| User Reviews (3) |
|
User reviews consist of pros, cons, and other thoughts.
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
- Unique, interesting themes
- Good, unusual photography style
- Wide variety of models, some well-known
- Good descriptions of videos
- Good value full trial available |
| Cons: |
- Low res pics and videos
- Sparse updates
- Set names obscured & unhelpful zip names
- No tagging or categorisation
- Some sets too big |
| Bottom Line: |
Yet another infuriating site!
I'll start with a couple of disclaimers. First, I'm not really a foot/leg fetishist as such; however I seem to have become a one by default since the genre (particularly legs) seems to cover eroticism, undressing, nylons and lingerie etc - in short, the whole picture - more than most porn. Second, I'm slightly biased since I'm familiar with the photographer, Ed Fox; I've just had his second book delivered and like his work in Leg Show magazine - which I get occasionally, one of the few printed magazines still worth a look with all the online porn around.
Anyway, at FF, you'll find a good selection of foot-oriented material; sets and videos cover various themes, such as:
- candids of eg girls getting dressed, putting on shoes;
- masturbation scenes, sometimes starting with the girl eg rubbing lotion onto her feet
- quite a few with sex toys
- some girl-girl scenes and a few b/g scenes
- scenarios, eg I liked a couple involving undressing/masturbating during phone calls
- behind the scenes
- some not explicit at all, purely focused on feet
- outdoor or other unusual locations
- plenty of dirty feet
Some themes I didn't like; smoking is common but has never worked for me, and some weirder S&M stuff, eg unseen strangers whose gloved hands abduct or molest girls. And many videos have music whereas I prefer without; however it tends to be ambient/electronic/experimental stuff which although sometimes offputting, is far preferable to the corny faux-sexy music we get so often.
It's worth noting that this is material that leans towards foot fetishism but doesn't focus solely (rimshot) on it - hardcore foot folk may find it strays a bit too much but it's a balance that works for me. And largely I really like the style; it's not as brightly lit as most porn so it may not appeal to some folk; but there is a documentary/voyeuristic style to it which is quite unique, and even the magazine type shoots have a starkness and realism that sets it apart from most glam. The light and shadows make it very erotic - but not at the expense of being too arty, which it's not, or too tame - although there's not much hardcore, there's plenty of explicit midcore.
And there are a great selection of models featured. Some I'm familiar with from the pinup/fetish genre, eg Angela Ryan, Emily Marilyn, Dita von Teese; some porn stars, such as Aria Giovanni, Ryan Keely, Jelena Jensen; and plenty of pretty amateurs that perhaps only appear here.
Roughly 570 photo sets and 230 videos going back to 2004; maybe 150 models. Photo sets are split between 'photos' and 'features' - I think the former are meant to be more candids, and the latter more glamorous, magazine shoots and the like - but it's a vague distinction and there seems to be quite an overlap. Updates are quite sparse at 1-4 per month; but this is clearly stated on the tour so I don't have a problem with that.
Site navigation is fairly standard; a general updates list, photos/videos lists in date order, a model index. Given the number of themes involved it would be nice to have some kind of tagging, but sadly there is none. The layout of the site means that the names of photo sets are obscured which is annoying, especially as zips do not have meaningful names; but at least zips are there and easily accessible. I found some sets too large, maybe > 200 pictures, and really could have been edited; more is not necessarily better. Videos are mostly WMV, some QT, and whereas there's no info about photo sets, most videos have a long and explicit description, particularly discussing the feet - Mr Fox is quite a fetishist.
The biggest issue, though, is the resolution; all pictures sets are just 1024x768 (or less on the shorter side). I'm really not a resolution fiend and don't expect the somewhat daft 80 megapixel sets that Hegre Art is now offering; but Ed Fox is a well-known published photographer and it baffles me that he can't/doesn't/won't muster more than even 1 megapixel. I'd at least like to look at them full-screen and 1024x768 is well under half the size of mine - at least 2000px would be far more appropriate.
Similarly, videos are fairly low; many are DVD size, but older ones seem to be about 450x300 px - although for me a video survives upscaling a bit more than a photo so I don't mind quite so much. But still, a bit of HD would be appreciated and hardly technically challenging to produce now.
As some others have pointed out, once you go to leave the site you get offered a link to a $3/3 day trial; I took this and felt a bit guilty since I did get some good content. But I'd really need a month to comfortably go through everything - I like the material so much that it's only the resolution issue that preventing me from buying a full subscription. And similarly that's what prevents me scoring this higher; even with all the other cons I would happily give this 90+ - but it's still good size archive of great material and hopefully 80 reflects this. |
| Respond: |
0 Replies
- Add Reply
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
-Clean and efficient navigation
-All exclusive content
-Classy, artistic pictures and videos
-Acceptable archive size (+300 videos, +3000 picture sets)
-Beautiful models (including Valentina Vaughn, Justine Joli or Dita von Teese, for example)
-Full trial membership
-Pictures are downloadable in .zip format |
| Cons: |
-Mostly solo, softcore content
-Very irregular updates
-Somewhat dark in style and lighting
-Videos with music (I hate that)
-Not a wide choice of formats and qualities for video download |
| Bottom Line: |
So, following my quest for new and exciting foot fetish sites, I joined this site, which I knew mostly because they released a couple of videos as movies in Hotmovies.com. To join, I used a "trial membership" option that appears as an "easter egg" if you try to surf away from their Join page: for 2.95€, I got complete access to the site for three days. Great deal, I am really thankful after my extremely dissapointing experiences with other trial memberships recently.
As for the site itself, well, to enjoy it you have to know what you are going to get, and you have to like that kind of stuff: it's mainly artistic, classy, elegant, somewhat dark foot fetish solo/masturbation pictures and videos. It has an Andrew Blake ring to it, although without the BDSM.
Among the models who work(ed) for this site, you will find some of my personal favorites, such as Justine Joli or Valentina Vaughn, but also a lot of unknown actresses who are just ok. One thing that I hate is that most videos -not all- include a music soundtrack, which silences the moans and groans of the actresses. I really don't like that, it's a complete turn off for me...
On the technical side, the navigation is just good (you can only access the pics and videos in inverse chronological order, with no search options or categories) and the choice of video qualities and formats is minimal -inexistant for older sets. Another big "con" is the low rate of updates in this site: they come irregularly, mostly once every week, but sometimes every two weeks, or every three or four days...
All in all, I was dissapointed with the site, mainly because I am not that much into solo action, and because, although I can enjoy a softcore video once in a while, I prefer it not to be SO softcore. This site is clearly devoted to showing the beauty of the female body, and more precisely female feet, but I also expected it to show some hot f/f or even m/f action. Obviously Ed Fox is a great photographer and a talented artistic director, but it's just not exactly my taste. |
| Respond: |
0 Replies
- Add Reply
|
| Status: |
Review is over 2 years old and no longer counts toward score. |
| View: |
Read Expired Review (3 Replies)
|
*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.
|
|
| User Comments (0) |
|
Ask a question, give quick feedback, warnings, etc.
Be the first to comment on Foot Factory!
Add Comment
|
RSS Feeds : All Foot Factory Activity - Foot Factory Reviews - Foot Factory Comments - Foot Factory News
