Digital Desire (2)
Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
||+Vast collection of professional quality pics by Stephen Hicks and his fellow photographers
+Many, many beautiful models from all over
+Some photos in 1600px; first set of each month has 3000px at least from start of 2006
+DDGX subsite offers extra pink, toying, and hardcore
+Returning member price of 15.95 for both DDG and DDGX combined (use same username and password as last time)
+Zip files (but only in largest pic size available)
+Quick model search, but some models have 2 names
||-Some exclusive, some seen elsewhere (Twistys, Penthouse, etc.)
-Too many categories of pics
-Piece-mealing: “Daily” pics in 1-per-wk segments over 4-6 wks, or “themed” in one gallery with 4 models having about 5 pics each from shoots already or not yet published; DDGX has small sets taken from same shoots as featured galleries
-With “Daily” pics, you never know if max size will be 1024 or higher
-Softcore videos are often boring, overly edited, DRM restricted, and music tracked
||I’ve been a member many times off and on since 2002. The photography by Mr. Hicks & Co. is usually very professionally done and has signature elements of lighting and color that make it identifiable on sight. For awhile, it was my absolute favorite site.
Actually, though, I’m pretty burned out on it now. Here’s why:
1. All of that piece-mealing of photo content is really annoying!
2. Quite of lot of the “new” content each month as actually older content in larger sizes. (“Seen it before. Find older gallery on hard drive. Replace it?” – over and over again)
3. I’m tired of the inconsistencies in pic sizes and in number of pics per gallery.
4. I’m tired of seeing old, 3rd-party content showing up here, some of which is really mediocre.
5. With truly new content, they just don’t often do the great belly-down-flat and standing ass shots they used to. And that’s the final blow! ;)
At least they’ve toned down their hype. In ’06, they were pasting “3000px” and “exclusive” on their public pages, as if lots of that awaited the would-be subscriber. Glad they’ve cut that crap.
And the good news for photo lovers who have never been is that they’ll be getting better versions of the older content -- and probably won’t even know that they are.
Reply To Review