| Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
TheSquirrel (41)
|
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 (238)
|
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 (238)
|
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 (238)
|
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 (238)
|
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 (92)
|
What did you think of the 3d ??
|
03-07-12 12:50pm
Reply To Message
|
11
|
rearadmiral (238)
|
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 (238)
|
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 (238)
|
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
|
