Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!


Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
User Comment A note about the site and any replies from other users.

Visit Young Legal Porn

Young Legal Porn (0)

Claypaws (44) 05-16-12  02:13pm
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Pollster TRUST USER?   YES (21), NO (0)

Overrated network, in my opinion

I was a member a few months ago. I would rate this network around 70 to 75. First of all, it is almost entirely video based and the tour does not make that clear at all. Yes, it is true that a few, very few, models only have photos. But then those photos are not exclusive but typical content-provider material, much of it fairly old. There are more than a few models whose photos I have seen previously, and in higher resolution, elsewhere, such as Teendreams. For example, the model this site calls Peris.

For a photo lover, not interested at all in video, such as myself, there is almost nothing in the network to download. They greatly concentrate on video. I joined mainly for the model they call Gloria (=Kylie A on MET, Kylie on Averotica etc). All her photo sets, except for one non-exclusive one, are just video caps. That seems true of the great majority of their photosets of all the models I looked at, and I looked at most of them. I found not one single photo set of Gloria to download from the entire network. I found no more than two or three photosets worth downloading in total from all the models in the whole network, such as one of Anjelica (aka Ebbie, Abby, Abbie). The later videos are excellent quality and probably many, or even most, are indeed exclusive, but video does not interest me.

The network is organised as a complete mess. Sets are duplicated between sites in the network but named differently so you can end up downloading the same thing several times. And you have to search each component site separately.

Despite the duplication, if you want everything for any one model, you need to join the network and the 29.99 is reasonable value for the network for a month if you have never joined before. It is really one site, split into several overlapping sub-sites.

But the network is a huge disappointment for photo lovers unless you aim to collect all that exists on the internet for some particular model, as I do for Gloria(Kylie) and are therefore prepared to accept that you will need to take videos to get anything at all from the network. Because I did actually download many of Gloria's videos, I do not feel it was a waste of money but I do not expect to join again.

In summary, I think that the ratings reflect the preference of reviewers for videos. Photo lovers really need not bother with this network.

Reply To Comment

Comment Replies (15)

Replies to the user comment above.

Msg # User Message Date


rearadmiral (388) As a former member who scored the site at 95 I was prepared to disagree with you, but you make some valid points. I’m not a big collector of photos so when I collect them I only collect those of models I really like. I did download a lot of photos from this network and was impressed with the quality. But I can understand how someone who is primarily interested in photos would find this site a bit disappointing.

I wasn’t aware that the models here aren’t exclusive until fairly recently. I don’t know or follow many European or Russian models so I made the assumption that they were exclusive since many of the models work together and the production values are equally high in all the videos.

I strongly agree with you that the way the site is organized doesn’t work well. There is no good reason to spread a model’s videos and photos throughout the ‘network.’ And it can be especially frustrating to see the same videos repeated, though that isn’t a common occurrence. It would seem to make a lot more sense to sell this as one large site and not as many small ones. I suspect the reason for the setup is that it makes it easier to sell as a network than a site even if all the material is the same.

But… being a video fan and really liking many of the models here, this ‘network’ is one that is on my list of sites that I return to occasionally to look for updates.

05-17-12  02:15pm

Reply To Message


Claypaws (44)
REPLY TO #1 - rearadmiral :

That is a nicely considered and generous reply to my comment, rearadmiral.

It is significant how a user's preference for either photos or videos can greatly influence their perception and scoring of a site. I can indeed understand, though not share, the strong appeal of the site to someone who prefers videos.

I have long followed European, Russian and Ukrainian models. I have seen most if not all of the Diesel models on other sites which show models from that region. But that is not necessarily a criticism of the Diesel network. If you were not already familiar with those models, there appears to be much that is of interest here. But if you were already as well acquainted with them from their photos on other sites as I am, there would be very little of interest within the Diesel network.

For example, considering their "Gloria", I already have approximately 8000 images of her as "Kylie" from other sites.

05-17-12  02:41pm

Reply To Message


dieselman (35)
Hey guys!

I am the man behind the network and I love talking to our members! :) Thank you for your comments, please allow me to get into your discussion :)

The exclusivity of our models.

We nowhere claimed that all our models are exclusive, though a lot of them were discovered by us. We brought a lot of great stars to web, Ivana, Sasha, Natasha, Kat, Alice and the list is quite long. I love to get real girls rather then models, but the ones we found already modeling, got much better scenes with us.

Girls love to be with us, our approach in creation of content is much different, it's like another world comparing to industry standards. For example, take the girl Gloria, the one you commenting about, there was no chance to get her filmed in masturbation scene. NO CHANCE. And a Girl-Girl scene with Gloria? NEVER EVEN THINK ABOUT IT. Year ago it wouldn't be even funny, but today - we got it! Real girl-girl scenes with Gloria. We have managed to create the right atmosphere for her so she feels attracted by the idea of girl-girl action and it took us one year!

Take Sasha and making her go hardcore? FORGET IT AND NEVER ASK AGAIN, couple of months and voila :) Same goes with almost all girls who came to us.

So, some girls were modeling already and I care more about rediscovering them! Girls love to be with us and you can feel it in the scenes of course and that's why they are popular.

05-18-12  02:36pm

Reply To Message


dieselman (35)
The photo sets.

Well, we have the best films online, it's unarguable, but our photo sets are very average which is unarguable as well.

I am a big fan of cinema myself and we love image in motion but saying that, we are going to blow up our photography this summer. We are going to change the standards of photography as we did with filming.

So if you are interested in photography, we got a lot of nice photo sets but they are not captivating enough as our films and we are definitely more in filming. Give us few months and we will surprise you with our photography skills and its quality.

As for Gloria's photo sets, we have 36 real photo sets with her. Have you seen her solo girl site, www.skinnysupergirl.com?

05-18-12  02:39pm

Reply To Message


dieselman (35)
About splitting the sites.

You do know that we were among the first solo site makers online and it had huge success. This is why we have a lot of sites and those solo girl sites are not just regular sites, we are talking here about following the girl for many many years. This is not "point and shoot 200 sets in one flat and create website", this is a real get to know the girl and follow her, talk to her live and become friends.

This experience is priceless and yet very costly so this is how it works with us and I think we did a great job, creating awesome platform where you can easily switch between sites and getting all within two clicks. This is actually very popular among our members.

05-18-12  02:41pm

Reply To Message


dieselman (35)
We almost have no duplication, only few scenes for promotion of different sites/

Now about overrated network and rating us between 70 to 75 - oh no :) No way here. We have created so great much scenes and our cooperation with girls is unique. We brought a lot of innovations and interaction with models. I find our sites very well rated by members here and underrated by staff of TBP and I hope it will get better. Members know better then staff, that's for sure!

Thank you for your time guys and see you in our world again!

05-18-12  02:43pm

Reply To Message


Claypaws (44)
REPLY TO #3 - dieselman :

First of all, thank you for joining in the discussion. I was not criticising you for having non-exclusive models at all. I was just responding to comment from rearadmiral, who said he had not realised the models were not exclusive.

I can understand why your girls and sites are popular. Remember I was making my comments from the point of view of a user with almost no interest in video. I shall comment further on that in a reply to one of your other comments.

It does not surprise me at all that Gloria took some persuading to do hardcore. I am not interested in hardcore so this is not a positive development for me. But I appreciate that many members would like to see her in hardcore and indeed, in girl-girl, which also does not interest me.

I feel that your tour could make the nature of your content clearer. You are currently primarily a video site. Albeit your videos are special and unique. Unfortunately, there are some of us who join purely for photos and we tend to be disappointed if we do not find what we hoped for.

It so happens I was also a member of sashablonde in January 2008. She had hardcore video on site then. I even downloaded a couple of them, which is unusual for me to do. Only one of them now plays. It is called 709.wmv. The other one is called 699.wmv. It appears to be DRM protected and will not play. It is asking me for login details, which I no longer have, of course. It may be that I or WMP has lost its DRM records. It seems I have not attempted to view the video in the last four years! I still have my login and password though.

05-18-12  04:08pm

Reply To Message


Claypaws (44)
It is refreshingly honest of you to say that your photo sets are "very average". I would like to see your tour being more up-front about being video biased. Most users probably are more interested in video anyway. We photo-lovers are rather in a minority and I fear that, one day, we will find we can longer get photos and have to leave the world of porn subscribing behind. That will be a sad day. Fortunately, I have over 2 TB of photos.

But if you are really going to give still photography some quality attention, I will be interested to see it, particularly if it is of Gloria. I am not interested in sets with toys, or with masturbation. I love to see full pussy spreads with full eye contact and the face in focus. When you get some quality photos, I will definitely be prepared to give the network another chance.

Yes, I did see skinnysupergirl.com
I was a member of the full Diesel network for a month from 15 December 2011. skinnysupergirl was the main reason I signed up to the network.

I have saved 32 Gloria photo sets from skinnysupergirl, of which 12 sets are true photo-sets at 4000x2666, though, as you say, they are very "average" in quality and interest. I am sure I have seen one or two of them elsewhere too though, if I did, I did not consider them worth downloading then. The other 20 sets are 1000x562 vidcaps. If there are 36 real photo sets with her then either they have been added since mid January 2012, or I saw them and found them too uninspiring to download, or I missed them, which seems unlikely since finding photos on that site was my reason for joining the network.

I also downloaded 17 videos of Gloria from that site and 8 from the rest of the Diesel Network. I agree that the videos are excellent, as videos go. I downloaded them because otherwise, I would have felt I got no value from the Network, as a photo-lover. If you were to produce solo photo shoots of Gloria, without toys or masturbation, of a quality equal to the videos, you would get a rating in the high 80s from me. As of now, there are excellent such photo sets of Gloria (as Kylie) on MET-MODELS (now called eroticbeauty), MET-ART, Femjoy (as Valonia)and Averotica. I also got good sets of her from the now defunct 66Beauty (as Susi). They were ruined by a silly watermark and a horrid grey border but otherwise were moderately interesting though well below the calibre of the MET-MODELS or Averotica sets.

There is no video of her anywhere that comes anywhere near the quality of yours. But video is not my thing. The one called "Fuck me" is almost enough to convert me though :-)

05-18-12  04:42pm

Reply To Message


Claypaws (44)
REPLY TO #5 - dieselman :

Just to me, speaking personally, it feels a bit creepy to get to know a girl in regular chats and still get off to her pictures and videos. I prefer to keep the model as an unknown goddess and worship her from afar :-) A real live, real world face to face relationship is a different thing entirely. However, I understand that many users enjoy webcam style chats with the girls. I have only ever participated in one myself and it did feel a bit weird.

If you started the genre of solo-girl sites, you certainly started a huge niche. There are thousands of them now. But I cannot have too much Gloria. The more Gloria the better. She is amazing. So is Sasha. I would love it if you could photograph Sasha doing wide spreads without insertions. She has a huge number of photo sets on MET-ART, very polished but not explicit enough. Perhaps you could do better.

05-18-12  04:55pm

Reply To Message


Claypaws (44)
REPLY TO #6 - dieselman :

I think 70 to 75 is completely fair unless you either
(1) advertise and promote the network as specialising in video with some bonus photos
(2) Add a lot of high resolution, explicit, properly lit, focused and produced photo sets. At least as many photo sets as videos.

But it is dragged down by having a lot of old content that is not unique and of poor quality (I mentioned Peris). And I think there is some AdultLabs content too.

70 to 75 is not a "trash" rating. The PU description of 70-79 is "Does some things good, some things poor. Might recommend."

Your videos are excellent. The photos are poor. The navigation is clumsy. It is impossible to search for original photo sets (or such was the case in January 2012). I seem to remember having some difficulty opening photos in a new tab. The tour does not make clear exactly what is present. None of the "poor" part is beyond rescue.

But, as things stand now, from the point of view of a consumer of solo softcore explicit photography, I regard my rating as fair, especially as it was given in a comment rather than in a full review.

I really do appreciate your taking the time and trouble to discuss. My aim is always to gain improvement. Improving the good leads to the excellent. That is where we all want to be.

05-18-12  05:16pm

Reply To Message


tangub (155) As a photo lover myself I have to agree with what you're saying in this comment. I scored the site 85 in my review last October and I feel that was over generous considering what I actually got from the site, I guess I was trying to be objective and rate the site in its overall value to those who also enjoy videos. I'm also a big fan of Goria aka Kylie A and out of interest just went back to see what I downloaded of her from YLP. All I got of her was 4 solo sets in 2000px, they may have been available in 4000px but I can't remember and tend to opt for full sets in 2000 to save on disk space. I later found 2 of those sets on The Life Erotic where she is named Elise so they are certainly by no means exclusive to YLP.

Like you I have little interest in videos, or boy girl and lesbian action. They do have many hot models here but it is difficult to appreciate them when most of the photos have a maximum size of 1000px and I certainly don't see the point of those shitty screencap galleries, surely they have no use to photo or video lovers. I certainly hope the site continues to improve on the quality of the photographic side as promised by the webmaster here as that might tempt me back one day.

05-19-12  12:34am

Reply To Message


Claypaws (44)
REPLY TO #11 - tangub :

Thank you for the endorsement. I am glad that you agree with this. I was beginning to wonder if I was being too harsh and was hoping that a fellow photo enthusiast might add a comment either to confirm or to bring me back into line.

Ah yes, The Life Erotic as Elise. Elise rang some bells as that is what she is called on Teendreams. I have one of those YLP sets from Teendreams in 2500 resolution. I think there was another one at least there too but I appear not to have downloaded it or perhaps just not indexed it.

Scoring is a difficult conundrum. If I had been writing a review of Diesel Network, I would probably have forced myself to score higher than 70-75, perhaps even 80, in an attempt to be fair to video enthusiasts. The score is in huge font at the head of a review and there is an obligation to be as balanced as one can manage. But I think that a comment can be more subjective and focus on a single issue.

It is difficult to decide how much you should be influenced by your own impression of a site that has weaknesses in areas which are important to you but may not be to everyone else. How should you rate a site which does very well in aspects that you are not really interested in? I think that, perhaps, it depends on how much the site's promotional claims match up to what it delivers. I am much more likely to be generous to a site whose tour indicates that its main specialism is in some area that does not particularly interest me but which I am prepared to join for its small proportion of content which I do want. SimonsScans is a case in point. It operates almost entirely in a genre which I find tedious and boring but it does what it claims. I have joined it for the small proportion of images which do not have toys and it would be unfair to downrate it for its obsession with toys, given that it promotes itself as being obsessed with toys.

But the Diesel tour does seem to me to indicate a stronger performance in photos than it delivers, and by a very large margin. Hence I feel justified in suggesting a moderately harsh rating within a subjective comment, especially as I included the words "in my opinion" in the header of my comment.

05-19-12  03:36am

Reply To Message


slutty (111) While I generally like this site, like rearadmiral, I can see where you are coming from as a photo lover (I have been in a video phase lately). Most of the photo sets I have saved are average, like you mentioned some are just vidcaps - which is sort of pointless to even post on a site in my opinion.

Welcome to PU, looking forward to hearing more from you.

05-19-12  10:59pm

Reply To Message


elephant (67) I'm a huge fan of the improvements this network as gone under the last year or so, so much better than it used to be and the models are so cute its unreal. I was thinking yeah maybe they should make it more clearer though that the site isn't really that much for the photo lover as it is much more based on the movies. I for one are the opposite of you and realy only a movie lover, photos don't really do much for me anymore. But there is some decent photos of Gloria on her site, I really like her too and have looked at a few sets, some really good shots of her, that said I'm not a photo expert. I hope the network carrys onto grow and I'd love to see wowgirls being added to the network.

There is sadly very few sites that do amazing photos and amazing movies, I think most companies concentrate on one think and become experts at that,The Diesel network I have to say are pretty damn incredible when it comes to movies.

05-20-12  05:48am

Reply To Message


Claypaws (44)
REPLY TO #14 - elephant :

Thanks for commenting, elephant. That is a good clarification.

My original comment might not have been entirely to Dieselman's liking, but the discussion has, I think, been very useful as it has helped to clarify the strengths and weaknesses of the network. Anyone reading all of it would get a very good idea of them.

It seems that video enthusiasts would find the network exceptionally good whereas photo enthusiasts would find it disappointing.

You are quite right that very few, if any, sites or networks are excellent in both media types.

05-21-12  04:09am

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.