| User Reviews (3) |
|
User reviews consist of pros, cons, and other thoughts.
| Status: |
Current Member for over 1 year (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
-Some good-to-great looking models.
-Content is exclusive to this site.
-High-quality glamour photography.
-No DRM video protection.
-No download limit.
-They do have a bio sheet on the models. But some of the information is fantasy or worthless.
Giving the age of the model, with no date to compare the age to, is not much use. Stating in
"sexual experience" that a model is a virgin, when I have seen hardcore clips of the same model
giving blowjobs and having vaginal and anal sex with different males, makes me wonder what kind of
virginity they are talking about. The hardcore clips of this model were posted on other sites long before the photoshoots of this "virgin" model were posted at glamdeluxe.
I realize that I should not be picky about factoids when posted at a porn site, but it pricks the fantasy bubble when the factoids are so obviously false. |
| Cons: |
-Site does not update very often. Can go a week or more before a new photoset is posted. Very irregular posting schedule for updates.
-Only 1 photographer for the site: Thierry Murrell. He does glamour-type erotic photography. Usually nice clean pictures, but if you don't like his style, you won't like the site.
-Softcore only. Single-model posing. No boy-girl pictures. No girl-on-girl pictures.
-Site advertises "huge archive" of photosets and flix. But the site has only been around since 2006, and the "archive" is tiny compared to a super-site like met-art. The flix archive is really small, only 28 videos. New videos are added very, very slowly.
-The flix (videos) are basically a video of a photoshoot. And some videos are a collection of
individual pictures from the photoshoot, not a real moving-picture video.
-No zip files for the photosets. Need a blackwidow program to download a photoset. Otherwise, you have to download each picture separately, a real pain. |
| Bottom Line: |
Cons (continued):-Photosets are in 1 resolution only. Do not have a choice of 3 different resolutions for downloads as you have at some of the better sites like met-art (low, medium, high resolution).
-Navigation could be improved a lot.
You go to the flix (video) page, which lists with a thumbnail of each video at the site. The hot-
link to download each video is not clearly marked. Maybe this is a French version of a joke, where
increasing the obstacles means increased pleasure when you reach the goal of downloading the video?
-Videos are listed separate from the photosets. So if you want to find whatever videos there are of
a girl, have to look at the video page, then scroll down the page to examine each video to see
which girl it is. Videos are not grouped by the model, but apparently in random order.
-They do not date the videos or some of the older photosets. I like to know when the photosets and
videos were shot, for my own interest.
-Models are white girls from Europe only. No blacks, Asians, other races.
-Photos have a watermark. Doesn't bother me, but some people dislike photos with a prominent watermark.
Bottom line:
-If you like softcore, glamour shots of single models, and you like the models you see on the tour, then this site is maybe worth 1 single-month subscription to get the basic files you want, and then maybe a visit once a year to get any updates. Hopefully, the site will last, because the
photographer does do quality work and picks some nice-to-great looking models. But a regular
subscription beyond 1`month is not worth the money.
-I wish I could give this site a much higher score, because I belong to it and hope it does not go out of business. But for this type of softcore photography, you get more for your money with met-
art > metmodels > hegre-art.
Giving this site a 75, because some of the girls are gorgeous, and the pictures are high-quality glamour shots. |
| Respond: |
0 Replies
- Add Reply
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+51 models, predominately Russian, some hot! (188 galleries)
+Photo quality has been improving, especially in 2007
+Most photos are between 2000 and 3500px on the long end
+Good server speed
+Login first requires typing in use-pass and a displayed code, but after that, just clicking the member’s entrance gets you straight in.
+Prompt technical assistance |
| Cons: |
-No zips!
-Only about 12 photoset updates per month in 2007
-Photos in only one size
-Some earlier photos as small as 1024px
-Ugly watermark on pics
-Videos? Most links to videos in the models index are inactive.
-Videos? They’re slide shows! (Actually, they’re called “flix” on this site.)
-Only 23 “videos,” 7 of which are of the same model (Nadja)
-Sample file sizes: 16mb (wmv), 18mb (DivX), 124mb (Quicktime). The quality doesn’t seem THAT different.
-Not totally exclusive |
| Bottom Line: |
I wonder if the term “flix” here is somehow intended to distinguish them from actual videos. As they are really awful, I also wonder who would want them. They are a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside three video format enigmas, especially Quicktime, which is about 5 times larger than the wmv or avi versions with no discernible improvement in quality.
The pics, on the other hand, are making me happier and happier as the quality is getting better, and some of their recent models are really beautiful and hot, including
Abigail (Anastasia atNubiles)
Darina (Emanuelle at Nubiles)
Francesca G (Olga at JustTeenSite, Ofemija at FemJoy)
June (aka Bianca, Ekaterina, Kamea, Katya, Tatyana)
Kayla
Lea (Masha at TeenDreams)
Victoria (Ira H at MetArt)
Yana, and of course
Helena (of Helen’s Planet).
One set, of their “Abril,” is the same as one on My Precious Virgins (as “Gaby”) – hence the “not totally exclusive.” Could such a thing happen again?
I do wish that the thumbs didn’t cut out part of what is in the actual photos, which sometimes is the case. “What you see is what you get” (WYSIWYG) would be a better approach.
That foamy green-colored watermark looks completely out of place on the pics, too. Yech!
And it’s about time that they at least provided zips (they do at their Helena's Planet) and 2 pic sizes (the current large size and one half that size). That would help the score. |
| Respond: |
9 Replies
- Add Reply
|
| Status: |
Review is over 2 years old and no longer counts toward score. |
| View: |
Read Expired Review (0 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 (3) |
|
Ask a question, give quick feedback, warnings, etc.
|
RSS Feeds : All Glam Deluxe Activity - Glam Deluxe Reviews - Glam Deluxe Comments - Glam Deluxe News
