| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1976
|
Mature Reality
(0)
|
Reply of
Onyx's Review
This isn't a site I'd join but I have to weigh in and say I really like your review format. Maybe it's time I rethought my own format... Or lack thereof.
|
02-19-18 10:54am
|
Reply
1977
|
Max Hardcore
(0)
|
Reply of
jd1961's Reply
jd1961 - I wasn't just copying you, but like you I think that is the key to the pros and cons. Max isn't for everyone. Max isn't like anyone else on the 'net. If someone likes Max then that is probably the biggest 'pro' and if they hate him, that's probably the biggest 'con.' Because you reviewed the site favourably I'm assuming that like me, you're a Max fan. I find the contrast between his older stuff (like stuff with Tammi Ann, Vixxxen, Anastasia Blue) taped in the early to mid 1990s seems almost tame now compared to his newer stuff when in its day it was pretty extreme. I remember being blown away when I saw Tammi Ann gagging on Max's cock in Hitchhiker 1 when it came out in 1993. That was so much more extreme than anything else then. But now gagging is common and Max continues to push the envelope. I'm not sure how much more envelope-pushing I can take though. Or how much more envelope-pushing the US government will tolerate. But there is obviously a big market and fan base for Max because he's still in business and I assume he's pretty well off.
BTW - I liked your review a lot. It could stand as the only Max Hardcore review but i wanted to add in my 2 cents worth so any Max fans would know that at least two of us give it pretty similar reviews.
|
11-14-07 09:28am
|
Review
1978
|
Max Hardcore
(0)
80.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- It’s Max Hardcore, dammit!. If you like Max, then you’ll love this site
- A decent selection of 200+ scenes from many of his movies
- Fast downloads
- Pictures too, if that’s your cup ‘o tea |
| Cons: |
- Well, if you don’t like Max hardcore, he would be the biggest reason to not join
- The resolution on many of the videos is poor
- The videos are broken down into too many clips and there are no other DL options
- The site is a bit confusing and not laid out particularly well
- ‘Classic’ Max is under-represented |
| Bottom Line: |
Let’s face it: Max Hardcore is an acquired taste. If you like Max and don’t already have a huge Max collection you’ll be satisfied with this site. If you don’t like Max you’ll be offended by this site.
In my experience, this is the roughest site on the ‘net. On a scale of 1 to 10 Max scores a 10 for rough sex. The closest I've seen is from Sweet Entertainment, which might be an 8.5 compared to Max. Some people might say that the new sites by Kink.com are close, but they’re in a different league. Kink trains subs. Max goes nuts on young women.
As for technical stuff, Max Hardcore.com could use some improvement. The navigation is tricky at times but the biggest drawbacks are the number of clips you need to DL and the resolution of most of them once you do get them. As for the number of clips, I followed a recommendation by “apoctom’ in the comments section and DLed the free trial of Internet Download Manager. Using a DL manager isn’t optional unless you’re unemployed and have nothing better to do.
The bottom line for me was that as a long-time Max fan (since about 1994) this was a no-brainer. If you like Max, this site is a great way to get your fix. I live in a country where Max DVDs tend to not be allowed in the border anymore, so this is my only fix. For those of you in the U.S., this is probably the only way that you can get the European versions of Max. |
|
11-13-07 03:37pm
Replies (4)
|
Review
1979
|
Melissa Pass
(0)
60.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Five sites of four good-looking amateurs
- Supports download managers
- Bills through CC Bill |
| Cons: |
- Site is dated
- Videos low resolution
- Most videos are broken into parts even though they’re very small
- Photos not available in zips
- Undated uploads but doesn’t appear to be updating |
| Bottom Line: |
I joined this small network based on the tour pages and the sample videos that I was able to download and watch. The problem with this approach is that I figured that the size and resolution of the videos were low and small precisely because they were previews. After joining the site I learned that the quality in the member’s pages was no better.
I joined primarily because the sites in the network seemed to have a public nudity theme and that’s a niche I’m interested in. For fans of that genre there is a fair bit here but the network’s shortcomings likely outweigh any advantages. To be fair, this is some decent public nudity. Where it loses marks in my measure is that they trade off brazenness for heat. Val, for example, makes a lot out of her arrest and 30 days in jail for public nudity and then flaunts that by wearing pasties and panties that match her skin tone to attract more police attention. There isn't a lot of sexual heat in those shoots.
There is some girl/girl and very little boy/girl (oral only) so don’t join expecting to see these models in hardcore action.
The network has five sites but one of them is a cam site and I didn’t check it out. I’m not really into those and I don’t want to risk additional charges for something I don’t want. So this review is of the four solo girl sites on the network. The four models are all young, petite and attractive. They all have a wholesome look popular in many amateur models. The girls and their sites are:
• Val Midwest – 45 videos and photo sets
• Melissa Midwest – 40 videos and 96 photo sets
• Foxy Jacky – 20 videos and 76 photo sets
• Sweet Adri – 12 videos and 79 photo sets
The site has some fairly serious flaws for both video and photo collectors. For video collectors the biggest drawbacks will be the low resolutions used and the fact that even short videos tend to be broken into parts. The highest resolutions I saw were 720x480 which are marginal at best. But when you consider that some of these videos have bitrates below 1000kb/s those are well below current standards. The best of the videos aren’t that good and the worst are badly pixilated. Some of the videos are 640x480.
I can’t give you photo guys much information here. I don’t normally collect photos but I certainly don’t if I have to download them one at a time. Yes, this site doesn’t offer zipped photosets.
You may be thinking that the reason for these problems is that these videos and pictures were made many years ago. That’s a fair question but since one model has videos and photos of her 2013 appearance in Hustler magazine it seems that the site does have newer content. Much of the material here could be older though based on a comment that exotics4me made in 2013 about having been a member there ‘years ago.’
I can’t provide any clear answer on whether any of the sites updates or not as they don’t date any of the uploads. I’ve been a member less than a week and my plan is to cancel my membership today and not bother going back. Even if there were new uploads the resolutions are so low as to not have me too interested in getting them. The good news about cancelling is that the site bills through CC Bill so that won’t be a problem. My educated guess, however, is that none of the sites are updating on any regular schedule.
The site supports download managers but the file sizes are so small that they aren’t really needed.
I can’t say if this will be an issue with other users and I’ll be cancelling my membership and have no reason to go back, but while it is true that you get access to 5 sites with your network membership you must sign in through the site you joined through. Once in that site you have access to all the sites. What I don’t know is if the content on the additional sites is limited in any way. I have no way to check that.
If you do choose to join you’ll note that they offer a three-month membership. My advice is to avoid that. I downloaded 90% of the videos from the four girl’s sites in less than an hour.
The bottom line is that unless you must have photos and videos from these specific models you’re best to spend your porn dollars elsewhere. The monthly fee is $30 and that’s very high for what you get. The models are hot, and there is definitely some interesting stuff for fans of public nudity, but the videos are too low resolution to have any real collectable value. And if you need the photos be prepared for a lot of clicking on your mouse. My advice is that if you’re interested you should consider this carefully: it’s a lot of money for some not-very-good porn. |
|
12-08-14 03:38pm
Replies (0)
|
Reply
1980
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
Denner's Comment
Damn! To make matters worse, I see they have pics of Sasha on the preview pages both before and after her implants. That sort of highlights the issue. At least they aren't cartoonishly big, but she looked almost perfect before them and didn't need new breasts.
|
07-21-13 08:11am
|
Reply
1981
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
taken4granted's Comment
Look at the bright side though, if law enforcement raids your house for porn usage all the rest of us PU members will be in jail too. It'll be like a Pornusers convention!
Seriously though, I'm glad to hear you got your access back. Met Art seem to be a reputable site so anything less would be troubling.
|
06-19-13 05:32pm
|
Reply
1982
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
KET924aab's Review
I'm a bit late to say this, but welcome to the site. I hope you stay around and continue to participate.
|
12-23-12 07:15am
|
Reply
1983
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Comment
No idea. But... if you happen to find out that you're right would please let me know who the manufacturer is. Just out of curiousity, of course. Not because I want to order the "Gloria" model or anything like that...
|
08-09-12 10:36am
|
Reply
1984
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
otoh's Reply
Yeah, after I thanked you for steering me away from the site with your review it seems odd that I'd join. But the offer was good. I think if I were really a fan of the site I'd need to spend a much longer time there to apprecaite it. And regardless of hardcore or softcore preferences, I think it's safe to say those of us into hetro sites are all into beautiful women. And Met Art has them by the hundreds.
One thought that kept going through my mind was "where do they find all these stunning women and how do they get them into nude modelling?" Obviously a big draw here is that these women aren't being asked to stick baseball bats up their bottoms, so that increases the potential number of models right there. As for the site size, I assume that based on the type of material they also pay less and therefore can shoot more.
But I'll admit that I was surprised at how much I liked the site. It certainly does well at what it does.
|
01-11-12 09:34am
|
Reply
1985
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
tangub's Reply
Thanks for the comments. I agree if you like softer, glamour-style photos and some videos this site could keep you busy for a long time. It's an excellent value at full price and even better when the offer a discount.
|
01-11-12 09:23am
|
Reply
1986
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
Ergo Proxy's Reply
I don't know why, but I just can't go for animals in a porn. If they producer needs more living creatures, throw in another 20 year old chick!
|
01-10-12 04:23pm
|
Reply
1987
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
Capn's Reply
I was surprised that I like Met Art as much as I did. I probably should join Bound Gangbangs or something in case I start going into hardcore withdrawl. The strange thing is that I'm only moving mildly to hardcore after that with a membership at Nubiles. I haven't been a member for years and I'm looking forward to seeing what's new.
As for animals, I find their use in erotic photography to be distracting and even disturbing. That might say more about me than it does the photographer...
|
01-10-12 04:22pm
|
Review
1988
|
MetArt
(0)
88.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Enormous site
- Huge selection of beautiful models
- Models are natural (few fake breasts and tattoos)
- Supports download managers
- No obvious timeouts on downloads
- Good download speeds
- High-resolution photos are stunning quality
- Options for picture quality
- Zips available
- Over 1000 videos
- Videos available in different formats
- Newer videos in HD
- Best search function I’ve ever encountered
- Excellent value |
| Cons: |
- Site may be too softcore for some
- Site is so large it can be a bit overwhelming |
| Bottom Line: |
Why did a guy who likes hardcore videos join a softcore photo site, even after I commented that the site was too soft for me? Simple: they emailed me an offer I couldn’t refuse, so I joined.
I usually take a short while to get used to site navigation and start figuring out how I’ll go at browsing the site and finding stuff I want. I started that here and quickly realized that this really wasn’t like any other site I’ve ever been a member at. This site is HUGE. I normally try to provide accurate details on what a prospective member can expect from a site. So if a site has 500 videos, I’ll tell you that. With this site, the best I can say is that it is enormous. There are many hundreds of models, maybe a thousand even, each with multiple photo shoots and many with video clips. Just choosing a model to look at can be a daunting task.
While on the topic of models, I can’t complain because the type of model on the site is what I look for: young and natural. With a site this size there is lots of variation on body type. I can download the small-breasted lasses while you download the larger-breasted models and neither of us will feel cheated. Same with hair colour. I love redheads and there a dozens of them here. Blondes and brunettes abound. Different ethnicities are represented and there are a few models who are 35 years old.
One thing the models do lack are fake breasts and lots of ink. A vast majority of the models are all natural. Many sport pubic hair even. Remember that?
I should note, because of the above, that the advanced search function is like nothing I’ve ever encountered before. It allows searching for narrow parameters and the site is so large you’re apt to get some returns. Want some pics of a 30 year old Asian with full pubic hair? If it exists on the site it is easy to find. The site would be unmanageable without this excellent tool.
This is primarily a photo site. Anyone thinking of joining this site needs to know that.
The site has been around for many years, and I didn’t sample all of the older material. But I can say this with some confidence: they push the limits of technology now so I have no reason to think that they didn’t then. Photos are available as singles, or in a zipped file. High, medium and low resolutions are available. I didn’t sample the lower two resolutions but the high-res photos are stunning quality at 3744x5616. They’re amazing. Obviously older photos won’t be in that resolution.
There are some videos available and those are mostly videos of the photoshoots. Some of the older videos are horrible quality, but I won’t hold that against them as it isn’t a video site and those were uploaded years ago. Videos are available in streaming (multiple sizes) and downloads (multiple formats). The default is mp4 though wmv is always available too. The standard resolution for videos (all but the oldest stuff) is 1280x720 @ 4,300kb/s. The wmv files are in codec 9 and play at 30 fps. Higher resolutions are not uncommon. Subjectively, these videos look stunning.
Videos tend to be fairly short, with some less than five minutes long.
With the technical stuff, the site is as good as with the artistic stuff. There are multiple updates each day, download speeds are good, download managers are permitted and there are no obvious timeouts on download links.
I realize the 800lb gorilla in the room with Met Art is that many people see it as being too sterile. It’s as if they stripped the sensuality from their models. I can understand that criticism, but I don’t share it to the same level as some other reviewers. While the site lacks the playfulness that is often found on ALS Scan and FTV Girls, they can be erotic. Where some other solo model sites can be overtly sexual, Met Art is more sensual. There is no hardcore sex on the site at all. I can understand how many would find this simply too soft. I suspect that this is highly subjective though. For example, there is a lot of outdoor posing and posing by and in water which I like so that’s going to improve my perception of the site.
I’m left with an odd conclusion. I can definitely recommend this site: I liked it and I’m glad I joined. But I probably won’t put it on my list of sites to rejoin. The reason for that has nothing to do with the quality of the site or the models. The reason is 100% subjective. For a guy who likes sites like Sinnistar and Public Disgrace I’m way out of my element in Met Art. But if you like stunning quality photos of stunning women you really can’t go wrong with Met Art. You could spend months browsing around the site is so large.
One final note for the photographers: please don’t pose models with farm animals. It’s weird. Actually, make that ‘don’t pose models with animals.” Period. It’s weird. |
|
01-10-12 03:39am
Replies (10)
|
Reply
1989
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
otoh's Reply
I understand that subjectivity makes up a big part of any score, but... what makes a better review is when the writer explains the reasons for those biases. You definitely did that. Met Art is one of the most respected sites out there but thanks to your clear explanation of why you don't like it I'm 99% sure that I wouldn't like it either.
I'll take a peek at Juliland. Thanks for the tip.
|
12-31-11 06:53am
|
Reply
1990
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
otoh's Review
otoh (and I mean no disrespect for the other members who also reviewed this site), but this is the best Met Art review I've read! Like you, Met Art has been on the list of sites to consider but regularly got bumped down by something else. But thanks to your review I'm going to remove it permanently from the list. You succinctly and clearly build a case for why I shouldn't join, but you also build a case for why someone may want to join. I prefer harder sites but have nothing against soft sites, but when I read your line that the site "seems to be to emphasise the beauty of the models at the expense of any sexuality" that really made your point clear. And when you wrote "there is little teasing, no touching, and rarely even a lewd glance" that finished any interest that I may have had in the site.
I'm sure there are many people who would love Met Art's style of porn, but I'm not one of them. Thanks for saving me $30!
|
12-30-11 12:31pm
|
Reply
1991
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
tangub's Reply
I don't recall that I've ever had a membership at Met Art so this is a good chance to try it. I'm mostly into mainstream American b/g hardcore, but lately I've been trying some new stuff. It's paid off in a couple of cases and not so much in others. Met Art is highly recommended around here so I'm looking forward to it.
|
11-23-11 04:51pm
|
Reply
1992
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
tangub's Reply
Damn tangub, you beat me to that comment! First Young Legal Porn and now this. The cashiers at Costco must wonder what I do with all those external drives I buy.
Well, Milk Enema bumped In the Crack and now it appears that Met Art will do the same...
|
11-23-11 12:21pm
|
Reply
1993
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
MisterMark's Reply
Wow! 6 or 8 more reviews just waiting. I don't have the time for that many memberships at once. A couple of weekends ago my wife headed away with some friends and I took three memberships out. I'm pretty particular about cataloguing the material and backing it up, so it'll be a couple of weeks before I'm on the hunt for another site again.
Between PU reviews and the "What's Hot" reviews at TBP it is usually fairly easy to find something that I'm interested in.
|
05-16-11 04:27pm
|
Reply
1994
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
MisterMark's Reply
Glad to do it. I think you'll find this is a very welcoming group. Regardless of the topic that brings us all here, there is a lot of civility - and a lot of good fun.
|
05-16-11 02:13pm
|
Reply
1995
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
MisterMark's Review
Excellent review! I'm not normally a fan of softcore, but I'm regularly drawn to sites like MetArt for many of the reasons you seem to be.
Welcome to PU.
|
05-16-11 03:59am
|
Reply
1996
|
MetArtX
(0)
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Reply
Did FTVX actually ever get off the ground? I recall that the FTV site owner started talking about FTVX at least three or four years ago. I Googled FTVXGirls and I can't really tell if it's legitimate or not. I gave up waiting for it though if it ever happens I'll join it immediately - combining the beauty of the typical FTV model with hardcore sex would be an must-have for me.
I read on another forum that the FTV site owner ran into some legal trouble last year which threw him off. Even FTV Girls took a nosedive for a while. As you likely know, FTV does a lot of risky public nudity and apparently that caught up to him. It's good to know that Phoenix is so crime-free that the police can chase down beautiful naked women. On second thought, scrap that... I'D happily chase down beautiful naked women!
|
02-04-19 05:08pm
|
Reply
1997
|
MetArtX
(0)
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Review
I'm glad you posted this and glad that I read it. I like Met Art stuff but don't have any desire to join them again because I really prefer 'harder' stuff. I think had I seen a site called 'Met Art X' I may have been tempted to join thinking that it combined all the great Met Art traits with hardcore porn. I would have been disappointed.
Thanks for reviewing the site.
|
02-03-19 12:04pm
|
Reply
1998
|
Microminimus
(0)
|
Reply of
Capn's Reply
My guess is that the people behind it had no intention to actually create a site and likely no experience either. It may have just grown out of the fan community and then they figured the could charge perverts like me to join. As a site, it really needs a lot of work.
|
02-02-13 04:57am
|
Reply
1999
|
Microminimus
(0)
|
Reply of
KET924aab's Reply
Thanks for that info on rebilling.
I read your comment and agreed with all of it. I hope you put up a full review too. P/U members can always benefit from different opinions.
|
02-01-13 05:09pm
|
Review
2000
|
Microminimus
(0)
65.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Broad range of model types
- Logically laid out
- Good mix of amateur and pro models
- High quality photos
- Low annual price |
| Cons: |
- Photos only, no videos
- No zip options
- Multiple clicks to get to high-res pics
- Some overlap with their free site
- Some topless, none nude
- No monthly membership, annual only |
| Bottom Line: |
This isn’t a porn site in the traditional sense. I’m merely stating an objective fact for prospective members rather than making a subjective judgment. Whether the site is worth joining is probably up to how much you like what they have to offer, which, I guess, is one way that this is definitely like a porn site.
Microminimus is the ‘community’ site for Wicked Weasel Bikinis. WW is an Australian swimwear company known for making ‘barely there’ swimwear like micro-thongs. They also offer swimwear made of see-through material. There are also some accessories, but the overall theme of the company is skimpy swimwear. This site offers photos of WW’s professional models as well as submissions from their happy customers.
The site is logically laid out. Photos can be sorted by newly added, updated, popular and wallpapers. Also on offer are photo sets from ‘competitions.’ These are set around a theme, Christmas, for example, and users submit photos and members vote on them. I find these are a great mix and so far I’ve spent a lot of my time on the site here. There are also archives for Cover Girls (seems that this can be a pro or amateur) and contributor archives. Another advantage is that they offer archives of the photos of their professional models that they use at their main site where they sell their bikinis.
There does appear to be some overlap between what is available for free at the commercial site and this ‘community’ site though I really have no idea how extensive that overlap is. There is a difference though: on the free site you only get lower-res photos while on the paid site you get access to higher-res photos. That may not be such a big deal though as the low-res photos on the free site are close and in some cases larger than the low-res photos on the paid site. (The low-res on both free and pay are approximately 950x663.) The higher resolution photos come in at 853x1280. That’s not much of a difference and it might not be a big enough difference to counter the work you have to go through to get the higher-res photos. The only lure for spending the $25 annual fee to join will probably be access to more photos, not higher-res photos.
The way the site is laid out and the overlap among how the galleries are organized it is pretty much impossible for me to say with any certainty how many galleries and photos there are here. There are certainly hundreds of photos, and more likely well over a thousand. Ten thousand? I doubt it.
Because the site relies so much on user-submitted photos there are a broad range of model types here. There are models who look like they could easily get modelling work at legitimate fashion shoots, models who could easily get work on adult sets, and models who probably shouldn’t model. I realize that may seem harsh, but some women shouldn’t wear WW bikinis. You don’t see me flaunting my 46-year-old body in a speedo. (Photos available upon request…)
The photo types themselves vary, but there is one certainty: this site doesn’t have full nudity. Some of the models go topless, some don’t. Some of the photo competitions specifically prohibit topless submissions. I find this very odd. Why make that choice? My guess is that the photos can then be used as marketing on their public site to drive sales. Even with the ban on nudity many of the photos can be pretty risqué. We are, after all, seeing photos of women in micro-mini bikinis that are often made out of translucent material. Some of us older guys can still draw on the days when our imaginations played a role in arousal.
If the site has a major flaw (and it DOES have a major flaw) it is that there are no gallery zips offered. So if you like a particular model or theme then be prepared to work to get what you want. To make matters worse, clicking on a photo opens the lower-res version. To get the higher-res version you have to go near the upper-left corner of the screen a click an icon which will then open the high-res photo in a new window. Then you can save it. And close the new window. And go back on the original page to click on another photo to start the labourious process all over again. If I wanted a hobby that required work I’d take up cabinetry.
So can I recommend this site? No, I can’t, but I don’t feel too bad about that since this really isn’t a site that fits well here either. I think the target market for this site is someone who’s girlfriend posts pics here and you want to show those off. If they offered zips I might lean to recommending it (but probably still wouldn’t). If they offered video I might think about recommending it, but they don’t. The good news is that it isn’t expensive at $25 per year. The bad news is that I now have to remember to cancel the membership in 11 months. |
|
02-01-13 04:01pm
Replies (4)
|
