Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
- Average to very attractive models.
- Very few fake breasts, and the ones that are fake are nicely done and not cartoonish.
- Mostly 20-35 year olds (guessing at ages). Very few teenie-bopper looking girls.
- Zip files for photos, but only one choice. No small/medium/large option.
- Pictures are adequately detailed, but not at the same level as MET or MC Nudes. You'll be able to zoom in on the tiny hairs shining in the sun on the curve of her hip in a few shoots and with a few models, but most aren't that detailed. That could be a major con for some, but the pro aspect is that very few of the zip files for photo shoots were more than 200MB.
- Speeds seemed fine and the website was functional the entire week or two I was paying attention.
- Fairly small site.
- Ads on the page for pay-per-view movies that have absolutely nothing to do with the model. That's a huge gripe. Charge less if you want to try to make more money off of me once I've paid to get inside. I took five points off the score for that alone.
- No small/medium/large option for zips.
- Videos are probably afterthoughts and not the main selling point of the site, but they're still of mediocre quality and either have no sound or have techno music playing over any sound that might have actually been picked up by what was probably the video setting of the SLR being used. I watched a dozen or so clips and don't know what any of the women sounded like.
- Not every model is shown nude, although that may be part of the appeal for some.
- The attempt to make women who are clearly and quite obviously strippers seem to be girl-next-door amateurs with charming backstories. "Fun Fact: I've been a Hair Model" sort of stuff.
I joined almost entirely because I discovered a model who looks nearly exactly like a woman I was once involved with.
Would I join it again in the future? No, probably not.
There will be an occasional flash of inspiration, such as the lens looking down a flat stomach so that the bikini straps come up ever so slightly to bridge the area between the hipbones and the mons pubis, but I get the feeling those are mostly pleasant little accidents since most shots are the same poses in front of the same backgrounds, many of which involve corrugated metal buildings. I guess it's visually interesting the first couple of times, but after the tenth or fifteenth time it begins to seem like they just gave up and walked behind the U-Store-It again for another shoot in the same clothes as that last girl.
Seriously. The same clothes. Not the same *style* of clothes. I don't mean the girls dress similarly. I mean the exact same clothes, the same swimsuit (a blue one piece spider web pattern comes to mind), the same lingerie, etc. After a while it starts making you feel the same way the U-Store-It backgrounds do.
Do I recommend it?
I can't recommend it at $30.
I may recommend it at $15-20.
I would probably recommend it at $10.
There are some attractive models and some decent shots, but the site is fairly small and the As it is, and unless you're like me and wanted to get images of one specific model that are not available anywhere else, I think you're probably better off joining the "Only All" sites for $5/month more.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Some of the models are really beautiful
Most are at least good looking
Most are natural, not enhanced.
100% original content
Exclusive models as far as I can tell
Reasonable variety of body dimensions
Sets are not dated.
Unknown update frequency.
Can't tell if sets are recycled.
No HD found so far
Images and zips are 1600x1067 MAX!!
Navigation is a little clunky
Site is mostly bathing suit and lingerie shots.
Models are not very animated (most just standing)
Softer than soft core...really a bikini site with extras.
Not a particularly good value at $29.95.
About 210 models and 1475 sets.
Very few videos but all are decent quality.
Sets have between 30 and 120 images.
Vast majority of sets are bikini/lingerie sets.
This is an odd, sort of misidentified site and I just can't understand why they didn't define it better. (Sorry TBP...) Probably 97% of the girls are NOT NUDE! This would be a classic tease or bikini site if it were not for the occasional nude set. Even the nude sets, most of them anyway, are not particularly revealing. I've seen more on the Chive, Maxim or free web sites. Much more. But then, oh wait, there are two or three models that get naked and provide extreme close-ups. Waaaat? What's THAT about? No wonder TBP had such a hard time defining the site. It's like the sock drawer of nude sites! Most things in there match up with a specific genre ou would expect, but rogue loners to make you wonder what's going on....
Maybe the next best way I can define this site, besides as a tease site, is outdated. Navigation is good but not ideal. You can filter the models by odd preferences like "wet" (as in water),"fishnet", "see-thru", "blond" and, oh yea, "nude" and even "extreme close up" which is just wierd compared to the rest of the site. You can't select multiples, so no way to see wet blonds, etc. And "see-thru" applies to a top worn over a bathing suit as often as something you can actually see parts through.
When you select a model, you get a list of her sets. The sets have tags like "fishnet", bathing suit", "nude", etc. that match the search parameters. These are site defined. Select a set and you get the first batch of 30 thumbnails. If there is nudity, it is often very late in the set. Some sets have over 300 images, so you have to go through 10 pages or more to see everything. You can also navigate directly to a page. Or you can download the entire set in a zip file.
The sets are not dated, so you have no idea how old they are. You also don't know how many images are in a set until you look. The image or file sizes are also not listed. The tags are helpful, but "nude" in this case might mean a nip slip. Ad if the model is nude, chances are pretty good that they superglued her legs together. Many of the girls that are nude are all crossed up like they have to pee! Some are only topless. One kind of interesting thing is that the girls may go nude but cover up everything with thier hands....until they turn around. That all of a sudden you'll get this beautiful standing rear view. The photographer seems to have a knack for these rearview shots as they occur pretty consistently in clothed and nude models.
Oh, yeah. The photography. Competent. Nothing special. No photoshopping. Some studio sets. Since most of the girls are clothed, it looks like the photographer often takes the models to a local hotel pool or maybe some gardens someplace. You can tell that many of the model sets were shot on the same day with the same locale. Nothing even remotely exotic in the locations.
Now if you are LOOKING for a bikini site, this one is probably not bad, but the occasional rogue naked close-up model kind of messes up that niche.
If this were my site, I would probably break it up into a "network" of three sites that might include bikini, lingere and nude sites. The price I paid, $29.00 was probably about $10.00-15.00 high considering comparable sites with tens of thousands of high-resolution images and HD videos.
Bottom line? If you are looking for some exclusve non-nude photography and don't mind a little nudity mixed in, this is a good site for you. If you are used to the top softcore sites, pass on this one...at least until the price comes down.
*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.
I returned to this site after nearly a year. They do have more full nudity than they used to, though clothed and partially nude teasing remains the staple.
One bright spot here is Lena Nicole, who gets fully undressed and shows off her sexy ass in ways I've never seen before. Have seen rather stilted posing from her at some other sites, but here she really comes through. She's put on a bit of weight, but she's still really, really sexy.
There are a couple of big negatives for this site. #1 is the WATERMARK on the photos. It's to-o-o big and gets on the girl, a LOT. Imagine looking at 5 photos in a row of a girl's face and each time having to mentally tune out this WATERMARK that gets in her hair, on her skin, etc.
I know we have to protect our wells, but doing so by poisoning them isn't such a hot idea.
#2 is the past-three-months update list. Everything before that you have to look for by viewing the content by individual model. Obviously, a complete update list, even a text-only one such as they have here, would be better for both users and the site (less server load from people scrounging through the model directory).
I've been to this one twice; last time ended early January of '07. The photo quality was usually rich with color and more recent pics maxed at 1600px. Exclusive pics, too.
Even though it's still only $19.95, I think it's mostly non- or semi-nude, which doesn't suit me, but if you like that, you should probably give it a chance.
Among the few fully nude girls, I recall Amy Reid and Riley Shy, both in very HOT sets, maybe about 3 each. Riley had several bruises (arms, back, legs) in at least one set. Don't know why (rough play? abusive asshole?), but I wish they'd waited to shoot her after giving her a chance to mend. (She really put out the sexual energy and charm, though. She's one of a kind.)
About a year ago, they showed their updates in the public area, but not now. They really ought to show them instead of just saying, "Update Schedule 3 Times / Per Week and sometimes More!" for videos and "Update Schedule 5 Times / Per Week and sometimes More!" for photos. Can't we see what we'll be getting??
Navigation was always kind of difficult, too. It's too complicated to describe, but it was annoying. Hopefully, they will fix/have fixed that.
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.