Review
9
|
Burning Angel
(1)
88.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- There is a cross-sell on the sign up page but it isn’t pre-checked
- Bills through CCBill
- Great chance to see some new models
- Many familiar porn models appear
- Many download options for newer videos
- Supports download managers |
| Cons: |
- No zips on pics
- Pics relatively low resolution
- No search function
- No specific tags |
| Bottom Line: |
I have to confess that I never expected to be writing a review of a site featuring models with tattoos and piercings, Goth models, punk models and others along that theme. I’m as anti-tattoo as the next guy, except that it turns out I’m not. I’m still anti-tattoo and piercing unless the model goes all the way.
The biggest surprise for me was how conventional the porn here actually is. I don’t know what I was expecting, but whatever it was I was wrong. This is a typical porn network that just happens to showcase models with a look that is slightly out of mainstream.
The main page is laid out as you’d expect with any network: there are tabs for going to pictures, videos, the individual sites, or sorting by model. One choice conspicuous by its absence is a search function. If it exists on the network I haven’t found it yet. (This lack of search is further worsened by the lack of scene tags. Tags exist, but are too broad to be of a lot of use in specific searches.)
The network is made up of eight individual sites. (Cum on My Tattoo, Fuck me in the Bathroom, Heavy Metal Pussy Party, Joanna Angel, POV Punx, Punk Porn, Punk Schoolgirls and Big Boobs are Cool – I’ll post some stats as a comment on each site’s PU page.) While several of the sites have a reason for being stand-alone, several others could just as easily be grouped together. This is neither positive or negative, it’s just a fact.
Each site is laid out in the same way: the site opens into a page where there are thumbnails for 20 scenes per page. Under each thumbnail is some basic information about the scene, including a scene name, the genre (girl/boy, solo, etc.), the running length, user ratings and the female star.
When you select a scene you get a larger thumbnail and four small thumbnails to give you some idea of what’s in store. Each scene has multiple options for downloads. You can download a trailer, the full scene or the full scene broken down into parts. I have to question the value of offering the scene in parts in 2012, but maybe there are still people with slow internet connections. For each of those options there are usually some choices for file type and resolution. MPEGs are offered (in resolutions up to 1400x800 – 5000kb/s and 24fps – depending on the upload date, of course), as are WMVs in high and low resolutions and a mobile version. These options decrease as you get into older files. Prior to 2010 MPEGs weren’t offered but Quicktime files were. The oldest scenes on the network, which date back to 2007, are often only available in one resolution and only in WMV. The resolution on the oldest scenes is low at 480x360, 1800kb/s and 30fps.
This is being a bit picky, but the way the download options are laid out with the trailer as the first option made it too easy to select that instead of the full scene. It didn’t happen to me, but it required that I pay more attention than I’d normally do when just downloading porn. Even having a trailer as a download option seems odd to me, but at least they could put it lower in the option list.
The site supports download managers and I had no problem with the links timing out.
The network bills through CCBill so you have confidence in that. There is a cross-sell, but it isn’t pre-checked.
If the site has a major flaw it is how they provide pictures. I don’t normally download photos but in this case I was looking forward to doing so. I had flagged several models that I really liked that are rare on more mainstream sites and wanted photos too. I was disappointed to see that zips aren’t available and that even if they were, the resolution isn’t great. The newest photos are 1080x720. I know that isn’t bad, but they could be better. Older photos are obviously a lower resolution. I gave up on getting photos since having to save each one individually seems like too much work for porn. The lack of zips really needs to be addressed.
I know this is highly subjective, but I found most of the models on the site to be very attractive. I do question why some models appear on the site though. Katie St. Ives has a few scenes here and I’d not normally think of her when I think tattoos, piercings, Goth or punk. Don’t get me wrong, I’ll take any of Katie’s scenes when I can get them, but it just doesn’t seem to be a good fit.
Dracken posted a comment back in ’09 that the network appeared to be a ‘community’ site for people who like the Goth / Punk / etc. look and lifestyle. That is true. There are blogs and forums for the look, the music and the life. I’m only interested in the naked chicks so I really can’t comment on the non-porn parts of the network.
The bottom line is that this is an excellent network. It is well laid out, easy to use and offers some great porn. If you’re like me and want to push your porn boundaries a bit then I’d highly recommend starting with Burning Angel. The models are beautiful and the scenes are hot. |
|
11-24-12 10:01am
Replies (9)
|
