+ Exclusive Glamour Vids/Pics, Interview & Casting Content Too.
+ Big Archive of Content Going Back More Than a Decade.
- Not Much Model Info, Model Index Could Use More Sort Tools.
- Content Quality Does Vary, Not All Shoots at Highest Levels.
User Reviews (13)
User reviews consist of pros, cons, and other thoughts.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
- Good camerawork, lighting
- Great quality pics, and HD videos
- Multiple video formats
- Lots and lots of very pretty girls
- Large archive of material
- Frequent updates
- Many well-known models and porn stars
- Excellent value
Cons:
- Slightly random selection of codecs for past videos
- Too many thongs
- Some fake boobs
- Not enough teasing
- Possibly too slick
- Slightly formulaic material
- Tagging and search sometimes lacking
- Not really any model details, stats etc
Bottom Line:
The esteemed tangub's recent review is excellent and gives you a good idea of the stats and type of material here, so I'll try not to repeat that and instead be quite subjective.
I joined mainly for the videos here, which have the level of explicitness that I like; some teasing, undressing, before masturbating; either with fingers or toys. The lighting, camerawork, atmosphere of them is very good (some may find the shadows too arty, but I don't mind), but my main problem is that they are a little too formulaic. The large majority of the videos go like this; ambient music as the model cavorts/gyrates in lingerie; often backlit and/or wind blowing through her hair; slow-motion and crossfades; then the music dies out and the model takes over, showing no shyness at all about pleasuring herself for the camera, underwear discarded (but heels inexplicably still on, why do they keep doing that?).
It's actually not a bad formula - they are produced very well and the girls seem fairly genuine, but I'd like to have seen a bit more variety; more teasing, more undressing from clothed, different lingerie styles, a bit less slow-mo and soft-focus. The category of videos I enjoyed the most were the flirt - where the model talks to the camera and teases; and perhaps also the toys - not generally my interest but it provided an angle.
The girls themselves here are stunning; a mix of well-known US porn stars and models, some familiar East European girls, and some amateur first-time models. Again, it's subjective, but I found myself pining for at least a little imperfection; although arguably guess I found it in the ones that have fake boobs - the focus is on natural girls and enhancements aren't in the majority, but still more than I'd expect given how often Mr Hicks states in the shoot notes how he prefers a natural look.
There's also, of course, a huge library of photo sets, going back many years. Although the models are biased slightly towards the 19-22 range (I prefer at least a little older) I found more sets that I liked than expected. The Flashback section is quite amusing, showing his earlier Penthouse era pics of girls with lip gloss and big hair; a contrast to the more subtle style and more natural looking girls Mr Hicks employs now. I did find a few inaccuracies in the search; eg when looking for unshaved models and finding shaved sets; but overall the search/browse options are useful. One minor niggle though, was in the models's profile page there is no info and sets don't seem to be in any particular order; some models are popular here with material from multiple shoots; it would be good to see it in date order.
So, a tricky one to score. It's an excellent site and great value; the material has a good level of explicitness and if I was being more objective, this would get a 90, and higher if I really connected with the content. As it is, it didn't grab me quite as much as I'd predicted; I do like glam material, but with an angle of some sort, which - other than lots of stunning girls - I don't see much of here. If I had to compare it to any other sites I've visited, I guess the centrefold glam theme places it closest to Holly Randall; DD is possibly more slick, but Ms Randall gets a bit more flirt, a bit more cheekiness from the models, so she keeps the edge for me.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
TBP/PU discount
No regional pricing
Lots of exclusive content
Daily updates
No download limits or DRM
Browse photos online in a choice of up to 5 sizes (800, 1024, 1280, 1600 & 3000px) or view slideshow.
Zip download but only in the largest available size for each set.
Latest videos have 6 download options, H.264 format in HD720p, 480p, 260p and Mobile plus WMV in HD720p and 480p. Streaming also available in high and low quality.
Cons:
Some of these are not really cons for me but may or may not be for others depending on your personal preferences:
Unfamiliar billing processor but no problem with the cancellation process for me.
Content may be too softcore or too artistic for some tastes.
No file sizes listed for zips or video downloads
Those with a slow connection or struggling for disk space might be disappointed at the lack of a zip option for the smaller sized photo sets.
Many of the photo updates are years old recycled sets simply re-released in a larger size. (These photo sets usually have a maximum resolution of 1600px)
The sequence of photos in some sets seems mixed up.
Some non exclusive content.
Bottom Line:
This is the site of glamour photographer J.S.Hicks who has been taking photos of beautiful women since way back in the 80s and whose work has been associated with names such as Playboy and Penthouse. I’ve been a member here a couple of times before but not since 2006 and although I’ve been a big fan of his photography certain issues with the old site such as the DRM and meagre download limits as well as constantly recycling old photo sets as new updates had put me off going back until now when I was tempted back by the special offer price of $9.95 for a month Thankfully the DRM is long gone and I didn’t hit any D/L limits but I did recognise that many of the photo updates are recycled enlarged versions of sets I’ve already downloaded prior to 2006.
Ignoring the recycled sets I did manage to find plenty of new models and content which have been added in the last 5 years since I’ve been away. The site now boasts a collection of over 800 models and I found many of my favourites here including Ariel, Faye Valentine (Reagan), Georgia Jones, Jana Jordan and Shay Laren to name a few. They have a well organised model index where you can easily find all the photos and videos of your favourite models or you can simply browse photos or videos separately and sort them by date order or ranking. The content is also tagged with some of their dozen different category listings such as Dreamgirls, Young & Fresh, Toy Lovers, Girlfriends or Ethnic if you wish to search the content via a specific niche and you can refine your model search within the niche by hair colour, boob size or shaved/bush/landing strip. You can also rate the models and create a favourites list.
The photos here have more of an artistic feel to them than your usual glamour site often making use of natural light and shadows to create some dramatic effects. Also they don’t go overboard with the airbrushing so the pictures tend to have a more natural feel to them than the artificial looking glossy pics you get at some glamour sites. Overall I was highly impressed with the quality of the 3000px photo sets. The only slightly annoying thing for me was that sometimes the sequence of pictures seems muddled and doesn’t always run in the expected order from clothed to naked. A prime example of this is the July 1st update of Malena Morgan, she starts off wearing a sexy white see through lace dress with matching bra and panties underneath, picture 27 the dress is off and she’s removing the bra, pic 29 the bra and dress are back on again. Pictures 52 and 53 she’s almost naked and removing her panties, pics 54 and 55 the bra, panties and dress are back on again. Is this the deliberate intention of the photographer? Surely not?….or is it just laziness on the part of the webmaster not ensuring the photos are uploaded in the correct order?
The site also has a collection of 787 videos to date, 407 of which come with an HD option. When searching the video library you are able to check a box to include only HD videos in your results if you so wish. Most of the videos I’ve watched so far range from around 8-12 minutes in length and usually feature the model in a slow sensuous striptease accompanied by music followed by masturbation session. As the model begins to pleasure herself the music fades away so you can hear her moans and groans. You can also find some videos featuring sex toy use and some girl/girl videos although these are in the minority here. The 1280x720 wmv option I chose had a bitrate of around 3400kbps. On average 8-9 new videos added per month as part of the daily updates.
Extra features include the Daily Word, over a thousand desktop wallpapers, backstage features, talent search, forum and a Twitter feed. Overall a highly recommended site for fans of solo glamour photography especially if you can grab one of their special join offers. If I go back in another 5 years I wonder if they will be recycling all those 3000px photos I just downloaded in a bigger size again?
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
I have seen Mr Hicks stuff for many years and this is a good collection of glam babe photos.
I like his taste in women. If you like glam photos, this is a gold mine.
the collection os videos goes back some years in Standard Def. There are a limited collection of HD videos of some very fine glam babes.
Cons:
The navigation is crazy in this site. There are so many catagories and sub catagories that you have no idea what is what and where to find it.
Pesonally I am looking for HD video of glam babes. Very hard to find things in this site.
The video is very "artsy" slo motion with very little closeups of face or any body part for that matter. It is like Mr Hicks is embarressed to get in there and get the shot I need to see.
Bottom Line:
This site is probably worth a months join to get the good stuff downloaded. There are a lot of nice women here.
If you are into pictures only, then this is a great site. If you are looking for HD video and glam girls, then this is only mildly satisfying.
*Newbie reviews and ratings don't count toward a site's overall score/rank until the user reaches the Rookie status level (5 points). This rule is needed to help prevent fake (or heavily biased) profiles and reviews.
2.5 months ago, when I reviewed this site, it was called "Digital Dreamgirls," as it had been for years. Now that it's "Digital Desire," you may wonder what has changed.
Instead of one pic set with 3000px photos per month, they've been doing two. They still recycle old content into larger pic sizes (with varying results of quality), but it seems like a little less of that than before.
Other than that, I don't see any change at all. I've been through their content to the present, except for the videos (not interested). A lot of the girls are hot, but I'm tired of the pileups of pussy closeups, "tight" shots (excessively cropped, that is), and pics of girls staring away into space (as if they've got nothing better to do ;).
They have made a recent visit to Prague and shot several of the beauties there, but the results are underwhelming. Even Marina/Euphrat can't save them from their often mediocre approach to presentations of fine women. And their descriptions of the shoots are so canned and superficial -- give me a break! Gee, I hope they don't actually spend time COMPOSING this drivel.
What's in a name? A rose by any other would smell pretty much the same.
At least they still offer a 15.95 price for renewing members. Not many sites are that generous.
As you may know, ddgirls is now called "digital desire". Having been a member years ago, I received an email highlighting this. Aside from being a "totally redesigned" site, the email mentions that the videos are no longer DRM protected.
Has anybody verified this? I would join again in a heartbeat if the DRM no longer applies - personally I hate DRM, I like to download videos and watch them later on my laptop - DRM ruins the experience for me.
What I don't understand is, the removal of DRM is only hinted at in the email, when J. Stephen Hicks should be highlighting it in a huge marquee!! I know many of you out there agree with me, this site would be awesome if DRM were lifted!
Still, I caution anyone eager to try this out - it seems to me that the DRM signature is part of each video stream, and while the new videos may not have DRM protection, I doubt if they have had time to remove it from each and every video in their collection. Of course hopefully I'm wrong...
Only the last month's updates are available via zip file, for everything else, you must manually download each pic. Truly annoying, and not worth the money.
There is no doubt that DD Girls is a pretty nice website, but DRM protected videos (restricted use of videos) destroys it all for me. I hate protected videos and I believe that such restrictions are totally bad for the website.
What is the point of dropping the member's monthly subscription price by (about) one and a half dollar and say that you make a special join price, well LOL. It's too funny to me and of course makes me pass sites which do things like that.
Hope that the webmaster(s)/owner(s) of the site will see this comment and think about it :)
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.
RSS Feeds : All Digital Desire Activity - Digital Desire Reviews - Digital Desire Comments - Digital Desire News
