Very nice, readable review. Glad to see you posting again, and hope to see more reviews from you. Also interesting to see some input from one of the few female posters at PU.
Fantastic memory, Khan. To remember a poll question from over a year ago.
Thanks for the tip.
The best reply to the poll, in my opinion, was: Pornjackker: "It depends on what happens in the scene. Most of the time if it's just pure sex 5-10 mins is fine.
If there's a good flirtatious back story then 15-20 is good. Anything beyond 20 is really a waste of time."
His reply was entirely sensible, and fits with my thinking exactly. He also framed his reply better than I did when I tried to express the same thing.
I think you brought up a really interesting point. How long should a video last?
Maybe you could make that a poll question.
Personally, unless a video is really fantastic, I don't see the point of a video that goes beyond 10 minutes. Since most videos are basically rutting, with little attention to elegant style or storyline or other factors that might increase the appeal, I think these rutting scenes get tired/boring very quickly. For me they have little appeal. But even if the models are attractive, which would be a real plus, I don't think it's more of a turn-on for a single sex scene to last beyond 10 minutes.
I am talking about the sex scene itself. It would be great to have some prolog/story that leads up to the sex scene itself, if the story is not really stupid, the conversation is not really stupid, or demeaning or trash.
Erotic is something that most sex videos ignore or have forgotten about.
It would be nice to find a site that specializes in erotic videos, where the body is mainly natural, no tattoos, lovely young models (maybe a few over-30 for Drooler and his buddies), and the videos are like mini-movies or actual movies, with a sensible plot, good dialog, good lighting, good color, soundtrack, etc. etc.
Since they are going out of business, there is no legal obligation to give any refunds. I've known several small businesses that took in money for work to be done, that continued accepting money until they officially reported they were closing down, the work was never done, and the money was not refunded.
So if refunds are issued, that would be a class act.
It would take more time if you write your review in your native language, and then translate that review into English, but I believe the review would be more easily understood.
Welcome to PU, and you have written an interesting first review.
That page does not load the images that it is supposed to show. Instead, I get a page that is mainly white-space. The titles and brief descriptions of many photosets are listed on the page, but there are no images loaded that are supposed to be a thumbnail for each photoset.
Clicking on one or more hot links for each photoset listing brings up a new browser page, that is supposed to be a larger image of that particular photoset. But again, there is no image of the photoset that is supposed to be shown on the new page.
Do you, or any member of PU (including staff), get any images when you visit the Intro page (http://www.amourangels.com/trial/) at amourangels?
Can you load or view the image for any of the photosets from the trial page?
Maybe my problem is that I need to clean out my cache, or do something else to bring up the images. Or maybe there is a problem at the amourangels site. That is what I am trying to find out. Is the problem of viewing the images due to my computer, or is it a site (server) problem?
It looks like Amour Babes uses EPOCHEU.COM, which gets a lot of complaints about poor service, wrong charges, etc.
But it's worth calling them (if they have a toll-free number) to explain you have been denied access to a site even tho you still have a current subscription.
You might get a refund.
Or, if you paid for your subscription with a credit card, explain to the credit card company that you paid for a service you did not receive (membership to an internet site). The credit card company should reverse the money you paid (give you a refund/credit).
I am surprised by how cheap the licenses are for the photos and videos.
For a couple of thousand dollars, an individual could start his own porn site. The content would not be exclusive, but you could have a nice selection of models in photosets and videos.
My impression (I don't have hard facts) is that this site, and most of the Teen Mega World/Royal Cash network) gets most of their content from other providers. They don't product their own material. That is one reason why the material at this site probably seems familiar, because the content really follows a cookie-cutter approach where the sex is straight-forward with no bells and whistles. And the male cocks are mainly familiar because they are used so often.
Pat362 knows the name of the firm that either produces or has the lease rights to a lot of this Eastern European porn. But I can't recall the name of the firm offhand. But my understanding is that any site, or even private individuals, can lease this material, by paying their fee. The firm has a web site with their prices.
Anyway, I don't think the site material is exclusive. You can probably see at least some of the same scenes at other sites in the Teen Mega World/Royal Cash network sites. And you might also find some of the same content at other networks or un-related sites as well.
I do know I have seen at least some of the contents from the Teen Mega World network at other sites.
Excellent review, as usual.
Great details, great ideas, great wordplay.
My only complaint is that your reviews don't focus enough on the teen softcore sites that are my interest.
If you ever join any of those sites, I would find those reviews more helpful to me on a personal level.
(I think I forget to take my medicines last night, so please ignore this request if it seems off-topic.)
Met-art is strictly softcore. No hardcore, no midcore, no masturbation.
If you want more action than 1 or 2 pretty teens standing, sitting, lying down, etc., then you need to look elsewhere.
You should be able to get a basic idea of the site from reading the numerous reviews posted at PU.
There are probably thousands of photosets posted at Met-art. It is a huge mega-site.
There are a huge number of videos, mainly 10 minutes runtime or less. The videos are almost all boring and a waste of time. The models in the videos can be lovely, beautiful, or merely attractive, but the videos are a waste of time to watch, after you've seen a few to get an idea of what they are like. I don't understand the psychology of why Met-art will post photosets of lovely girls that I find erotic, and yet videos of the same models are just a bore. Almost all of the PU reviewers that mention the videos state that the videos are a waste of time.
If the PU reviews don't give you enough information on whether Met-art would be appealing to you, you should be able to find 1000s of free mini-photosets of the Met-art photosets. I mean, there are 1000s of reduced-number of picture photosets on the internet. Many were posted by Met-art itself, as a form of advertising for the site. So if you look at a number of those photosets, you should get a good idea of whether the site is worth your while.
A 1-month subscription is only $20 (rounded off). So it's not expensive.
I've had several 1-year memberships to Met-art, because it's my favorite porn site.
I posted a PU review of Met-art over a year ago. And there are plenty of other PU reviews of Met-art that are worthwhile reading. Some people love the site, some like it, other people think it's over-rated and not worth joining.
Capn, I think there are at least a couple of PU members who really enjoy the tease. They can even appreciate sites that are tease and non-nude, I believe. But I'm more into sites where nudity is the majority of the photos. Though there are some models that I will enjoy their photosets, even if there is little to no nudity displayed. Because the models are really attractive for me, for some reason.
I'm much more into softcore than hardcore. But that's just me. A lot of PU members like their porn more graphic than what I do.
"Toy Desire is full of young sluts who have never had the pleasure of a fat dick in their tight cunts, after weeks of trying to get them to take fat cocks, we failed, but we did manage to get them to shove just about anything else in their tight little twats, and yes, we got it ALL on video. These girls use cucumbers, strap-ons, vibrators, dildos anything that will give them the orgasm they so desperately need!"
I haven't had a chance to examine this site yet, but it appears to be one that you should avoid at all costs, until you get over your aversion to dildos.
Trying to find sites that you would really like seems to be a much harder thing to do.
I guess I'm lucky, because I really enjoy sites like Met-art. The only problem is that my budget is limited, so I can only join one or two a month.
But if I had an unlimited budget, my mind would blow a fuse, and I'd lose my appreciation for porn. Lol.
You can always switch to softcore teen mega-sites if you get really desperate. Have you ever joined Met-art, mplstudios, or similar sites? I realize you appear to like your women a little older, but there are a number of high quality teen sites that are worth visiting. But as I keep repeating, that depends on personal preference. If teens are out, that limits the selection of what is available. I've certainly never viewed all the sets at the teen mega-sites, but there are a number of teen sites that never seem to have heard of a dildo, or even masturbation, and have so far stayed completely away from hardcore.
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.
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?
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.
