Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!

E-MAIL   PASS  

Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
Site Feedback Feedback and ratings from other users just like yourself.
Visit The Life Erotic

Visit Site

The Life Erotic

Type: Pay Site

NICHES COMPANY COST

1. Nude Photography
2. Glamour Models
3. Soft Content

HLP General Partner Inc.
18 Sites Listed
Partner: Met Art Money 2

Monthly: $29.99  Our Price $19.99 (recurring)
Monthly: $29.99 (non-recurring)
1 Year: $99.99 (recurring)
Beware of Pre-Checked Cross-Sells! Be sure to uncheck additional offers (if undesired) to other sites when inputting your credit card info.


View all The Life Erotic Site Facts at TBP.

81.6
Feedback History  (11)

Active Reviews 2
Newbie Reviews 1
Active Ratings 0
Newbie Ratings 0
Comments 6
Review by TheBestPorn:

89.0
TBP Review

Date: 12-06-14

Type: 2.0

Vanessa
+  Exclusive Erotic & Artistic Photography.
+  Great Quality Content.
-  HD Specs Could be Better.

User Reviews (5)

 User reviews consist of pros, cons, and other thoughts.

Active
80
skippy (52) 07-02-15  01:22pm
Rookie Badge  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (23), NO (0)
Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: Generally high quality material
Beautiful, natural models
Wide variety of sets, locations and models
Very "artsy" site
Good range of image sizes to view/download
Generally good video options
Navigation is generally good
Fast download speeds
Many popular European models
Good navigation
Cons: Very "artsy" site.
Very little eye contact with camera
Creative edge takes precedent over practicality
Landing page focus is on cross-selling live site
Entire site including all sets are very dark!
Many sets in black and white or oddly tinted
Many shorter sets
Many models only have a set or two
There are more tattoos here than other Met-art sites. (not always bad, but not good on otherwise beautiful models)
Seems like some is B-roll from other sites
Bottom Line: Stats (Deduced):
About 1500 photo sets
About 500 videos
About 320 models
1 new update a day
Some older sets are not exclusive
The site has been around since 2009 but some of the sets pre-date that.
The models are generally young and all shapes, sizes, ethnicity, hair color, some hairy, some tattoos, etc.

This site is, to a large extent, sort of an evolution of the "girl in the woods" theme with the idea that you are observing a model in a more natural environment instead of a studio environment. Often the idea is that the model doesn't really know you are there or doesn't pay much attention to you, the viewer. About 50% of the sets are solo girl in a straight modeling scenario. Many of these sets are of very, very attractive girls that are just standing or in other conservative poses. Another 40% are female masturbation sets that range from boring to pretty interesting. And the remaining 10% are girl/girl scenes. I need to say that the majority of these are very conservative sets with few money or close-up shots. (There are some Oh My God models, but they are not necessarily doing OMG things....) There are notable exceptions, though. It depends on the model, I guess. There also is a wide mix of eye contact. Some sets have models that never make any eye contact with the camera at all. Earlier sets are better, but the quality of those sets is not as good. Oh, most of the sets start out with the model(s) clothed. I noticed some models remained clothed for 75% or more of some sets.

The first thing that strikes me about this site is how dark it is. Everything is dark. The site, the sets, the lighting, the videos, EVERYTHING! Older sets are a little better in this regard, but you will generally think there is something wrong with your display. Newer images are dark, contrasty, very shadowy. Distracting. Annoying. Generally awful. I batched a couple of sets through Photoshop and auto-adjust increased the brightness in most images by 50% or more. That is a heck of a lot and it is not accidental. They are deliberately turning down the brightness on these sets. You have to work to make images this dark. Really work.

The second thing I noticed was how hard the webmasters are trying to get you to go to the live site. When you get to the landing page, you don't see a single girl on the site you are paying for. instead you get a full page of images from the two live-cam sites that seem to be taking over the Met-Art network. You have to scroll down to see the contents of the site you already paid for. The webmasters are apparently experimenting with where best to put these live-cam ads as they can be found in different places on the various Met-Art sites. This is the most intrusive placement, right at the top of the main page and present on every page on the site. Stop it! Really. Just stop.

Another thing is the almost complete lack of playfulness, compassion or interaction with the viewer in many of the sets. Some of these models have all of the expressions of a check-out girl at K-Mart, meaning none. Even models that normally shine are somehow less expressive here. This is not in any way erotic as the name implies.

And the last thing to note is how inconsistent many of the sets are. More recent sets seem to follow that dark theme for the most part, but some sets are not like that at all. Some sets are very short, some are filled with close-ups, some are not. Some girls are almost entirely fully clothed for the whole set, some are not clothed at all. Some have eye-contact, many do not. You can tell if you are familiar with other Met-Art sets that some of these sets seem like they might have been B-roll or too weird to put on Met-Art. For example, there is an outdoor set of Lorena, beautiful Met-Art regular, where she is entirely covered in red mud in every single image. Really? Has to be a B-roll.

Navigation is generally good. There is an options section that allows you to set defaults for image size, number of thumbnails on a page, etc. like some other Met Art sites. The search function has user defined tags, which helps if you are looking for a particular trait that others are likely to define, like ginger or spread. But it could be better.

Bottom line? Good site to visit once, I guess. I personally don't like it anywhere near as much as other Met Art sites like Met-Art itself or Errotica Archives. You can actually see the weird evolution/devolution from a site similar to Met Art in the beginning to a site that now looks more like a bad graphic novel than a soft-core porn site. There is a decent amount of material here and some of it is pretty good, but be prepared to sift through a lot of dark, odd and often slightly off pictures to find things that really float your boat.

I wish I could be more enthusiastic, but this site just doesn't live up to Met-Art standards.
Respond: 1 Reply - Add Reply

Active
88
Parsnip (12) 10-31-13  01:30pm
Rookie Badge  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (5), NO (0)
Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - Recent material very well made and very stylish, beautiful standard of films.
- Recent photo sets very interesting & original.
- Greater variety of models than normal, including some a little older, and some latin girls.
- There seems to be a lot of genuine sexual excitement in the models, they really looked turned on and I often can believe that they have orgasms.
- Very quick and reliable downloads, always maxes out my internet connection (around 2 MBytes/sec).
- Multiple sizes and resolutions of photos & videos, up to 1080p, although I only ever download the highest.
- Site doesn't seem to time out. When I first joined I stayed logged in for several days while downloading the old material.
- Quite a few Paul Black movies - my all time favourite. You wouldn't believe a film with just one girl in it would be so exciting and different.
- Most films are relatively short - 5 to 10 minutes - and well edited.
Cons: - The earlier material is rather uninspired, and quite a lot isn't exclusive.
- Some of the earlier films are a bit pixellated - claim to be HD but I'm not so sure.
- Rather too many models with tattoos and piercings for my tastes.
- Some of the older photo sets are far too long, with endless almost identical photos.
- The logo on the films is a bit intrusive although it is a bit better on the recent films, the logo on the photos is much smaller.
- The cross-site advertising is a pain.
- It is possible to vote, but there is no comment mechanism so there is no feel of any community membership.
Bottom Line: The basis of The Life Erotic is stylized female masturbation - there is some g/g material but that also concentrates on the act of masturbation rather then regular lesbian sex. These days there are daily updates, 2 films and 5 photo sets per week, earlier there were 4 updates per week with rather fewer films.

I really like the current material, even when it is a bit dark for my tastes or when the girls have a few too many tattoos or piercings, it is so imaginative and well made that I still enjoy it. The earlier material isn't as good. Concentrating on solo female masturbation is a bit limiting, and it obviously took a while to find the right style. The current material is amazing, but pre-2012 isn't great. With 2 films produced per week, this means there isn't a huge amount of top quality material. That's really the only thing I can mark the site down for.

It might seem a bit limiting to concentrate on solo masturbation, but they are managing to make it very varied and interesting with some great scenarios. It may be all solo or GG, but in my experience the scenarios make it genuinely for couples too. Personally, I like to see member comments on sites, although I rarely join in as I tend to be downloading the material a week or two late, and I definitely miss having comments on this site - I think they are missing a trick here as one of the ways to encourage membership rather than piracy is to make a community of the site. I joined relatively recently for a year, and am almost certain to renew.
Respond: 4 Replies - Add Reply

Expired
91
otoh (54) 02-07-13  06:05pm
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Comments  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (39), NO (0)
Status: Review is over 2 years old and no longer counts toward score.
View: Read Expired Review (4 Replies)

Expired
79
tangub (155) 01-07-12  03:36pm
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Comments  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Hardcore Badge  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (51), NO (0)
Status: Review is over 2 years old and no longer counts toward score.
View: Read Expired Review (5 Replies)

Expired
75*
shroom (4) 06-15-10  07:32am
Pollster  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (11), NO (0)
Status: Review is over 2 years old and no longer counts toward score.
View: Read Expired Review (5 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 (6)

 Ask a question, give quick feedback, warnings, etc.

Parsnip (12) 08-10-14  08:15am
Rookie Badge  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (5), NO (0)

Stepped up release schedule

I'd let my membership of TLE lapse as the quality of the photo sets in particular had slipped a bit and they only release 2 films per week. However, I decided to rejoin for a month.

The bad news is that the photo sets are still a bit down on what they were a year or so ago.

The good news is that they have stepped up the release schedule. They now do 3 films a week (instead of 2), and release a photo set every day (they used to do photo sets on the days that they didn't do films). So thats 3 films/7 photo sets instead of 2 films/5 photo sets.

I don't think its enough for me to become a long term member, but I'll definitely dip into it more often.

Respond: 0 Replies - Add Reply

lk2fireone (196) 08-16-13  08:49am
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Comments  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Hardcore Badge  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (72), NO (1)

Not all content is exclusive.

I saw one video of Meddie and Stacy, titled "Afternoon Orgasms", posted 2012-11-09, that is a shortened version of the same video posted at Beauty Angels (part of the Teen Mega World network). Meddie is called Meddie at TMW, but the other model is named Stasy. That video was posted 2012-04-16.

Very good video, 2 attractive models, nice lesbian scene.

Respond: 1 Reply - Add Reply

otoh (54) 02-18-13  09:45am
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Comments  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (39), NO (0)

More interesting scenarios at TLE

Following my recent glowing review, this site continues to impress with its creative scenarios, great photography and atmospheric, high-production-values videography. Eg:

* I just found an older update in which the model sneaks off to a secluded location somewhere; laughs off and ignores an incoming call from a presumed boyfriend, and starts to enjoy herself. Later on, the phone rings again and she proceeds to use it to masturbate with in some detail (presumably the vibrating ring was on...)

* A recent video was titled 'Sex Art' - I figured they were just copping out and reusing a video from sister site Sex Art. As it happens, the video showed the model on bed with a laptop, watching a Sex Art video - then getting aroused and reenacting the blowjob she was watching with a dildo. Toys generally aren't my thing - but, like close-ups - here they manage use them without being run of the mill porn.

This is proper, erotic stuff that's both explicit yet still evocative. Recommended!

Respond: 4 Replies - Add Reply

TalonIcefire (6) 01-22-12  05:00am
Rookie Badge  Pollster  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (16), NO (0)

Not completely as advertised

I joined this site only after a promo email from Met-Art. The Life Erotic claims to be a nude art site with an erotic explicit edge to it yet more than half of the videos downloaded showcased models posing for video vice explicit erotic edge.
Every video observed has a musical track in the background which is generally alright for soft-core modeling. In my opinion, I should hear the model only. She is gratifying herself.
My primary interest of late in most sites is the photo collection. I break the photos down between portrait and landscape view then showcase them as you would “normal” photos you see in any house. I agree with Tangub; I do not see the erotic and explicit side that is advertised.

Respond: 2 Replies - Add Reply

exotics4me (463) 12-10-11  05:01pm
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Comments  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Hardcore Badge  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (85), NO (0)

Not for sure what's going on

I had joined this site after a promo email from Met-Art. The content, while mostly exclusive, isn't exclusive as a whole. I couldn't put a number on the amount of exclusive scenes since I don't collect all these models, but I can give some examples that may explain why the one member review here talks about technical issues with the photo and video quality.

On Eve Angel's content here on The Life Erotic, at least 6 of the 12 sets they have of Eve are from the old Eve Angel site, including a set, Eve drinking milk and pouring it on her body, that dates back to 2004. That photo and video set and the old stairs set (listed as Stairway to Heaven on Eve's old site) from Eve's site were released as exclusive on The Life Erotic. And both were released on The Life Erotic in 2011. Both of these sets are 6-7 years old.

They are posted as HD, where as the original ones were on Eve's site in 640x480 resolution. That could be where the problems with the video is coming from that the previous reviewer noticed.

So, check the model list and the available sets before thinking you're going to get content of a favorite model that you don't have. Overall, the site's not bad at all. They do have some really nice models I haven't seen before, but there was a letdown when I went to get some "new" Eve content only to find out it's up to 7 years old, repackaged as new and exclusive. This would be easier to look over if they didn't have a banner across the top of those sets that says "Exclusive".

Respond: 0 Replies - Add Reply

Wittyguy (105) 12-29-09  03:25pm
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Comments  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Hardcore Badge  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (57), NO (0)

Looks Interesting

Just noticed this one as a new artsy softcore listing at TBP and I glanced at the site. The place looks small with only about 25 scenes by my count but it claims to have 1080p HD video downloads and lifesize (4300 pixels) photos. The price looks reasonable at $20 a month and they promise multiple weekly updates but from the tour I couldn't tell how frequently they occur. Also the pic galleries seem to contain fewer than 40 shots per set which is a bit small by my standards. Now I'm just waiting to see who will take the plunge first and post a review on this one.

Respond: 7 Replies - Add Reply - Webmaster Replied!

Visit The Life Erotic

Company Sites Top sites from this company.

      Site Name (Reviews) Score TBP
1. ALS Scan (1) 100.0 90.0
2. Met Art (1) 95.0 95.0
3. Eternal Desire (1) 91.0 83.0
4. Rylsky Art (2) 84.2 83.5
5. Goddess Nudes (1) 82.0 81.5
6. The Life Erotic (2) 81.6 89.0
7. Sex Art (2) 80.7 90.0
8. Met Art Network (0) 75.0 N/A
9. Magik Sex (1) 65.0 84.0
10. Erotic Beauty (0) N/A 90.0

View All: Company Sites (18)

Home - Sites - Users - Reviews - Comments - Categories - Forum

Contact Us - Announcements - FAQ's - Terms & Rules - Porn Review - Webmasters

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.

Copyright © 2007 Ranks.com, Inc. and its licensors. All Rights Reserved.


Loaded in 0.57 seconds.