Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!


Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
Feedback History A detailed history of activity from this user in all different categories.
User : Drooler (220)  

Feedback:   All (3084)  |   Reviews (116)  |   Comments (241)  |   Replies (2727)

Other:   Replies Received (1471)  |   Trust Ratings (82)

Ratings & Reviews

All the reviews and ratings from this user.
Shown : 1-25 of 116 Page :    Next Page >

Type Site - Score Feedback / Review Date
Visit 1 By Day

1 By Day

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +huge collection going back to January 2001
+752 models
+new photoset (usually w/video) each day
+max pic sizes 1616px from 2/04; 2000px from 1/07 (two smaller sizes also available from 2/04)
+recent videos 672x378, in WMV/DivX/Quicktime segments; very crisp in 1024x768 screen rez; full-length HC are Hi-Def (1280x720) from 6/06 (often >500mb)
+solo, some w/ toys, fucking machines; lez; hc
+easy navigation
+quick server response (vid download over 600kps)
+public preview of models index
Cons: -no public preview of updates calendar (which they had years ago) or of monthly archives
-a few models so-so in looks
-zips of galleries only in largest size
-not really exclusive, as some of it shows up at ATK Galleria (there, as high as 1536px in 2007; 1024 before that)
-annoying black border around pics (not present in ATK Galleria)
-more recent “glam” shoots have too much shadow
-pre-2004 pics look funky
-voting on models, but can’t see results (if it matters to you)
Bottom Line: I’ve been a member of this site several times since Jan 2003. What’s attracted me are the beauties: Aneta Smrhova, Marina/Euphrat, Stracey, Simi, Caroline Cage, etc.

They even have recent HC vids of Stracey and Simi, I think with their boyfriends. You should see Simi assaulting the guy’s face with her tits (4/27/07). She looks like a fun chick! Sort of like Erica Campbell, but goin’ all the way.

May ’07 is a typical month: 58% are solo photosets with videos (some w/ toys, one w/ a sex machine); 29% lesbian, and 13% hardcore (in 2’s, 3’s, or 4’s).

It’s made important improvements over the years:
-better layout and navigation
-larger pics with more vivid color
-gallery downloads all in one set (used to be 1 zip per page), redone retroactively throughout (!) the site (a lot of work, that was!)
-much better server response (in 2004, had to go back and forth to a page just to get the thumbs to load (grrrr!); also was CONSTANTLY having to re-enter username and pwd.) Now you can hang around the site for quite awhile without being timed out. Yay!

Now I only wish they could retroactively increase their pic sizes, especially pre-2004. I’ve even asked them to redo a specific gallery or two, but got no response :(. Maybe it’s just not doable.

Since I wrote this review, the site has made further serious improvements: updates viewable in public area, vids in gobs of formats and sizes, and lots of reduxes of older pics and vids with great results! And two releases per day instead of one. Bravo! Raising the score. (Just wish they'd cool it with the toy stuff some, and do the ass shots in better ways more often -- but that's me!)

06-16-07  07:59pm

Replies (3)
Visit 66 Beauty

66 Beauty

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +Exclusive softcore photo and video content of beautiful Russian women -- 46, not 66, so far
+If you’re an ass lover, there is some great stuff here
+All pics are available at 3000, 1600, and 800 pixels on the long end in zips, 3000 px individually and sometimes in the lower sizes
+Galleries have at least 100 pics each
+Simple but tasteful and uncluttered layout
+Straightforward navigation
+Updates every other day with a photoset, beginning July 2009
+Videos in iPod, WMV 768x576 (1086kbps in sample vid), and QuickTime H264 1024x576 (1.6 Mbits per second), which is superior quality to the wmv here.
+Downloads at around 330kbps are OK, if not great
+Good visitors preview for overall grasp of the content
Cons: -Irritating login problems. You never know when you’re going to get prompted to re-enter your usepass.
-Semi-transparent grey border around every pic gets on the subject. ANNOYING!!
-Pics of goofy or angry expressions not edited out.
-A few galleries don’t display any thumbs!
-Some links to individual pics are 404! True in many galleries for all 1600 and 800 px sizes.
-Corrupted files in zips (a few)
-Photo thumbs are only 80x120 pixels; too small!
-Some shoots are segmented as separate updates. OK since each update has lots of pics, but not OK that the segments are often 2 months apart.
-Video updates are only 4-5 per month, and those are often partial shoots, too.
-Some very amateurish videocam work, or call it a lack of editing. They’re of the photo shoots. At least there’s no flashing light.
-Blurriness and light control problems come up, but it’s not chronic.
-There’s just a little bit of toy play here and there, so it’s a con whether you like it or not.
Bottom Line: If you’re a fan of the Russian girls, you’ll probably recognize Yulia (often Guerlain elsewhere), Yana (Rose at AvErotica), Susi (Kylie atAvErotica), Mocca (Anita at Errotica-Archives and TeenDreams; Danita at MPL Studios), Danny (Millis A or Mandy Dee), Bella (see Chloe at MPL Studios), and Lola (Bans, Cathy C, Ekaterina, Faith, Inga, Kat, Katerina, Lindsey, Nastya, Scarlet, Svetlana, Tori, Vikki), so she’s been at 14 sites so far! I don’t get the “66” part.

The sets are a mix of outdoor, indoor, and studio locations. There’s at least one photoset of each girl, and some have a lot. Several girls don’t have any videos. Visit, and you’ll see who does.

I still don’t get the “66” part.

The site is in English, though there are telltale “as a second language” signs. And speaking of second languages, there’s a bit of German, too, in the model pages, to tell you how many photosets and videos the girl’s got, assuming your lazy ass can’t do the arithmetic. And in the “favorites” section: “Hier könnten Ihre Favoriten stehen.” Hey, vatevah. My favorites may start global, but they always wind up local.

One standout beauty I haven’t seen before is their “Jennifer.” Wow, and HOWL again! Mandy Dee is a marvel of curvaceous femininity here, btw. And “Mocca” (Anita) has the most kissable lips!

One zip download had 3 copies of EACH file in it, about 380 in total. Delete, delete, delete ...

Oh, one video I looked at suddenly blanked out for a whole sleepy-town minute and showed nothing but a pattern that looked like it belonged to a dingy table cloth. Then the girl suddenly reappeared and continued posing. Was that intentional?? Talk about tease! And that was both in the wmv and QT versions.

In another, there was a spell of just the giant paper roll the girl had been posing on. No girl, just the paper roll. Was this some oblique attempt at product placement? How’s the Brawny supply holding up?

I would say this is primarily a photo site, anyway. The videos are “extra,” more extraneous than extraordinary, though with enough sampling and tossing, the surviving QT versions can make for pretty good eye candy.

Might as well be. There’s no sound.

But there are management issues. The login problems, the empty links for smaller pics, the missing thumbs, the lack of editing ... Most of these you can work around fairly easily, but work around you will.

And that’s for the exclusive photo content here, which is plenty good enough. Actually, this is the first site I’ve reviewed since last August that I’ve been especially happy about joining, in spite of the flaws.

I do wish they’d get rid of that grey border around the pics! Ughhh!

06-22-10  07:49pm

Replies (0)
Visit Alp Girls

Alp Girls

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +Lovely European ladies, many of them the tried and true
+Exclusive content!
+Launched with lots of content in Nov 2010. Currently has 156 photosets and 100 videos.
+Video streaming available, full-screen with built-in FlowPlayer, but see cons.
+Videos (mostly 10-20 minutes long) downloadable in both wmv and mp4, but see cons.
+Large photos: 3456x5184 pixels and vice versa
+Zips download quickly, but see the cons!
+Some girls who have been off radar for a while: Ally (Eny), Gwen/Pia, Lucy Lee (but only 1 set), and Monica Schimkova. They all look great!
+Some variety in shoots (indoor, outdoor, solo, girls together, lingerie/no “Alpine” dress). But it’s mostly “Alpine dress.”
Cons: -Navigation: AWFUL
-Some purely non-nude sets, and in many, the girls don't get completely nude anyway.
-No model index
-Thumbs of galleries only viewable 10 at a time
-Thumbs of pics in each gallery only viewable 10 at a time
-One photo size in zips: 3456x5184
-EACH ZIP is of the TEN PICS in a gallery you’re viewing (but see the neat workaround tip from anyonebutme in the replies to this review).
-Each zip in a gallery has the SAME NAME: modelname_pics_gallerynumber.zip, so YOU have to rename each one.
-Individual pics available only at 954x634
-Paging through galleries is sometimes slow.
-Videos are 320x240 in both MP4 (425 kps, 25 fps) and wmv (520 kps); full-screen playback looks bad.
-Streaming playback image is good, but bandwidth lacks, so it’s choppy on the computer monitor.
-Watermark is too big and winds up on the subject sometimes.
Bottom Line: I sure don’t care for the navigation. It’s not confusing so much as it’s tedious. It’s clear enough what you have to do to get the photo content: It’s the porn site equivalent of stamping, addressing, stuffing, and sealing 500 envelopes by hand. Why not have all-in-one zips?

And why not have them in more than just the mega-cutie 5184 pixel size? I’m sure that some folks would prefer an option of 1600 pixels at least some of the time.

And the videos, those I guess are intended for unoccupied-hand-held portable devices. They probably look nice on those. Well, maybe not a big ‘ol iPad.

More on the videos: Never heard any music playing on the ones I viewed. It’s mostly just the girl at first undressing (sometimes not very much), and the sound doesn’t kick in until she’s grooving down on her hot pocket and causes an avalanche. And sometimes the director talks to the girl, too. Kami was flirting and the director proclaimed his marital status.

Oh, yeah. Forgot. There’s no hardcore.

What action there is here is very formula driven: Girl takes off panties, drools on her own tits perhaps, hoists up alpine skirt to show pussy and maybe some ass, then grabs a toy (usually) and sucks and jabs. Sometimes you’re treated to 200 photos or more of this routine.

Alp Girls is a funny site. The pics are colossal. The vids are shrimpy. The navigation and photo downloading will induce fatigue. The babes are hot, but this user was pretty disappointed just the same.

01-28-11  02:38am

Replies (11)
Visit Ambra's Dreams

Ambra's Dreams

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +High quality photos of breathtaking Ambra (aka Valentina, Nadja, Vanessa Cooper)
+Zips of 1200s, 2000s, or 4992s in jpgs or "printable PDFs" (zip about the same size as for the 2000)
+Videos in Quicktime or WMV, both available in 1280x720 or 720x576, or iPod 320x240
+Good server speed
Cons: -only 29 photosets
-5 of the photosets are also on Watch4Beauty, but differently named
-only 4 videos
-one of the videos is also on Watch4Beauty
-navigation: click on a photoset thumb, then go to pointless enlargement of thumb, which you then click to view the gallery
-right click to download zip first time, but it fails; do again and it works. This "extra step" is required every single time.
Bottom Line: I first came upon Ambra at TeenDreams and was of course instantly smitten. She just looks like the kind of person you feel better just for being around. And she's definitely got the assets that a man craves.

Here's she's mostly outdoors (in 22 of the 29 pic sets and 3 of the 4 vids). She gets sand all over her skin in a couple of galleries.

If you haven't joined any of the other sites in this network, I'd recommend either Watch4Beauty or EroticDreams4You. The former has a lot of content buildup and is the best deal all around; the latter combines AmbrasDreams with 2 other sites -- of Nikky Case and Verunka, both very hot and alluring women -- for $24.95.

This review at least can give a potential subscriber to "ED4U" an idea of what's in the Ambra site.

By itself, high-quality though it is, it's not enough even for the $14.95 price.

Today I just saw one of the sets from this site on the Dreambabes bonus site of Babelicious, albeit at a max of 1600px. FYI, don't expect this stuff to necessarily be "exclusive."

09-01-07  05:41am

Replies (0)
Visit Ambya


Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +Some nice exclusive content of “natural” girls with no fake breasts
+Exclusive photos available in sizes up to 3000 pixels
+Easy to navigate; uses the same web package as now does Aziani and FuckedHard18
+Variety of models greater than shown in visitor’s pages (but see cons)
+Videos are only of the exclusive models (usually 2 per model) and are usually not shot at the same time as the photoshoots
+Videos available in DivX 1280x720 or 640x360, wmv 640x 360, iPod 480x272, or Flash video
+Total of 182 photosets to date
Cons: -Hasn’t updated with anything since May 2nd, '09
-Usually only 3 photosets of each exclusive model (one plain background; others in various settings)
-Some exclusive photosets are too dark
-Zips of exclusive content only of 3000 pixel photos
-Some of the exclusive models aren’t that appealing (chunky bods or overboard tattooing)
-Non-exclusive content is only 1024 pixels, even though there are always “stated links” for 1600 or 3000 pixel photos
-Thumbs don’t show all of pics; cut off sides of “landscape” shots are particularly annoying
-Not all zip file links work for non-exclusive content (the “Jeans” one of Renee Perez, for instance)
-Only 36 videos; 4 are “BTS”
-Videos are only 2-6 minutes long, mostly in the 3-4 minute range. This might be long enough for some. ;)
-Downloads are kind of slow, reaching approx. 360 kbps
-Last “news” post was over 2 months ago – not a good sign
Bottom Line: I’ve seen sites that started with a lot of non-exclusive content to boost the overall amount early in the game and gradually grew into truly exclusive sites. MPL Studios is one. But Ambya has done it in reverse! Browsing the model index by date, you’ll find most of the exclusive ones together from the time the site started. Then the non-exclusive, 1024 pixel sets start appearing rather suddenly, but regularly, usually with 2-3 updates per day until March 20th this year, when the frequency drops to 1 per day to May 2nd, after which purely archival zombieism sets in.

There are 89 models in total, but only 20 of them are exclusive content models. The rest are in the non-exclusive stuff, which includes Ember, Jade Hsu and Nikki Nova (many years old), but also some “less-old” stuff of girls like Cassie Young and Renee Perez.

Of the exclusive models, my favorites are Cali Logan, Stephanie Sage, Erin Nicole, and Alyssa Reese. Funny what they all have in common: Sexy eyes, slender figures, and nice butts. And usually small tits.

But others don’t do that much for me. Anyone remember Maliya Madison? I even have stuff of her from Shae Marks’ former site. Vintage 2003. Here at Ambya, she appears as “Heather.” She’s still got a cute face.

And “Tangent,” while having a nice physique, has this enormous tattoo all over one side of her body and much of her back.

It’s practically a cliche now, but you can’t always tell a site by its “cover” pages. I mean, just look at the bulleted points on the tour page ("Exclusive Content ... Diverse Model Portfolio," etc.). None of what they say is untrue, yet it is very different from what one would expect. Very.

And it’s a shame. Ambya looked like it had a good concept going: All-natural girls (‘except the ones with tattoos) in exclusive, toy-free softcore at 3000 pixels. But that sizzle turned to fizzle and now the fire’s apparently gone out.

Maybe there just aren’t enough all-natural girls around?

05-09-09  02:02pm

Replies (4)
Visit American Kittens

American Kittens

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +Features some hot models not seen much elsewhere: Chasen Love, Kayden Love, Reanna Mae, Sarah Peachez, etc.
+Exclusive content EXCEPT for stuff at other featured models’ sites
+Models show lots of personality
+Nice pic sizes at 2000 to 2300 px long end for portrait, 3000 to 3500 for landscapes
+Nice thumbnail size in galleries: 400x400 px!
+Over 200 videos, WMV (720x480, 5464kbps), plus h264 (720x480, 1.62mbps), mpgs, Quicktime, and Flash. Caps are available.
+Good download speed: starts around 400 kbps then climbs to 700-950
+Good navigation
+Tags (e.g., petite, indoor, shaved) let you find things fast, and you can suggest tags
+Responsive, friendly customer support
Cons: -Must manually enter on each login, plus a captcha
-(Added late May): They've redesigned and DIDN'T INCLUDE A MEMBER'S LOGIN LINK on the home page, so bookmark it from the start! And that's quite an oversight, no?
-Gallery pages too wide for 1024x768 screen resolution
-Thumbs show only half of each pic
-Only one pic size available for each gallery
-Inconsistent photo quality: quality glam, ‘shopped/glossed glam, grainy glam, amateurish/poor. So is lighting. And pose orientation, sometimes with 50% headroom or too far off to one side.
-Videos are mostly casual and amateur in style
-Videos vary greatly in length, ranging from 10 seconds to over an hour. Enough are 10+ minutes.
-A few vids are lower in quality
-Watermarks are a bit of a nuisance
-Clowning around by the girls is cute, but can get old
-“Nude” tag: Some of the girls NEVER take it all off. (Too much non-nude of Sarah Peachez)
Bottom Line: Fresh, exclusive content is presented here in myriad inconsistent and frustrating ways. With every click to a new gallery, you wonder.

It’s like this: How many thumbs will I have to enlarge to see what I think I’ll see? (What’s the point of thumbnails if not to show what’s in the entire image???) Will the next gallery be nude or non-nude? Will it have 1 page of pics, or 4? Will the lighting be OK, or will it be too dark? Will it be 150 watts ... 75 watts ... 40 watts depending on the picture? Is the model going to make a bunch of goofy faces?

And the videos? Well, it’s mostly of girls talking, often with men and/or other women. Sometimes there’s stripping. There’s not a whole heck of a lot of masturbation, nor girl/girl, nor boy/girl. The 2 hardcore vids of Kayden Love, with horrible lighting, color, and camera work, are entirely missable. And there’s one of Sarah Peachez just getting a “first-base” fondling by some guy.

You know how some sites can continue to draw you in? This one doesn’t. You have to force yourself to keep looking through more content to make sure you don’t miss anything that might actually be good.

There are many sites that charge around $30 bucks for a month (or less) that are better than this one, though along with the pros technically it does have some very nice and unique things to offer in content. There just wasn’t enough of them for the dough and all of the browsing time that had to be spent. The best stuff, I thought, was of Kayden Love, followed by Reanna Mae. At least there’s plenty here of those two. And they have nice asses! ;)

Bottom bottom line line: American Kittens has a lot of personality – more than a lot of really professional glam sites do – but it needs to standardize in key areas (nudity, for one) ... or come down in price.

05-15-10  08:39pm

Replies (4)
Visit APD Nudes

APD Nudes

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +The usual hot Euro babes such as Ariel/Piper Fawn, Chikita, Iveta B, Zuzana Zeleznovova, Katka Novotna, Samantha/Nina, Jana Mrhacova, and of course Jenni (bubblebutt!)
+Photos in two sizes: 1200 px and 3000-3500px
+Large photos are high quality and can individually be in the 1-4 MB file size range
+Zips for both sizes
+Good zip download speed at 1.8-2 Mbps
+Simple and clear design (but see the "quirks" in the cons)
+Low price if you sign up for a month. (It costs MORE per month if you sign up for 3. Weird.)
Cons: -A FIVE-FILE per week download limit that the subscriber is given NO WARNING about.
-A lot of non-exclusive material, and sometimes fewer pics than you’d find elsewhere
-Small site so far (52 photo sets and 11 videos)
-NO VIDEO DOWNLOADS. Only streaming in Flash player! And they don’t look that great.
-Updates every 2-3 days (not a major con)
-Quirk #1: upcoming photo updates are in the "photos" section, not the "updates" section
-Quirk #2: viewing from the galleries, you only get small (380x750) "enlargements" of the pics, which then can be clicked again for 666x1000px. But to get anything larger, you must download the zips. (That’s what I’d recommend. No use clicking yourself to death.)
-Quirk #3: doesn’t let you open galleries in a new window from a model’s profile page
-Quirk #4: if you DO have more than one window open of the site (doable by user sometimes), it won’t let you use the back button on that window
Bottom Line: "We have all been here before/We have all been here BEFORE ..." (Time for that old CSNY classic.)

Well, there’s having been there, and then there’s REALLY being there. Example: Chikita’s swimming pool set at TeenDreams is at 1600 px, but here you can get it at 3000px!

And once you do, you’ll be hoping that you never see it at any other site at that size. ;) And maybe you won’t! Why not be optimistic?

Well, sure, there is TeenDreams, Hungarian Honeys, MyGlamourSite, and JustTeenSite, to name some of the sites that some the photo material has appeared in. But those sites are more expensive!

Well, they DO have a lot more content, sure, but ...

Anyway, it isn’t just one photographer’s site. You see the work of such professionals as Stefan A, Michael Ancher, Bruno, Phillipo B, Christof, Iain, Roman Korovin, and Tom Veller. (Or is that Vellar? They spell it both ways.)

And there’s Chris Rugge, with the awful, "Days of Olde" murky-toned treatment of what could have been a wonderful color set of classy Michaela. She’s beautiful!

Since first posting the review, the webmaster has been in touch with me (see replies). Seeing how so many sites are doing more videos than photos these days and how some good softcore photo sites have gone away (such as Denude Art), I'm going to root for the underdog on this one.

Well, was ... Now they've imposed this five-file per week download limit which they spring on you after you've plunked down your payment. That's bad enough, but it's even worse when you get a "bad gateway" error when trying to download a zip and it gets added to your meager weekly allotment, which is what I suspect has happened to me.

They don't even tell you when a week begins and ends.

What the fuck difference does the 12.95 price make when you're going to be dicked around like this?

Don't make the mistake I did and wind up being SOL at APD.

And here's a little personal note for SteveB, the webmaster: You get a one-time-only-to-dick-me-around opportunity, and you've already gone and spent yours. That's the end of it.

12-12-09  11:11pm

Replies (7)
Visit Apex Glamour

Apex Glamour

Status: Was a member approx. 6 months prior to this review.
Pros: +Some great professional quality glamour photography
+Collection has nearly 320 photosets to date
+Approx. 130 models; mix of white, Latina, black, and Asian
+Some beautiful women; some known (Sanja Matice, Courtney Simpson, Chelsie Rae, Neveah, Puma Swede), some "new" faces
+All exclusive content
+Pics in 2 sizes (600px and 1200px)
+Good visitor's preview of updates list and models index
+Simple navigation
+Good design
Cons: -No zips, so gathering photos means first choosing the size, then repeating "click, open window, right click save, close window" for EACH photo. What fun!
-Updates come rather slowly (about 2-3 per week) and are not dated
-Join page mentions videos, but where? TBP said there were 2.
-Some of the women aren't attractive; some are too muscle-bound, overly tatted or pierced, or obviously beefed up with silicone
-Some photosets are too dark
-Some shoots are divided into 2-3 photoset updates
Bottom Line: Yes, it's been nearly 6 months since I've been a member of this site, but looking at the visitor's pages, I can go out on a 1-inch limb to say that the fundamentals haven't changed.

What needs to change most is having zip files. Sorry, I don't know if download managers work with this site. The "Contact" link doesn't work, but the "Support" link leads to a customer service page; an interested person could try asking there.

Of course, I'd also like pic sizes larger than 1200px, too.

It's a simple site that may interest and actually be a pleasant one-time join for glam fans, assuming you can use a download manager!

Finally, I've figured out the right "spin" to put on the fact that I've been away this long: I've thought about it several times, through two seasons, but I still don't plan on rejoining. How many "current members" can say that?

For visitors, they've now removed access to the list of updates and replaced it with a glammed-up set of "teaser" pages. Is the site still updating? No way to tell now! Bad move. Lowering the score from 73 to 70, but don't really know for sure what to score it now.

09-30-07  11:50am

Replies (2)
Visit Ariel's Blog

Ariel's Blog

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +Ariel (aka Piper Fawn): A fully blossomed, all-natural 24-year-old woman with girlish, sometimes mischievous charms. She looks closer to 19.
+Clean, clear, straightfoward site design
+Login right on the home page (no clicking for it)
+Exclusive content, even within the Watch4Beauty collection of sites
+Total of 87 “nude art” photosets so far (back to late Sept. 2007)
+”Backstage” photosets (17 so far) might provide some additions to some “nude art” ones
+17 “real life” photosets (but not that interesting unless you and she have friends in common, IMHO)
+Photos in 3 sizes (1200’s, 2000’s, and large at least in 3872px)
+Zips in all three sizes
+Videos in iPod (640x480); QT and WMV 720x576
+Updates continue (unlike every other single-model Watch4Beauty site)
+Users can rate photosets and videos
+Active fans’ forum
+Members get discount rates to other W4B sites (“links” page)
Cons: -Some photosets emphasize the “art” at the expense of enjoyable nudity
-Blurriness, darkness, graininess, strange skin coloring (especially red) in some of the photosets
-A small number of black & white photosets
-Watermark on photos can be annoying
-Not many videos. 8 in “nude” art and 6 each in “backstage” and “real life”
-Some videos may bore (Ariel looking into space) or frustrate with all of the cutting and splicing
-Videos usually under 5 min. (may be a pro for some)
-Somewhat irregular photo or video updates, but 3 per week on average for all types
-“Search” box shows only on the home page; good only for searching titles of updates
-Server rather slow (rarely > 400kbps; 20mbps connection)
Bottom Line: Ariel has a face that can project many nuances of mood with her eyes and mouth. She can look right into the camera and “connect” with a grin, an arched eyebrow, a startled stare, etc. She is one-of-a-kind and yet she possesses a chameleon-like versatility. This really shows when a good makeup artist or hairdresser is involved.

One video that drives this home is “Valentine day” (Feb. 14, 2008). You really get the feeling that you’re right there with her as she caresses herself and looks straight into the camera.

It’s too bad that it was an exception. The same goes for photosets with her looking away, looking down, keeping her eyes closed. In other words, the “spark” that she can create would have ignited more often had those on the production end of things been more conscious of capturing it.

But there were some nice photosets here, for sure. Some of the real standouts include “Desert Rose,” “Green Tea,” “I Like My Bed,” “Wood Nymph,” and especially “My Lamp” and “Palm.”

I also thought the video "Wanted for beauty" was good as unique video art.

The fans forum is also rather interesting. Ariel’s native language is Czech, so of course don’t expect her to know English as if she were born and raised on it. What she says about her standards as a model I found impressive (e.g., avoid doing what you’ve seen 100 times already) and the way she handles jerks (enough of those) was, too. The lady just doesn’t waste her time with other people’s crap.

Bottom-bottom line: This site’s worth a join for Ariel fans.

08-08-08  04:53pm

Replies (5)
Visit Ashley Doll

Ashley Doll

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -Ashley is sweet and beautiful
-content is almost entirely exclusive (exception: one huge Hustler gallery)
-navigation is simple and straightforward
-design is simple with a good color scheme
-ample number of pics in each gallery; varies from approx. 80 to over 200
-videos in 4 formats (WMV low (960x540), WMV high (1440x810), iPhone, and iPad)
-fast-moving downloads (1.5-2.5Mbsp)
-reliable billing company: Epoch
-blog and forum are active with Ashley posting/participating, though the forum isn't terribly active on the member end
Cons: -only one file size for pics in zips: huge (4752x3168; sometimes 5184x3456); FYI: enlarged in galleries 1067x1600
-galleries display no more than 15 thumbs per page
-in gallery section, number of pics per gallery and file sizes not stated; in video section, lengths, file sizes, and dimensions of videos not stated
-updates once a week with a photo gallery or video
-15 videos to date
-41 photo galleries to date
-shoots are "professional," which doesn't always mean great
-monthly membership price of US $29.69 will discourage some from joining
Bottom Line: I really liked this site. It's softcore without toys. I knew it was kind of a splurge given the amount of content, but it hasn’t given me any buyer’s remorse.

Ashley first came to my attention through David Nudes, where she is "Taylor Ashley." She's also appeared at Hustler, Twistys and Met-Art, and even did a bit of b/g hardcore at Exploited College Girls. As she makes clear in her blog, she does not intend to do any more hardcore with males. However, she is bisexual, so who knows if she'll take the g/g route some time?

More on photos: Ashley definitely has a way with the camera, gushing sweetness with her smile and her eyes. She has a nice, trim frame with lovely all-natural boobs and an ass that will make you glad to be alive just to see it. I only wish that the photos didn’t have so much hot streaming sunlight coming over her, especially in the indoor shoots by windows, but there’s enough good stuff after that kind have been pitched out.

More on videos: These are mostly posing and smiling and stripping without any music or talk to speak of. There are just a scant few that have her masturbating and moaning, but they are nice.

Clearly, this is a single-model site for the softcore fan with a few extra bucks to reallocate from the beer fund to something that’s gonna last a while longer. With that in mind, I recommend it.

10-11-14  05:10am

Replies (1)
Visit AT Kingdom

AT Kingdom

Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +Massive collection. Updates photos Tues. to Sat. every week.
+Many hot American and Euro babes
+Photos usually at 1536px since Jan. 2007
+Much content not seen elsewhere.
+Many niches: amateurs, coeds, babes, lingerie, uniforms, masturbation, feet, lesbian (“experimental coeds”), blowjobs, hardcore action, etc.
+Excellent, unparalleled search features by months, single days, model names, and many model and niche types
+Member participation in voting on models and on each photoset.
Cons: -Photo quality varies greatly, even now, from vivid color/clarity to poorly lit, “orange skinned models,” etc.
-A few “no way” models
-Non-exclusive content, same as from sites like TeenDreams and 1byDay; smaller pic sizes, too (but still good at 1536). 1by sets split between SC and HC galleries here. (That’s really cheating!)
-Vids segmented over weeks! Ugh!
-Zips of photos are by-gallery-page. 10 pages = 10 zip files to compile together! Such menial tasking is no fun.
Bottom Line: Like other PU members who’ve written about it, I’ve been a long-time fan of this site. How many sites offer 16+ gallery sets per day, meaning 80+ per 5-day week? 6,400 galleries is the total on quick estimate; could be more. Can’t beat it for value if you’re a photo fan. On pic size as well, they whip other large collections such as Twistys.

I also like that voting on photosets is distinct from voting on models. I’ve avoided voting on sites where only the galleries get rated as I haven’t wanted some models to suffer “collateral damage,” so to speak. I don't know how much much effect the voting actually has, though.

As for the vids, ~24 new HC, lez, and solo ones come each Monday. 213 such collections to date. 640x480, WMV and QT options for each, 70 to 160MB/7 to 12+ min. each, going back at least 30 collections. At least more recently the segments are longer. Some I've seen elsewhere, but, not bad!

Improvements needed, in priority order are:
1. Provide all-in-one zips! (ATKP Premium does!) That pop-up thing that replicates downloading by the page is utterly superfluous.
2. Improve image quality where needed. Stuff that looks like late ’90’s crap doesn’t cut it anymore, even at 1536px.
3. Do as little non-exclusive content as possible.
4. Reduce the obsessive upskirt and toy shots. Drop “pregnant.” (Too scary!)

Was really tempted to rate this site in the 90’s. Came very close! Call it an 89.9. I recommend it for sure, with a few caveats.

09-20-07  06:59am

Replies (12)
Visit ATK Exotics

ATK Exotics

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +vast and growing collection
+models not seen at other sites; some are very attractive
+updates every day except Sunday
+most photosets from Jan. 2007 on are 1536px
+excellent variety of search and browse capabilities
Cons: -overall quality not as good as ATK Galleria or ATK Premium
-gallery zips broken down by the page; 7 pages in a gallery? SEVEN annoying little zips in a row.
-too many categories: 12 for softcore; 9 for hardcore. Can ignore by using the search engine to get all photo or video content thumbs for a specific day or a whole month.
-plain and unattractive site design and color scheme
-in “latest updates,” thumbs are only of the current day’s updates; the rest are text only
Bottom Line: “ATK” puts out sites of varying types and quality. Here’s a comparison of ATK Exotics with what I think is the best of them, ATK Galleria (AG).

1. On photo quality, AG is a lot better overall. From Jan. this year, their pics have almost always been 1536px in size; Exotics started doing 1536’s about the same time, but not as consistently. Of the 193 photo galleries in Aug. ’07, most were at 1536, but 24 were smaller, usually in their “Best of” category (?) with unbalanced color and a cheap, grainy look like stuff from the late 90’s. But even the large ones in Exotics suffer more often from poor lighting and/or color control; some of the dark women would look just fine in better hands.
2. AG has more photo updates; 362 in Aug. ’07, for instance.
3. The women at AG are generally more attractive. You might wonder if I’ve got a racial preference, but no, attractive is attractive, no matter what the style or the wrapping is. And one of the draws of this site are the women “of color” that you don’t see on the other ones. Some of ‘em are HOT, but some are NOT lookers at all! It’s kinda gross.

The “babe” continuum is like this: ATK Premium/Galleria (close to a tie) – Exotics – Natural and Hairy (and fat ‘n ugly!). (“Archives” I haven’t been to in years, so I can’t comment.)

In sum, a 90-day term with Galleria is satisfying, but with Exotics, it’s once every 6-8 months, with the understanding that a fair amount of the newer content will be skipped over.

09-01-07  06:54pm

Replies (0)
Visit ATK Petites

ATK Petites

Status: Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
Pros: +Updates are always exclusive content, of their “featured petite” models, every day from site launch
+Exclusive featured petite model photos are 1600px
+Usually (not always!) 2 updates per day (2 photosets, or 1 each of photo and video)
+Zips of all photosets
+Videos in up to 5 formats: Flash Stream, QT, MP4, WMV (854x480), and WMVHD (1280x720, 4025 kbps)
+621 “bonus” petite models with tons of content – but see the cons
+Fast downloads to 2Mbps
+Great search engine that allows many kinds of searches
+ The results of your 10 most recent searches are automatically stored and easily retrieved
Cons: -Only 14 “featured petite” models so far, and they vary in appeal (looks and whether or not they do hardcore, if you’re a hard core hardcore fan)
-Bonus content is previously published material from other ATK sites such as ATK Galleria, ATK Premium, ATK Exotics, and ATK Natural and Hairy
-Some bonus content is pre-2007 (max pic size 1024px; vids not as good as these days)
-Most featured petite models have also appeared on other ATK sites, so quite a lot of their content is also not really exclusive to the ATK Petites site
-Even recent videos not always available in all formats, including HD. Saw one hardcore of Dani Cole in only 2 formats, though the wmv vid looked fine.
-Visitors cannot view recent updates or browse listings of models
Bottom Line: Us guys are not such a varied lot; we’re a lot like the fare at the local pizzeria. Women, on the other hand, I’d liken to Asian food. There’s so much variety! To say nothing of delicious! This is true among the petite girls here (“bonus” stuff, too). They’re by definition trim, no taller than 5’4”, and no heftier than 110 pounds. From there, the possibilities are nonetheless staggering.

The “featured petite” models are Aundra (10 galleries, 5 videos), Camila (23, 7), Dani Cole (26, 5), Emma (11, 4), Emy (44, 15), Evie (16, 5), Jana Foxy/Jordan (42, 12), Jayme Langford (48, 12), Kaylee (3, 2), Lexi Belle (33, 6), Marie McCray (100, 12), Nicole Raye (50, 13), Olivia, seen at FTV Girls as Lidia (9, 3), Stephanie Crane (19, 9). NB: Figures include both “Petite” exclusive and other ATK site content.

Not that I’m “staggered” by each and every one. Aundra is too skinny! Marie needs to watch it with the high fructose corn syrup, or whatever the cause might be. Emma has acne, though she’ll get past that and probably blossom into a full-blown woman soon enough. She does hardcore, and I’ve heard that sex helps clear the pores.

One standout is Jayme Langford. Some of the photosets of her reveal subtle nuances of mood that are worth slowing down to take in. Well, obviously I’m smitten.

It’s not easy to score this site. Petite fans, especially those with no ATK site experience, would probably love it. Those with credit card statements reflecting one or more ATK site purchase might want to hold off longer until the exclusive content has grown more. Still, it wouldn’t be fair to knock the site for simply being fairly new. So whether you agree with the score or not, I hope you now know enough to make an informed decision about whether or not to subscribe.

07-04-09  03:13am

Replies (6)
Visit ATK Premium

ATK Premium

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +295 different models; many attractive ones
+huge collection
+exclusive content (mostly)
+most photosets in 1536px; some max at 1024
+photos can be browsed by category: solo, toys, boy-girl, girl-girl, artistic
+search feature by name, characteristics (age, hair, tits, tatoos, etc.), dates, or photographer
+download photos all in one zip, or a zip of each page (helpful with long photosets)
+better navigation: back button no longer throws you back to page 1 of a gallery
Cons: -only 4-5 new photosets per day (M-Sat); sister site ATK Galleria has 16 per day (T-Sat.) for the same price
-some videos single file in WMV (640x480) or Quicktime, but some even new ones are only in mpg (single file or segments)
-tour site doesn’t show updates nor clearly link to “new this week” page (free.atkpremium.com/main.php)
-original, unique design of the site gone
-“artistic” sets: a nice euphemism for “boring,” usually
-too many shoots are uninspiring
Bottom Line: It’s OK as a video site, with lots of solo, lez, g/g and b/g content. (Noticed a HC vid of Julie Silver seen on a Defrancesco site, so I say “mostly” exclusive.)

As a photosite, there’s tons of exclusive pics, some hot, some not, but plenty to look through.

This site goes back to least early 2004. Then, it was “special,” with a unique design, larger photos than ATK Galleria, and an emphasis on the model’s personalities. Unfortunately, that meant models doing mudane things such as laundry, makeup, cooking, and cleaning, partially or fully nude.

Earlier this year, a major crash brought it down for several weeks. Once it finally returned, in mid-April 2007, the new sets no longer featured household chores – thankfully – but the site lost its unique design and personality.

Gone are the archives of complete monthly update lists with thumbs of all galleries and videos. The design and organization are now quite plain and very much like those of ATK Exotics or Natural and Hairy.

Re: organization, you now can click “solo” and then “2007 06,” for example, to see all of the solo sets for the month. It’s quite clear and easy to use.

This change means, however, that now only ATK Galleria has a design unlike any of the other “Amateur Teen Kingdom” sites. And although it pads itself with non-exclusive stuff seen at Denys Defrancesco sites and TeenDreams, with photos now also at 1536, it still offers more for the regular resubscriber than this “premium” site does.

06-14-07  01:04pm

Replies (1)
Visit Autumn Riley

Autumn Riley

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +British Columbian dynamite beauty Autumn Riley, a sexy model who has a lot of presence in front of a camera
+Photos are quite professionally done in image quality
+Photo galleries are at least 2000 pixels on the long end, if that’s the only size
+Most shoots are done indoors where the lighting is easier to control
+Videos are H264 mp4’s at 1920x1080, and are downloadable, but see the cons
+Fast download speed for videos (around 4-500 kbps)
+Navigation is easy and intuitive
+Fairly simple and straightforward design
Cons: -No zips for the photos
-Doesn’t allow download manager to grab pic batches
-Photo size selection varies a lot depending on the gallery. Sometimes they’re only 2000 px on the long end. A small handful are only 4000. A few have 1200, 1600, 2000, and 4000.
-Videos are jerky on playback, at least on my system, both streaming and downloaded/offline
-Videos come in only one humongous size
-Updates content once a week; it’s growing slowly, currently with 36 photosets and 20 videos
-Calendar doesn’t indicate when future updates will be posted
-Blog hasn’t been updated since May this year
-Visitors don’t really get enough of a preview of the site content
Bottom Line: Autumn Riley is both the model and, from what I can tell, the webmaster of this site. She’s also really busy, it seems, going to college at the same time. AND she’s a smokin’ beautiful 18-year-old with lustrous dark hair and dark eyes; as for the rest, I don’t believe it’s possible to be disappointed. She’s a got a couple of small tattoos, but they are placed tastefully.

She poses mostly in bathrooms, on living room couches, in beds, in the kitchen, and on a boat. She often gets completely naked in the photo galleries, but not always. Usually, she poses solo, but there are a couple of photosets and videos with a female friend.

For a site that is amateurish and inconsistent in some ways, the quality of the photo content is really high. It is better-looking content than I’ve seen at some of the more “professional” sites, with no shirking on file sizes, either. The 59 photos I saved of her “Blue Tank Top” strip in a kitchen take up 287 megabytes of storage space; that averages 4.86 megabytes each; it was one of those that was only available in the 4000 pixel size. And the 2000 pixel photos will average over a megabyte.

I’m not complaining (my hard drive can handle it), but prospective members might want to know.

So what’s to become of Autumn Riley? Will she continue modeling? Will she start appearing at other sites? (I’d love to see her at TorridArt, for instance.) Will her own site get a new infusion of energy and attention, and start flourishing?

Or will Autumn keep her glasses on, not to take off during a photo shoot, but to study even harder and get through college and on to a career doing something else, and live on in Facebook/Twitter obscurity? Could this be one of those sites that comes and goes, the kind that winds up with that “no longer active” notice at PU?

It’s anyone’s guess at this point, I’d say, along with “Might Recommend,” as long as you don’t mind saving the photos of Autumn one at a time.

09-18-11  05:12pm

Replies (0)
Visit AV Erotica

AV Erotica

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +NO TOYS! (Yes, it can be done!)
+All exclusive
+Photos in 667x1000, 1667x2500, and 29xx X 43xx.
+Zips in medium size only, but they’re heavy, and the galleries have lots of pics. (Example: 5 zips I had of one model equaled about 650MB.)
+High quality, data-rich images. A medium-sized with a plain green background was 656K; a large was 1.72MB.
+Videos, smallest to largest file size, in wmv, Quicktime, and DivX
+Galleries from 07/07, daily from 11/07
+Server speed
+Easy, sensible navigation
+Can rate and/or comment on models, galleries, and videos
+Visitor’s preview shows a lot about the site
+Do check out the blog area. The writing is clear and focused and the stories told there might interest you. The English is almost perfect. They must have a great Russian-English translator. (Assuming that Volkov is Russian. Ukrainian? Other? I don't know.)
Cons: -For video fans: Not that many are up so far. 26 to date. Videos started in 9/07 and there’s a new one each Tuesday.
-For 1280x720 stalwarts, just 16 of the vids are that size.
-Videos can be boring
-Too many photos of the model looking away from the camera
-Galleries usually have no clear organization; I recommend a "narrative" approach of stripping to total nudity with implied sex
-Blurriness in some photos was a bummer, especially of what would have been splendid ass shots of Goldie (oh my!). Overly dark pics less of a problem, but sometimes were.
-Would you like all of the models? I didn’t, but I liked enough.
Bottom Line: Anton Volkov (hence the “AV” in the site name) is an established nude photographer with quite a corpus of work at MetArt, where he presently ranks #10 among their 60 listed artists. Several of his models there are also here, including Alice A/Malina, Irina, Julia, Katya, Leticia, Nusia, Olivia, Riana, Tati, and the especially awe-inspiring Lena, Goldie/Zlata A, and Nata (aka Helen, Larissa, etc.).

There are no duplications of MetArt material here. And yes, this is a purely softcore site, and I hope it stays that way.

Vids: With softcore vids, it’s especially challenging to keep the viewer enthralled. I recommend this basic idea: “I am undressing for you ... I want you so bad ...” The model has to get aroused, look often right into the camera, and feel passion for someone who’s not physically there. The POV is the viewer, having a very memorable day.

Dasha’s vid of turning around on a bed, looking very bored and clueless as to what to do was a total bomb. Olivia’s “In Corset” was better, as she had some magnetism, but it still didn’t hold me. And that’s all the predictable boredom that I cared to undergo to write this review.

$24.95 for access to several months of exclusive, quality content was a good deal, in spite of the flaws, without which the site would have rated higher.

What it needs most is a more consistent visceral "connection" between the models and the viewer, in the pics and the vids.

02-10-08  04:03am

Replies (6)
Visit Aziani


Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +Exclusive pics of hot American and Euro models
+All exclusive pics in 1400px size
+Zip files at good speed
+File names include model name, gallery number, and file number
+Straightforward navigation if you understand how it works (see “Bottom Line”)
+More recent vids at 960x540; crisp and excellent quality!
Cons: -Times you out after awhile (not due to inactivity!); makes you type in UN, PWD, and random security code each time
-Not all content is exclusive; superfluous access to 20 bone-ass, I mean bonus, sites
-Some non exclusive pics in 1024 or 800 px size, some crummy in quality
-Saving single pics, file name is “push” (hmm), so just get the zips.
-LARGE watermark in pics that sometimes overlaps the subject
-Vids mostly solo softcore WMV (a plus for some, of course)
Bottom Line: There are about 460 vids total (including the bonus sites, as far as I can tell). Trust me, there are TONS of pics, but not all that glitters …

The bonus site content is actually integrated right into the Aziani site, so by clicking, say, “Crissy Moran,” in the models index, you’ll be taken to her content. You could instead click the Crissy site thumb, but you’d be getting the same stuff. That’s why it’s superfluous, but it is convenient. And I mention Crissy because I was once a member of her old site; haven’t seen anything new here.

From most recent to least, the photo content goes from vivid quality to so-so to “forget it,” the last being old, non-exclusive “filler” content we’ve all seen before and have probably purged from the hard drive by now.

Some of the non-exclusive stuff, of European models, is in 1600px and very good quality; however, you might have seen it already, as it’s also generally available at the Babelicious bonus sites, clubsilviasaint.net (which offers previews, so you can see the kind of stuff I mean), and many more.

The biggest plus is the delicious exclusive content of models like Andi Valentino, Nikki Nova, Moni Michaels, Jamie Lynn, Carli Banks, Lexxi Tyler, Charlie Laine, etc. But I wish I’d waited longer to join, so there would be more of it. There are about 33 models with just one to seven exclusive galleries each.

And Rachel Aziani is here, too, in photosets. She and her husband, Buzz, co-created and run the site.

06-06-07  05:43am

Replies (4)
Visit Babe Centerfolds

Babe Centerfolds

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +Exclusive content
+Quite a few hot babes
+Some of the newer photography is really good: Justine Joli, Michelle Maylene, Nika Noire, Rebecca Linares (though some of it is on her site, too), and Leah Wilde are hot.
+Some galleries have MANY photos (but there are those excessively repeated poses)
+Two subsites included: “Club Sabrina Rose” and “One Time Babes” (this one, mostly videos, is VERY disorganized, though)
+No DRM on the videos
Cons: -“We guarantee daily high quality super sexy updates,” they say. Nonsense. 6/13, 6/11, 6/06, 6/4, 5/30, 5/28, 5/23, 5/21, 5/16, 5/14, 5/12, 5/09 ... so much for that.
-“(Including Extremely Large PHOTOS compressed in ZIP files available for download),” they say. Phooey, I say. Most newer photos are 1200px. Found only TWO galleries of the “extremely large” (3072px).
-NO ZIPS of ANY photos except for the 2 "extremely large"
-Slideshow feature doesn’t work
-Lists only the last 12 updates. To find the other dates, click on model, then on gallery; the date is under each thumbnail.
-Disorganized! Justine Joli "Fashion 1" gallery pics labeled "Fashion 2" is but one example.
-Some content is really old and looks it; 1024’s, and lower. Example: Jana Cova “Dress Up” from 2003 is 800px.
-Slow video downloads (330Kbps; ISP max is 20Mbps)
-Nominal video sizes can be misleading: Mariah Nelson “Back Alley Noir” 720x480 is actually smaller but matted in those dimensions.
Bottom Line: This is one of those sites that you like for having exclusive content, but you keep wishing it was in better hands. Pics that are too small, no zips (well, almost), amateurish design, and webmaster incompetence all make it feel like a wasted opportunity. Really, the web design is a joke. You can look at the site and see how it could be to set up in a user-friendly way instead of the sorry state that it’s actually in. Frankly, I’m amazed.

Why not have separate sections for models, photos, and videos, each with their dates posted THERE, for all of the content? This site is organized just by models (these models on page one, these on page two, etc.). And sometimes in a model page you get a video image, but click deeper and there are also photos.

The header on each gallery page of photos takes up so much vertical space that you have to scroll down to see the photo. Go to next photo, repeat ...

You’d almost think the objective was to make this site non- ... no, make that, counter- ... no, ANTI-intuitive and just plain difficult.

Low score, and well deserved, especially for 1. the statement “(Including Extremely Large PHOTOS ...,” which gives the misleading impression that much of the site has such photos, and 2. their “guarantee” of daily updates.

And actually, some content that it used to have is missing! Where are the Madison Doll, Meriah Nelson, and Rebecca Lord photosets? (Have been a member twice before, Dec. ’05 and Nov. ’06.)

06-14-08  06:55pm

Replies (4)
Visit Babelicious


Status: Current Member for over 3 months (at the time of review).
Pros: +570 photo sets to date, usually of very HOT Euro and American babes
+Just 37 of the photosets are hc (a + for me; a - for others, though)
+Pic sizes max at range of 2500 to 4000px
+Zips or pics à la carte in 1000, 2000, and max size for each photoset (usually)
+Flexible, intuitive navigation and gallery viewing options
+Very easy and helpful search functions
+265 vids (35 are b/g; 20 are lez)
+Detailed info (for each vid, too) available to visitors
+8 bonus sites (3 are really good!)
Cons: -Most of the content is not exclusive, but generally done better than other sites do.
-Too much toy content; would like more good solo ASS content, like Claudia Oct. 28, photo number 62. (THAT’S what I’m talkin’ about!)
-Wish they had thumbs corresponding to the main activities in each vid segment; they have good thumbs for the content overview of each vid, though.
Bottom Line: I’ve seen LOTS of these photosets at BlueFantasies, TeenDreams, Xisty, ATK Galleria, and the now defunct BrandNewBabes, BUT Babelicious offers larger pic sizes and more flexible viewing and download options than most. (I like to view all the pics on one page, and it’s a snap here.) And Xisty puts only a fraction of their content above 1800px in a “special” section of their site; at Babelicious, it’s just normal to have pix at 2500px or higher. So Babelicious does ‘em best, that’s for sure.

Add to the pros:
+You can vote on each model and on each photoset and video, and you can post comments
+Previews of the next 10 photosets to come and the next 6 videos
+Highly responsive, friendly support
+The bonus sites SexyBabes.tv, DreamBabes, and Eurobabez update 5-6 days per week. From Sept this year, SexyBabes got an improved interface (similar to Babelicious’) and has been offering larger pics, sometimes to 3500px, as well! DreamBabes offers a lot of MatrixNudes content, usually at 1600px. Eurobabez also does 1600px most of the time. All of them also have even more videos! And all have zips.

Add to the cons:
-The bonus site content isn’t exclusive, either, except perhaps BabesUK, which updates infrequently and erratically and has a “bleached” quality in the photos.

Among those sites that specialize in the non-exclusive (hey, someone has to!), Babelicious is probably the best there is. It’s very user-friendly, with valuable features and tons of content.

12-09-07  10:52am

Replies (7)
Visit Baltic Babes

Baltic Babes

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +Some attractive women you've probably not seen before
+Generally good quality photography
+158 photosets (may be closer to a "con" for some)
+Models with the most photosets: Akvile (29), Gabriele (21), Jurate (15), Loreta (16), Gaile (15), and Zivile (16)
+Photos in two sizes: 1600x1067 and 800x534
+Videos in WMV 1280x720; 5516kbps (some are lower)
+Not great, but not bad download speed for videos (575kbps or so).
Cons: -Limited visitor's preview
-They say "3X Weekly Updates," but as of May 12, they hadn't updated at all since April 26th. (Maybe the meaning has changed to "once every 3 weeks.")
-Only 13 models
-Oversized watermark on both the pics and the vids
-NO ZIPS for photosets (!)
-Photosets vary in size from just 6 to 274; many are in the 40-60 range
-Only 12-14 photoset updates per month (lag time can be 5 days).
-Models with only 4-5 photosets: Goda, Ieva, and Violeta
-Only 23 videos so far and only 3 video updates since February this year.
-Video list doesn't always say who is in the video (and the thumbs don't make it clear sometimes either)
Bottom Line: After all of the recent discussion of Daisy this, Nikki that, and Sandy this 'n that, you might find it refreshing to encounter girls with names like Akvile, Jurate, Milda, and Zivile. As the homepage states, most are Lithuanian, and a few are Latvian or Estonian.

There are some pretty ones here. My personal favorites are Milda and especially Loreta. Milda may have a hard look in some photos, but she's very sexy in her video, rolling around on a bed and showing her lovely round ass. Woooh, Milda got back!

And Loreta is simply beautiful, with a slim figure, nice curves, lovely all-natural full breasts, and a face that would sail a thousand ships. I've got high hopes that she somehow shows up big time at MetArt and FemJoy.

Gaile is another beauty, but she's crimped her own style with an annoying large ass tatoo and a heavy green addition to her blond hair (though it's closer to red in some photosets). Nothing was broken, so she "fixed" it. Probably one of those girls who simply doesn't see how good she's got it. Well, had it.

You've heard of tit-for-tat? Akvile is a brunette with lovely light blue eyes, but she's got tats-for-tits. Animal paw prints. Fuckin' eh.

Anyway, the low score is due to all of the inconsistencies in updating and pics per set plus the lack of vids, lack of models, and the total absence of zips, especially given the price of 29.99. And that blasted watermark. Why, why, WHY??

Let's hope they make improvements in the future.

04-30-08  02:05pm

Replies (2)
Visit Bare Maidens

Bare Maidens

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +Exclusive photos of hot American babes
+large sized pics usually at 4000px
+zips available of two sizes (but see the con's)
Cons: -just 111 galleries total so far; site's been up since May 2006; updates about every three days
-Medieval theme, sometimes with weapons, "sorcery" photo effects, masks or face paint or smudges of soil, etc. on the models
-zips are a pain: often they don't download properly the 1st time and you have to redo them once or even twice, replacing the first incomplete download
-only two pic sizes: elvish 1000's or Grendel-sized 4000's
-blurriness in pics sometimes
-tacky, "late 90's" web design
Bottom Line: If you'd like to see American girls in a medieval fantasy theme, you might well enjoy such depictions of Alektra, Courtney Cummz, Cytheria, Jayna Woods, Mia Rose, MaryAnn (a blond with a very nice ass and sweet personality), Phoenix Ray, Tavia Spizer, etc.

Often, the girls and their charms are not upstaged by the "effects" mentioned in the con's, but sometimes the heavy "blue light" immersion or other photoediting tricks do detract from the primal, beastly enjoyment.

I'd say let the girls work their natural magic on us and leave it at that.

But on the positive, I must say that it's pretty rare to get photos at 4000px size of these girls. For that, this site should be commended.

I'd rate it several points higher if they'd fix the zips, have more consistently clear large pics and have a medium pic size, such as 1280 or 1500.

05-17-07  03:29pm

Replies (1)
Visit Beauty Is Divine

Beauty Is Divine

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +High quality, professional photography
+Exclusive content
+Speedy server
+Mix of Euro, Latina, and American babes
+Some hot “name” babes: Georgia Jones, Heather Carolin (as “Scarlett”), Alexis Love, Sasha Grey, Franziska, Lexi Belle, Klara/Zoe, Nella (Jana Miartusova)
+Some hot “lesser knowns” and unknowns
+Zips. The most recent 24 photosets in 1200, 2000, and 4000px. But see the cons.
+Nice thumbnail sizes (277x417).
+Simple, clear, attractive design, but note the cons.
+”Showcase” tells you some things about the photographer and his work.
Cons: -Only about 98 photosets to date
-Updates about 1x per week.
-Photosets accessed from one LONG, SCROLLING page.
-Average number of pics per set is 23 in the ten most recent photosets.
-A few photosets have < 10 pics.
-Approach to zips is inconsistent. Most zips are “hi” (2000px) and “low” (1200 px), but a few photosets have only one zip size (e.g., 1200x800, called “medium” then!).
-Inconsistent approach to single files. Most have the hi and low, but the most recent have only 2000px as singles.
-Artistic approach means black & white photos either mixed with color ones in a gallery or all B&W (15 to date; a bit over 15%)
-Many photosets are purely artistic objectifications; the stuff of exhibition halls, not a horndog’s hard drive. In fact, some of them don’t even give the model’s name anywhere.
-However, pussy probing with toys has shown up, too.
-“Bonus” features is just two more galleries, and boring.
-No videos
Bottom Line: The site shows signs of improvement with the expansion of zip files. There’s been a bit more pink added just lately, too, such as Heather Carolin’s fun with a big toy.

These things, however, are all that might conceivably interest a PornUser who also likes nude photography. Other than that, I think an actual photographer or perhaps another kind of visual artist would find a membership to this site more gratifying.

This is not to say that some of the girls don’t look nice here, but there aren’t enough photos to take you very “far” into a fantasy. Evidently, it’s not the point of the site.

But what of the future? Seems that the site might be undergoing an identity crisis -- one of “art” vs. “porn,” to put it simply. It has the potential: a skilled and creative photographer, a fast server, and simple web design that wouldn’t take too much fixing to make it more user-friendly (more gallery pages and less scrolling).

If the resolution is in the “porn” direction, that could mean larger photosets, and more fulfillment of user fantasies. And obviously, more frequent updates for that $20 price tag.

If it isn’t, though, the site will remain on the periphery of what PornUsers is all about. It will be art that just sticks a toe or two into the “porn” realm.

As it stands at present, I rate it accordingly.

09-09-08  04:33am

Replies (1)
Visit Bella 1010

Bella 1010

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +Completely exclusive softcore and toy play content
+Some hot models, including Shay Laren, Rita Lovely, Lena Nicole, and Riley Jensen
+Photos in zips at 3000 pixels
+Updates every day, usually with 2 items (videos and/or photo sets), sometimes with 3, rarely with just one
+Good visitor’s preview
+Navigation is clear and easy.
+The videos look great. They can be streamed in a player that allows you to select low (crappy), med (default and plenty good), or high quality. Some even have an additional “HD” option for those with blazing connections and muscular video hardware. View full screen if you like, and jump from one part of a scene to another (click the icon of 4x3 squares).
+Videos downloaded are hi def, 1280x720, 1.98 mbits/sec.
+”BellaTV” offers brief BTS or outtake scenes that stream and download. See Shay Laren prove that you can’t laugh and jack off at the same time.
+Good “self-help” section
+Responsive support if you have a question
Cons: -Photos to download come in only one size: 3000 pixels
-Photo galleries range too much in number of pics. Some have over 100, but others have just 20-30.
-Previewing photo galleries is difficult: pics are not arranged in any particular order; thumbs are small and are not wysiwyg; and to get them wysiwyg, you “enlarge” them (but not to full size) in the viewer.
-Zip downloads take about 15 seconds to really get going
-Zip download speed around 340 kbps (not a major con, perhaps)
-Pics are randomly ordered in the zips as well.
-The watermark in the pics is large enough to be distracting. It should be at least 50% of its current size.
-Videos available in only HD MP4 or iPod (might not be a major con).
-Street noise can be heard in the videos; it’s a bit distracting
Bottom Line: I signed up for the site as a “premium” member rather than fiddle around with the credit purchasing system they have. I hate those things, especially during tax season.

I like the overall look of this site, but of course it’s fairly new with only 51 photo galleries, 54 videos, 12 “Bella TV” scenes, and just 20 models at the moment.

In the photo galleries, even though there is some toy insertion, and sometimes even multiple insertions, the emphasis here is on “sexy” rather than sex. Full nudity is also pretty uncommon; the preference is for the model to have on a dress or some article of clothing draped over her which she can lift up. There also seems to be a preference for natural light, so indoor shoots are often near large open windows.

It’s a rather unique approach. The sites that seem closest are Breath-Takers and GirlFolio, but Bella1010 has a better control of light and there aren’t as many pics with heavy contrasts of amber light and shadow as you’d find at those other two.

The videos are another matter, and they are the real strength of the site. There’s more prolonged nudity and plenty of masturbation with the digits or the old “Dan-o.” They’re actually pretty exciting. You’ll be sitting in your computer chair, rooting for Shay Laren to get off, forgetting all about baseball or football or whatever for a moment.

I do have suggestions that I think would make the site better:
- Get rid of the photo viewer and just put thumbs – larger thumbs – on the gallery page. (See my PU poll “How do you prefer to view pics at a porn site?” With 25 responses so far, no one likes “photo viewers.”)
- Arrange the photos in “start to finish” order, not “52-card pickup” order
- Allow a smaller photo option as well as the nice 3000 px, for both single pic downloading and zips. 1200 or 1280 px.
-Make the watermark smaller.
- Show the girls completely naked more in the photo shoots
- Show the girls really showing off their asses. (I had to put that in.)

Doing that would give the site two notable strengths – videos AND photos. There are some people who prefer pics over videos. Keep them happy too and Bella1010 will probably have even more people delving into its treasures.

04-02-10  08:06pm

Replies (18)
Visit Bikini Riot

Bikini Riot

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +Very hot & familiar women, usually posing by a pool, striping out of bikinis and getting into some nicely provocative poses
+Collection of 53 models with a total of 140 exclusive pic sets and approx. 15 non-exclusive sets (usually older stuff seen at MatrixNudes)
+95 videos of acceptable quality at 640x480 wmv; 480x360 wmv and iPod mp4 320x240 also available
+What’s New link gives all of the updates
+Attractive design and mostly easy navigation
+1200px images (the last two updates only)
Cons: -No zips
-Very slow w/updates: just 3 new pic sets and 3 new vids per month is typical
-Only most recent updates dated, on home page
-a few “Polaroid Scans” and BTS pics of lesser quality; those who run the site seem to think these are worth getting excited over
-Pic sizes vary: 42 sets top at 800 px, 96 at 1024, and to date, just two are at 1200px (I counted them pretty carefully)
-clicking on an update takes you to the model’s page, so you have to remember which one you clicked
Bottom Line: If you’ve got a thing for “American” girls, you may be especially pleased with the exclusive content here. The only girls here that I know of not from the U. S. of A are Jana Cova and Zdenka (Czech), Kellie Marie (Welsh), Monica Sweetheart (Hungarian), Crystal Klein and Sanja Matice (Austrian), and Martina Warren (English). Not that I would for a second recommend ignoring the obvious charms of the aforementioned beauties from across the big pond!

The best of the burger and fries group are, IMHO, Tiffany Brookes, Charlie Laine, Crissy Moran, Carli Banks, Rita G, Jamie Hammer, and Mindy Vega. I’d include more but their pics are too small and/or non-exclusive.

There’s a good emphasis on ASS here, which I find is a real plus! There was a time when the site had only 800px photos; then they upgraded many sets to 1024px. Will they do it again, to 1200? That would be nice, but they should just settle on 1600s, NOW, and get proactive for once.

It's also nice that the toys stay in dishwasher on this one. It's just softcore posing and showing plenty of pink, unaided.

Zip files and more frequent updates would also be a step forward. Granted this site has some things really going for it, but given its shortcomings and glacial progress, I can only rate it in the 70’s, as a “might recommend/enjoy at your own risk.”

09-02-07  08:06am

Replies (5)
Visit Body In Mind

Body In Mind

Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +A good amount of professional quality photography
+Archives back to 2002; 350 galleries to date
+2-4 pic sizes depending on how recent. 2005 to present, 778 (medium), 1556px (large), 3-4000px (“extra”) is a rule of thumb.
+Navigation allows browsing by models, or reverse chronologically by undated thumbs or an undated text list (model and title). The galleries themselves do contain dates.
+Visitor’s area gives a complete preview of who is in the galleries and how many photos there are.
Cons: -Only updates about 7-8 times per month
-Pic sizes are inconsistent. For example, pre-2005 galleries may max at anywhere between 1280 and 3000px.
-Gallery zips in only one size, usually “medium.”
-Some non-exclusive material by Erro, Manfred Baumann, Petter Hegre, Ron Harris, and Martin Krake (here as Victor Lindenborn).
-Image quality is mediocre to poor in some earlier galleries.
-Only 6 (six) videos to date. Nothing impressive about them.
Bottom Line: This is a very softcore nude photography site. In fact, it’s more about female beauty than it is about sex. There are no toys, no masturbation, and not that many provocative poses for that matter. There's a lot of what jd1961 has coined "JC Penny poses," meaning that the models look away from the camera, stare blankly, and generally assume a mannequin's aura. This isn't always true; personality does come through sometimes, but it doesn't seem like anyone is making it a requirement.

Some of the women are very beautiful, and some are recognizable: Marketa Belonoha, Marketa Brymova (here as Morgana), Claudia O (here as Klaudia), Raylene Richards (aka Zuzana), and Yvette Blanche are among them.

The design is very simple in the member’s area.

Individual gallery pics open in a new window.

While some of the material is not exclusive, especially in earlier years, those who like this niche will probably find enough that hasn’t appeared elsewhere to make it worth a one-shot join. The 3-day trial price of $9.99 might be acceptable for quick collectors with time on their hands. (That's what I did.)

10-01-07  02:20pm

Replies (0)

Shown : 1-25 of 116 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.


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 1.05 seconds.