. What you get is videos that could be improved by better camera work (better lighting, better control of the colors). Some black and white parts of the videos are supposed to suggest real-time video capture, but I would prefer good colors for skintones and background, instead.
You also have portions where the teens are supposed to be videotaping themselves. This is also supposed to add to the "reality" of the
experience. So the teens are kissing, and glancing at the camera, and fucking, and glancing at the camera, and it's distracting. It doesn't add to the realism or excitement. They would be better off dropping the idea of "hidden cameras" and "self video-taping" and just get a good cameraman who can take good videos. Because they are using a cameraman anyway, but the video product is supposed to be showing an amateur real-life capture of teens having sex, and that theme is not really working.
This is a good-sized site for hardcore teen.
Currently 275 video clips.
Clip run about 20 to 30 minutes.
Most of the action is boy-girl.
-Pages listing the site contents are cluttered with adds for other sites.
I click on the thumbnail of "Top Rated Videos", and I get a full page of thumbnails of videos. But when I click on any of the video thumbnails, it turns out these videos are all from Young Libertines, a different site that I would have to join to see any of their videos. So I have to hit the "back button" on my browser twice, to get back to the Teen Sex Reality site. I didn't even realize I had left the Teen Sex Reality site until I saw the signup page for Young Libertines.

There are many ads for other sites on each page, but most ads you can guess are ads, and not videos at the Teen Sex Reality site. But it would make the page far less cluttered if they removed the ads, so you can see (and focus on) what this site has to offer.
This site is one of many hardcore teen video sites. The sex is gentle and not abusive. But it's also not very exciting. Maybe the girls (and guys) that are having sex are having a good time, but it certainly doesn't come through. It's more like they are having sex because it's something to pass the time. No real passion or excitement or enjoyment.
My belief is they are having sex because they are getting paid for it. Which is, unfortunately, not a joke.
The video quality is ok to good. The quality would be improved if they dropped the "hidden cameras" idea and concentrated on making good, sexy videos.
When you join this site, which is part of the TonyBucks network, you currently get access to a number of the other TonyBucks sites. How many
sites you get access to, and which specific sites, depends on which site you join through. Most of the sites you join through have the same
membership fee, but some sites give you a greater number of "bonus" sites.

11-23-10  11:54am

Replies (0)
Review
59
Visit Tin Seks

Tin Seks
(0)

78.0
Status: Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review).
Pros: -Download limits: none.
-DRM: none.
-Currently updates: 1 update about every 10 days recently.
One week you post a post a photoset which is a record of a video shoot, 10 days later you post the video made during the photoshoot.
-To view individual photos in a set, click on the thumbnail, and you get an enlarged picture. This is easy and fast and wonderful compared to the
slow, clunky software viewing system used at most of the other TonyBucks sites. All the sites in this network should use this simple system, and
get rid of the fancy software that makes viewing individual photos a slow and laborious process.
-Easy login. There is a captcha, but it's easily read, not the messy squiggles that make you wonder what the letters or numbers are supposed to be. I dislike the messy squiggles, and even when I guess them right, I feel irritated that I have to pass a test that I believe is unfair and
stupid. And when I fail to guess right, I am even more irritated.
Cons: -Streaming: Not available.
-Zips for photosets: Not available.
-Photos available in 1 size only.
-Models: less attractive than most of the TonyBucks models. On the plus side, there are few tattoos or body piercings on the girls.
-Thumbnail ads clutter the listing page of site contents. The thumbnail ads are not identified as ads, you have to figure out which thumbnails show you the site contents, and which thumbnails are ads for other sites.
-Very basic search. Can search by name of model. Can search by type of content (video or photoset). Can also search by date the content was posted, which is basically useless.
Bottom Line: Tinseks is part of the TonyBucks network, a small network of 11 sites that focus on hardcore teen.
The sites have both videos and photosets. The photosets can be from ok to good quality regarding photo size, focus, lighting, skin tone, etc. But the photos have little erotic quality. The photos are mainly a capture of a video shoot.
It's cheaper to have one session where you do both the photoshoot and the videoshoot. But the results, for the photoset, would be better if you had a separate session for the photoshoot. You would get better pictures (more erotic, more interesting, better posed, etc.). That is assuming the photographer was competent.
So the main value of the photos is to give you an idea of what the model looks like, and maybe an idea of what the video action will be.
But the main value of the sites is in the videos. The photos can be of good quality, but the eroticism does not approach the photo sites like Metart. The videos are a different matter: The
TonyBucks videos are mainly well shot, feature a number of ok looking models, and are hardcore. Metart and most major photo sites are
mainly softcore, and their videos are usually more boring than erotic. At TonyBucks it's the other way around: the value is in the videos, the
photos are a minor addition (even though the photosets have a large number of photos per set, and there is usually the same number of photosets and videos). So a lot of effort was put into making the photosets, but the effort was basically wasted.
Unless otherwise noted, what follows refers specifically to the tinseks site:
The tinseks theme is European college students having great sex.
-Site contents:
94 videos
94 photosets
-Videos can be downloaded in different formats:
WMV: low, medium, high resolution
MPG
MOV

The videos are large files, 580-765 MB for a 20-30 minute clip for high quality WMV file:
Frame width x frame height: 720x576
Total bitrate: 4128kbps

The figures shown are as high or higher than what some sites advertise as high definition. There are other TonyBucks sites where the total bitrate
can be as high as 6300kbps for some videos, but even 4128 is extremely good or "high" definition, as far as I can tell from watching the videos.
The videos are very sharp and clear, good lighting, good colors, good skin tone.
The sound is pretty good. A little annoying random background noise, but they usually don't bother with a music soundtrack, which is a plus.
I personally didn't find many pretty models at this site. This site has a lot of hardcore videos. The action is not rough. It's a boy and a girl getting a lot of enjoyment from sex. Or they are certainly trying to. I just find the action slightly boring. I want a connection,
something erotic to stimulate the imagination. Even if the model were pretty, I still want
something beyond her getting banged.
I'm giving the site a score of 78, because access to the bonus sites raises the value of this site.

11-14-10  09:53am

Replies (0)
Review
60
Visit Teenamite

Teenamite
(0)

83.0
Status: Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review).
Pros: -No DRM.
-No download limits.
-Multiple download formats:
--WMV: low, medium, high quality.
--MPG.
--MOV.
-Streaming: low, medium, high quality.
-Videos and photosets are paired.
-Content is dated.
-Screenshots and a photoset to illustrate each video.
-Zip files for photosets.
-No site timeout. Edit: there is a site timeout, but it takes hours of inactivity before you have to re-login.
-Videos are very high definition: Size 1GB+. But you get high clarity.
Cons: -Last update is dated 05 September, 2010. That's 2 months ago. Before that, they were updating about every 5 days with a video or photoset.
-Only 1 size for photos.
-Slow-loading system for viewing photos.
-The members page listing the site contents is cluttered with advertising for other sites.
-Models not listed for some videos and photosets.
-No model bios.
-Very basic search. Can search by name of model. Other search parameters are fairly useless (date added, title, top rated, most viewed).
Bottom Line: This site is part of the TonyBucks network, which currently has 11 sites. About a year ago I posted a comment that joining this site made little economic sense because you only gained access to this single site, and not to any of the other sites in this network, for a price of $29.95/month. And the contents of this site, by itself, did not justify a price of $29.95/month. A year later, for the same price, you can get access to up to 10 of the sites in this network, depending on which site you join through.
The TonyBucks network is teen sites. What makes this site different from the other sites in the network? I don't know. Many of the sites are interchangeable. But as a marketing ploy, they put some videos in this site, some in a different site, and each site is supposed to have a different theme. You could put most of the TonyBucks videos into one giant site, but then it would be much harder to search through all the videos. So separating the videos into different sites makes good consumer sense, except when they rename a video clip and put it into more than one site. But the duplicated videos are not very common.

There are around 73 videos and 73 photosets at this site.

Sample data for a high definition video:
runtime: 25 minutes 14 seconds
size: 1.12 GB
frame width x height: 1600 x 900
total bitrate: 6336 kbps
frame rate: 25 frames/sec

Type of content:
Sex in most normal varieties: vaginal, anal, bj, cunnilingus.
Mainly boy-girl. Some scenes where you have "group" sex, but it's not very groupy: you have a boy-girl having sex, and maybe 1 or more other people watching them, or maybe the other people are having boy-girl sex. A limited amount of 2 guys on a single girl. A few scenes of solo female masturbation or 2-girl lesbian action. But the basic theme is one couple (boy-girl) sex.

The sex is not rough or abusive. It's friendly sex between two horny teens.

The site is your basic hardcore teen site, with high definition videos that are professionally shot: good lighting, good focus, good colors.

The photosets are basically a record of the video shoot. But the photos are high quality, not screencaps, and worth viewing for themselves. This site has the best quality photos of the entire network. I don't know who the photographer is, but he should have been hired to do all the photos at this network. The photos are large size (about 400-1,000 KB each).

You are not getting the glamor-style videos of X-art or the glamor photos of Met-Art. But the quality is very good at this site.
On the other hand, the sex action is your basic sex, with less roughness than at many hardcore sites, but it doesn't grab your interest, or impress you.
I'm giving this site a score of 83, for the value of the site contents, and the network contents. The site would be very expensive to join if it didn't include network access.

11-09-10  01:22am

Replies (6)
Review
61
Visit Springtime Beauties

Springtime Beauties
(0)

69.0
Status: Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review).
Pros: -DRM: no.
-Download limits: no.
-Most models will be present at more than one TonyBucks network, but most of the models are not found at a large number of other sites. So the faces you see here are mainly fresh faces, at least until you have gone through the TonyBucks network.
-There are some models that are really cute or outstanding, that you will probably have seen at one or more other major sites.
-Multiple download formats:
--High, medium or low resolution WMV.
--MPG.
--QuickTime.
-Easy login.
-No site timeout.
Cons: -The biggest con is that the site is not updating. The most recent update I saw was from January 2009.
-So this is an archive site. Some of the content is ok, but once you have downloaded the material you want, there is little reason to come back again. A shame, because they chose some nice models at this site, and you want to find more material on them, and that won't happen at this site.
-No zip file for photosets.
-1 size only for photos.
-No streaming option for videos.
-Watermark, bottom right corner of photos. Not large, but could be smaller, less noticeable.
-Download problems? I was downloading 2 videos from the site using DownThemAll download manager. Both videos stopped downloading, giving me a
"timeout" error message. Each download re-started from the beginning of the download. I do not know why each download stopped, or why each download could not resume from the point that it stopped.
Bottom Line: This is part of the TonyBucks network. Joining any site in the network can give you access to 10 or less sites in the network, depending on when you
join and which site you join through. There are currently 11 sites in the TonyBucks network.
At this site the photosets outnumber the videos by a large margin. At most TonyBucks sites the photosets and videos are close in number, and several sites have each video paired with a photoset. Not here.
The size of a single photo (up to 250 KB) indicates high definition. But you don't get the "professional quality" you will find at top photo sites like Met Art or MPL Studios. The photos are "ok", but not high quality regarding colors, clarity, etc. There are some attractive Eastern European models, but they could look much better with professional photography.
The content is softcore teen nudity, with some masturbation. Even though the site was
launched in late 2008 and stopped updating a few months later, the photo quality seems more like something from the 1990s: some very pretty models, but the quality is not high. If you know Teen Stars Magazine, the photography style is very similar: more skin is shown at SpringTimeBeauties, there is some mild solo masturbation at SpringTimeBeauties(no masturbation that I can remember at Teen Stars
Magazine), but the photography is better at Teen Stars Magazine: the colors are better, the models look better.
With the large file size for the "high quality" videos, you expect high quality playback, but you don't get it. The first video I saw had a tiny jittery effect that creates eyestrain. The second video I watched did not have the jittery effect, but the video picture is not crisp. 572 MB for a 15 minute clip, so the video picture should be extremely sharp, but it's not: it's like you're watching the scene through a very faint fog.
You do get the impression you are watching amateur teen models who are just starting their porn modelling career, these girls are young and fresh. I just wish they were presented better (better photography).
The soundtrack of the videos I saw was music from a radio (music mixed with talking from an announcer). The volume level of the music is low, which is better than loud, but it would be better to have no background music at all. The music
is a minor distraction that does not really fit the video.
If you like softcore striptease videos, this would be a nice site, except:
1. The site is not updating.
2. The videos are just ok.
3. The photography is not excellent.
By itself, I don't think the site is worth joining. The videos I saw had some attractive models, but the video quality is just ok in spite of the large file size.
If you like this style of photography, I would choose a site like Teen Stars Magazine, which is a site that doesn't update, but the photos are
nicer, and they have zip files. Or choose the My Precious Virgins site, which has a similar photo style, and is supposed to be currently updating.

11-07-10  08:55am

Replies (3)
Review
62
Visit Devils Film

Devils Film
(1)

83.0
Status: Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review).
Pros: -Easy login. Enter username and password, which can be saved.
-Updates with new series and older series. Offering parodies of Mad Men, Fast Times At Ridgemont High, Twilight, etc.
-Huge amount of content. 1722 Gb.
-Wide variety of content. 4637 movies, with wide variation of sexual activity.
-Can stream or download videos:
--Stream in high or low definition. Many videos can be streamed in HD (supposed to be higher than the regular "high definition" used at their site).
--Can download as high or low definition WMV file.
-No DRM
-No download limits.
-No site timeout.
Cons: -Uncheck the pre-checked agreement to join another site on signup, or you will be charged for a trial membership to another site.
-Poor search engine.
-Video quality (definition) could be improved. This is basic DVD quality video. Many PU members want better quality videos to watch, and will
complain about much of the video content at this site. But the newer material is higher definition.
-The only download format is WMV.
-No zip file for photosets.
Bottom Line: This is a major site in the netFameSolutions network. There are about 5 sites in the network that update consistently. The other sites have few to no updates. Many of the updates at the smaller sites are older clips from one of the 5 main sites.
The 5 main sites in this network:
Devils Film
Peter North
Rocco Siffredi
Silvia Saint
Silverstone DVD

The other sites in the network are niche sites.
Each of the 5 main sites is large, with a large number of DVD quality video clips. These are professionally shot videos, with good basic
technical features: good lighting, good focus, etc. There are a number of attractive models at each of the main sites.
The video quality is good, not great. Don't expect high-quality definition, because you will be seriously disappointed if you have that
expectation. Most of the video content is from 5-10 years ago or more. The videos have not been remastered to today's higher quality standards. But if you are familiar with the DVDs from 5-10 years ago, you will have a huge selection of video clips that cater to a wide range of sexual
preferences: mainly boy-girl, but also group sex (meaning 3 or more people in a sex scene); and there are niche sites that offer tranny, granny,
lesbian, MILF, Indian, etc. The quality of the newer videos is better than for the older videos. You do not get the HD quality of some sites, but the newer videos are nice quality.

The high quality clips are about
-400 MB for a 27 minute clip.
-total bitrate of about 2100 kbps.
-frame width x height: 720 x 400

Devils Film itself, like the other 4 main sites, has a wide variety of content. The content is mainly separated by category or series.
There are photosets, but they are useful for illustrating what the model looks like, and what the video action is. The site uses a software system where you can view each photo. But the system is really clunky and slow. You slowly load each photo as a thumbnail separately. You are supposed to be able to enlarge the thumbnail by clicking an icon, which might or might not work to enlarge the thumbnail. And to get to the next thumbnail, you click an icon, and wait for the thumbnail to load. A really stupid and slow system.
No zip file for the photosets, but most of the models in the photosets are not attractive anyway.
Search is basic and could be vastly improved. You can search by series, by name of model. The results for searching by name of model bring up clips at the Devils Film site plus other sites in the network the model is featured. But you have to know the name of the model for this to work. Not all models are listed for every clip. And there are other problems with the search. The model named Barbara at DevilsFilm is supposed to be in a clip at RoccoSiffredi, but the model named Barbara at RoccoSiffredi is a different model.
The price to join the network is $9.95/month, through PU/TBP. That gives you access to a huge amount of content of wide variety.

11-02-10  09:28am

Replies (5)
Review
63
Visit Teen Burg

Teen Burg
(0)

85.0
Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -Large amount of videos for a site of this type.
-Site advertises more than 500 videos, more than 300 photosets.
-Note: TBP update 09-20-10 states 296+ videos, 37+photosets.
Why the big difference in the numbers, I don't know.
Looking at the site, without actually counting the separate videos, it seems the site contents is much smaller.
-Site advertises daily updates. The update rate is actually about 1 update every 7 days.
-Free live cams with models. You pay USD $2.95 (EUR 2.30) for 30 days of access to several hours per day of nude public shows. Private chats are optional and cost extra.
-There is also a separate "Models online" service that offers a xxx webcam live show.
-Large number of cute models.
-Search engine: can search by model's name, month and year, video or photoset.
-Content is dated.
-Model's name is clearly listed for each video.
-Zip file for each photoset.
-No DRM.
-No download limits.
Cons: -No streaming.
-A simple text list of the models at this site, with a nice-sized thumbnail of each model, would be very helpful.
-Single size for photos. No choice of low, medium or high resolution.
-No biography. Models identified by name only.
-Basic search. Can search by model's name or when video/photoset was posted. But can't search by description of model, type of sex, or any other factors.
-A faq page would be helpful, listing basic site facts: number of videos, number of photosets, number of photos, total size (GB) of videos, total size of photos, number of male models, number of female models.
-No text on the site identifies which videos are high definition. The HD videos are the ones that are 1 GB+ when you download them.
Bottom Line: Photos are 1643 x 2464 pixels
Videos 720x576 (1100kbps)
File Sizes (HQ):
WMV = 200MB-1GB

This is the town where I should have grown up. Lovely, nubile chicks that fuck at the drop of a hat. Or the glance of an eye.

This is a hardcore teen video site. The videos far outnumber the photosets. Most of the videos are a boy and a girl.
Each video/photoset has a few thumbnails to show what's inside the file. It is difficult to get a clear idea of what the model looks like from the thumbnails that are actually furnished by the site. A much better system would be to have a nice-sized photo of the model that shows her clearly, plus 4 thumbnails that clearly show the model from the video/photoset.
The videos are good quality.
The technical factors are handled well: lighting, focus, action, a lot of good looking teens.
The photos are high quality: the size of a single photo is around 300-500 KB. I was surprised the photo size is so large, because the photos sure don't look high quality to me.I am not talking about the attractiveness of the model, or her makeup or costume. I am talking about the extreme clarity that photos can have, which is not found here. The colors are not brilliant or sharp. I just find the photos at major softcore glamor sites so much more appealing than the photos at this site.
If you are into hardcore teen action, this site has a lot of videos. The videos are good quality. The sex is gentler than the gonzo sites, and the teens actually talk and kiss before getting down to the action. The teens are ok to nice looking, very little tattoos or piercings.
The site is part of the TonyBucks network, which currently has 11 sites. Membership in any one site will normally give you access to some of the other sites. How many bonus sites you get, and what those bonus sites are, varies depending on which site you join through. It definitely pays to check each site for the bonus details. One site will offer 2 bonus sites, a different site might offer 6 bonus sites, another might offer 9 bonus sites.
I joined through Spunky Bee, which charged me the same or lower price for the membership, as joining a different TonyBucks site. And I got access to 9 bonus sites (10 sites total).
I am giving the site a score of 85, because it's part of a network that has a number of attractive models, and a large number of good quality videos.

10-26-10  05:02am

Replies (3)
Review
64
Visit Teen Dorf

Teen Dorf
(0)

69.0
Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -Content is dated.
-Zip files for photosets.
-Easy login: username, password, captcha (easily read letters).
-No site timeout.
-Streaming options: low, medium, high quality.
-Download options: low, medium, high quality WMV.
: MPEG.
: QuickTime.
-Little or no photoshopping in the photos.
-No download limits.
-Updates 1 photoset or video approximately every 10 days.
Cons: -Only 1 size for photos.
-If you want to download individual photos instead of the full zip, you sometimes get a "show.php" file instead of the photo file you are trying to download.
-In some videos and photosets, it can be hard to see what the face or body of the model is like. This is true for outdoor scenes, where the
cameraman/photographer does a poorer job than if the scene is indoors.
-The index listing pages are cluttered with thumbnail photos advertising other sites.
-I found very few cute teen models at this site.
Bottom Line: The theme of the site is interesting: young teen couples having sex in a natural way. But many photosets and videos are lacking. They are shot in an amateur way, especially the outdoor scenes.
The best way to improve this site would be to fire the photographer and video man and get someone who knows how to take a photograph, how to shoot a video. If you're shooting outdoor scenes, get a shooter who knows how to take a photo, how to shoot a video so the model is shown clearly and attractively.
In some outdoor photosets and videos, the face and body of the model is hard to see clearly. The camera is only a few feet away, but the model's face is not shown clearly, because of focus or lighting or shadows or some other reason.
-How a photographer shoots a model can make a huge difference in how attractive she appears. There is no effort to make these girls look more
attractive (from lighting, makeup, costumes, whatever). Even the two models I've seen at other sites that I thought are attractive, did not seem special in their appearances at this site.
The audio track is often poor. A boy and girl are in a meadow, nothing but plants and dirt around, and you hear loud microphone noises, you also hear what sounds like a jet plane overhead, but the sky is clear except for clouds. Maybe it's the wind you hear, because it's windy, and the
microphone noises are loud to begin with. But when you hear the couple speaking, it's not loud enough to make out the actual words. You can often hear the camera clicking in the background for a photoshoot of the video, and the cameraman and photographer walking behind the couple that are being shot can be making noises as well (footsteps).
The lighting outdoors is hard to control, and the model is in and out of shadow, it's distracting.
The indoor scenes are better shot than the outdoor scenes. You have less noise from the microphone, better closeups of the model and the sex action, better control of the lighting. The outdoor scenes are a nice idea in theory, but the photographer/cameraman need to improve his technique to make the outdoor scenes work well.
In a few scenes, where the boy and girl are playfully teasing each other before they start kissing and getting down to business, their acting is good enough that the scene is interesting, even though you can't
understand the actual words they are speaking(German, maybe?). But in other scenes, the prologue to the sex is just wasted time. Porn actors are not often noted for their acting ability, especially in low-budget shoots like these.
The site theme is "natural teens, natural love". This translates to teens making love in outdoor scenes: in a field or meadow, by a lake. If you've been a member of femjoy or zemani, you will have seen videos where, in addition to a lovely nude model, you also see some great outdoor scenery. At this site, the scenery is there, but it's not shown to advantage.
Bottom line: I found no photos worth saving, and only a few videos to save.

10-18-10  01:26pm

Replies (1)
Review
65
Visit Silverstone DVD

Silverstone DVD
(0)

87.0
Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -DRM: none
-Site timeout: none
-Download limits: none
-Easy login: requires username and password, no captcha
-Download: low or high resolution WMV files
-Streaming: low or high resolution
-Large number of attractive models
-Models have very little piercings, tattoos
-Models are clearly identified in each clip by name and thumbnail
(that is a really nice feature; I wish more pornsites would include the
model name and a clear thumbnail of the model to show who she is and what she looks like)
-Videos are 10-30 minutes, a nice runtime
-Videos have 20-30+ screenshots to show model and action
-Large amount of hardcore videos with nice variety
-Updates 1 new video every 5 days
Cons: -Check carefully for the pre-checked cross-sells when you sign up. I got stung the last time I signed up, even though I knew they were supposed to be there. I just didn't see it on signup, so I lost a few dollars down the drain.
-Video quality is acceptable but not great.
-It would be really nice if they could upgrade/increase the visual clarity of their updates. The updates are mainly older scenes from DVDs shot years ago. But if they could remaster the scenes to increase the clarity of the video, that would be a really nice feature.
-Screenshot photos do not have a zip file. But few people would want to save these photos anyway. The photos are low quality: they are useful to give you an idea of what the model looks like, and the video action, which is great. But the photos have little erotic value.
Bottom Line: The video quality is acceptable, but a site like Nubiles or X-art or Mplstudios can give you crystal clear videos, and you don't get that here.
This is a DVD site, and even for the "high quality" streaming or downloaded files, it's like you are watching an older movie: the quality is OK, but not excellent: the colors are not vibrant, the clarity is not great. All the technical factors are good: professional lighting, professional focus, background music is better than most porn videos, the action is good, everything is good, but not the high quality video clarity you can get at some sites. But at the sites where you get the high video clarity, the quantity is small compared to the amount of content you get at this site.
This site is one of the main values of the netFameSolutions network.
The network currently has about 32 sites. About 5 of those sites are general hardcore sites that make up 90% of the value in the network. The
other sites are niche, that might have a limited number of videos for fans of that niche/fetish, but that most PU members will probably skip over.
With a single membership to almost any site in the network, you gain access to about 22 of the network sites.
The sites that I believe have the most value are:

Devils Film
Peter North
Peter North DVD
Rocco Siffredi
Silverstone DVD
Silvia Saint

This is a video network. It has a large amount of photos, but I consider the photos low to medium quality. The photos compare poorly to Metart,
Mplstudios, Femjoy, or other photosite pictures.
The network (and this site) has a number of attractive models. There is some ethnic variation of models: You have not just the standard East
European models, which make up the bulk of the models, but also a significant number of Latina models. Also a small number of Asian models. A very small number of black models at the network. The Curry Creampie site features models that are supposed to be Indian-looking (from India).
At this site, the videos have a tiny plot setup, where the boy and girl meet, then almost immediately have sex. But the setup tries to give a little more meaning and flavor to the sex instead of just two or more people banging away on each other. The sex is pretty straightforward: for 1 boy 1 girl: start with a blowjob, guy eats girl, they fuck vaginally, maybe fuck anally, then cumshot to girl's face. The action is not rough or harsh or abusive. This is definitely a hardcore site, but not the harsh, gonzo action found at some sites. Not a lot of tenderness in most of the sex, or affection, but not the harshness or abuse found at many sites.

The monthly price of $9.95 (through PU/TBP link) makes this site a real bargain, based on the good quality of the content, the large amount of
content, the large variation in content, and the low price.

Giving the site a score of 87 because the site is good, plus you get access to a solid network of sites.

10-17-10  12:23am

Replies (0)
Review
66
Visit Spunky Bee

Spunky Bee
(0)

78.0
Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -Billing agent: SegPayEU
-No pre-checked sales agreements on the signup page
-Access to this site was immediate after signup
-No DRM.
-No site timeout.
-No download limits.
-Easy to read captcha.
-Screenshots to illustrate videos.
-Zipfile available for each photoset.
-Content is dated.
-Very little photoshopping in the photos. You see model's freckles and scratch marks clearly on her face and body.
Cons: -No streaming
-Updates irregular
Site advertises 3 new updates every week (on one of the signup pages), but that was a goal, not a reality.
Updates stopped on July 26. Then on Sep 28 1 photoset and 1 video were added. Nothing added since then.
-Photos are available in only 1 size.
-Large watermark in bottom right corner of photos.
-Navigation is very basic.
-There is no search function.
-Preview page says, "Join now and find out what I do on weekends!" That
implies some kind of blog or diary inside the members area, but I can't find one.
The preview page has a hot link to a blog. Unfortunately, the blog has a few entries for May 11, 2010 and June 06, 2010, and that is the entire blog.
-"I love to naughty chat with my members". Quote from a page advertising her site. But I find no place to chat with her inside the members area. Perhaps the forum was supposed to furnish contact with the model, but the forum is "coming soon..."
Bottom Line: Site statistics:
Currently about 25 videos and matching photosets.
Video file formats:
high, medium, low quality WMV
MPG (high quality)
QuickTime format
Video specs: (for the mpg file format):
Videos are very high quality and run about 11-30 minutes.
total bitrate: 6,488 kbps
frame width x height: 1600 x 912
Photo specs: Most individual photos are 300-550 KB. 2464x1643 pixels.
The site contents is small. Someone with a fast connection can download the entire site in 1 or 2 days. Anyone with faster than dialup can
download the entire site in 30 days with no problem.
This is a solo teen site.
This is not a site where you go to watch hardcore action. The theme is more like you are watching a cute girl who is playful and friendly. The
video "plot" varies with each episode or clip: She is being playful with a boyfriend, with a girlfriend, showing off her body, whatever. The "action" can be softcore, midcore, or hardcore, but the overall impression is more that you are watching a cute and friendly girl who is enjoying her sexuality. This is entirely different from the hardcore teen video sites where 1 or 2 guys are banging away on 1 or 2 girls.
You put the SpunkyBee model in a video, and she performs with charm and attraction. The videos and photos have good clarity, focus, good lighting, good colors, good skin tone. There is no talking from the cameraman, and the girl herself usually says very little. No bothersome background music.
SpunkyBee appears at many sites under different names:
Abigaile, Abigaile Johnson,Abby, Spunky Bee, Veronika.
I am listing the different names because pat362 recently brought eurobabeindex to my attention again.
If you can get this site along with a bunch of other sites in the network as a special offer, it's definitely worth checking this site out.
Giving this site a 78. If they increase the updates, add the forum that is "coming soon", have the girl blog more often, the site value would go up.
By itself, the site would be very expensive. But as part of a network, where you join this site and get bonus sites as part of your membership,
the site makes a nice addition.

10-12-10  03:52am

Replies (8)
Review
67
Visit Rock Star Porn Star

Rock Star Porn Star
(0)

70.0
Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -No site timeout.
-No DRM.
-Exclusive videos.
-Can watch videos in streaming: low, high, high definition quality.
-Can download videos in WMV format in low or high quality.
-The videos are professionally shot: good focus, good lighting.
-The model's name in each video is listed, with a nice sized thumbnail that shows what the model looks like. That is a really nice, simple
feature that more porn sites should have.
-The videos are dated
-There is a page where the models at the site are shown with their name and a nice-size thumbnail of the model. It would be better if the models were shown in alphabetical order, but the simple page layout is really helpful if you are searching through thumbnails of the models, because you can easily get a nice idea of what each model looks like.
-There is also a very basic search where you can enter a model's name, and it will return a list of the different sites at the network the model is featured.
Cons: -The site uses the same stupid program for displaying photos that is used at other sites in the network. The program will load a thumbnail picture slowly, then it's hard to get an enlarged image of the thumbnail. I try and try, then usually give up trying to see the enlarged photo. And the next photo in the series is also a slow-loading thumbnail.
-The photos are clear and crisp, but the models are not to my taste.
-TBP reports 55 photo shoots. But I could only find 12 photosets at the site (when I look at the page for "pictures"). How to get to the other
photosets is unclear.
-Each photoset is around 25 photos.
-No zip file for the photoset. But who wants to keep these photos anyway?
-Search is very basic. Can search by model's name, but not by description of model, type of sexual activity, or any other factor.
Bottom Line: I always wanted to be a rock star. I can't play a musical instrument, or sing, but rock stars get the chicks. And now you can get the chicks as well. Just join the rockstarpornstar site and you can dream you are a massively tattooed male rockstar who gets to bang away on pornstars when
he is not banging away on the stage with his favorite instrument.
The female models at this site are past the teeny stage, but if you close your eyes, and listen to the moans and groans, you can reach rocker's
fantasy heaven. The only male model here is one guy, who is playing a rock star, who bangs a bunch of female models. The guy is heavily tattooed.
From the site stats, you can see this is a small site, when the total size is 18 GB. I assume that all the regular PU members here have a personal
porn collection that is many times that size. Most PU members could download the entire site contents in 1-2 days. I personally did not find
anything at this site that was worth keeping. Or even worth viewing, for that matter. But personal tastes vary, so maybe someone might find a
worthwhile video here.
The fake moans and screams from the female models are way overdone and totally unbelievable. The girls act as if the guy is using an electric prod instead of a normal penis. The guy is mildly rough, likes to slap the girl's face and ass, gag her with his penis. The guy is acting like a
really masterful, take-charge sexual stud putting these bitches through the paces. Except that it's phony as hell. Pierre Woodman can give a great
sexual performance with his models, but this guy is just a waste of time to watch.
I do like, quite a lot, the nice-sized, very clear thumbnails with the model's name, for each video/photoset. This gives you an easy way to
search through the videos and photosets you might want to look at more closely. This is a very simple and basic structure, and I wish more porn
sites used it. Because at many porn sites, it's hard to get an idea of what the models look like until you watch the video or look through each
photoset, which can be very time-consuming and a lot of work.
You get access to this site through the netFameSolutions network, which has some nice sites. This site is not one of them.

10-02-10  03:24pm

Replies (4)
Review
68
Visit My Teen Oasis

My Teen Oasis
(0)

78.0
Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -No DRM.
-No site timeout. But I do get disconnected after long idle times, so maybe there is a site timeout, but it takes a good while before disconnect.
-No download limits.
-Streaming, low and high quality
-Download, low and high quality WMV file
-Less fake moaning and groaning than many porn videos
-Canned background music could be better, but less annoying than in some porn videos
-Some attractive models
-Female models in videos are listed by name
-Screenshots, maybe 20-30, to illustrate the video
-Caucasian and Latina female models
Cons: -Navigation is basic.
-Site design is poor. The videos are not categorized or laid out to make searching easy.
-No search. Have to click through the entire site to see what is there.
-DownThemAll download manager sometimes does not work smoothly. Sometimes get error message 400 (file does not download). Don't know reason why.
-No text listing of models' names, with nice-sized thumbnails, so you can get an idea of what the models look like. There is no text listing at all, and thumbnails of models are scattered through the pages, making a simple
search of the models at the site extremely difficult.
-No zip file to download the screenshots for a video. But who would want to download and keep the screenshots anyway?
-They should definitely get rid of the tool they use to display photos. It makes viewing the photos more difficult than normal. Many times it is hard to enlarge the thumbnail sized photo that is first presented, to get a normal-sized photo. And the photos are slow to load.
Bottom Line: Myteenoasis is a hardcore teen video site.
The site is made up of videos from other sites in the network, mainly SilverstoneDVD and DevilsFilm, that were put in here to make another site offering.
The video runtime is from 8 to 20 minutes.
File size is from 100 MB to 300 MB for high quality.
Frame width x height = 720 x 528
Total bitrate = 2096 kbps
The netFameSolutions network has about 32 sites currently. There are about 5 sites with general hardcore appeal, and the rest of the sites are more niche, with a wide range of niches:
tranny
blowjob
granny
Indian (from India)
etc. etc.
With membership in any network site, you get access to about 22 sites.
Get a special price of $9.95/month from PU/TBP, which is a steal considering the large amount of content, the varied content, the generally OK to
good quality of the content. This is mainly a video network. The photos are mainly to give you a good idea of what the videos will show.
The quality of the photos is low. These are screenshots. Even when the model is good-looking, she does not appear good-looking in the photos. A
model like Ashlyn Rae, who appears in a bj video here, is just blah. At Metart, where she also appears, she is presented as a fine-looking woman. You would not recognize it was the same woman except for the same name.
In the videos, Ashlyn Rae looks better than the screenshots. In the videos, giving a bj, she comes across as enthusiastic and enjoying her
work, as a professional should. Sure gives a different impression from her Metart photos, where she comes across as lovely but more distant. Makes me appreciate Ashlyn Rae in a whole different way. Lol.
This is one of the minor sites at the network. I am strongly into teens, so I would normally rate this site much higher than a normal niche site.
But there are only a few very attractive models I found at this site. And because the navigation is so basic, with no search, it's hard to find the videos I might like at this site.
The main value of the site is that it gives access to the netFameSolutions network.
This site has a few really attractive models, but the navigation is bad. And the general level of the videos is slightly disappointing. Maybe I am spoiled, but even a DVD site (which this is, basically) should have nice quality lighting and focus in the videos, so when you find an attractive model, she will be presented and seen clearly and easily by the viewer.

09-27-10  11:09am

Replies (0)
Review
69
Visit Teen Sex Fusion

Teen Sex Fusion
(0)

85.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -No DRM.
-Some attractive models.
-Photosets are a visual record of a video shoot.
-Captcha very easy to read, and can be entered in either uppercase or lowercase.
-Site is currently updating.
-Have high quality videos (nice, clear definition, good lighting, etc.)
-Access to public chats, paid private chats
-Planning on making blu-ray DVDs of scenes available
Cons: -Only 1 size picture for the photoset.
-No zip file for photosets.
-No streaming option for videos.
-A small amount of duplicate files from other TonyBucks network sites.
-High quality videos are large, 1-2GB+
Bottom Line: This is a teen hardcore site.
Apparently 1 video a and matching photoset for each session. The photoset is apparently photos taken during a video shoot.
Most of the action is 1 boy-1 girl, or 2 boys-2 girls. But there is also some 2 boys-1 girl.
Video download options:
WMV: high, medium, low quality
MPEG
QuickTime
WMV high quality: 1440x1080, 8256 kbps
1920x1080, 6256 kbps
The videos are mainly crisp definition, good lighting, good skin tones on the models, little background noise (no music track, not a lot of random noise from the street as sirens or car sounds or whatever). The sets are simple: bedroom or living room. The models are all late teen or very early 20s. Very little tattoos on the female models, very little piercings.

Denner mentioned in a reply there is duplication of video files at different TonyBucks sites. He stated that some of these videos can be also be found at non-TonyBucks sites as well, such as TeenMegaWorld sites. I've seen some videos which were posted at more than one TonyBucks site.
But even though I've been a member of TeenMegaWorld a couple of times, there is material I never bothered to look through, and Denner's hardcore experience is far greater than mine. Does that make him a porn hound? Is that a compliment? Perhaps we should rather call him a connoisseur of hardcore porn. But he seems to slurp it down in large quantities. You only have to look at his PU score (currently 208), and realize his devotion to porn is extremely serious. Denner claims to be Danish, but his enthusiasm seems to be Teutonic. I always thought the Danes were supposed to be laid back and casual, but he is hardcore to the core. (Either I am channeling Wittyguy's PU Forum Awards, or some evil spirit has overcome me momentarily.) :)

As a pro feature, I mentioned there is access to public and private chats. I got away from chats a few years ago. I was spending too much time
watching the girls at Met-art chats. Public chats were free. There were some very attractive, friendly girls at Met-art chats. I was just spending too much time at the public shows. But here is another entry to those chats: some very pretty girls put on softcore shows. It's easy to get addicted to these shows and spend hours watching the girls. Some people find the chats boring, since they are softcore. But I enjoy them too much, and don't want to get hooked again.
There is a current bonus offer that allows you access to differing numbers of bonus sites, depending on which site you join through.

Use the SpunkyBee site to join through:
$29.95 for 30 days membership
10 sites included in your membership (including 18Stream)

Use the 18Stream site to join through:
$34.95/month for 30 days membership
3 sites in your membership

If the site were a solo offering, it would be extemely expensive. But with the current bonus offer of up to 10 of the TonyBucks sites for the price of one, this is a worthwhile network to join.

09-20-10  12:17pm

Replies (0)
Review
70
Visit Rough 18

Rough 18
(0)

60.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -Zip file for each photoset.
-Video download formats:
WMV: high, medium, low quality
MPEG
Quicktime
High quality WMV is 1440x810 (6256kbps)
-Updates once a week video/photoset
-Video runtime : 20 minutes to 60 minutes
-Easy login.
-No DRM.
-Very fast response to an email from tech support. But the response was not helpful.
Cons: -Only 1 size for the photos.
-Photos are a visual record of the video shoot, not an original shoot.
-No streaming option to view the videos.
-Some video files download with no estimate of file size or download time.
-The videos are overly long. A single sex scene should last from 10-20 minutes. There are many sex scenes that last 40-60 minutes, and the action gets boring and repetitious.
-It's strange the female model's face and body are not displayed clearly in the photoshoots.
I want to know what the model looks like, and the screenshots do a lousy job of that.
-Site navigation is poor.
-Search is poor.
-There is no simple listing of the models.
-Videos are large files. The high quality video file can be 1 - 2.3 GB or larger, for a video that runs 20 minutes to 60 minutes.
-Volume on some videos is too low.
-Download problems: on my last 2 video downloads, the download stops after downloading about 1 GB, and won't resume. Currently can't download any videos from this site.
Bottom Line: This is a site for mild BDSM (Bondage,Discipline, Sado-Masochism).
I do not care for the niche.
But even if I did like the niche, I believe the site is not very good.
You can't get a good idea of what
the models look like until you play the video. The photosets should give an excellent idea of what the model looks like, but they mostly don't.
Instead of giving clear photos of the face and body of the model, the photos focus on the "action", the girl being tied or abused or whatever, but you can't see her face or body very clearly in most photos. It's just lousy photography. And in many cases, you are not able to tell the model in 2 different videos is the same girl, because you don't get a clear idea of her face and body.

The videos are too long. A single sex scene can last 20-60 minutes. Beyond 20 minutes, I think people tend to lose interest, find the action boring, repetitive, dull. This is
not a movie with a plot, where you have brief sex scenes along the way. Instead, it's a single sex scene that loses it's impact after you watch
the scene for 10 or 20 minutes.
This is basically dull spanking porn.
My fantasy, to improve the videos, would be to have some guy in a leather costume and mask, come into the scene, and bash the male model who is
doing the spanking, with a metal baseball bat. The girl could jump up and down, screaming, "My hero, my lord", until the spanker is unconscious or dead. Then the girl could give her hero a bj or whatever to finish the scene.
This would serve to add color to the scene (the red blood), plus serve as a break in the dull sex scene, and lead to renewed interest in the next
sex scene (the bj or whatever), and remove the idiot doing the spanking.
I don't usually appreciate watching this type of female abuse, even if it's supposed to be consensual.
On a more realistic note, I have seen a few BDSM scenes that were colorful or interesting or erotic. But not at this site. These vids are just boring and overly long.
The scenes can be 1 boy-1 girl, 2 boys-1 girl, 2 boys-2 girls, 1 boy-2 girls, 2-girls. Most common scene is 1 boy-1 girl and 2 boys-2 girls.
This is a site with a small amount of content. Site just started around middle of 2010. You probably have less than 40 videos, plus 40 photosets. With that small amount of content, you would think the navigation would be extremely simple. But searching through the content is difficult. Trying to look through each video or associated photoshoot is difficult.
The site design is clumsy. Sometimes you can't easily find the photoshoot or video that is supposed to be the mate of a video/photoshoot.

I give the site a score of 60, because of the poor site design, poor navigation, boring videos, stupidity in making the video runtime too long,
and other problems.

This site is a waste of time. And very frustrating. And irritating.

09-18-10  03:05am

Replies (6)
Review
71
Visit 18 Stream

18 Stream
(0)

90.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -The best site design of this network I've seen so far.
-Nice-sized thumbnail for each model, giving you a good idea of what the model looks like. Many of the network sites have no nice-sized thumbnail of the model, so you have to play the streaming video or download the complete video before you get an idea of what the model looks like.
-Multiple viewing/downloading options:
Steaming: in low, medium, high quality
Screenshots: good sized, blurry to nice quality, to illustrate the video, could be downloaded as individual photos, but mainly useful to see what
the model looks like and to get an idea of the action.
Download options:
WMV, low, medium, high quality
MPEG
MOV
-Advertises daily updates of videos.
-No DRM
-Easy login to site.
-I don't like captcha, but this site has the easiest to read captcha that I've seen.
Search is basic but functional: search by model name returns model's videos and thumbnail of model.
Cons: Mostly minor:
-There is a site timeout. But login is easy.
-Advertises 500+ teen porn videos. My sense is there are far less videos at the site, but since there is no simple txt listing of videos, I won't take the time and effort to count the videos.
-A high-speed connection is really helpful. A high quality 30 minute video file is about 1.3 GB. To download that file takes 2 hours 30 minutes for a download speed of 150 KB/s. I can't watch the videos in streaming, because they stutter and stop. But I believe most PU members have fast Internet connections so watching a
streaming video would be no problem.
-Search is basic: Can't search by description of model, or by type of sexual activity.
-Need to manually create your own listing for the videos you download. Files are named as 342.wmv, 201.wmv, 199.wmv. Write your own description of model, and whatever else you want to know, with the file name/number.
-Watermark-bottom right corner, larger than needed.
Bottom Line: Excellent hardcore teen video site.
The videos are crystal clear for hardcore. Great definition, good lighting. There is actually foreplay and cuddling and kissing before the
sex in many scenes. Many of the girls are extremely attractive, and even the male teens are good-looking. Good camera work on the videos. Instead of gonzo sex, you get scenes of guys and girls making out and having sex. And during the sex, instead of just shots of 2 or more bodies banging away, you actually get to look at some lovely girls enjoying a sexual experience.
The lighting is generally ok to good. The skin color and skin tone of the models is generally ok to good.
At most of the Euro teen sites, the models are almost all small breasted, which I like. There are some models here with medium-sized or larger
breasts. But all the breasts appear natural. No fake plastic boobies, almost no tattoos on the female models, very little piercing (some belly
button or ear-rings, but that is minor). It's really nice the girls are so young and clean-looking.
Obviously not all videos are going to have good lighting and good skin tone color and good everything else, but the general level of the videos is very high for a hardcore video site.
Most of the videos are 1 boy-1 girl, which is what I prefer.
There are a few vids with 2 boys-2 girls.
I saw 1 lesbian scene.
I saw 1 female solo masturbation scene.
Models take a less gonzo style approach to sex. There is actually some tenderness and cuddling and stroking before getting down to hardcore sex. No strip tease, but a big improvement over the wham-bam-fuck-the-slut approach.
Female models don't give out with a lot of fake moans and groans. They do make some sounds expressing enjoyment and excitement, but these are more believable, natural sounds instead of the show-boaty expressions of American porn where the females start screaming: "GOD", "FUCK THAT CUNT", "OOOHHHWHEEEE!!!" as soon as the male gets within 25 1/2 inches of their body. (Slight exaggeration, possibly, or maybe not. :))
The male models are young, fresh, mainly good-looking teens. In some cases the boys look as good or better than the females.
The male actors treat the females, in general, with liking and respect.
There is little to no humiliation or abuse of the female models.

Bottom Line: This is a hardcore video site that makes a nice change of pace from gonzo sex.

I am giving the site a score of 90, because it's the one of the better hardcore video sites I've seen (not to be compared to DVD sites like
VideoBox or VideosZ) treating the models with respect, affection, gentle sex, whatever.

09-16-10  05:53pm

Replies (7)
Review
72
Visit Rocco Siffredi

Rocco Siffredi
(1)

80.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -Large amount of content.
-Wide variety of content of sexual activity.
-Current Site Stats (2010-09-14):
Movies : 998
DVDs : 212
Actors : 1019
Hours : 440
Total Size : 398 Gb
-Site is currently updating. Updates 1 video clip every 1-4 days (very irregular update schedule).
-No DRM.
-No site timeout.
-No watermark on older style videos.
Cons: -Navigation is basic and awkward.
-To log on to the network, you have to enter through the site you joined
through. You can't log on directly to any of the sister sites you have access to. Once you log on to the site you joined, only then can you enter
one of the sister sites you have access to.
-Moving around a single site is basic and awkward. To search for files at the site, or to look through the files available, have to look at lists from drop-down menus, or have to click many times to change from different pages. There is a lot of material at this site, and it's cumbersome to try to glance through the different video and photoset files.
-Need a fast ISP connection to play the streaming videos, otherwise the streams will frequently stutter and stop.
-A few good-sized thumbnails to show what the models look like in each video would be very helpful.
-A simple listing of the models appearing in each video would be helpful. Many models in videos are not named.
Bottom Line: Viewing options:
Download options: high and low resolution.
Streaming options: high and low quality.
Other options: trailer or screen capture.

Frame width by height: 720x480
Total bitrate: 2128 kbps

Quality of the video depends on whether the video is the high quality or the low quality option. Also depends on how long ago the video was shot.
The more recent videos are higher quality.
High quality streaming is not high quality. It is higher quality than the low quality, but it is nowhere near what some sites have as high quality.
These are professionally shot videos, but the overall quality could be much better in many ways.
One example: I am watching a scene where Rocco and a second man are both on a woman. In parts of the scene, you are seeing the action through a large block of clear plastic or glass. You want to see what's happening, without having a block of plastic obscuring the action. Remove the plastic, or shoot from a different angle. This is not the camera-man trying to be artistic, it's just the camera-man being lazy or stupid and
not bothering to shoot from an angle that clearly shows the action.
Site content:
You have a lot of vintage porn (101 videos) and even more straight recent
porn (892 videos). The vintage porn tries to add a little story-line to the sex, maybe even have some costumes. It's basically sex, with a little
story that is a negligible attempt to add some flavor or meaning to the sex.

The more recent porn also has a tiny story-line, but it's really just straight sex. The actors follow a script that is mainly fucking and
sucking, with little conversation (the female models probably don't understand much English, and English is what appears to be used to
communicate in the videos). Minor roughness and humiliation to the sex, but not a lot of hard-core roughness or hard-core humiliation. Most scenes are group-type sex, where you have 3 or more people fucking. Cunnilingus, bj, vaginal and anal sex in almost all scenes. No homo-erotic action of boy+boy. You do get boy+girl, 2 boys+girl, 2 girls+boy, or more than 3 people). Some girl+girl action in some of the scenes, but the main emphasis is on the boy+girl action.
I was a member of this site a year ago. At that time I found some videos that I thought were really good. But I can't find those videos now. If the videos are still at the site, I can't find them because of the poor navigation.
There is a large amount of video content, and the videos are split into series where the type of sexual action is changed from one series to
another. The models are mainly Eastern European females.
Rocco Siffredi is the star of the site, he's featured in most videos, and he can become annoying at times with his heavily accented English and overly boyish charm.
The quality of the videos is OK to good, not great. The large amount of content, and the wide variety of content means there is plenty of material to search through.

09-14-10  10:13am

Replies (4)
Review
73
Visit Nubile Girls HD

Nubile Girls HD
(0)

79.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -No DRM.
-No site timeout.
-Nice-sized thumbnail of the female model to illustrate each video.
-Some cute models.
-The girls are real teens, not twenty- or thirty-year olds trying to appear much younger.
-Can add/view comments on videos and photosets.
-Can rate the videos photosets.
-Small watermark bottom right-hand corner of photos.
-The videos are mainly clear and crisp, with adequate lighting. The videos and photosets are less gonzo style than the other sites in the network, but are not glamor-style, more like in-between gonzo and glamor style.
Cons: -There is no search. Not a major problem because the site is so small. Only 75 videos so far. Can list the videos by name of model or by date posted
(but date posted is not accurate or reliable).
-Occasionally, a photo will not display when you click on the thumbnail, get an error message: "cannot be displayed, because it contains errors".
-Hard to tell what the update rate is, because the posting dates are unreliable.
-Only 1 size of file to download video (no choice of hi, mid, lo quality).
-Videos download as WMV files (no other file extension choice).
-Only 1 size of zip file to download photoset.
-Limited types of models: they are all white Eastern European teens.
Bottom Line: Hardcore teen site, with some good looking young teens.
Sample size for the videos and photosets:
Videos are 400 MB to 1 GB
Photosets are 40 MB to 120 MB
Currently 75 videos with a matching photoset for each video.
Usually 1 video per model. A few models have 2 videos. Photos are crisp, but mainly to illustrate the video action; the photos are not artistic or glamor style such as the softcore photo sites like metart or mplstudios.
The style of the photos is more natural than glamor. I personally don't like the photos, but some PU members might appreciate them: they are
clear, usually crisp, hardcore photosets, with some really nice-looking models. Natural style of photography. The video and photoset are mainly
hardcore boy-girl; a few sets are softcore or midcore, where the girl is solo or with a second girl.
The photosets approach high quality in terms of photo size. But you don't actually get the quality of a met-art, mplstudios or other softcore photo site. I don't understand why it's so hard to make a quality hardcore
photoset. This site has plenty of cute girls, doing hardcore, but the photography is poor or lacking: in the flesh colors of the girls, in the
presentation of the girls, the girls just lack attractiveness or allure in the photos. I grew up in the days of Playboy and Penthouse. I didn't like every Playboy or Penthouse photoshoot, but in many cases, the girls/women looked extremely attractive, sexy, luscious, gorgeous, adorable, lovely.
You don't get that in these photosets. You can find it in the met-art and mplstudios and other glamor teen sites. The problem is that the girls are not presented at their best. It's like you buy an off brand of some product you like, Cheerios, or Rice Crispies, and the taste is blah
instead of what you get from the major brand.
They don't use photoshop or airbrushing on these photos, and that's part of why I rate the photos lower. But it's also the skin tone of the models,
the posing, the composition, everything that factors into how attractive or erotic a photograph is. The photosets are high quality in the size of the photos (each photo is 100 KB to 1 MB), but the quality of the photos is not up to the standards of the softcore glamor sites.

Some of the models at this site are also at met-art, glamdeluxe, justteensite, mplstudios, etc. And they look much more attractive on the
other sites, because of the photography or videography.
If this site is included in your network membership, you should definitely check the site out. Some models here (mainly the same ones shown on many of the other sites in the network) are very attractive, the videos are shot less gonzo style, the photosets are worth looking at.

08-07-10  08:09pm

Replies (14)
Review
74
Visit Teen Stars Only

Teen Stars Only
(0)

79.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -No DRM
-No download limit
-No site timeout
-Exclusive content for about 1/2 of the sites in the network.
-Exclusive content for the teenstarsonly site.
-File download options:
hi, medium, low quality WMV
MP4 ( Portable Devices )
MOV ( Quicktime Video )
-Zip files for the photosets
Cons: -Limited search options: Can search by name of model, or by date of update. But can't search by description of model, by description of type of sex action.
-Clumsy navigation.
-Going from one of the network sites to another is clumsy.
-Trying to see/search the vid files on a site is clumsy.
-Advertising for other sites on each page.
-Poor file names. Files are named with a number and the suffix "high", "medium", or "low", depending on whether you download the high, medium or low quality file. But if you want to know who the model is, or a short description of the action, you have to manually make up your own file record.
-You need a fast connection to play the flash files. My ISP connection downloads at 150-160 Kb/s, so I could not play the videos by flash. The flash video would stutter and stop, stutter and stop. So to see what the video was like, I had to download the entire video, then play the file.
Bottom Line: Cons (continued):
-Because I have a slow ISP connection (150-160 Kb/s download speed), it takes almost 2 hours to download a single video in high quality.
-The video files are fairly large size:
One sample movie, 25 minutes runtime:
Full Movie ( High Quality ) - ( 989.56 Mb)
Full Movie ( Medium Quality ) - (500.93 Mb)
Full Movie ( Low Quality ) - (301.81 Mb)

Bottom Line:
Hardcore teen site. Mainly a video site. There is a large photoset for each video, but there is little to no erotic or artistic quality to the
photos, they are more like video captures of the hardcore action. The models can be very attractive: they are young, slender, Eastern European teens, but you can't easily see how attractive they are, it's goddamn hard to see what the faces of these girls are like: the head is often cut out of the picture, the body, even though young, slender and attractive, is not made to look attractive. It's gonzo video and gonzo photography, and there's no erotic value to the photos, little erotic value to the videos, which are hardcore meat factory fuck and suck.
Site is part of a nice-sized network. This site hasn't updated since March 2010, but other sites in the network are updating.

08-01-10  07:33pm

Replies (11)
Review
75
Visit Zemani

Zemani
(0)

85.0
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -3 sizes for photosets: 800, 1200, 4000 px.
-zip file for each size px for each photoset.
-Online slideshow for photosets.
-Can download the videos or view as streaming.
-Material is exclusive.
-Tiny, unobtrusive watermark bottom right hand corner of photos.
-Vids have a larger watermark than the photos, small but not tiny, placed at bottom right corner of the picture.
-No DRM.
-No timeout from site.
-Can rate the model, photoset, and video. But this is a matter of personal taste, and I don't agree with a lot of the scores.
-Simple site navigation. Easy to get to the sets and videos of each model.
-One update per day (photoset or video).
-Most photosets have 100+ pictures each.
Cons: -Videos download as avi files. No other choice of format.
-Videos download as one file size only (no choice of high, medium, low resolution).
-Downloaded files have no descriptive name. Instead, the download file name is a number with "big", "medium" or "small" attatched, depending on whether you are downloading the big, medium or small px set. Downloaded videos are named with a number and the prefix "zemani-v".
-Search is basic but adequate. Can search by model name, age, or hair color. There is a limited number of models and photosets and videos, so this is not a big con.
Bottom Line: I resisted joining zemani as long as I could. But some of the models at this site are absolutely mouth-watering. I want to sink my teeth and other
body parts into these gorgeous creatures.
Although there are a nice number of photos and photosets for a site that started in 2006, I can't help wishing there were more photosets for my favorite models. Most models only have 1 or 2 photosets.
Site stats (April 4, 2010):
photos 64,806
galleries 471
videos 130
130 videos sounds like a lot of videos. But like many other softcore sites, the videos are short, most less than 10 minutes in runtime. Even
though the videos might have a gorgeous model as the subject, like most softcore sites, the videos are mainly forgettable. The real value lies in the photosets.
The photographic quality of the videos is good to high, but the videos are just ok. I'm much more into softcore than hardcore, but at most softcore
sites, the videos are just plain boring, no matter how attractive the model is. I don't really understand the psychology of why softcore
photosets of a model can be arousing, but a softcore video of the same model is usually boring. That is my reaction to the videos at softcore teen mega-sites.
The TBP review of this site, release date 6 Mar 2010, states the video "content ranges from softcore nude portraits to pussy spreads, girl-girl erotic posing, and more." I saw a number of videos, not all, and the only
content I saw was strictly softcore: no pussy spread, no girl-girl interaction that went beyond two girls that were nude. I found no solitary
or mutual masturbation, no toys, nothing that remotely approached hardcore porn.
There are some videos where the model performs a strip-tease. But you get better, more exciting strip tease at college night at a bar, where the
strippers are non-professional, probably less attractive than the zemani models, but they put on a much better show than the zemani models.
Also, the canned soundtrack on the videos is obtrusive; it adds nothing to the video, and often sounds annoying.
The models are 18 to very early 20s. Almost all Caucasian.
There is a nice mix of different settings/backgrounds for the photoshoots and videos: interior in a house, in a field, a stream, a lake or sea. Most photosets make nice use of colors in the background, the photosets are mainly nicely focused, the model is nicely featured in the shots. Not all shots are perfect, of course, but the photosets are equal to what you find at met-art, mplstudios, high quality glamor-style softcore photosets.
If you are looking for something more explicit than very softcore nudity, go elsewhere. If you are looking for softcore tease or strip tease, you are better off at a different site.

On a value basis, because the softcore teen mega-sites have far greater content, you are better off joining them first. But this is a nice
addition to the category, and the content will build over time. And the site does feature some absolutely yummy girls.

04-04-10  07:31pm

Replies (0)

Shown : 51-75 of 97 Page :    < Previous 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 1.08 seconds.