PU - Met Models - New Reviews

Met Models Review

Thu, 13 Nov 2008 20:19:25 PST

Met Models (3)

11-13-08 08:19pm

REVIEW = 80 by hondaman (7)

Pros:
-has some nice girls
-pretty much like MET-ART lite
-has more of some models that MET-ART dosent use much

Cons:
-pretty much MET-ART lite
-poorly up set model search
-some sets seem "average"
-not worth getting alone as sister site MET-ART is a better site only for MET-ARt mega fans really

Bottom Line:
This is a tricky site to review. In some ways it seems that MET-Models is like a "farm" site for MET-ART. Sort of like they use sets that they werent sure would do well on MET-ART I guess.Some models have more sets on MEt Models than they do on MET-ART. And some artists have more sets on MET Models.That being said one of the issues I have is model search as it will list all models with that same first name rather than only the model with the exact name. I guess ultimatly I'd suggest this site if you really like MET-ART and want some more or if you you are signing up for one of MET-ARTs combo deals that let you get Errotcia Archives and MET Models all together.But if you are not a member of MET-ART and are thinking of joining only MET-ART or MET Models then dont even waste your time with MET Models get MET-ART. This is the reason that I gave an 80 MEt Models is a Cessna when MET-ART is an Airbus.

Visit Met Models - View Replies - Add Reply

Met Models Review

Mon, 03 Dec 2007 03:48:58 PST

Met Models (3)

12-03-07 03:48am

REVIEW = 89 by jd1961 (82)

Pros:
- Beautiful High-Res Photography
- Zip Files
- Hi-Res Video
- Very Attractive Models
- Webcam - Decent Price (Nowadays)

Cons:
- Frankly, A Money Grab
- Old Met-Art Sets Snuck In
- Few Videos
- The Losers Who Chat With The Webcam Girls!
- Model Reference All Messed Up

Bottom Line:
I'm a member in both Met sites, and I think what they do is remove some sets from the Mother site and include them here. That's not to say that Models doesn't have it's own material, it does. And it's great Met material. But this site is a redundancy. Met-Money it should be called. It's less expensive than the Mother site, so you may just want to join this, but they have very few videos (30 as of this review) and haven't updated since July of last year. The newer vids are 720x580. The photos are typical Met style, hi-res and high quality, updated daily. Over 4000px for the latest, downloadable in zips of 2 sizes. The girls are mostly very pretty, the photography 1st class. But when you click the model info link, you may get 7 different models by the name of Katya, and if you vote pretty Katya a "10", plain Katya gets a "10" also! In the Mother site, they alphabetize the Katyas! This site also has a webcam, if you're into that, and it is high quality. I can't stand the guys who chat there. One guy asked a model if she liked older men, and she wrote a big red NO! LOL! I will review the Mother site later, but I wish they came up with a better idea for a 2nd money grab site. Like Met-Hardcore would have been a better idea. Or maybe one day they will open Met-Classic, with all those Lolita sets they have long ago pulled from the Mother site...maybe not! Join one or the other unless you are obsessed with the Met-Empire.

Visit Met Models - View Replies - Add Reply

Met Models Review

Sun, 17 Jun 2007 12:01:19 PDT

Met Models (3)

06-17-07 12:01pm

REVIEW = 88 by Drooler (156)

Pros:
+Very large, exclusive collection
+Professional photography
+Many beautiful models: Evelyn Lory, Jana Horokova (as Lisen), etc.
+Photosets usually 100-200 pics each
+two zip options (�hi� 3-4000 px, or �low� 1200)
+Daily photo updates from May 2005 (1 set per day)
+easy, straightforward navigation
+vids in DivX, WMV, QT264, mpeg (formats available vary by the vid)
+can rate both the model and the photographer on a 1-10 scale

Cons:
-sometimes delays updates for a day or two
-max pic sizes vary greatly early in site history (1024px to 40xx 5/05-5/06, but most are 1500 or higher); nearly always 3-4000+ pixel size from 6/06.
-a few unappealing models
-sometimes too little light, too much shadow, blurriness
-a couple of photographers I don�t care for (esp. �Magoo,� who goes too far with the �artistic� effects)
-only 30 vids (the last in July �06); transition effects sometimes overdone; some vids only 570px long

Bottom Line:
Have been a member off/on since Nov. 2005; currently on a one-year membership.

This is a softcore nude photography site, mostly solo (but no toys), with a smattering of girl/girl lite. The vids obviously amount to just a little �extra� -- like sprinkles on ice cream.

For a softcore photo nut like me, it�s pretty close to the right formula. And there�s plenty of delectable ass to be found in the archives. Per diem, it beats 1byDay, W4B, and even Nubiles in the tushy quality/quantity index.

You might think of it as Met-Art�s kid brother or sister, as it costs the same but only offers 1 photoset per day (vs. Met-Art�s typical 3-5 per day). But it does give an option to join for $6.99 for 2 days, and with a good broadband connection, plenty of time, and enough piping hot caffeine, you could certainly make a killing here.

I�d do the same, but I don�t have that kind of self-discipline.

And I actually like the design and navigation here better than at Met-Art. It�s cleaner and less cluttered.

But on the other hand, Met-Art now offers three pic sizes in zips, and their 1024s do just fine and use less space than the 1200�s offered here. But that�s not much of a complaint.

Be sure to check out the browser options in the top right corner (default pic sizes; "enhanced" to show previous and next galleries; slideshow timing).

Visit Met Models - View Replies - Add Reply