| User Reviews (3) |
|
User reviews consist of pros, cons, and other thoughts.
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
-No DRM.
-No site timeout.
-Nice-sized thumbnail of the female model to illustrate each video.
-Some cute models.
-The girls are real teens, not twenty- or thirty-year olds trying to appear much younger.
-Can add/view comments on videos and photosets.
-Can rate the videos photosets.
-Small watermark bottom right-hand corner of photos.
-The videos are mainly clear and crisp, with adequate lighting. The videos and photosets are less gonzo style than the other sites in the network, but are not glamor-style, more like in-between gonzo and glamor style. |
| Cons: |
-There is no search. Not a major problem because the site is so small. Only 75 videos so far. Can list the videos by name of model or by date posted
(but date posted is not accurate or reliable).
-Occasionally, a photo will not display when you click on the thumbnail, get an error message: "cannot be displayed, because it contains errors".
-Hard to tell what the update rate is, because the posting dates are unreliable.
-Only 1 size of file to download video (no choice of hi, mid, lo quality).
-Videos download as WMV files (no other file extension choice).
-Only 1 size of zip file to download photoset.
-Limited types of models: they are all white Eastern European teens. |
| Bottom Line: |
Hardcore teen site, with some good looking young teens.
Sample size for the videos and photosets:
Videos are 400 MB to 1 GB
Photosets are 40 MB to 120 MB
Currently 75 videos with a matching photoset for each video.
Usually 1 video per model. A few models have 2 videos. Photos are crisp, but mainly to illustrate the video action; the photos are not artistic or glamor style such as the softcore photo sites like metart or mplstudios.
The style of the photos is more natural than glamor. I personally don't like the photos, but some PU members might appreciate them: they are
clear, usually crisp, hardcore photosets, with some really nice-looking models. Natural style of photography. The video and photoset are mainly
hardcore boy-girl; a few sets are softcore or midcore, where the girl is solo or with a second girl.
The photosets approach high quality in terms of photo size. But you don't actually get the quality of a met-art, mplstudios or other softcore photo site. I don't understand why it's so hard to make a quality hardcore
photoset. This site has plenty of cute girls, doing hardcore, but the photography is poor or lacking: in the flesh colors of the girls, in the
presentation of the girls, the girls just lack attractiveness or allure in the photos. I grew up in the days of Playboy and Penthouse. I didn't like every Playboy or Penthouse photoshoot, but in many cases, the girls/women looked extremely attractive, sexy, luscious, gorgeous, adorable, lovely.
You don't get that in these photosets. You can find it in the met-art and mplstudios and other glamor teen sites. The problem is that the girls are not presented at their best. It's like you buy an off brand of some product you like, Cheerios, or Rice Crispies, and the taste is blah
instead of what you get from the major brand.
They don't use photoshop or airbrushing on these photos, and that's part of why I rate the photos lower. But it's also the skin tone of the models,
the posing, the composition, everything that factors into how attractive or erotic a photograph is. The photosets are high quality in the size of the photos (each photo is 100 KB to 1 MB), but the quality of the photos is not up to the standards of the softcore glamor sites.
Some of the models at this site are also at met-art, glamdeluxe, justteensite, mplstudios, etc. And they look much more attractive on the
other sites, because of the photography or videography.
If this site is included in your network membership, you should definitely check the site out. Some models here (mainly the same ones shown on many of the other sites in the network) are very attractive, the videos are shot less gonzo style, the photosets are worth looking at. |
| Respond: |
14 Replies
- Add Reply
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
Very attractive young ladies.
Good quality video (8 are 1080P @ ~7mbits/sec, rest 720P @ 4mbits/sec) and photos (3000 x 2000, some even better)
Photos are zipped
Decent amount of content (72 videos with picture sets plus network access)
Very good download speeds. Downloading a couple of videos at once with DownThemAll maxed my 100mbit connection.
No DRM, no download limits, download managers work, no regional pricing, Reputable billing through Epoch or Segpay |
| Cons: |
Photo sets do not always match the video
Some photo sets are just hi-res screen caps
Basic interface, no search or model index and little to no information about the videos.
Model names do not match with the rest of the network (see rant below)
A lot of the network sites are no longer updating
No update schedule, last update was 10 days ago. |
| Bottom Line: |
The thing about this site that annoys me the most is the seemingly random model naming. There are a few quite well known faces on this site (Sasha Rose, Nessa Devil, Mandi Dee) but none of them have their correct names. To make matters worse, a large percentage of the models also feature in other sites on the network, again under completely different names. I don't know if its laziness or maybe their system randomly assigns Russian sounding names when new scenes are uploaded but its bloody annoying!
This one was quite hard to rate. While everything about the site is generally good, it is just such a mish mash. Some hardcore, some soft-core. Some solo, some lesbian. Some 1080P videos, some 720P.
It seems like they either found a bunch of clips that were not used on their other sites or licensed it. Although the site is new, not all of the content is. When I compare the models on here to other scenes from 2008 / 2009 they seem to be about the same age.
I would not recommend going out of your way to join this site but as the network includes some decent sites (gag-n-gape being a good one) I don't think it will be money wasted. |
| Respond: |
0 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 (1) |
|
Ask a question, give quick feedback, warnings, etc.
|
RSS Feeds : All Nubile Girls HD Activity - Nubile Girls HD Reviews - Nubile Girls HD Comments - Nubile Girls HD News
