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 Divine Breasts

Divine Breasts (0)

BubbaGump (18) 06-09-12  03:44pm
Rookie Badge  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (28), NO (0)
Status: Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review.
Pros: -- Creative photography
-- Unique content.
-- A good number of classic photosets.
-- Site delivers what is advertised--images of women with Large BBW breasts.
Cons: -- Technical quality of images can be hit or miss.
-- Primitive site design and interface.
-- Exceedingly poor streaming speeds of both photos and videos throughout my entire memberhips period.
-- Site is not growing much.
-- Limited content.
-- Vdeos are just a novelty.
-- Site owners play games with content(hold back content and offer to let you view more content if you stick around longer or sign up somewhere else)
--Bandwidth Limit imposed to 550 MEG per day.
Bottom Line: Most of the models at this site are of the BBW variety and most sport large EEE size breasts. There is very little silicone here. These are well-endowed amateur models for the most part, with a few glam types thrown in.

Full nudity is rare and the site is mostly softcore. It's all about catering to those with a breast fetish. The photography, in many caes, is actually quite well done and creative. There are a few poorly done sets but this is the exception. However, the owners skimp on resolution at times and the actual technical quality of the displayed images can vary from fairly decent 1600 resolution to grainy and out-of-focus 1024.

If you are into this genre and natural, large breasts are your thing, you would likely find the photo content here to be interesting. However, that interest will fade pretty quickly, as the amount of content is a bit limited and the site seems to be growing at a snails pace. Unless you view only a few photosets once or twice during a one-month subscription period, you will find the content runs out pretty quickly.

Videos are pretty much a novelty and the main show are the photosets. With very few exceptions, most videos are small 350 clips that run perhaps a minute or two.

The site designers also have a habit of 'padding' the numbers when it comes to overall photosets available. For example, they have created a fair number of photosets for each model. Model X may have twenty photosets available for viewing on her page. However, what they do in most cases is split up a single photo shoot into a number of different sets. For example, a lingerie shoot might be split up into three or four seperate sets. The first set on the page would be perhaps fourteen photos of the model disrobing, the next would show the model reclining while partially disrobed, etc etc. In essence, you are being given ten different photosets for a model, when in reality, they are really just one or two actual photo shoots split up.

This type of presentation is annoying and similar things happen in other areas. There are a lot of cross-sell marketing tools being used. In more than one case, a popular model will only have one or two photosets(or perhaps none at all and a few videos will be in the model area) and a marketing link advises you that "btw..this model has her own page !". Unfortunately, that page requires a seperate memebership.

The owners also let you know that the longer you stick around, the more content you can see. For example, Model X may have only a few photosets or a video that is incomplete and ends with a tease. They will then advise you that the longer you stay past 30 days, the more content you get to see --"Want to see more of her? blah blah blah.."

Given the limited content already available, this may be a good business model to get people to stick around, but the content isn't that great that I would eprsonally pay more just to see a bit more of Model X. IMO, this tactic will simply rub people the wrong way and they will just move on. Also, who says you aren't going to do the same thing if I sign up for Model X's page? I would advise the owners to rethink this strategy. You will more often than not just succeed in ticking off your customer base instead of given them a reasont o want to stay around with knowing they won't get the same treatment for next month's rent.

As far as the site design and layout, it is quite primitive. It gets the job done. However, the menus and navigation tools are primitive. The actual streaming speeds of content is about the worse I have ever experienced at any time with any online service of any kind. Strangely, the quickest way to get content on this site is to download the photosets. Usually, the opposite is true.

Without fail, I could view perhaps one or two images in a gallery, then any subsequent images would take a ridiculous amount of time to simply load. I have a high speed DSL connection and have never experienced anything this bad.

The site also limits you to 500 MEG download per day. You cannot stream or DL past this limit. In short, the strategy of this site seems to be to employ any possible means to get people to stick around longer than thirty days. They make it is hard as possible for you to stream or view the already limited content at the site in a thirty day period. Limiting to 500 MEG download a day and freezing the stream after viewing two photos means it will take six months to get to all of the content that would take a few days of viewing to get to at any other site. The goal is obviously to frustrate you by prolonging the time to to view images via streaming so you download the sets and quickly eat up your daily allotment.

Crooked? Underhanded? Shady? I will leave that for you to judge.

I would give the actual photo content a score of 70 but the experience a 0.05. Since I can only score a minimum of 50, I will give the site an overall score of 50.

Reply To Review

Review Replies (7)

Replies to the user review above.

Msg # User Message Date


Monahan (44) Rather complete review for a site that you scored so low. That means you are definitely on our side and want us to be fully aware of all the downsides before we lose money on a piece of crap site.

AFAIC, this review makes you a superior level reviewer. Thanks a million.

06-09-12  09:31pm

Reply To Message


BubbaGump (18) REPLY TO #1 - Monahan :

Hi. Thanks. I just try to tell it like I see it. It is easy to write long-winded reviews on sites that rub you the wrong way as you are ticked off enough to vent about it.

Anyways, I wouldn't classify the entire site as junk, just the user experience and treatment. The content is actually fairly decent for this genre. I have seen better and I have seen worse. I suspect most people interested in this genre would come away with positive opinions if the site owners didn't play the games. Considering a magazine today costs somewhere around $15, paying $21 for a modest collection of BBW erotica is really not a bad deal. The owners just play games and hold back content, as mentioned in the review. It becomes obvious after a a little bit of time at the site what the owners are up to.

06-10-12  09:04am

Reply To Message


Claypaws (44)
I read this because I wanted to see a recent review of a 50 rated site.

I agree with Monahan. You have put considerable effort into providing full detail of a poor site and have made it clear why it deserves the lowest possible rating. Well done and thank you.

As for why sites make it difficult to download, it beats me why they think that will make us stay longer just to get all their "wonderful" content.

06-10-12  09:13am

Reply To Message


BubbaGump (18) REPLY TO #3 - Claypaws :


Well, for a site owner with limited content to offer, it might be tempting to use such a strategy, thinking you could 'hook' users and they would pay to stay around so they can access the content. You could easily grab all the content at this site within a short period of time. It is not a high-volume site.

The problem is, the content is not THAT good that it will keep a lot of people around to view the remaining limited content that they couldn't get to during the period due to restrctions. It's not bad content, but not exactly a pot of gold.

06-10-12  09:21am

Reply To Message


Claypaws (44)
REPLY TO #4 - BubbaGump :

Perhaps what they would gain by making it easier would be a higher recommendation. If a site irritates the hell out of me, I am not going to stay or rejoin in a hurry. I would just cherry pick for the one and only month they would ever get from me. If it has not much content but they make it easy to get, I still only stay a month but would score higher and maybe return if they have added decent new content.
06-10-12  10:00am

Reply To Message


xexbot (36) Download limits are always suspicious to me. On the one hand I can see where a solo artist may do this just to try to keep people around an extra month. I mean, c'mon, a girl's gotta make a living and you kind of expect it from the sex trade industry. But then there's those sites that just look low-rent and shady, and I think you have found a great example of this.
06-11-12  11:22pm

Reply To Message


boredsurfer (0) Thanks for the heads-up! I hate when a site does that sort of thing. No excuse for it in this era of competition from almost everywhere! Maybe you could get away with that ten years ago, but now? Feh. I'll just go elsewhere! thanks for helping me not to waste my money!
08-28-12  12:20am

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 0.01 seconds.