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 Penthouse

Penthouse (0)

Active
85
rearadmiral (320) 03-05-12  04:30pm
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Comments  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Hardcore Badge  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (71), NO (0)
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Multiple video download options
- Huge site with diverse models
- Good mix of softcore and hardcore
- Mix of porn stars and Ďlesser knownsí
- Photos of all Monthly Pets back to 1973
- 3700+ photo galleries
- 2200+ video scenes
- Full length movies available (340+)
- Access to Penthouse Forum and Variations
- Some videos are available in 3D
Cons: - Download speeds can vary and sometimes can be a bit slower than average
- Links time out after 10 minutes or so
- Video scenes stream automatically on opening page
- Picture galleries tend to be small (less than 50 photos is common)
- Some pictures appear to be airbrushed
- Even on HD many of the videos donít look great
Bottom Line: I find that if I join a studio site Iím best served if I go in with low expectations. That way Iím not too disappointed when the site barely meets what I expected. But I have to admit that I was pleasantly surprised at how good a site Penthouse is. This is a very well done adult site.

Penthouse likely needs no introduction to anyone reading this review. The magazine was my introduction to adult stuff back in 1980. The site is much more than the magazine though because the Penthouse empire has grown to include softcore and hardcore videos. The site gives access to a huge amount of PH material and all of it is very good quality.

There is a search function but I didnít use it much since the site is so well organized. There are links to sort material by porn stars (which gives you access to all the photos and videos with those models) and Pets (which again is an easy way to access photos and videos). If youíre looking for specific themes in videos the video scenes are tagged with the most common themes. Finding them is as easy as using the pull-down menu.

PH does a disservice to itself by not allowing prospective members the opportunity to get a good idea of what the site has to offer. I canít see what harm it can do to any site to allow non-members the ability to see whatís on offer. (It was mentioned here on an earlier comment and it still happens: when you go to join the offer is for a free membership. Itís only when you click through the non-existent free membership that you have to enter payment information. Most porn buyers are sophisticated to know that they have to pay to get access to a site like this so why hide behind a trick that fell out of favour years ago?)

Most models have pictures and videos available. PH has certainly become more hardcore in the past decade, but there is a good amount of soft stuff too. Video downloads are available in a wide array of formats and sizes. MP4 HD, WMV HD, MP4, MPEG, Mobile and WMV SD are all offered on most scenes. I downloaded WMV HD and SD. HD came in at 1280x720 8000+ kb/s 24fps. SD is 768x432 3200+ kb/s 24fps. Both use WMV Codec 8. Subjectively, the videos donít look that great even though the numbers would suggest otherwise.

Huge pet peeve of mine with this site (which is becoming more common too) is that when you open a link to a scene the scene starts to stream immediately. If you have your speakers on this can be a problem, but what I dislike about it is that it hogs bandwidth for something that I donít want. To make matters worse with PH is that the scene continues to download even after you pause it. I open scenes I want in new tabs and wondered why my download speeds were so slow until I realized that most of my bandwidth was being sucked up loading streams for scenes that I was going to download. Webmasters: please stop doing this!!!

Apart from offering scenes with various porn stars and Pets, PH also offers about 340 full length DVDs. These are mostly PH-produced with a lot of Jill Kelly Productions thrown in the mix too. The problem with the full length videos is that they are full length. They are broken up into approximately 3-minute clips but those clips donít necessarily begin and end with the one scene you want to see. With many of the titles added 5+ years ago there are no star names associated with them but many of the titles are listed on IAFD so you can get that information.

Photos are available in multiple resolutions, listed as being small, medium, large, extra large and extra extra large (no actual resolution sizes were listed). I downloaded the extra extra large and they came in at 2667x4000. Subjectively they look great. One beef I had with the zipped sets is that many (likely most) that I downloaded were buried six folders deep before you got to the pics.

Iím not a big photo collector but I always take the opportunity to get photos of favourite models. It was going through some of these photos that I realized that some of them have been airbrushed. I noticed this when I was looking at a high res photo of Faye Reagan and realized that they airbrushed out her anus. I know she doesnít do anal, but Iím pretty sure she has an anus. Websites: please donít doctor the photos!

The absolute bottom line? I really liked this site. PH is synonymous with stunning women and great photographers and the site carries on that tradition. PH has branched out into hardcore to follow the money, but there is a lot here for most people to like. There are models of different ages and body types and thereís hardcore, softcore and solo. And given the amount of older PH photos thereís also lots of hair for guys who remember those days. Iíd definitely recommend giving PH a try.

Reply To Review

Review Replies (14)

Replies to the user review above.

Msg # User Message Date

1

TheSquirrel (53) Great review Admiral, thanks for the information. I have to admit I wouldn't have thought of touching this site with a bargepole until your review. My expectations were as low as yours. Not many cons, I would have expected many more.
03-05-12  04:53pm

Reply To Message

2

rearadmiral (320) REPLY TO #1 - TheSquirrel :

I was pleasantly surprised. TBP reviewed it and liked it so that gave me some confidence even though past PU reviews weren't all that favourable. It's certainly among one of the best studio sites I've seen and it clearly shows that Penthouse understands the internet. The biggest weakness (and this may be subjective) is that the quality of the videos looks lower than the numbers would suggest. One of their strengths (again this is subjective) was access to exclusive stuff from models I like that.
03-05-12  05:38pm

Reply To Message

3

Denner (233) Fine, fine review here, honored rearadmiral...
Found some newer downloads - free ones - from the ol' Penthouse - which, btw - has not been too keen on giving us fine quality vids in the past.
It looks like, it's changed.
The quality and the style seems to have stepped up - and thanks to your review, I'll probably give this ol' site a try - thumbs up!

03-06-12  08:21am

Reply To Message

4

lk2fireone (194) I was wondering how many photos there are for each individual model from the 1970s and 1980s? Are there just a few photos on each Penthouse Pet for each month back then, or is there more like 20-30 or more photos of the individual models?
I've seen some of the models back then which only had like 10 photos or so from their photoshoots back then (in the 1970s and 1980s). Does the Penthouse site have more extensive photos on their early Penthouse Pets?

03-06-12  01:21pm

Reply To Message

5

rearadmiral (320) REPLY TO #3 - Denner :

Thanks for the compliment, Denner.

I had some mixed feelings about joining because there were some older reviews and comments that were somewhat negative. But I balanced those against the review that TBP did less than two weeks agao where they gave it an 87 and said some good things about it. So I took the plunge and I'm glad I did.

One thing I can't confirm yet but plan to after I cancel my membership is whether you get access until you cancel or access for 30 days like you paid for. Like most people I cancel any membership a few days early to avoid a recurring charge and several older comments here have said that terminates your membership immediately. I'm not planning to stick around for more than the one month and I'll add a comment here to either confirm those older findings or to report that the membership is no longer terminated on cancellation.

03-06-12  03:44pm

Reply To Message

6

rearadmiral (320) REPLY TO #4 - lk2fireone :

I wish I could be more specific but the number varies widely. There are some sets where there are only five photos and some where there are 50. I'd say the average is 25-ish. What the site appears to do is include all the photos that a Pet does if she appeared in other pictorials apart from the time when she was Pet of the Month. That happens more frequently as you get into the 80s meaning that the 70s sets tend to be smaller.

I hope this helps. Please follow up if you'd like more information.

03-06-12  03:47pm

Reply To Message

7

lk2fireone (194) REPLY TO #6 - rearadmiral :

I'm interested in how many photos there are of the three models listed below. They were among my all-time favorite Pets :)


Karen Sather
February 1973 - Pet of the Month

Sandi Greco
May 1973 - Pet of the Month

Cindy Mcdee
July 1973 - Pet of the Month

If you don't have the info, because your membership ran out, that's OK.

03-06-12  09:24pm

Reply To Message

8

rearadmiral (320) REPLY TO #7 - lk2fireone :

Some bad news... Karen Sather and Sandi Greco only have 10 photos each on the site. Cindy Mcdee has none. I didn't spend a lot of time in the really old material but now that I've checked on these for you I can also say that in 73, 74 and 75 there are only three or four models there. In 76 it starts to get better, but it isn't until the mid to late 1980s where you start to get every monthly Pet available.

I'll be a member for at least another 10 days so if you have more specific names you want stats on I'd be happy to provide that information.

03-07-12  04:04am

Reply To Message

9

lk2fireone (194) REPLY TO #8 - rearadmiral :

Thanks for checking. I really appreciate it. I'm pretty sure I've seen the 10 photos each for Karen Sather and Sandy Greco already.

And I was hoping the old photos would have better definition than what I've seen before. But my guess is that photos on the site are probably not better definition, after all.

So I will probably wait a while before joining Penthouse.

03-07-12  08:11am

Reply To Message

10

Cybertoad (104)

What did you think of the 3d ??

03-07-12  12:50pm

Reply To Message

11

rearadmiral (320) REPLY TO #9 - lk2fireone :

The definition on the older photos isn't great at 432x648 but given the age of them they are pretty good. I can see why you'd avoid the site if all you want are some of the older photos. Getting just those would skew the value of the site to not being a particularly good use of your porn dollars.
03-07-12  01:37pm

Reply To Message

12

rearadmiral (320) REPLY TO #10 - Cybertoad :

I can't really say because all I did was skim through a couple of scenes. The scenes I saw looked just like two images side by side and had no colour differentiation that you'd normally see with 3D. There may be better ones there, but since I selected two randomly and recently posted I suspect that they're a true representation of 3D. I confess that I didn't look at them through 3D glasses, which is obviously required. The problem is that I have no idea if we have 3D glasses in the house and if I ask my wife she'll want to know why. I doubt 'so I can look at 3D porn" will be an acceptable answer. If I am able to source some 3D glasses I'll make sure to update the information here. PH does also say that the scenes work on 3D monitors for those who have them. For now though, I'm treating 3D as a gimmick with little real value to a porn collector.
03-07-12  01:46pm

Reply To Message

13

gaypornolover (38) A beautifully written review which was a pleasure to read! I agree with you about the immediate streaming - really annoying - and it's sad to see them using the "free membership" trick, but it sounds like a quality site in terms of content. Excellent review.
03-09-12  07:44am

Reply To Message

14

rearadmiral (320) REPLY TO #13 - gaypornolover :

Thanks for the comments! I'd like to think that maybe at some point enough people will complain about automatic streaming that websites will drop it. I can't imagine what it actually contributes to the site.
03-10-12  12:09pm

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.