| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1601
|
Ripe Flesh
(0)
|
Reply of
tangub's Reply
It seems likely.
It is strange how you get a feeling for these things.
With some sites of course, it is obvious from the watermark dates in the Update area.
Cap'n. :0)
|
11-20-11 02:50pm
|
Reply
1602
|
Ripe Flesh
(0)
|
Reply of
tangub's Comment
I can't really help on this issue.
One thing that did quite impress me on the tour though was that the sets are clearly marked with the level.
From Non-nude through to explicit nude.
Very helpful, I wish other sites would do that.
Cap'n. :0)
|
11-20-11 02:36pm
|
Reply
1603
|
Ripping 4 Fun
(0)
|
Reply of
GCode's Comment
Thanks for flagging this one up, GC.
An interesting variation, but it doesn't really hit the spot for me.
Why not just a straightforward striptease to full nudity?
That would work for me.
Cap'n. :0/
|
02-18-10 02:34pm
|
Reply
1604
|
Ron Harris
(0)
|
Reply of
tangub's Comment
It is a regional pricing scam again.
I thought that had been consigned to the bin.
Looks like there are still some unscrupulous folk around in the industry.
Unless it is an oversight,which I think unlikely.
:0/
|
08-07-15 05:53pm
|
Reply
1605
|
Ron Harris
(0)
|
Reply of
slutty's Reply
I feel it is just another of those plethora of sites from photographers with a somewhat over inflated ego.
Cap'n. :0/
|
03-02-12 12:11pm
|
Reply
1606
|
Rookie Babe
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Comment
Just took a look.
Placeholder pics all over the tour pages.
Not a good sign. :0/
|
09-12-09 08:46am
|
Comment
1607
|
Ryanne Redd
(0)
|
|
06-25-12 03:49pm
Replies (0)
|
Reply
1608
|
Ryanne Redd
(0)
|
Reply of
xexbot's Reply
Is that just screencaps then?
Cap'n. :0/
|
06-22-12 06:36am
|
Reply
1609
|
Ryanne Redd
(0)
|
Reply of
xexbot's Review
This lady is one of my few favourites.
Is there any decent photoset material there, please?
Cap'n. :0/
|
06-21-12 12:58pm
|
Reply
1610
|
Rylsky Art
(0)
|
Reply of
RLane's Comment
I really don't mean to sound negative, but there are so many, glam artsy photo sites that they tend to get pretty anonymous.
( Actually, Met art is a prime example of that.
It is so formulaic that each set blends into another ).
If he is going to be successful in this venture, he needs to find a good angle on the content.
Cap'n. :0/
|
11-22-12 04:19pm
|
Reply
1611
|
Saint Paul Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
yadayada321's Comment
The link from PU is dead, so it doesn't look good, I'm afraid.
Cap'n. :0/
|
01-22-11 03:39am
|
Reply
1612
|
Schoool Mistress Fantasy
(0)
|
Reply of
Jason123's Reply
Yes, that was more what I would have expected.
Although full frontal nudity, even coy, would have been nice! ;0)
Welcome to PU, BTW. :0)
Cap'n.
|
11-17-11 12:56pm
|
Reply
1613
|
Schoool Mistress Fantasy
(0)
|
Reply of
Jason123's Review
I'm just a little confused here.
You say 2 sections. Nude & Non nude. OK with you so far.
Later though you say maximum levels are topless?
Is that the non nude section?
My definition of nude is naked!
Cap'n. :0)
|
11-17-11 12:51pm
|
Reply
1614
|
Secret Virgin
(0)
|
Reply of
pat362's Reply
It doesn't sound like there will be much to review considering the 'no access' situation.
Cap'n. :0(
|
03-21-12 11:48am
|
Reply
1615
|
Secretease
(0)
|
Reply of
otoh's Reply
I thought it might appeal, that is why I bumped it up.
The comparison to the 'Only' sites was based more on the uniform / costume angle, which in all honesty I think they do much better, as that is their main strength. That and the fact neither feature nudity, by my stricter definition.
Cap'n. :0)
|
12-21-11 09:23am
|
Comment
1616
|
Secretease
(0)
|
|
12-21-11 04:48am
Replies (6)
|
Reply
1617
|
Secretease
(0)
|
Reply of
PinkPanther's Comment
It just struck me, & it was too late to edit....
If you want to be PC about the webmaster / mistress angle, just use Webmanager.
It is an androgynous title! ;0)
Cap'n. :0)
|
02-01-11 08:42am
|
Reply
1618
|
Secretease
(0)
|
Reply of
PinkPanther's Comment
Just guessing.....
Billing company issues?
Cap'n. :0/
|
02-01-11 03:11am
|
Reply
1619
|
Secretease
(0)
|
Reply of
Secretease com's Reply
Mitch said:
" If explicit nudity is classed as 'open leg' upward, then over half
of the sets are explicit and the site will be continue this. "
For me softcore full frontal nudity means:
No clothing, No hands groping spoiling the view, no toys, no gynacology.
Cap'n. :0)
|
11-07-10 01:13pm
|
Reply
1620
|
Secretease
(0)
|
Reply of
mbaya's Review
You are pretty much confirming my thoughts & expectations of this site.
Useful to have that extra info about the download limit though, thanks.
I like the format of the site but do not get along with the overtly glam models & outfits.
For me there has to be progression from fully clothed to softcore full frontal nudity.
I'll pass for now, but watch for any changes in content.
Thanks again for the useful review.
Cap'n. :0)
|
11-07-10 11:10am
|
Reply
1621
|
Seduced By A Cougar
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Reply
I think for a lot of us ink is an issue too. ;0)
Cap'n. :0)
|
12-31-12 03:33am
|
Comment
1622
|
See Me Tease
(0)
|
|
04-03-14 10:38pm
Replies (0)
|
Reply
1623
|
See Me Tease
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Reply
I love a good rant.
For me, it doesn't matter if I am Ranter or Rantee!
I always appreciate a good one!
Cap'n. :0)
|
02-08-12 04:33pm
|
Reply
1624
|
Sex Art
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
So I suppose you might lump them both into a description of 'Mutually Enjoyable Hardcore'? Cap'n. :0)
|
02-16-13 04:05pm
|
Reply
1625
|
Sex Art
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Comment
wtf is glamcore?
Cap'n. :0/
|
02-15-13 04:52pm
|
