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).
User Review A review of the site and any replies from other users.

Visit Nu Dolls

Nu Dolls (0)

Active
84
Drooler (220) 05-01-09  05:15pm
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Comments  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Hardcore Badge  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (83), NO (0)
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: +40 different adorable, natural young women who smile a lot and make eyes at the camera and arenít usually photographed staring into some mysterious and distant void
+No fake tits, and very little in the way of tats (exception: Vlada, with a big one on her belly and a ďVĒ right above the ...)
+Exclusive content
+Photo quality is pleasing to the eye with sharpness and color
+Variety of indoor and outdoor shoots (though Iím more of an indoor man myself)
+191 photosets and 212 videos to date, usually combined into a single set (the extra vids are b/g hardcore or masturbation)
+Fast downloads of zips and vids that peak between 660-670 kbps (20MB nominal connection; using Firefox)
+Built-in ďDoofus Recovery SystemĒ: If you accidentally close all windows to the site, you can return without having to log in again
+Nice design and good, straightforward navigation
+Extensive blog area might be of interest
+Visitorís area gives you a good idea of the content
Cons: -First post was late Oct. 2007. Thatís 10-11 photosets per month.
-Pics are 1549 pixels on the long end; for a site at this price, there should at least be 3000px photos as well. (That would make it more competitive.)
-Some sets have less light than Iíd like, but I guess thatís a matter of taste. Theyíre not overly dark.
-Vids are only downloadable in avi (576x320)
-Vids have gotten shorter than they used to be (approx. 10 min. to approx 5-6 min)
-Models who have the same names: Anna (4), Natasha (3), Tanya (4), etc. require you to give them additional (or alternative) names if you want to keep them straight
-Too much play with the props sometimes: body parts viewed through spaces in chaise lounges, flowers all over the body (or sticking out of the Miracle-Gro), sand all over like tempura batter, a star-shaped dollop of cake icing above the ass -- stuff like that
-They have stopped doing hardcore (OK by me, but maybe not for the die-hards); last time was end of Nov. 2008
Bottom Line: Because the updates come approx. every 3 days, this site is better to join for the increasing size of its archives than it would be for the updates. And thatís what Iíve done, having not been a member since May of last year.

The girls are lovely for the most part, and as I said, natural in their charms. Thatís a big plus for this site.

Some of them have been making their mark at other sites as well. "Anna S" at HegreArt (also at MetArt and FM Teens) is absolutely stunning! "Anna" the extremely alluring dark-eyed brunette is also at FM Teens, TeenDreams (as Tantsi), FemJoy as Paulina, JustTeenSite as Anita, and MetArt as Atena.

While I could list a few more, I'll just have to mention Viktoriya, who has smitten both Denner and I. This girl needs MORE exposure! I have seen her at JustTeenSite as Victa, but that was some time ago. Really, she should appear in oodles of updates at every high-quality softcore site in existence.

One little picky thing they could do is have each gallery open in a new window. It is a picky point, though, as Iíve discovered that right-clicking on a gallery link in Firefox allows for the same thing.

It seems that after a nearly year-long flirtation with occasional hardcore additions, theyíve decided to stick strictly to the softcore niche. Frankly, Iím glad just because it will be clear that this is a softcore site.

Reply To Review

Review Replies (6)

Replies to the user review above.

Msg # User Message Date

1

Jay G (65) Wow! Your point about the girls looking at YOU (into the camera) and not into the void is so true and so sexy. It's a wonder more photographers don't realize the power of beautiful eyes.
05-02-09  08:57am

Reply To Message

2

Drooler (220) REPLY TO #1 - Jay G :

No kidding! Do the photographers actually say things like "look to the left, a little higher, look at the tree over there ..."?

Nude photosets should be virtual encounters with the girls, not exercises in "living statuary."

05-02-09  12:03pm

Reply To Message

3

Denner (233) I sure agree with practically all in your very fine review, Drooler - well, no wonder...lol

They site has gone back to entirely softcore - again, yes that's probably for the better - some of those hc/bg scenes are not very good.

And one thing I didn't think about before is the props, as you call it (tried to google that word)- and yes, a little too much of pearls, flowers ect. - they really should try to leave that out..

AND I look forward to more scenes going indoor again - too many lately are in shot by or in some lake, in the sand or some wilderness - not too crazy about scenes like that...

05-02-09  02:30pm

Reply To Message

4

Drooler (220) REPLY TO #3 - Denner :

Probably the one "props" thing that bothered me the most was the latest one of Sveta. She's the girl with the dollop of icing over her butt. I would have gotten the set if it hadn't been for that. Sure, it's cute and it looks delectable, but I'm not in the kitchen there with her to, well, I suppose there would be a number of possibilities ...

What really kept me away, besides the holdup on updates that had occurred (which you had explained was a server-related issue), was the pic sizes. I'd think that going up to at least 3000px as an added option for the photos wouldn't cost them that much and it would draw more members.

05-02-09  03:22pm

Reply To Message

5

Jay G (65) REPLY TO #2 - Drooler :

"Virtual encounters"....exactly the right words!
05-02-09  11:43pm

Reply To Message

6

Tom22 (6) I agree with you about not having enough light on the scene. I think they are really too dark, it's like going back to 1970's porn again. I didn't join the site, I just looked at their preview vids. Yep, they need to turn on the lights, no doubt.
12-26-09  01:29am

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.

DISCLAIMER: ALL MODELS APPEARING ON THIS WEBSITE ARE 18 YEARS OR OLDER.

To report child pornography, go directly to ASACP!  We're proud to be a corporate sponsor.
Have concerns or questions about porn addiction?  We recommend this helpful resource.

Copyright © 2007 Ranks.com, Inc. and its licensors. All Rights Reserved.


Loaded in 0.01 seconds.