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 Magic Porn

Magic Porn (0)

Active
61
lk2fireone (194) 09-18-12  12:48am
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Comments  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Hardcore Badge  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (74), NO (1)
Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -Content is dated. The video dates range from November 2006 thru November 2008. The photosets are from 2007 and 2008.
-No DRM.
-No download limits.
-Long time before site timeout.
-Can download the videos.
-Zip file for each photoset.
-Good download speeds. I get 1.3MB/sec, which is my maximum download speed.
-DownThemAll file manager works at this site.
Cons: -Primitive site layout.
-No search.
-Archive site. No updates.
-Videos are from years ago. The definition is very low.
-Videos download with the default filename of full.avi or full.wmv. So you have to re-name each download, or else the succeeding videos will either over-write the previous video, or it won't download. Also need to rewrite the filename so
you know what the video is about.
-No model bios.
-Models not named in the videos or photosets.
-No streaming option for videos. Have to download the file to watch.
-Only one definition for each video.
-Only one definition for each photoset.
-You have a thumbnail illustrating each photoset and video. But the thumbnail is so small, and such poor quality, you don't really know what the model looks like.
Bottom Line: Videos:
Number of videos: 106
Width by height: 360x240 or 288x216
Total bitrate: 1340 kbps or 216 kbps
Runtime: 8 to 23 minutes


Photosets:
Number of photosets: 532
Number of photos per photoset: 70 to 170
Photo: 370x560 pixels or 600x336 pixels or 768x1024 pixels

This is a hardcore teen site.

Because of the low definition of the videos, they are only useful as a reminder of the early days of internet porn. No one who has access to most internet porn sites today would want to watch, or be satisfied with, the low-definition videos available at this site.

I didn't save a single video from this site. The girls might be attractive, but they are so blurry, and the videos are so low-definition, it's just a waste of time looking at them.


The photosets are like screenshots. The photoset is usually like a video-capture of a video shoot. So there is no posing for best effect, no artistic or sensual value to the photos. The colors are poor.

The truth is, I've been spoiled by the good and fine and excellent quality of the videos and photosets at today's porn sites. Looking at the content of this site makes me realize how far we've come in a few short years. This site might
have some curiosity value. But comparing the contents to what is available at other sites, this site is a waste of time and money.

Reply To Review

Review Replies (5)

Replies to the user review above.

Msg # User Message Date

1

rearadmiral (334) Great review. I wouldn't consider myself a video 'snob' by wanting decent quality, but this stuff from years ago just doesn't cut it anymore. Like you, I wouldn't download anything with this low a resolution unless it was something I really, really wanted.
09-18-12  04:22am

Reply To Message

2

marcdc1 (165) Ditto Rearadmiral. Nice review thanks for a complete review. in my book this site commits two mortal sins - dead content (only ok if I'm warned in the preview section) and poor quality.
09-21-12  05:51pm

Reply To Message

3

lk2fireone (194) REPLY TO #1 - rearadmiral :

Thanks for the kind words, fellas.

The truth is, there are plenty of good and bad sites willing to take our money.

I don't mind an archive site (no longer updating), as long as there is good content available and I know beforehand that the site is no longer updating.

But like most things, there are plenty of porn sites that are a complete waste of time and money.

09-21-12  06:55pm

Reply To Message

4

blahman2 (0) REPLY TO #3 - lk2fireone :

Thanks for the review. Ive been flashbanged with adds from this site too many times by some click-catcher website and I always thought of joining if the photos of the attractive girls were larger in reality!.. turns out they can actually be smaller! lol thanks for saving 20+ bucks for me!
10-23-12  06:19pm

Reply To Message

5

lk2fireone (194) REPLY TO #4 - blahman2 :

I remember years ago I was a member of this site. They had a few sets that I really liked, at the time. But those sets are no longer at this site.

There are much better sites/networks out there, where you will hopefully get a better return on your porn dollars.

10-23-12  07:49pm

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.