Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!


Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
User Review A review of the site and any replies from other users.

Visit Girls Out West

Girls Out West (0)

messmer (137) 05-07-08  02:12pm
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Comments  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Hardcore Badge  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (72), NO (1)
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: Others have given all the details (quality, regularity of updates and navigation etc. etc.) regarding this site, so allow me to generalize and simply state, or shout: This is without a doubt the best amateur site I have come across so far.

Instead of a bevy of aspiring porn stars (read clones) here be found real women! Arghh!

There are the skinny, the chubby, the shaved, the hairy, the teens and the mature. There are teeth that aren't capped, pimples that aren't hidden under layers of make-up, hair that's not always perfect, instead there's simply a bunch of models who are for the most part unabashed exhibitionists, cheered on by photographers (female) who don't give a hoot if they end up in the picture now and then, by accident or design.

I think the web mistress defiantly proclaims through every set and video: take us or leave us!

Well, I gladly take it! The site is one of the few that's true to its niche, yet the pictures and videos are of good to excellent quality.
Cons: I really can't find any cons, except for the usual one: that some of the older material is obviously not as high quality as the newer stuff.
Bottom Line: Summing up: this is my second subscription to this site. I was so delighted with it first time around that I put down money for a three month subscription this time. (Billing through CCBill, another plus)

After reading tons of reviews from my fellow PU members I must warn those who express disappointment in connection with other sites because they always find some models that fall short of their ideal, that this might not be the perfect site for them.

However, for those who long for natural rather than "porn queen pretty", this could easily become their second home.

I know that I find ALL of the girls gorgeous because they almost manage to convince an old cynic that they are not just posing for money.

They ARE the girls/women next door who like to be naughty now and then. Three cheers for our friends from Oz for running a great site.

Reply To Review

Review Replies (14)

Replies to the user review above.

Msg # User Message Date


Toadsith (48) Looks like an interesting site, I may have to check it out sometime in the future. Though it appears to have the same basic downfall of the amateur style that Abby Winters has, many cute models but very, very few beautiful models. At least as far as the photos they put in their tour.

The photography also appears to be sub par in technical skill when compared to Simon Scans or Abby Winters (in my opinion the big two in this genre) and your description seems to confirm this. (Am I right about that?) Still, photo shoots with less of an agenda can sometimes capture some very interesting moments. Plus, the site does seem to have a huge variety of models - more varied than either of the aforementioned sites - so that is appealing.

05-07-08  03:15pm

Reply To Message


messmer (137) REPLY TO #1 - Toadsith :

I believe that the technical skill is there and is being used, toadsith. The difference is that they make no attempt to create art. It's a "raw" site and to someone like me who is tired of very beautiful models shot in very tasteful poses it is a breath of fresh air. The photography is crisp and clear, so technically there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. Esthetically maybe (feet of photographer showing etc.) but I'm tired of aesthetics. That's exactly why I wrote what I wrote. Perfection turns me off these days, I see too much of it in another very highly rated site that I subscribe to and which I have visited about three times since the beginning of last week in order to check their updates ... without finding anything to download. All those gorgeous teenies in all their blandness. I wish that, in their case, I had stuck to my usual "subscribe for a month routine" because I have two more months of Barbies left. But, to use the old cliche: chacun a son gout! That's why I hope I made it crystal clear in my review what the site is all about. I wouldn't want to mislead anyone into subscribing to a site that goes totally against their taste. Just to stress it again: the models are mostly ordinary next door type girls/women (I hope I won't insult them with that remark) but that is exactly their attraction for me. Keep in mind that this review is coming from the pen of a guy who wouldn't know a Jenna Jamieson if he tripped over her and judge accordingly. :-)
05-07-08  06:33pm

Reply To Message


Toadsith (48) REPLY TO #2 - messmer :

Thanks for the clarification - it validates my estimation of the content from their preview pages. I thoroughly understand how you've tired of the "perfect" model look, it can get boring. Years ago I was a member of both MET Art and Hegre Art (back when it was called the Hegre Archives) with year long subscriptions to each. By the time the year was up, just about the last thing I wanted was to look at another glamour girl posing in a window. So I joined a few ATK sites, and that was a nice departure from the glamour model look.

As for the technical aspects of the photography - I guess I'm a bit of stickler about that. A number of people like the poor photography that sometimes shows up on Suicide Girls (which I've been a member of off and on for years) - it always drives me nuts. It isn't just a matter of the photos being crisp and throughly in focus - modern autofocus is so superb that the camera will handle that just fine as long as there is even remotely enough light. An old Sony I had actually projected a laser matrix in front of it and would autofocus in nearly pitch black.

Even with "grit" porn, I expect a certain artistic focus. So you want to do aggressively unorthodox photos and put the photographer's feet in the photo? Fine - but make that style a continuing theme throughout the site. In the preview photos I see photos that could use much color balancing, plus others with washed out colors, flash shadows and so on. Many of the photos look like they want to be smoother, they just aren't.

If you want it to be gritty - photograph it at high ISOs. Throw various objects in the extreme foreground that we have to look past. Give us bizarre angles, like overhead or underneath shots. Photograph using just the on camera flash - or light the scene with a TV. There are tons of fun ways to look amateur while being professional - I just get frustrated by content that looks professional with some amateur seeping through.

Frankly, early Hegre Art stuff had a lot of that problem, he has come a long way over the years. I don't know how young Girls Out West is - maybe they too will improve with time, or maybe they know what they are doing and it just won't ever be quite to my taste. I'll join at some point in the future and try it out, a number of the models do look rather interesting.

05-07-08  07:08pm

Reply To Message


messmer (137) REPLY TO #3 - Toadsith :

You are making many good points, toadsith and I agree with most of what you say. When it comes to GOW I'm convinced that it's no accident that a video will show the videographer hand the model a bottle of body lotion while she's doing a slow strip, or to see her knees and feet as she is laying down for a shot from a floor angle. Is it laziness, I just can't be bothered to edit out these scenes or is it by design? As I said, I think it's by design (a continuing theme) that's why I keep referring to the site as "raw" for lack of a better word. A studied casualness?
05-08-08  08:07am

Reply To Message


Toadsith (48) REPLY TO #4 - messmer :

"A Studied Casualness", good term - yeah, that might not be up my alley, but I'll have to check it out none-the-less. I'm certainly quite used to casual style in videos, I'm just usually less of a fan in photos. I guess, I won't know for certain until I browse the site for a while. Thanks for all the info :-)
05-08-08  09:01am

Reply To Message


williamj (9) Its on the radar for later this summer. Thanks for the great review.
05-08-08  09:43am

Reply To Message


messmer (137) REPLY TO #6 - williamj :

You're welcome. Hope my taste won't let down your taste. :-)
05-08-08  11:31am

Reply To Message


williamj (9) REPLY TO #7 - messmer :

Currently A memember of AbbyWinters, I did the special they where offering
05-08-08  12:13pm

Reply To Message


WeeWillyWinky (90) Good review. I might check it out in the future.
05-08-08  05:55pm

Reply To Message


messmer (137) REPLY TO #9 - WeeWillyWinky :

Thanks, www. I think one of the sites selling points for me is that it is so different from the others. A raunchier Abby Winters as I wrote in my comment way back.
05-09-08  06:55am

Reply To Message


BabyGetReal (32) Hey, messmer, I am intrigued by your review of GOW. However, I mostly like b/g scenes, not so much g/g or solo. Ramscrota says "The BG scenes are pathetic". What do you have to say about the BG scenes (knowing my tastes from my profile, and the forum thread "against the grain"). What might be pathetic to some may be just my cup of tea. Thanks!
07-28-09  04:57pm

Reply To Message


messmer (137) REPLY TO #11 - BabyGetReal :

Hi, I would not subscribe to GOW for any g/b scenes. There's only a tiny number of them. In GOW's case I subscribed mainly for the g/solos and g/g contents so I can't comment on the quality of the b/g scenes.
07-28-09  06:13pm

Reply To Message


BabyGetReal (32) REPLY TO #12 - messmer :

Thanks for the quick reply, messmer. Meanwhile, I looked at GOW's B/G trailers, and I love them. So I think I'll give it a go anyway. I assume that ramscrota's problem is a preference for more typical hardcore fastpaced banging, just what I don't like. But maybe ramscrota will comment, I hope.
07-28-09  06:19pm

Reply To Message


messmer (137) REPLY TO #13 - BabyGetReal :

Well, maybe you'll feel about GOW the way I felt about Anilos. After I had downloaded clips and videos of four of my favorite models I felt that I had gotten my money's worth. I know that you'll be able to download GOW's b/g clips in one day, but if you find something that really appeals to you then it will be worth it, won't it? Good luck. GOW is highly regarded by my because of the naturalness of its models!
07-28-09  06:25pm

Reply To Message

*Message rows highlighted in light orange are replies to replies.

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 0.02 seconds.