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 Erotic Beauty

Erotic Beauty (0)

Drooler (220) 06-17-07  12:01pm
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Comments  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Hardcore Badge  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (82), NO (0)
Status: Current Member for over 6 months (at the time of review).
Pros: +Very large, exclusive collection
+Professional photography
+Many beautiful models: Evelyn Lory, Jana Horokova (as Lisen), etc.
+Photosets usually 100-200 pics each
+two zip options (“hi” 3-4000 px, or “low” 1200)
+Daily photo updates from May 2005 (1 set per day)
+easy, straightforward navigation
+vids in DivX, WMV, QT264, mpeg (formats available vary by the vid)
+can rate both the model and the photographer on a 1-10 scale
Cons: -sometimes delays updates for a day or two
-max pic sizes vary greatly early in site history (1024px to 40xx 5/05-5/06, but most are 1500 or higher); nearly always 3-4000+ pixel size from 6/06.
-a few unappealing models
-sometimes too little light, too much shadow, blurriness
-a couple of photographers I don’t care for (esp. “Magoo,” who goes too far with the “artistic” effects)
-only 30 vids (the last in July ’06); transition effects sometimes overdone; some vids only 570px long
Bottom Line: Have been a member off/on since Nov. 2005; currently on a one-year membership.

This is a softcore nude photography site, mostly solo (but no toys), with a smattering of girl/girl lite. The vids obviously amount to just a little “extra” -- like sprinkles on ice cream.

For a softcore photo nut like me, it’s pretty close to the right formula. And there’s plenty of delectable ass to be found in the archives. Per diem, it beats 1byDay, W4B, and even Nubiles in the tushy quality/quantity index.

You might think of it as Met-Art’s kid brother or sister, as it costs the same but only offers 1 photoset per day (vs. Met-Art’s typical 3-5 per day). But it does give an option to join for $6.99 for 2 days, and with a good broadband connection, plenty of time, and enough piping hot caffeine, you could certainly make a killing here.

I’d do the same, but I don’t have that kind of self-discipline.

And I actually like the design and navigation here better than at Met-Art. It’s cleaner and less cluttered.

But on the other hand, Met-Art now offers three pic sizes in zips, and their 1024s do just fine and use less space than the 1200’s offered here. But that’s not much of a complaint.

Be sure to check out the browser options in the top right corner (default pic sizes; "enhanced" to show previous and next galleries; slideshow timing).

Reply To Review

Review Replies (8)

Replies to the user review above.

Msg # User Message Date


jd1961 (95) How is this site different from the main site Drooler? Are they using the same photo sets? Are the photos of a different style? Thanks, good review!
07-02-07  07:27pm

Reply To Message


Denner (235) I second that (jd1961): Good review and the question of centent compared to the motherload at MET ART.
I had some serious problems with the boredom of the videos - is the style the same here?

09-20-07  06:38am

Reply To Message


Drooler (220) REPLY TO #1 - jd1961 :

Wow, first my apologies for not answering this for over 2 months. I did say "exclusive" in the review, and exclusive it is. Some of the models and photographers are the same in both MetArt and MetModels, but there is no duplication of content.

I guess there's some difference (but also a good amount of similarity) between the photo content of the two sites. Hard to put my finger on it. There's more of the photographer Magoo on MetModels, it seems. He doctors up a lot of photos to an extent where the model has this unearthly sheen to her skin. He's done it to Cayenne and Adrienn (sp?) aka Laura at ATK Galleria/Kelly at Nubiles, for instance. Makes me think of Mr. Magoo, blindly going through life, wreaking havoc on the world with his misplaced notions.

Anyway, the archive volume is huge. You're a photo fan, if I remember right. If you like Met-Art, the collection at MetModels should keep you busy. You could try the $6.99, full access trial if that's still on, but it's only for 2 days.

09-20-07  07:22am

Reply To Message


Drooler (220) REPLY TO #2 - Denner :

Hey Denner,
I just responded to jd1961's question about the photo content. Went at length, but the summary statement is, "Yes, the content is exclusive to MetModels."

As for the videos, they are boring. I've thought about this, having recently sampled some of the stuff at Hegre-Art, too, for my review of it.

Get a pair of people together and they can keep each other occupied, but a single model, along with the director, has to work out ways to keep the video interesting. Just lying around and turning this way and that, staring into space, etc. is boring!!! I've seen very few models who can maintain the turn-on. I must say that Evelyn Lory at her own site is a rare exception; she really does it for me. Helps that her ass is so worthy of devotion and zeal.

Anwyay, I think that a lot of effects like superimposing two stretches of video, transitions, and tight editing are done as a poor substitute for "continuous heat conduction."

To make me happy, the model has to be "videogenic," to coin a term (?) and do POV simulated sex, and the camera has to stay at the right places for good lengths of time. Most softcore solo vids never do such things; they jump around so much that it seems as if they're only good for inducing ADD -- if not ED. So for me at least, they've usually been a waste of time.

Good to hear from you. Hope this wasn't too long.

09-20-07  07:41am

Reply To Message


jd1961 (95) REPLY TO #3 - Drooler :

Believe it or not, I have been waiting for your answer, so thanks for responding! I was hoping that this site would be more on the erotic side, but i guess not. I have DVD's full of Met-Art material, so I guess I'll pass on this.
09-21-07  03:17am

Reply To Message


Denner (235) REPLY TO #4 - Drooler :

Certainly agree with your point about the videos...
A solo-model need to act - and not just lying around - even looking bored.
How do otherwise professional (it seems) people from these sites except the customer to not getting bored as well.
I have that feeling about both Hegre Art and Met...
And compared to my favorite at the moment Pier 999 this other stuff is not worth paying for....
But ok, some of the photos in the two sites mentioned are very nice, and your formost a photo-freak, are you not?

By the way this PU keeps getting better and better - AND take up more and more browsing-time.....

09-21-07  07:38am

Reply To Message


Drooler (220) REPLY TO #6 - Denner :

A photo phreak indeed I am. 2nd for me is hot hardcore video, but I'm really picky about the quality and the action. BTW, since you're into videos and I think HC, you might want to check out 1000facials, which is actually part of a network of several sites. I was a member early this year and have occasionally lurked around the newer updates areas.

It's got a $30 price tag and is one of those signups for mostly the existing (but exclusive) content since the updates are a tad slow (for me to get what I'm after, at least). And if you go back far enough in their archives the quality suffers, but it still might be of interest to you, especially with the dollar now at an all-time low against the Euro. The action is hot, and some of the girls are great, too, like Lela Star and Riley Shy.

09-22-07  03:18am

Reply To Message


Drooler (220) REPLY TO #1 - jd1961 :

Well, guess what. Today for the first time I saw a set on MetModels that had already appeared on MetArt, of the thin blond Olga, "Svelte," on MetModels.

I'd picked it up Nov. or Dec. last year from MetArt as Olga R, "Presenting." Same model, same pics.

So I've paid for it twice. How nice!

09-27-07  11:47am

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.