Great review, RB! I've been thinking about joining this site for a while now--well, really just Wet and Pissy, as those two words encompass nearly everything I seek out in porn--but if this is the same price for two additional sites, it's obviously the better deal. I guess I'll wait a little while on a review once I join (and don't want to risk carpal tunnel syndrome either!). Your comments on camera work are also a lot more than what I usually manage, the typically redundant "Me see naughty parts in video. Me get horny."
Also, your reply to graymane about use of the term "puffy," that "Big TACOs are the Labia Masters" is hilarious (though I would think the title "Labia Mistress" is more correct). If that were a real award or title it would be one I wouldn't think twice about accepting! :-)
Rocco Siffredi, the Italian Stallion, is one of the few living male legends in porn. He is comparable to Peter North in the U.S., but with a few mainstream credits to his name, along with a more aggressive approach to his "acting".
LOL! You do start off a lot of reviews with that "this site is definitely NOT for everyone" warning, a problem I share whenever I start a new thread, but it's also a pretty tempting warning which I think is part of the appeal of porn in general.
Roxy seems to be a prime example of how to continue to make it in the changing economics of the porn industry, at least if shooting primarily from home provides enough excitement, and apple-in-ass content doesn't provide too much. She's also one of those naughty-but-nice Florida performers that's making a living with some pretty "unique" talents that not a lot of other porn stars even seem willing to try (Naughty Alysha is the other one that immediately comes to mind).
But I think if you've heard of Roxy Raye then you probably know what you're getting into, and if not her Twitter photos makes it pretty clear what she's willing to do--double anal fisting, for example...unless that's normal for women on Twitter, I'm not on there very often. Then again, if you ever mistakenly subscribe to this content then at least you will have some interesting anecdotes for your next dinner party conversation (or therapist!). ;-)
Thanks, and yeah it's long, pretty soon I'm going to have to sit on exotics4me's couch and discuss my addiction to writing long reviews. I swore to myself that I would try and keep this one short...
(Bottom Line continued. Sorry my reviews are getting so long.)
Also Simon (assuming he does all the shooting) frequently shoots short depths-of-field, meaning not a lot of the photo is in focus, so focused face but not ass, or focused ass but not face, but not a lot of both if the model is on her back or stomach. Other sites do this but it seemed to be very apparent here for some reason and it can get annoying. Clean sets and proper lighting seemed to used in almost all photos though older shoots seem to have shots thrown in that should have been deleted, like everything is out of focus, a flash didn’t fire, or something else, but for some reason they are there. I also found one little problem that irritated me in some sets; dust on the sensor. This happens in digital photography in between lens changes when dust gets on the camera’s image sensor and shows up in every photo (usually in the same exact place) until cleaned off. It sounds insignificant but to me it just seems unprofessional when everything else is done professionally (lighting, sets, verifying the model’s age).
If your looking for videos you should keep looking as a lot of models have none and those that do may only have two or three, but not one for every photoset. Older videos are smaller, around 480 x 360 .mpgs @700kb/s, but again not in great quantity so don’t get your hopes up. Not once did I ever hear or see Simon or any other male help for that matter, so it makes for a lesson in restraint to all the hands-on two cents-adding douches out there who want to ruin my video, uh, ‘experience.’ The girls are often shy and quiet too, and since they claim the orgasms are never forced none of the models really get that vocal or overly physical when masturbating but they seemed happy and I wasn’t complaining.
If SS really get their act together and release bigger photos with the links improved and videos for every model then they can get a score in the 80s, but until then members will have to put up with the relative narrow reach of their current and fully archived content; almost entirely solo girls (girl-girl is rare), many of them amateur, armed with lots of toys.
Just to second Drooler's opinion here, yes the majority of the models start off clothed, though getting naked with a toy at the ready can be done pretty quickly. The videos don't waste a lot a time and many of them (of what videos there are) start naked.
Overall you see plenty of lingerie and clothing before the 'real' action starts.
Looks cool, hope someone joins and does a review soon.
The only thing I didn't like was the way Nella (from ALS Scan, Met Art, Sapphic Erotica, etc.) looked with her jet black hair with bangs. I can't stand bangs! They make models look more like fake, plastic porn actresses than horny girls next door.
Yeah, I should have specified girl-girl or girls-only hardcore, not boy-girl hardcore--which I am not very interested in--and this site sounds like it fits that bill really well (or fit on a future credit card really well...). Can't wait to be a member, and thanks again for responding.
Exotics, I know it's been more than six months since your review but you're the latest actual reviewer, so how soft or hard is this site exactly? I was wondering because Cap'n made some comments about it being listed under softcore when it looks to be more explicit than that.
I'm just curious because I don't like stripping and posing--it's just too boring for me--so anything you can remember would help, thanks!
By exclusive, I just meant that a lot of the models in the previews I have already seen on other sites, especially since so many love to shoot the same group of Eastern European ones. It probably wasn't the best word to use, since you guys do shoot and capture your own content, just probably not the first ones to do so for the majority of your models.
Looks like a great site for girls only content, though it appears that all the models are eastern European, which is not what I like to think of as "exclusive." Still, high resolution photography and videography are always nice to see. Can't wait to hear from members in the near future.
I was checking out the price of those premium channels -- $18! Considering a regular membership, with its access to so many DVDs, starts at $10, I cannot believe that people would really want an extra channel for that much cash. Does Evil Angel = evil price?
Love how this site takes this fetish seriously, if that's the right word to use when discussing golden showers. Normally it's relegated to something only done at the end of scene so webmasters can just add another tag, and rather clumsily at that. Even better, it has long, hot, and enthusiastic girl-girl scenes which can be kind of rare within this genre. It's one thing to watch a pretty girl do a standard boy-girl or solo scene, but quite another to discover she's done work for this site.
As far as I'm aware this site is totally exclusive, if also appearing to be the hardcore side of Wet and Pissy, though the companies are different. A model seems to do W&P and/or Wet and Puffy, and then move on to this. Those sites' solo scenes are well done, but again, add a second girl and it becomes even better, IMHO.
Also, there has been at least one American performer on here, Tiffany Fox, who's also done solo scenes for both Wet & Pissy and Wet & Puffy. Still wish they did have more American performers though.
Oh, and to add to the con questioning "is material this hardcore too transgressive?", I would say no, at least with regards to this specific subscription and its sister sites.
The genre of this reviewed site (boy-girl pissing) had already pretty clearly been taken to the extreme years ago. People like Max Hardcore and sites like 666 Bukkake are not for the squeamish, or at times even the comfortably consensual viewer. Then Kink's now out-of-date Pissing.com (still open, but a few years since last update) is as rough and hardcore with the fetish as any of their other sites but also just as consensual, something missing with way too many other sites.
Now we digital deviants have sties like Wet and Pissy and VIPissy--frankly, far less transgressive for me than the countless anal and cum/swallow fetish sites. Hell, compared to the latest R-rated "sex" comedy we could see advertised on TV and on giant billboards this porn is practically art that people not only want to genuinely see, but might actually find pleasure in seeing(!).
Good review, John, hope there's more to come from similar sites!
I'm trying to figure if there's really that much of a difference between this and Wet and Pissy, since both's samples look so similar, share many of of the same models and scenes, and both are parented by the porn octopus Epoch. The only noticeable change from W & P I can tell is the focus towards more boy-girl golden showers instead of the former's solo and occasional (way too occasional for a guy like me!) girl-girl scenes.
Obviously, the Puffy Network subscription is the best deal at the moment--We Like To Suck, Wet and Puffy, and of course Wet and Pissy for $20/month--but that still seems to miss some of what VIPissy has if hardcore, in the boy-girl sense, is what really floats your porn boat.
I certainly never thought it would be such an intentional and consensual one. There's Girls Gone Wild of course, which was all about taking advantage of girls through inebriation and peer pressure, and then all the shoots where a performer showed up partially stoned or hung over.
I guess this site would be a lot more worrying if it included sober male co-performers, but as it is now it doesn't seem to be crossing any lines.
I joined PuffyNetwork myself a couple months ago and was quite happy with the sites...well, W&P was really my only interest. I would say that this site is pleasurably unique in shooting well--lighting, resolution, longer scenes--in a genre that too often doesn't get this treatment, instead relegating it to shitty, creepy, sites that have seemed to think that simply shooting "fetish" content makes up for a measurable amount of quality.
And to top it all off they have the crazy idea to depict the performers actually enjoying it, instead of the fetish=sadistic treatment angle that too many sites have gone for over the years. Who would have thought to make the content in porn appear to be pleasurable?
My main complaint would be, like RagingBuddhist raged in his review of PuffyNetowrk, that the download speeds were inconsistent and all too frequently slow, at least for the larger 1GB+ size files they have so many of. A growing problem, as the site builds up its lecherous library and you really want to get the most for your money. (But if you're into it, you damn sure will wait on every single file!)
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.
