Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
-The finest softcore teen glamor site on the Internet.
-A huge amount of photosets, number of individual models, number of contributing photographers.
-Long time before site timeout.
-No download limits.
-I use DownThemAll download manager, which works at this site.
-Fast download speeds. I normally get 1.3 MB/sec, which is my maximum download speed.
-CCBill billing agent, which is one of the best credit card processors around.
-Search engine to allow you to search for models or photosets or photographers that you might like.
-Wide range of locations for the videos and photosets. In studios or houses, in fields, forests, at lakes or oceans or beach, they pose their lovely models to best advantage to show off these beauties.
-The cons are basically minor. This is without a doubt the finest softcore teen glamor site on the Internet.
-The sheer size of the site (number of photosets, number of models, number of videos) appears to turn some people off. Instead of appreciating the massive amount of content, many people seem to
think the site has too many photosets to go through, and that, because there are so many gorgeous gils, that the models themselves are not as attractive as they really are.
-Metart has a patent on filming gorgeous naked teens and making the videos boring and a waste of time to watch. This is something I've wondered about for years: It's just a wasted opportunity of attractive models.
-The site will disappoint those looking for midcore or hardcore action. This is strictly a softcore site. No boys are in any photosets. If there are two girls in a photoset or video, their interaction is extremely softcore. No masturbation or fondling of the other girl.
As I've stated many time in the past, this is the finest softcore teen glamor site on the Internet.
There is an amazing amount of content. The site updates with 4 to 6 updates daily, which is just amazing for a single site.
Number of photosets: 12,534
Number of videos: 1,045 Movies
Number of models: 2,766 Models
Number of contributing photographers: 250
Number of photos: 1,365,839
Those are staggering numbers, that blow past any softcore teen glamor site that I'm aware of.
Metart is the giant in the field, not just in terms of quantity, but also quality. Since it's start back in the late 1990s, Metart has featured high-quality teen softcore photography from leading photographers around the world.
The photosets are offered in three sizes for both online viewing and for download:
Low definition, medium definition, high definition.
The videos can be streamed or downloaded in three definitions as well: low, medium and high.
Metart was the site I picked for my first review for PU in 2008. At that time I gave the site a score of 97. That turned out to be the highest score I've ever given to any site. Since that time, the site has only increased the number of models and photosets and photographers. I think the review I did about 4 years ago is still basically accurate today.
One difference is that the Metart live shows/live chat have changed. Metart used to offer an in-
house live chat that featured a number of girls that were live each day for a number of hours
daily. The public shows were basically free. True, you could pay for a private show, or you could tip a girl during her public show. But it was basically a free source of entertainment, and the girls were friendly, and the shows were not designed to maximize the amount of money the members would pay to watch the show. That seems almost quaint today. Most live shows I've seen recently try to get the members to pay to watch the girls perform.
Metart no longer has the in-house live chat shows. Instead, they offer a link to a commercial live chat program designed to make money off the members. I believe it's cheaper to go to a topless bar than to watch a private live cam show.
Lately, the site seems to have loosened their rules, and allow two girls to kiss in a photoset or video, but the kisses are almost chaste. The sample video in the preview pages gives a false impression the site has erotic videos. It's true the videos inside are of naked girls, and many of the models are attractive. But I can't emphasize enough how boring these videos are.
I complain about the boring videos. But because of the massive photoset content, the high quality of the photos, the number of photographers that contribute to this site, the site deserves its reputation as best in breed of teen softcore glamor sites. I gave the site a score of 97 about 4 years ago, and the site has only improved since then, adding more content, trying to make using the site easier to use over time, changing the default filenaming system to make the filenames more descriptive, and in other ways they try to make the site more user-friendly.
I am giving the site a score of 99.
How could they improve this site, to give it a perfect 100?
That would be a fantasy project:
1. They could delete almost all their
videos, and hire whoever shoots the videos at X-Art or the Diesel Access network. But that would mean a change in the Met-art philosophy, which stresses softcore porn.
2. They could send their models over to my house, where I could tell if their models are really as attracive as they look. At my age (I'm in my 60s), I couldn't do that much with these girls, but it sure would be nice to try. But that might be illegal. So maybe they could hire me as a stunt cock. Again, that would mean a change in their softcore approach. But maybe they could start a "Metart meets an aging fan reality show", because reality shows are very popular today.
Unfortunately, that's only in my dreams.
For $20/month with a PU discount, this site is a fantastic bargain. Or $99/year, which is an even better deal if you join the site for a month and believe the site is worth a long term membership. I think the site is like a museum of Most Erotic Teens, which I believe is the former name of the site, from which they changed it to MET-Art. For a softcore teen site, this is truly the best in show.
Current Member for over 1 year (at the time of review).
12-30-1203:26am (Update History) Reason: Added important info about the shortcomings of the search engine
Met-Art has a huge number of very attractive models (2700+). A new user could easily spend months going through the entire site. They usually have 4 to 6 updates a day. Excellent photography overall. This is primarily a photo site. They have videos, but they are very soft core. It is also primarily a solo girl site--the occasional "lesbian" sets are really just 2 girls posing together. Another thing worth noting (not necessarily a "pro") is that their Met Live Cams is just their name branded version of Streamate. I don't think there is any advantage to accessing it through their website, and I've only seen one Met-Art model there (Malena Morgan). The main attraction here is the huge volume of quality photos of beautiful naked women.
The videos are way too soft core for my taste. They are really just an extension of the photo sets. There is no masturbation and not enough explicitness in the videos for me. The site seems to have a rule against the models touching themselves, so there is no pussy spreading here. Too many models don't do explicit pussy photos. The 2-girl photo sets are not lesbian photo sets--they are pretend lesbian photo sets. There is rarely any actual kissing, and no pussy play etc. I guess the site has a rule against actual sex. I know thats their niche, but it does get annoying sometimes. Many other sites have shown that it can be done tastefully. Some of the photo sets do suffer from less than top quality lighting (this seems to be an issue with some of the European photogs). A lot of the sets have too many redundant photos--by that I mean photos that are nearly identical. This makes many of the sets unnecessarily large. Some user submitted search tags do not seem to work at all.
Probably the best soft-core porn site out there, with a huge number of very attractive girls, quality photography, and lots of daily updates.
One month is nowhere near enough time to explore all of the content. In fact, narrowing down the 2700+ models to find the ones you like is the most problematical aspect of Met-Art. Their search engine uses 9 standard tags (e.g. hair color, breast size, etc), and this is useful to a degree. They also have user submitted search tags which potentially could be much more useful. For example, you can search using the term "beach". However, many of the user submitted search tags do not return all sets that have that tag. One example is the term "perfect pussy". Its in the 100 most popular user submitted tags, but when you enter it, only 15 sets are found, all of which have the word "perfect" in the name of the set. It would be very useful if they could get that fixed. Bottom line though, this a must join site, even if you only try it for a month.
Update: I contacted Met-Art support about the user submitted search tags not working. The next day I got an email back from them, stating that they had corrected the problem (I checked, and they did), and as a way of thanking me for alerting them to the problem, they gave me a free two week trial to one of their other sites! Sweet!
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Obviously a very professionally run site. Nothing to complain about the nuts and bolts
One man's meat is another man's poison. This is undoubtedly true but all men know a beautiful woman when they see one and they are going to see very few of them on this website. I have never seen so many average-looking females thrown together. Most are plain, many are almost ugly and – what is worse – few are genuinely sexy. The whole set-up is more reminiscent of nudism in the 1960s than modern erotica or porn. It beats me why anyone should want to see these plain janes without their clothes on.
The models are neither beautiful nor sexy. Many look so incredibly softcore that it is doubtful that they would know what to do with a penis if they ever came across one.
Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review).
Top rated softcore site
Some of the most beautiful models ON EARTH!
Spectacular imagery and sets
4-6 updates PER DAY!
Only one thing in the CON category:
obnoxious cross-selling to the other sites in the network.
One minor annoyance: The user defined keywords are not particularly useful.
This is without a doubt one of the best softcore sites on the internet. The models are spectacular, the sets are great, the clothing, hair and make-up are usually perfect, the variety is great and the girls generally look like they are having a good time. Nothing cheap or poorly done anywhere, period. Navigation is also very good.
There are several exclusive or nearly exclusive models on this site that words cannot describe. FOr example: Mila, with 44 sets, always looks like she is enjoying herself. Fergie, with only 16 sets, is a little more conservative but can melt ice with her looks. Wait...loking at the site while writing a review can be very distracting....
OK, there is rally only one negative that I'm going to mention here and it is more of a customer service thing than a fault with the site. It seems that Met Art is now part of a network which includes Sex Art, the Life Erotic, Errotica Archives and Erotic Beauty. Unlike many other networks, you have to join each oif these sites separately. OK, I can appreciate that the owners want to maximize revenue. I can even appreciate that some owner/photographers hire a model for a day or a weekend trip, shoot many, many sets and then break the sets up over multiple sites, again, to maximize revenie (Met-Art and Met-Models, now Erotic Beauty, comes to mind) What I find offensive is that in Met-Art, when you look at a set of a model, a section sometimes appears at the bottom of the set that says something like "more of this model:' with a bunch of images that are links. Well, the links are NOT WITHIN THE MET ART SITE. They are links to offers to join one of the other sites in the network where more images of this model supposedly exist. It is one thing to list other sites on the model page, but it is simply obnoxious baiting to put a clickable image of the model at the bottom of the page and only include a small reference to the name of the other site. This is the only site I've ever seen that uses this relatively deceptive practice and I absolutely hate it. (Can you tell?)
Now, in-spite of that trashy cross-selling tactic, the guys at met-art are gracious enough to discount the other sites once you join one. And, to be fair, these sites appear to have plenty of unique sets spread around to each of the sites.
So...if you have not yet been to this site and want some seriously great softcore imagery and video to add to your collection, Met-Art is a MUST. I come back every year and will probably succomb to the cross-selling and try one or more of the other sites...and will review them when I do, of course!
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
high quality content
deliver what they promise
unike pictures in my opiniom
large gallery, many many hours if you will go through everything.
You should have the ability to create favorite photo album.
Very good site that provides very good content. Well worth the money.
My account was hacked, and the hackers used my account to become members of all the pages in their network. They also used money from my account on the web camera shows. Met-Art were very helpfull, and I've got all my money back. The handeld this very professional.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
-Bill through CCBill
-Discount through PU
-Huge site with over 2000 models and over a million photos. Archives go back to 1999.
-Nearly every model is absolutely drop dead gorgeous with few exceptions.
-Models are natural in that there are no tattoos or implanted breasts. Most are shaved, but many are not.
-Six updates daily.
-Zipdownload photo option with three choices, large, medium and small
-Three video download choices, MP4, AVI and WMV. The AVI is the best quality. HD quality at 1280x720.
-No download limits. Works with download manager.
-Great search engine. Without it, the site would be unnavigable. Even with it, many searches provide over a thousand photo sets. This can be daunting if you are trying to get to them all.
-User rating system for photographers, models, photo sets and videos. You can search by ratings.
-Wonderful, very complete tour that lets you see what you will get.
-Not very fast downloads. I got speeds of about 600KB and my FIOS conenction maxes out at 2400.
-The largest photo files are huge, ranging from 200MB to over 1GB. Individual photos can be as much as 6MB.
-Close to zero ethnic variation. Nearly all models are thin Eastern Europeans between 18 and 25.There are a few Asian, Black and Latina models and they are exceptionally beautiful. I just wish there were more.
I don’t usually sign up for big well known sites that have many reviews as I prefer niche sites. However, I felt in the mood for a photo site that had so many nice reviews, as well as a very low discounted price. I love the quantity and quality of the models and the photo sets. This is overall a truly great site that deserves the many wonderful reviews. I will focus primarily on the videos as I am much more a into them than photos anyway. The previous reviews were much more focused on the photos and I feel did notappreciate the videos.
I was impressed by the videos here. The models are almost without exception drop dead gorgeous. At present there are 1077 videos and are now being updated more so than in the past. As of today, 30 new videos have been posted this year. They added 106 in 2011.
The quality is HD, DVD level stunning and most videos are outdoors. Usually lighting is a negative in outdoor photos and videos, but mostly that is not a problem here. There are a few videos of public nudity that were just ok. Some were not really public, as you are directed to scenes in a forest or a deserted beach. Some of these were hot, but the majority were not very effective at creating eroticism.
Across the board, the camera work is outstanding and the videos are generally shot by the same photographers who shoot the photosets. This leads in many cases to the videos being either a video of a photo shoot, very boring, or suffer from a lack of direction that makes the videos look like moving photo sets, also some what boring. But there are also many that do work and are very erotic.
I like the work done here by Luca Helios. He generally gets the models to flirt with the camera in most of his videos. There is also a little teasing and even a few showcase a bit of stripping. No dancing though. They have a rating system on the site and he has the number one slot with a video featuring Dominika A called "Parusa". She walks past some shops, enters a room, and slowly removes her clothing, piece by piece. She gets to total nudity at 3:37 and spends the rest of the video, about four minutes, in a chair and on a bed showing us her body in slow motion. No masturbation here, this is all for our pleasure. She shows everything and is very explicit. Nothing artsy about this; it is the good stuff. He also has a video starring Jenni A called Carefree that I really like. She comes walking down stairs inside a house, bottomless, and walks towards the camera and teases. This goes on for about ten minutes. She is simply gorgeous and knows how to create a mood. Great direction in a video that works.
I also appreciated the videos by Goncharov, especially Ksucha C in a video called Lathin. She is not much to look at, but is great at teasing. She goes to a home in the forest wearing a short skirt. She teases us continually with pussy peeks up her dress, while not wearing panties. Very hot.
While many videos are not worth downloading unless you just love a particular model, there are some true gems here. I appreciate eroticism that focuses on putting on a good show.
As a total package, I would give this site at least a 95 for the sheer quantity and quality.
As a video site, I think it is fair to compare it to the videos on other photo sites. It is number one in that category in my book. Compared to other soft core sites, in the area of videos of solo females without masturbation, I think it can hold its own. I would give it at least an 85. There are just too many videos of photo shoots and posed videos to go for a higher score.
*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.
I found an email today with a promo join offer for a new site Rylsky Art featuring the work of one of Met-Art's top photographers Rylsky. He's been one of the most prolific contributers at Met in recent times with a new Rylsky set being added almost every day or two. I'm wondering now if the new Rylsky sight will see a gradual decline in his work being show-cased at Met-Art.
The new Rylsky site only has about a month's worth of updates so I couldn't decide if it's worth a subscription yet even at the $7.99 promo price I was offered but the $15 cross-sell to rejoin Met-Art that comes with it might just clinch the deal
1. MET-Art (originally Most Erotic Teens) is a softcore pornography website owned by HLP General Partners Incorporated of Santa Monica, California. The site features erotic photographs of partially or completely naked women, and has been online since circa 1999.
2. Not to be confused with the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City.
But much easier to visit than the New York City museum. And the price to visit the online site is much cheaper.
3. Headquarters: Santa Monica, California
Parent HLP General Partners, INC
It surprises me that the headquarters are in Santa Monica, California.
Almost all the models used in the early years of Met-Art were Eastern European girls.
And the photographers were mainly from Europe, as well.
Most of the models are still from Eastern Europe.
And most of the photographers are still from Europe.
What I want to really know:
If I drive down to Santa Monica, California, how many of the Met-Art girls will I be able to meet?
My guess is: Zero to none, since the site uses very few models from the United States, and almost all the photoshoots are done in Europe.
Can anyone explain to me the benefit of having a headquarters in Santa Monica, California? Versus some place in Europe. I can understand not locating in Russia or some area around there, because the authorities might turn against porn and shut the operation down or force it to move. The same thing happened with Abby Winters in Australia, I think, which is why Abby Winters moved from Australia to Europe.
When you download a photoset of a model, it includes a small bio sheet for the model.
The model sheet includes:
And maybe a few small details about what the model likes or is doing.
The age of the model refers to the age she was at the time the photoset was posted to the site. (I believe that's what it's supposed to refer to. Less probable, it was the age the model was at the time of the photo shoot.)
Anyway, the computer program that is responsible for printing out the bio sheet has been, in error, I believe, now set up to print the age the model is currently.
On the Metart site, there is a bio section for each model, and that section gives the current age of the model.
But the downloaded bio sheet, that comes with a specific photoset, is supposed to give the age of the model at the time the photoset was posted to the site.
Instead, it now gives the current age of the model.
Met-Art is probably the biggest site for softcore teen photography, based on content.
And the site just keeps getting bigger. They add up to 6 photosets and videos per day. I don't know of any softcore teen photo site that comes close to that in terms of updates.
But over the years, they also tinker with the site to make it user friendly. They have a massive amount of content, but I feel the site is very easy to use.
One example of how they to make the contents more accessible/user friendly:
Years ago, the naming system for zip downloads of photosets used a combination of letters and numbers. Then they switched to a different system, where the filenames were much longer, but that tried to describe the file contents more clearly. The system they use now is much improved:
It gives the site name, the date the photoset was posted at Met-Art, the name of the photoset, the model(s) featured in the photoset, the photographer, and the definition of the photoset (low, medium, or high).
Would be a photoset posted on 2011-05-08, with the title, "Presenting Felicia", featuring the model Felicia B, by the photographer Dolce, and the definition is high.
Personally, I would rather that the name of the model comes before the name of the photoset. And I would prefer the date of the set comes before the name of the photoset. For example:
Felicia B-2011.05.08-Presenting Felicia
That would make more sense, and make it easier to categorize, as far as I can see.
Because when you are looking over your photosets, you want to know who the model is, when the photoset was posted, and then the name of the photoset.
I pay less attention to who the photographer is. And I try to keep all the Met-Art sets in a common group for Met-Art.
But it's nice that Met-Art tries, on a constant basis, to make the site more user-friendly.
I visit Met-Art more often than I go to any museum. For one, it's easier to visit. For another, the contents are more interesting. For another, Met-Art is like a museum, that is cultural, uplifting, and stimulates the mind.
There are very few porn sites that fit that description.
This is not a news flash. They've always been boring.
I get more fun watching some commercials than I get out of watching most Metart videos. How do they make videos of beautiful, lovely models getting undressed so boring?
Many of their photosets are alluring, lovely, outstanding, really gorgeous to look at.
But my main question is: why can the Metart photosets be so alluring? And at the same time, their videos so boring?
Separately, when the downloaded Metart videos play back, there is sometimes a mosaic effect where the colors are sometimes pixellated, and that is just another distracting effect. What causes this? I don't get this effect watching videos I download from Diesel network or Teen Mega World or other sites I download from.
I don't have a gaming computer, that is set up for fast visual effects. But my laptop, and my desktop, are both fairly new, within the last year, so I should be able to play back even the 1080p videos with no problems, I would think.
all for 39.97 but I guess its a alot of material to get through in a month and what is on some of the lesser known sites might not be upto much I don't know. I think you have to be on their mailing list to of got this offer, just thought I'd inform those that are interested though.
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.