Mr Fountain, nice to meet a fellow softcore teens fan.
In my opinion, metart is the best in class in softcore teens:
-quality of gorgeous young models
-quantity of gorgeous young models
-quality of photosets
-quantity of photosets
-low annual membership of $99
There are other worthwhile sites that come close, that I've joined.
I've been at 5 out of 13 of the sites you've reviewed. I enjoyed them all.
Metmodels is metart lite, as Hondaman noted:
-Similar quality as metart, but much lower quantity in terms of models and photosets.
-Metart updates with 4 photosets per day.
-Metmodels updates with 1 photoset per day.
-So the difference in quantity will only get even bigger over time.
-(Metmodels is actually a sister site of Metart)
For the same price, Metart wins over Metmodels hands down.
Join Metmodels once a year with a monthly subscription, where you download all the photosets/videos that you haven't seen yet.
I'm more into pics than vids, because of bandwidth and hard drive storage concerns, but I can't help falling in love with the pics of these gorgeous girls.
I took my mother to see "Out of Africa" and "The Color Purple" when they were playing together at a movie theater in 1986.
Out of Africa won 7 Oscars.
The Color Purple was nominated for 11 Oscars.
The movies were supposed to be excellent, but I was bored out of my mind.
I kept going out to the lobby, and smoked half a pack of cigarettes because I was so bored.
Lol.
That was when it was still legal to smoke in theaters.
I've been having problems coming up with a sensible scoring method for a site. But after examining your mathematical model, I realized you deserve a "Professor of Scoring" badge.
If there is no such badge, Pornusers should give it to you anyway.
You hit it exactly when you say, "a 98 (rated) site for one might be the epitome of boredom for another."
That's why I am quibbling about the value of a score.
I've seen pay sites rated 90+ I would not want to watch for free. Either the models don't appeal to me, or the action is a real turnoff. Personal taste (site content) is more important than ease of use (site layout).
I want a site that's easy to use. But more importantly, I want:
-great looking models.
-lots of high-quality pics or vids
-a price that I think reasonable (based on content)
Still looking for the perfect site. In the meantime, I enjoy window shopping.
Main factors for me to join a site:
-how attractive are the models
-how many models are there
-quality of the pictures
-quantity of the pictures
-price
-(not really into DVDs or videos, takes too much bandwidth, too much space to store on hard drive)
I am trying to get value for my porn dollars, but the main factor is how attractive are the models.
Anyway, I wish you would write some site reviews. You seem to have extensive experience with porn.
Even if I don't agree with your personal tastes (which I don't really know yet), I think it would be interesting, sometimes entertaining, to read your thoughts.
I really have enjoyed reading some of the reviews at this site, not just for the information on possible sites I might join, but also for the humor and insight.
As a bonus, if you write reviews and get points, you have a chance to win a few dollars/pounds/euros in the weekly drawing.
I like the review of Old Spunkers. Clean, easy to understand, lots of details.
What I don't understand is the score. I have a hard time figuring out how to score a site. I've only done 3 site reviews. 2 of the sites I scored at 75, and I like the sites, think they are worthwhile joining, even if you only join for a month to download whatever files you want to keep (Domai and Glamdeluxe).
One site I scored 97, because its got massive content, lots of great models, lots of quality photosets, and a low annual price of $99 (Metart). That's the best value I've seen for softcore teen.
But you give a score of 68 to a junk site.
What counts is the overall impression of the site, which you make clear. But I wonder how useful these scores are, even as a general guide. People really need to read the complete review of a site, and not just look at the score as a major factor.
I wish I had a more objective way of scoring a site, because I don't think a score means very much.
On the other hand, I'm also glad we can score any way we want, because I wouldn't like to be bound by some formula that Pornusers developed for scoring.
Patience is a virtue.
One I've never enjoyed.
Try sitting in a chair waiting in the emergency room for 6-8 hours before you see a doctor.
Maybe I will achieve patience once I get to heaven.
But the older you get, the more you wish it was like the old days. You're right about Met-art and the 404 files.
I didn't think that was funny, until I saw your comment. Now I really understand why they say, "Misery loves company." I'm glad other people are just as frustrated as I am. Lol.
It really was a simple pleasure, looking forward to the Met-art updates, and clicking on the photosets to see how good they were. Served fresh and hot off the server. Now it's better to wait until the next day, to avoid the dreaded 404 file syndrome.
www.eurobabeindex.com is a great resource. I hate to think of all the effort that some people used to make it. Would warp my mind to try to cover all those web sites checking out their favorite models.
Seriously, that is one great index, with the model's aliases, a nice photo to identify her, and the web sites she appears at.
There's also the linked forum thread for the model, with pics and links.
Could easily spend weeks or months looking through this site.
Current Member for over 1 year (at the time of review).
Pros:
-Emphasizes simple, natural look for models. Models can be in a variety of environments (in a field, at the beach, in a house, wherever), but they are trying to appear normal girls, not artsy,
glamorous or exotic
-Small sized sets of many different models. Most photosets range from 20-50+ pictures
-Wide selection of photographers that contribute to this site
-Easy entrance to site for members
-Navigation fairly simple and direct
-Choice of 2 file sizes for most photosets to view or download
-Zip file downloading for photosets
-No download limits
-Has an index of contributing photographers. Under each photographer's name is listed the photosets he shot (with hotlinks to each photoset)
-Exclusive content. You will see many of the site models at other sites, but I've only seen 1 Domai
photoset of a model that was later posted at a different pay site.
Alinda has 1 photoset at Domai, and an expanded version of the photoset was posted at Amour Angels as model Alina, photoset named
Cons:
Pros (continued): "Wonderful Time". Amour Angels has at least 3 models named Alina: The Alina I'm writing about is the blonde, slender girl with small breasts, waist-length hair, and a pretty face.
(Links to free low-res sample pictures of the model were removed due to pornusers guidelines.)
The girl is much more attractive at the higher resolution pictures at Domai and Amour Angels.
(If anyone has seen other photosets of this model, please let me know where, in a reply. I obviously like her.)
Cons:
-Photosets only. No videos. No live cams.
-Strictly single-model photosets. Softcore nudity. No boy-girl, girl-girl action.(They have a few
photosets where there are two girls together, but the girls are sitting/standing/lying together, not interacting sexually).
-The bonus features they offer are worthless: a newsletter, a few short stories.
Bottom Line:
Cons(continued):
-offers small number of short fictional stories by the site founder; useful to put yourself to sleep as an alternative to staring at your navel (as I get older, I find myself getting to be more snippety). Seriously, I find much more humor and enjoyment reading some of the reviews at pornusers
than reading the simple, love life-fellow-man-fellow-woman short stories of the site founder.
-Site newsletter is same style: love life and enjoy nudity and love your fellow man
-Site advertises 36,200 photos. You would think the site would have many more photos than that. The photosets are usually around 20-50+ pictures, and they average around 6 new sets a week recently. That would indicate well over 86,000 pictures because they've been around
since 1997. So why so few pictures listed?
-No bio data on the models
-No posting date listed on the photosets. You can find when the photoset was posted, but that takes
a little work: Have to search each yearly archive for the model's name, to see when that photoset was posted.
-Models are white European girls. Very few girls of other races.
Bottom line:
-On a cost-conscious basis, join for a trial or a 1 month membership, download all the files you want, then rejoin once a year for one month to update any new files.
-Or not rejoin, if you don't appreciate the photosets available at Domai.
Just a side note: If you like the model Ariel: Two of the best photosets I saw of her were posted at Met-art and Metmodels.
The Met-art set was posted 2005.01.04, named "Presenting Gabriela", by Magoo.
The Metmodels set was posted 2006.07.22., named "Fresh", by Magoo.
Ariel was named Gabriela at both Met-art and at Metmodels at that time.
She currently goes under the name of Ariel A. at Met-art.
I don't like the way Magoo colorizes his pictures. I like more lifelike, realistic color tones on the model.
But Ariel really looks like a yummy young girl-next-door in these two photosets, especially the Metmodel photoset. Like you said in the review, the expressions on a girl's face can change a photo from boring to interesting/attractive or vice versa.
She's a sweet, sweet girl, I'd really like to bite into (In my dreams).
More recent photosets of Ariel at either Met-art or Metmodels do not compare to the earliest sets. Glaring hair color, excessive makeup, whatever, she is just not presented as attractively as before. Is there some technical reason why a girl with red hair is more difficult to photograph so that her hair does not look like a dye-job?
Current Member for over 1 year (at the time of review).
Pros:
-Some good-to-great looking models.
-Content is exclusive to this site.
-High-quality glamour photography.
-No DRM video protection.
-No download limit.
-They do have a bio sheet on the models. But some of the information is fantasy or worthless.
Giving the age of the model, with no date to compare the age to, is not much use. Stating in
"sexual experience" that a model is a virgin, when I have seen hardcore clips of the same model
giving blowjobs and having vaginal and anal sex with different males, makes me wonder what kind of
virginity they are talking about. The hardcore clips of this model were posted on other sites long before the photoshoots of this "virgin" model were posted at glamdeluxe.
I realize that I should not be picky about factoids when posted at a porn site, but it pricks the fantasy bubble when the factoids are so obviously false.
Cons:
-Site does not update very often. Can go a week or more before a new photoset is posted. Very irregular posting schedule for updates.
-Only 1 photographer for the site: Thierry Murrell. He does glamour-type erotic photography. Usually nice clean pictures, but if you don't like his style, you won't like the site.
-Softcore only. Single-model posing. No boy-girl pictures. No girl-on-girl pictures.
-Site advertises "huge archive" of photosets and flix. But the site has only been around since 2006, and the "archive" is tiny compared to a super-site like met-art. The flix archive is really small, only 28 videos. New videos are added very, very slowly.
-The flix (videos) are basically a video of a photoshoot. And some videos are a collection of
individual pictures from the photoshoot, not a real moving-picture video.
-No zip files for the photosets. Need a blackwidow program to download a photoset. Otherwise, you have to download each picture separately, a real pain.
Bottom Line:
Cons (continued):-Photosets are in 1 resolution only. Do not have a choice of 3 different resolutions for downloads as you have at some of the better sites like met-art (low, medium, high resolution).
-Navigation could be improved a lot.
You go to the flix (video) page, which lists with a thumbnail of each video at the site. The hot-
link to download each video is not clearly marked. Maybe this is a French version of a joke, where
increasing the obstacles means increased pleasure when you reach the goal of downloading the video?
-Videos are listed separate from the photosets. So if you want to find whatever videos there are of
a girl, have to look at the video page, then scroll down the page to examine each video to see
which girl it is. Videos are not grouped by the model, but apparently in random order.
-They do not date the videos or some of the older photosets. I like to know when the photosets and
videos were shot, for my own interest.
-Models are white girls from Europe only. No blacks, Asians, other races.
-Photos have a watermark. Doesn't bother me, but some people dislike photos with a prominent watermark.
Bottom line:
-If you like softcore, glamour shots of single models, and you like the models you see on the tour, then this site is maybe worth 1 single-month subscription to get the basic files you want, and then maybe a visit once a year to get any updates. Hopefully, the site will last, because the
photographer does do quality work and picks some nice-to-great looking models. But a regular
subscription beyond 1`month is not worth the money.
-I wish I could give this site a much higher score, because I belong to it and hope it does not go out of business. But for this type of softcore photography, you get more for your money with met-
art > metmodels > hegre-art.
Giving this site a 75, because some of the girls are gorgeous, and the pictures are high-quality glamour shots.
I believe the reason met-art removed some "Lolita" sets was for legal reasons.
The main photographer for met-art in its early days was Grigori Galitsin. He also provided pictures to Domai.
Later, Galitsin worked with Petter Hegre to set up an erotic website, and then Galitsin set up his own erotic websites.
Galtsin has had legal problems in recent years. In 2006 Galitsin was put in jail in Russia for his erotic photography.
His wife was also arrested and put in jail in 2006, released, then put in jail again. His wife was the model named Valentina at met-art and named Val at Domai.
Her photosets have all been pulled at met-art and Domai.
As far as I know, Galitsin is still in jail in Russia.
Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review.
Pros:
Best site on Internet for softcore European models.
Huge selection of models.
Many of the models are lovely/gorgeous/beautiful: really, some of the prettiest models I've seen on
any porn site.
Many different erotic photographers have contributed to the site.
Most models have multiple photosets.
Most photosets have 100+ pictures of the model.
The photosets are of very high quality (except some from the early years of the site).
With a membership, you get a large number of hours of live webcams per day.
For years they have been posting 3-4 new photosets per day. That is a huge number of updates.
They are constantly coming out with new models, as well as with new photosets of older models(not in age, but as in previously viewed models).
Most models appear to be in their late teens or early 20s.There are many different physical types of European girls: breast size: small, medium, large. Most girls slender, some medium, a few large (not heavy, just big beautiful girls).
Cons:
Met-art has made an art of posting boring videos of beautiful young girls.
Sorry, but that disappoints me.
The videos are a very minor extra, hardly worth watching.
The models are almost all European. There are very few Asian or African or others. To see other types of models, go to a different site.
This is softcore only. If you are looking for hardcore, go elsewhere. No boy-girl sex. No boys at all. A little girl-girl touching, but so mild you wonder why they bother.
Met-art has a posted schedule for the livecam shows. If a model does not appear for her show, you don't find out about the change until you are waiting for the model to appear live, and maybe there is a replacement model, or maybe no show at all.
The same model can have different names. This is a porn problem, but why can't they give a girl a name and remember it?
Search feature for model sets is OK, but could be easier to use.
Bottom Line:
If you like soft-core pictures of beautiful European girls, this is the site to join. The annual fee of $99 is a bargain.
This site (in my opinion) offers, for the same or less money, so much more than competing sites such as:
metmodels: (a sister site to met-art) that has fewer updates and fewer models and fewer photosets.
hegre-art: fewer updates and fewer models and fewer photosets. No livecams. No variety of photographers. And is more expensive than met-art.
domai: a nice softcore site, but again: fewer updates and fewer models and fewer photosets. No
livecams. And the photosets do not have the great quality of the met-art sets.
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.
