Thanks, a year ago i came across a good review on OT. i was just going to give it a month. I just saw some of the hottest models like Carla Brown; and too many more to name. I went from that to joining OT about seven or eight times. Then this month; I joined all the sites- which is how I got Only Opaques membership; don't know if i can do that every month. But I will make myself useful and do some reviews of their other sites in the near future.
I've done a few ultra cheapie trials in the last year without problems but all of those have been done with reputable sites and/or billing processors. I mostly posted this as a warning for newbies or casual porn users since the potential problems are less obvious than with some other sites.
I'll have to second that and go so far as to say 480 X 320 is NOT acceptable by any means. Maybe in the early 2000's but nowadays, the standard should be at least 720 X 480 but I will admit that by the end of this year, 1280 X 720 should be the standard and become average.
Thank you for the tip and kind remarks, I have started joining a couple of sites to get my Silvia collection going. Club Silvia Saint and Videosz, I'm even getting her solo/masturbation videos, which I usually wouldn't care about with any other models. She's the only one where I'll watch the scenes just for her looks, though her attitude is great too, even if it has annoying things like music and jumpy cuts during which she lose her clothes and/or changes position. With her everything seems to come together her hair, her eyes, her face, her mouth, her breasts...
Ok, I will just say it this way, the series is pretty bad, the women aren't good looking at all(being nice), the guy(Randy) talks though out every single film, actually striking conversation and trying to crack jokes, he seems to think his penis is so big(hilarious imo), bad quality because it's really old, it's just a disaster really, BUT!!! BUT!!! the blowjobs given are really great and you may find maybe 5 chicks out of the many many that you actually think are cute(at best), I like the series and it is quite rare, but still, not exclusive.
I got these from Sugardvd & TLA Video.com, but I got them in questionable ways, so in a way, they are kind of exclusive because this is the first time(besides clips4sale, which is a sonofabitch goddamn ripoff of epic proportions)that they have been available for legit download with out doing things.
So, while they are not created exclusively for the site, they are download exclusive...... if you are legit with the situation.
Also, I wouldn't recommend joining right now as their collection is holy shit tiny in comparison to the collection of these that are available, I would wait 6 months and see where the site is.
So all in all, I like it, but I am not sure if I like it because it's good or because it's rare.
Mbaya, do you like Extra Crispy or Original Recipe? (LOL.)
Seriously, I do appreciate your sticking your neck out to check out this site. I've been a BIT gun shy after doing the dirty myself so many times I could inflict myself with angina had I not blown the dough on disappointing sites (again, this is a food reference).
For what it's worth: I was a member a couple of times. Last time was about 5 years ago. They were touting their "hi rez" then; turned out to be 1024 pixels. The photos were really crappy. Have all of 6 photosets from this site, and if it weren't for the models (Crissy Moran, etc.), I'd have none.
Now, on their site, they say they've got 'em "hi-rez" in three different sizes, but they don't say what the sizes are. (Man, does this get tiresome, this shit.)
The site still looks like it was designed for the days when anything over 56Kbps had some "wow" factor to it. Itty-bitty thumbs, small screen areas for the pages, and such. ("Best viewed at 800x600.")
Until it's clear that hi-rez means 1600px or more, and the pics don't look like they were left too close to a nuclear test site, I'd rather park my $10 at a KFC than blow it on this.
This is better news actually, the true medical theme was the largest aspect about the site that turned me off. I just joined ALS Scan today and have been a member of Only Cuties and Nude2Rude which all featured speculum scenes. This content was the reason I joined GynoX in the first place for more of this 'type' of material (I had no idea ALS Scan did this until recently) and I was a bit put off by the dryness of the content when it came to attempting a true gyno check up (with obvious fakeness as well) in the case of GynoX. I'm happy that this site may not be taken itself to that extreme but still provide that kind of content which I think I'll like if I joined. It's always great to get reviews on sites not reviewed before that I may look over or just miss; and I think this just may be one of them I may enjoy. Thanks for the feedback and more information on the site. See ya around!
Great review. I hate when I find a site that interests me that I had no idea about when I have such a huge list to join already :)
This site reminds me of a site I was a member of 1 or 2 months ago called Gyno X which provided real-like (almost too real) gyno exams. The best part is you get to see them doing calisthenics with this site while the other site seems to have maybe a bit more probing of the snatch and anus. I suppose it's give and take, but I am a bit interested in the site after your review, thanks for building up my list even more (note a hint of internet sarcasm) :)
Wow, thanks for the kind words mbaya. I'm glad you like my reviews and I'm always trying to improve them as well. Sometimes, I just run out of room as well and need to shorten them :(
Anyways, I appreciate your support and by the way, you're not too shabby a reviewer yourself :)
This is the advantage of internet porn. No one has to know who is looking at what. People do not have to ask friends for it and worry if they will think they are strange for it. The privacy factor is huge.
Of course being younger my friends mostly freely admit looking at porn and we have no issue discussing it. But, we are not married and freshly out of college.
I know that exotics4me will have some info because there is an Eve Angel update on the 4th tour page :) Let's wait it out and see what he can tell us when he hopefully looks at this comment.
No problem, at least I can warn other people about it. The streaming doesn't even properly work - it keeps buffering every 20 seconds or so. Got a 10 megabit line so that's not the problem. Their customer care is not interested in helping me ...
Separate from the site or network score (although related), I do try, when writing a site review, to mention some of the positive and negative aspects of the site I am reviewing.
In the case of White Ghetto, the major positive factor is that it is part of a nice network. I searched really hard to find something positive to say about the site. :)
On the negative side, other than I didn't like any of the models or the video clips or anything else about the site, I tried to say it in an intelligent way. But I'm afraid that it mainly came out as "I just don't like this site".
So I'm glad that I finished with my review of that site, and will hopefully focus more on sites that are easier for me to enjoy.
But the truth is that a site score has limited value. What is more important, on an individual basis, is whether the site caters to your personal tastes. My tastes are mainly softcore. I don't mind some hardcore, but I would like it to be good-looking or glamorous or nice. I don't like rough.
Site content (quality and quantity) and ease of use and price are the main factors in determining score, for me. My approach is different than the TBP approach, which does not consider price. But those are the factors which are important to me. Price does matter.
But I do try (and hope) that my reviews will have some usefulness or value to a PU member who might read the review, as an indicator of whether a site might be worth a membership or not. Based on individual tastes, of course. For a lot of PU members, my personal tastes are far too softcore.
I am not following the PU suggestion of rating an individual site that is part of a network as an individual site.
Instead, I am rating the overall network of sites.
I have reviewed several different sites in this netFameSolutions network, and I gave the same score to each site. Each site has a different individual value, but most of the value comes from the ability to access all the sites in the network, to access all the videos (and pictures, which are a minor part of this network).
I explained in each separate review in the BOTTOM LINE (summary) section the basis of my score: that I was not giving the site a score based on the value of the site itself, but on the network of the sites.
Perhaps I did not make that point clear enough.
You are entirely correct that, if I was thinking consistently, based on the negatives I reported about this individual site, my score would have been far lower than the 87 I gave the site--if I was rating the site on an individual basis. But I am not rating the site on an individual basis, but on a network basis.
I wrote at the end of this review: "I'm giving this site a score of 87 for its network value. As a stand-alone site, this site personally has zero value for me. But tastes vary. Some PU members might find it worthwhile to visit."
Technically, I am being too hard when I say the site has zero value, but I basically regard this site as a waste of time for me, personally.
But I wrote in this review, "I'm giving this site a score of 87 for its network value". What I meant was that the network of sites has a score of 87, even though this individual site has, for me, little or no value. Individual tastes vary, so maybe some people will enjoy at least some of the video clips.
Sorry to write such a long explanation to a simple remark, but I am trying to explain clearly what I meant when I said I was giving this site a "network score", instead of a score as an individual site.
It sucks when such beautiful talent gets wasted on a site like this. While I can't blame him for getting all these girls, I would rather see a site that isn't another dude's self-congratulatory tribute to his conquest of a lot of hot women.
POV is nice every once in a while, but a whole site, with the same swordsman and setting, is like you are just getting access to his home video collection. There is no variety, in the action or girls, and it is boring and routine.
That tiny download limit, plus that awful sample video, will keep me far, far away from this site.
I gave the site an 85 just for the beautiful women. I looked at it as if it were a model site and since most of the women haven't been on any other sites, I had to give it an 85. There was a couch? I do think the price should come down, but I'm guessing Thomas has to pay a hefty chunk of money to get those gorgeous women to swallow him! His site and Dream Stash are two of those sites that bring up the whole "why is this legal, but prostitution isn't" question. Oh and that maybe answers the question of why it is always the same guy. The two guys that run Dream Stash and this site have both all but said they don't film just for the viewer's pleasure. They're getting their money worth!
I've considered joining this site on several occasions but that goofy sample video always gave me pause. Your review confirms most of my assumptions. Thanks!
06-24-0903:01pm
*Message rows highlighted in light orange are replies to replies.
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.
