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 Vintage Flash

Vintage Flash (0)

Active
89
messmer (137) 06-17-12  03:26pm
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Comments  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Hardcore Badge  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (76), NO (1)
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Updated: 06-18-12  02:56pm  (Update History)
Reason: After a brief mental struggle I upgraded this site from 82 to 89. It should be rewarded for being different in a conformist world!
Pros: Beautiful British Ladies in alluring retro lingerie and doing a lot of erotic talking. Nice!!

Improved search since my last review.

Excellent streaming is available for those who like to preview a scene or watch it on line.

Updates appear to be steady with one update every 5 – 8 days, containing one picture set, plus screenshots and video of a given model).

Picture sets are available in High Resolution up to 2390x1600.

Videos are available in 720p HD wmv. Lesser sizes and resolutions also available.

4 additional sites: Vintageflash Archive, Pantyhosed4u, VF Academy, The Joy Of Feet
are also available as a bonus.
Cons: Still a very basic outlay since my last review. No model bios, no member forum, pictures are designated as “small” “middle” and “regular” (leaving one guessing as to their dimension until a set is downloaded and studied.) The individual sets are marked “pictures.zip” and nothing within the zip gives any indication of who the model is. So make sure you memorize a model's name before you download and then rename the zip.

Medium watermark on pictures (upper left of the photo.) It is not too intrusive except that I prefer my watermarks (if I have to put up with them) at the bottom right where they are less visible to most.

The tour promises 1920x1080p HD videos but I haven't come across one yet. BTW, I wish the lay-out of the member's page were as clear as that of the tour.

Navigation within the site is awkward with each bonus site requiring a separate sign-in. I am using Firefox to save my user names and passwords between visits to a site, so this was only a problem first time around
Bottom Line: Okay, here it is: I have looked at many sites over the past few years and being a lingerie lover have not found any that would suit me better than this one. The ladies are great, the talk is great, the retro lingerie is great and taking this into account I was prepared to return to this site over and over but there is one big con for me:

Strangely enough I didn't notice last time around or maybe the handful of videos I have looked at are no indication of how things are but all the videos I have looked at during the past three days were way too softly focused for my taste despite the fact that they are shot in 720p HD.

I have been to many other sites in the meantime where the picture in full screen was crystal clear and crisp even at the lower end of HD (720p).

Some members might actually prefer a slightly diffuse picture, so might the webmaster, but my taste runs to “crystal-clear” where every pore can be counted so, until that changes, I am afraid that, once again, I will have to resume my search for the perfect lingerie site.

This one is good, make no mistake about it, you have a choice of 567 picture sets (54410 pictures), 407 videos and 155 beautiful mature models (25 – 40?) at the moment, but it could be much better with sharper videos, renamed picture sets, and an easier way of getting around within the site.

Recommended to all vintage lingerie lovers despite the personal drawbacks I listed.

Reply To Review

Review Replies (18)

Replies to the user review above.

Msg # User Message Date

1

otoh (54) Messmer, thanks for a helpful review - this site remains firmly on my to-try list, being a fan of both retro underwear and lewd talk - I don't know of any good sites with the former, let alone both! I also especially like the broad age range of models here.

Useful to know the few cons and it would be good to find a site which was perhaps a bit slicker - but they are not enough to dissuade me!

06-18-12  03:15am

Reply To Message

2

Claypaws (44)
Webmaster
Excellent review, informative, balanced and scrupulously fair. It also matches my own opinion of the site from my several repeat memberships there.

I am very glad they have moved to 2400x1600 pictures. I had a very long email exchange with the webmaster in my last membership and I suggested 2400x1600. I am delighted that he has done this. I will definitely be rejoining when my current memberships to other sites end in about a month. I have more memberships than I can cope with right now!

As for the video, I did download quite a lot of it when I was there in November 2011. I think the clarity issue you mention has more to do with their video camera than with whether it is encoded to 720p or 1080p. 720p can be perfectly clear. I dread it when a site starts using 1080p. Neither my PC nor my laptop can play 1080p video!

I do not know what video player you use. Their video was (and your review suggests still is) only available in wmv rather than mp4. I find it looks clearer and sharper played with Windows Media Player (WMP)than with VLC. If you regularly do use VLC (as I do), it might be worth trying them in WMP instead.

The zip naming never bothers me on this site or any other. I download each zip to a separate subfolder with a unique folder name.

06-18-12  04:52am

Reply To Message

3

PnP Media (2)
Webmaster
This is my site first of all.

A fair review overall, but it's disappointing to note recent amendments this year to navigation not actually noticed at all.
Makes me wonder if they are used...

The site now has 'breadcrumbs' to aid backwards and forwards navigation, and in and out of sets, across sets of images and across video set pages. This took alot of work!
We added streaming mp4 in three sizes as well as same sizes for download.

Model ratings added, (and strangely models are rated differently across sites, Vintageflash users being way way more fussy and picky than the other sites I run...not sure why or who.

Front end now has all updates clearly visable dated,with sample pics and streaming trailer. Video length and image count also stated.

Video quality, well we tried 1080p, and there ARE a few on the site, nobody noticed. I didn't see any advantage, for such a big increase in file size( and download time).. But it is being worked on slowly, but as we back tracked, I'll remove reference to 1080p.. As for softness, yes I know what you mean, we are doing our best in house and bought in content is no sharper than ours, we shoot on a Sony V1P. One of our contributors shoots for ATK and other bigger sites, and I cannot see any differencev in supplied content, honestly... We use a semi wide angle lens that does soften things a bit, but makes a scene a much nicer view over all.

We can add 1080 in wmv or Mp4, if enough interest, but the request trends are not looking that way, more to Netbook, Tablet and Android or Iphone use.

Requests often contradict each other entirely , so we have to take an overall view, seem fair to you?


Members can always chat with me on ticket or email, I'm totally happy to do that and get their feedback. We did enlarge image sizes when asked! Also we added, TheJoyOfFeet.com site free to satisfy the foot guys, and get less feet on Vintageflash for those that prefer feet in shoes!

However, fair review, no complaints.

VF Webmaster

06-18-12  08:24am

Reply To Message

4

messmer (137) REPLY TO #1 - otoh :

And you shouldn't be dissuaded, otoh. If you like retro lingerie you will like this site.
06-18-12  09:56am

Reply To Message

5

messmer (137) REPLY TO #2 - Claypaws :

Thanks, Claypaws. I appreciate your positive comments. I did try to be as fair as I could, especially since this is such a treasure of a site for lingerie lovers who like a bit of a tease in deed and word! I am using the Home Media Player to watch all my videos because it will play all formats but might do just the opposite of what you suggest and start using VLC when it comes to clarity of picture. With VLC one can adjust the setting to "sharper" and that helps in some cases, maybe it will with VF.

I, too, have a multitude of sites on the go at the moment but could not wait to re-subscribe to Vintage Flash since going to the other subscribed sites proved to be a daily disappointment. See my negative remarks in my other review yesterday.

06-18-12  10:06am

Reply To Message

6

messmer (137) REPLY TO #3 - PnP Media :

First of all let me say that I am glad that you found my review fair overall. I was really trying hard not to let some of my negative remarks cloud the fact that yours IS the best vintage lingerie site I have found on the web so far. It seems strange to call it vintage, since that's what I grew up with and it seems like only yesterday. Oh, btw., I always hated bullet bras so let's keep sets of those to a minimum! (smile)

I think the reason why more people have not made positive (or other) comments re. your improvements in navigation is because your site is so unusual in its set-up.

Not worse than others but definitely different and I had to experiment quite a bit before I caught on to some of your changes. I made a reference to your tour page .. that's the more familiar look. Ten (or so) of the most recent updates listed by date, then when you get to the end of the list you get a "next page" or a 2,3,4 etc. until you get to the first set/video ever produced by you.

Is there a "next" page with another bunch of updates on your home page? I didn't want to mention it because I might look like a fool if there is an easy way, but I couldn't find it.

As to the "softness" of the video picture. I really find that regrettable but think I have found a work-around. If I start using VLC player I can sharpen the picture a touch myself. It does work but not with all videos. Sometimes I get "ghosts" instead, just like in pre-cable TV. :-)

And, yes, I would remove the banner advertising 1920x1080p HD TV in mp4 (my favorite format) as soon as possible lest it influence someone who subscribed for the high-end HDs and now finds he cannot get them.

All in all, let me repeat what I stated above: yours IS the best Vintage Lingerie site I have come across in my years of searching and I hope nothing in my review did anything to obscure that fact. Cheers.

06-18-12  10:41am

Reply To Message

7

Claypaws (44)
Webmaster
REPLY TO #5 - messmer :

You are welcome. It was a pleasure to read. The site is certainly a treasure.

I am not sure what you mean by Home Media Player. I have tried the various sharpening, saturation and contrast settings with VLC. VLC is generally great but I found the Microsoft player better for wmv files. Worth experimenting with whatever you can.

If you mention a video or two from VF, I might well already have one of them since I downloaded quite a lot of them.

As for lots of sites- well I am in six at the moment. I will enjoy VF more if I wait a while!

I noticed your negative comments in your other review yesterday. I am glad VF delivers more to your liking.

06-18-12  11:00am

Reply To Message

8

messmer (137) REPLY TO #7 - Claypaws :

Home Media Player comes with the "K-lite Codec Pack" and is basically the old Media Player with loads of advantages over the present one.

The play stops and resumes on a click, the volume can be adjusted through the mouse, all the stuff the new Windows media player no longer does. If a video is published with the wrong dimensions (too stretched, too narrow) it can be adjusted through the numbers pad. It also seems to have a codec for just about every format under the sun. It's great but I haven't found a way to sharpen the picture yet! :-)

06-18-12  11:15am

Reply To Message

9

Claypaws (44)
Webmaster
REPLY TO #8 - messmer :

So messmer, I still don't know what Home Media Player is! Is it a Microsoft player or some downloadable software? I did not find it via google. I am familiar with K-lite codecs but never heard of Home Media Player.

VLC has the advantage of not needing separate codecs of course.

By the way. I sincerely hope PnP, the VF webmaster does not go down the 1080p route. My PC cannot play 1080p video at all. Its graphics card just cannot handle it. 720p is perfect for me.

06-18-12  03:43pm

Reply To Message

10

Claypaws (44)
Webmaster
REPLY TO #3 - PnP Media :

Hi, PnP (I won't use your name even though I know it from email correspondence with you).

I am really pleased you listened about picture resolution after all our emails on it. Thank you very much for that.

Though pictures are my main thing, please do not replace the 720p video with 1080p video. Some of us, like me, with older computers, cannot play 1080p video at all. 720p is perfect. If you put up 1080p, please retain 720p as an option for those of us that cannot play 1080p. There must be plenty of users in that position.

I can also confirm what you say, that the 720p video shot by the photographer who shoots for VF and ATK is the same quality on both sites.

messmer's review has told me all I need to know to happily rejoin VF. I shall do that when my current memberships to six sites expire in a month.

06-18-12  03:55pm

Reply To Message

11

messmer (137) REPLY TO #9 - Claypaws :

Hi claypaws, it's the old version of the Windows Media Player but kept up to date with all the new codecs. I just switched the default of all my videos to VLC and it has markedly improved the quality of the VF videos because I have it set to sharpen the picture a bit by default.

You may have noticed that I also upped the rating of the site itself because the more I thought about it the more grateful I was that there was ONE webmaster who bucked all the current trends and tenaciously stuck to his guns (niche). It can't be all that popular with most who seem to prefer young and casual these days, so he must be taking quite the gamble?!

06-18-12  07:13pm

Reply To Message

12

Claypaws (44)
Webmaster
REPLY TO #11 - messmer :

Hi Messmer. Thanks for the clarification on Home Media Player = Microsoft. And I am pleased VLC sharpening helps you get closer to how you want the video to look.

Yes. I did notice the increase in score. I mentioned in a post in your forum thread that I would have rated VF at 83 based on my last visit in November. That was of course before they upgraded the images and added more content. When I next join, I may well be giving a rating closer to your current one, though I cannot tell whether slightly higher or lower until I am in the site. I shall also evaluate navigational changes though I must say I do not usually get too worked up about those unless a site is lot bigger than VF. On a site of VF's size, all I really need is a good model directory. But, as you know, I collect models! You might want to find sets with a particular kind of lingerie. I just want everything for a particular model.

I agree with you for applauding the webmaster for concentrating on the niche. Not only is the modern trend young and casual; it is young and casual in hardcore video. Almost everyone who joins a site that is not firmly in that niche wants to change it into a young, casual, hardcore video site.

The webmaster may indeed be courageous but what he is doing might make sense financially too. He is the best example in a small niche but that still has enough devotees to make it viable. Whereas a young-casual-hardcore-video site is competing with about a million other similar sites.

I particularly like the inclusion of VF Academy in the membership. For there we have young in lovely lingerie. I am still hoping he gets my very favourite model ever in that genre. No doubt, that will lead to more email correspondence when I join!

06-19-12  02:11am

Reply To Message

13

messmer (137) REPLY TO #12 - Claypaws :

Actually, VF Academy wasn't a site I paid much attention to because I normally don't like uniforms but I am thrilled with the site because I have already found many sets with lingerie as beautiful as that found on VF, therefore I am willing to forgive the occasional model who wears Blazer and straw hat! :-)
06-19-12  02:20pm

Reply To Message

14

Claypaws (44)
Webmaster
REPLY TO #13 - messmer :

Ah, the rediscovery of VFA and its young ladies of lingerie! I am quite looking forward to rejoining.
06-19-12  03:02pm

Reply To Message

15

Denner (233) Glad you finally took up this site (and made a review)...which I've suspected that could be your kind of deal for some time....I really like the site...and btw: great review, messmer....
06-20-12  08:44am

Reply To Message

16

messmer (137) REPLY TO #15 - Denner :

Hi, friend Denner. Actually I subscribed (and had a review) to this site before. I was just giving it enough time to acquire some more material. It IS my kind of site. As a matter of fact it is the only one I found so far that matches my taste almost exactly. And thanks for the positive comment.
06-20-12  09:42am

Reply To Message

17

Denner (233) REPLY TO #16 - messmer :

Hello, friend messmer - well, "just came in from the storm" (vacation) and forgot about the past (and your former review). Still it's great to come back and get into porn again - and read a splendid review like yours....look forward to some fine talks.....
06-20-12  10:06am

Reply To Message

18

messmer (137) REPLY TO #17 - Denner :

Me, too, Denner. I have missed our talks!
06-20-12  10:44am

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 0.04 seconds.