Body Parts.biz (2)
|
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
-Billing through CCBill.
-Frequent updates. "UPDATE SCHEDULE: Softcore Video Clips - Three times/week. Hardcore Video Clips - Twice/week. Softcore Photos - Three times/week. Hardcore Photos - Once/week. Amateur Photos - Three times/week. Body Parts Photos - Three times/week. Amateur Video - Three times/week."
-Really large site. I counted 774 videos, most about 2 minutes. There are 928 photosets and 140 models.
-Videos are HD at 1280x720, 3776 kbps. At this level five to seven minute videos are close to 1GB.
-Works with download managers.
-Not done in glam style. The models, aged 18 to 25, look very real, although not all are amateurs.
-Many hairy bushes although most are shaved.
-A few have tattoos, but no fake breasts.
-Some ethnic variety, but none in body shape as nearly all are very thin. |
| Cons: |
-Many of the videos are clips of a longer one, which is not offered as whole video. The video count is deceptive. My best guess is that the actual count is about 250 to 350.
-Photo sets are not zipdownloadable. Advertised as 2400x1600, they are often grainy. I used 1200x800, which is not that good. Many photos were still grainy.
-The photo sets are very repetitious. After a few sets, a closeup of a vagina looks like the last closeup of one. |
| Bottom Line: |
This site is run by Frannie Addams, who is the photographer, videographer and apparently the only one who works on the site. She has a blog where she makes entries once a month. In it she talks about upcoming additions to the site, which sounds like advertising if you ask me. There is no user interaction.
The focus here is on as she calls it "the closest close-ups on the web". The photos and videos feature breasts, butts, and especially, vaginas. Interestingly, she also realizes that the tongue and mouth in erotic poses can be highly stimulating. I have rarely seen softcore shots like this, although occasionally as part of blow job scenes.
With the videos in HD quality, sometimes the closeups are a bit too much. I don't care to see every pore or even each individual hair. However, it is not as much a gynecolgy lesson as is inthecrack.com.
The comparison here is a fair one. I believe these two sites are the only ones that use the up close focus. Inthecrack.com focuses to a large degree on butt views, whether of the ass crack or the vagina. This site has a few of these photos and videos, but its focus is on the vagina full frontal. Both are big sites, both are in HD and both can be hit and miss regarding the erotic. This site bills itself as amateurs, but I think most are pornstars or professional models. I know I recognized many and found a few more on the internet. The approach is one of natural looking models, not glam as inthecrack.com uses. Here most, if not all, models are American. Inthecrack.com has Europeans as well as Americans. Just my opinion, but I liked this site better despite its flaws.
The site is big enough and is high quality in its videos. In contrast, the photo sets are somewhat disappointing in quality. Although I can enjoy closeups of body parts, sometimes the focus is just TOO focused and misses that special intangible quality that makes a model work for me. |
Reply To Review |
