| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
426
|
Melissa Midwest
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from sycophant85:
(RagingBuddhist's Reply)
The number of pictures in a set ranges from 40 to 80 and the quality ranges from ok to crappy. She definately does NOT have a professional photographer. You can get the a sample of the quality from any of her free galleries. Her videos run about 5 minutes at the most and well, suck. They are poorly lighted most of the time and not of professional quality. Again, click on the free video sample on her site to get a sample of the quality. My biggest gripe with the site is the lack of any new material. 30 bucks a month is a lot to pay for stuff you have already seen or picture sets of cam shows she did 2 years ago. Her forum page now basically is her posting once a week telling her members how busy she is that she is going to go out a party that weekend.
It is not a bad site, just not worth 30 bucks a month.
|
05-27-09 06:17am
|
Reply
427
|
Melissa Midwest
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from asmith12:
(RagingBuddhist's Reply)
IMHO his review is still MUCH MORE useful than facts like number of pictures (which can be easily found on TBP, and even if they're not 100% up to date, they're most likely pretty close):
380+ Photo Shoots (avg. 100 pics each)
Hi-Res Pics: N, Model Index: N, Small & Large Pics: N, ZIP Files: N
Watermarks: Yes, medium-sized (all pictures).
Videos: 205+ Videos (approx. 4 min. each)
Full Scenes: N, Multi-Bandwidth: N, Vid Caps: N
Watermarks: Yes, medium-sized (all videos).
|
05-27-09 05:58am
|
Reply
428
|
Matt's Models
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#17
from Douggie:
(RagingBuddhist's Reply)
I hear ya. I was just trying to give constructive criticism. The way I look at it now is just like he said. Its his site and he will run it the way he wants (right or wrong). Ill just join when I feel the need to blow 14.00.
I better be careful of what I say...last time he threatened his lawyers on me. LMAO. good luck! want my address?
Nohing personal against the guy. I just see it way too often...the producers/camera people are way more amaturish then the models are. But hey like I said, its his business.
|
05-02-09 02:50pm
|
Reply
429
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Comment
from largeun:
No, you're not on your own pal.
I slated them simply because the quality is rubbish compared to other sites and the prices they charge are far too high for the quality provided.
It is a shame because they have exclusive content that is appealing.
I like secretaries in stockings or MILFs getting boned by the plumber. That kind of shit.
But I do hate the fake screaming crap.
I think Priya Rai is the leading fake scream porn babe. Sure, I'd length her in a heartbeat but a muzzle would have to be purchased and that would dent my porn subs heavily.
|
04-29-09 06:38am
|
Reply
430
|
Abby Winters
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from messmer:
(RagingBuddhist's Reply)
I had no idea what was causing the lags but reading your explanation I will put in a complaint about the subject to AW. Thanks for clarifying why I have to wait what seems an eternity between pages.
|
04-24-09 02:50pm
|
Reply
431
|
Abby Winters
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from messmer:
(RagingBuddhist's Reply)
I've always had problems navigating within AW, RB. It is slower than cold molasses to go from point a to point b. Nice to hear about a possible explanation for that slowness.
|
04-24-09 02:13pm
|
Reply
432
|
Abby Winters
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Review from RagingBuddhist:
I'm really kind of upset at Abby's now. My system started lagging severely while I was browsing the pages of the new layout. I opened the task manager to see if anything was out of whack and noticed that Firefox was using over 1,000,000kb of memory. No wonder it was dragging! The only thing I can attribute it to is part of the new navigation - at the top of the page, it keeps track of all the pages you've visited. Every page you open is the equivalent of opening a new instance of Firefox! I went to the settings page on the site where you can set the options for how you want things displayed and there was no option to disable the page tracking. While I was there, I noticed that it showed I'd downloaded 54 gigs of files in 2 days - THAT wouldn't do, since A). I'd only downloaded about 15 gigs of video, streamed maybe a dozen low res flash files and saved maybe 200 pictures and B) I have a monthly download cap of 250 gigs.
So... I sent an email asking about these two issues and, unlike any time in the past, I've yet to get a response. That's pretty disheartening coming from a site that had always had the most attentive customer support I'd ever seen.
My new score is still more than generous. The content I'm after is definitely there - but it's a real pain to have copy the current link I'm on, click off the site, and restart Firefox and copy the link to continue browsing. And I'm still curious about their download count. I haven't gotten a notice from my ISP yet, so I'm hoping that's just some sort of a glitch on AW's part. It'd just be nice to hear from 'em to clear it up.
|
04-24-09 12:56pm
|
Reply
433
|
Abby Winters
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Comment
from messmer:
I rejoined AW under their special former members rate and get all three categories. I'm not sure if I'm getting jaded or if the quality of the material has deteriorated but I'm certainly not as enthused about the site as I used to be. For instance, I have not kept more than two picture sets in two months because there is no excitement to them, close-ups of one breast or disembodied shots of genital areas abound but if I am not able to see the rest of the model I find it boring, so I switched almost completely to downloading videos only. Photographer(s) should definitely switch their style now and then.
As to your question, I think anyone who were to choose g/g only would be disappointed with the updates. I would guess they amount to about one a week, followed by IM with about three updates and with Solo getting the lion's share with sometimes as many as two, even three a day.
These are guesstimates because updates tend to change from week to week and day to day but if I had to choose a single site I would say g/g would not be worth the price unless one subscribed for the first time. Simply not enough new material.
|
04-21-09 09:02am
|
Reply
434
|
Figure Baby
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from Xororos:
(RagingBuddhist's Reply)
Ah! This is blowing my mind - a substantive discussion of an "adult" site. I love it.
RB - Maybe I overstated my position in my reply. I agree that it's very small. I think I mainly wanted to say that it's just one of those spinoff sites that Monahan mentioned. In my view, those are altogether different and not worth investigating. I've definitely seen those types of sites and they are annoying. I suspect that we agree on at least 90% of the issues we mentioned in our respective reviews.
Monahan - If you want help evaluating FigureBaby, figure-baby.bravoerotica.com gives you a massive amount of samples. I joined and rejoined FigureBaby because I happen to really like four or five of the most prominently featured models. So, for me, it was worth paying a premium. When I rejoined, it was to get about 20 new sets that I had seen them add in the months since my first subscription. In essence, my $18 was for 20+/- specific sets that I wanted. For me, the sets were worth nearly $1 apiece. However, now that I type this out, it seems a bit extreme. I think you're best served by visiting FigureBaby's site on BravoErotica and looking around.
Thanks again for the discussion, guys!
ps - RagingBuddhist - sorry for mistyping your name . . .
|
04-07-09 01:17pm
|
Reply
435
|
Figure Baby
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from Monahan:
(RagingBuddhist's Reply)
While I agree a site needs to start somewhere and to grow in a controlled manner. But what seems to be the case here, by your description, is that they are still in the planning stage and are playing with what they want to be when they go "prime time."
Most embryonic sites start off as an adjunct of another, established site as a "bonus" offering in order to get some direct feedback by porn users...or at least a very low membership price like $5.99.
But at $17.99 with only two "naked videos" and very few photos, I think I can wait a while.
Great review RB.
|
04-05-09 01:01pm
|
Reply
436
|
Figure Baby
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Review from RagingBuddhist:
If it wasn't for their departure from the world of gonzo, glamour and glitz, I would've rated this an average site. But, as it is, I think they deserve a few points for what they seem to be trying to do. I'll definitely be keeping my eye on it. If you're as much of an amateur fan as I am, you should too. It just needs some time to grow and to work the bugs out.
|
04-05-09 06:20am
|
Reply
437
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from messmer:
(RagingBuddhist's Reply)
I can understand people going for cheap but can't understand a high rating for this site, especially since price isn't supposed to influence our judgment. I really believe that my last subscription WAS my last no matter how many DVDs they add on a daily basis because only the titles seem to change. Open any of them and after a while it's ho hum time. Unless you are VERY young! :-)
|
03-31-09 04:15pm
|
Reply
438
|
Figure Baby
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Comment
from Xororos:
The site is updated three times per week (M/W/F) at 3AM Eastern time. Most models have at least four sets, although two or three (Idaho, Ada Rose, and Birdy) have between 17 and 22 sets. I would say that the average is around 7 sets per model.
With zip files, it's definitely possible to download the entire site in a matter of hours. However, the content is quite good (I plan to review it shortly) and considering the cost, it's probably worth subscribing for a month.
|
03-22-09 09:56pm
|
Reply
439
|
I Feel Myself
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from TrashMan:
(RagingBuddhist's Reply)
https://www.pornusers.com/profile.html?id=
Put that PornUsers address in your address bar, AND after the "=" character put the Gregorian calendar year that is equivalent to 2506 on the Buddhist calendar ;-). After that click on the link to see the recent activity (it appears below the list of stats) and then click on "Comments" to get a list of all the comments made.
Assuming you got it right, you will see everything you need to see >:|.
|
03-16-09 04:38pm
|
Reply
440
|
I Feel Myself
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from TrashMan:
(RagingBuddhist's Reply)
There are certain people whose activity I have looked through and all their comments week after week are the same "has anyone been a member of this site recently?"...simple CTRL-C CTRL-V comments.
|
03-16-09 09:26am
|
Reply
441
|
I Feel Myself
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Comment
from TrashMan:
Nice to see a quality comment for a change. I'm not a big fan of people posting "Hey has anyone been a member recently?" for the purpose of just posting a comment for the raffle (of course).
|
03-15-09 09:46pm
|
Reply
442
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Comment
from uscue:
I've been a brazzers member for a while, but I also am a VideoBox, Bang Bros, Innocent High and Reality Kings member so I have a nice variety to compare. I have never had a billing problem with any of these 5 (Brazzers included) and I'd rate the video quality better than the other networks. I don't value it as high as the other networks because of the variety issues (all big tits or big butts...I'm not a "fake" fan but I like big butts so they get me there). I do like the download options and the "Save" feature that works (compared to Bang Bros save feature). Daily updates are consistent and never miss.
My only real problem with Brazzers is variety. They are kind of all the same, but when you have "contract" models like Rachel Starr, Ricki White, Gina Lynn or Carmella Bing that always put out good scenes, it keeps me a member to see everyone's new material.
|
03-12-09 10:44am
|
Reply
443
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Comment
from james4096:
I hear you. It is true that the video quality, customer service quality and variety of the site probably do not warrant our site's top ranking. However I understand why a lot of people love Brazzers. And now they are have this mofo's crap, trying to squeeze more money out of their loyal subscribers.
The site is probably coasting on it's reputation. They do need to step it up.
|
03-12-09 07:24am
|
Reply
444
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Comment
from Tree Rodent:
The site has some serious supporters on here. I'm not one of them, for all the reasons stated. My taste also does not stretch to enjoying tons of fake breasts, tattoos, and 30 or 40 somethings with a ton of make up trying to look 20. Even if the girls were to my taste, I would not touch the place given what some some say about customer service.
I guess I know the site is not to my taste. I could join, give the place a 60 and so could others. I am not going to join just to give the place a low mark. I think this is the reason for the high average. The high marks come from those who know they are going to love the place. If you look at Trashman's justification for such a high mark when I questioned the 98 he gave, he said that he does not "downgrade on the type of content." If you look at his review it will give you a very good idea about the site, and the reasoning behind his score. At least he gave his reasons for such a high mark. I know enough about the site to not want to join, even if it were 5 dollars a month.
|
03-11-09 09:31am
|
Reply
445
|
Brazzers
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Comment
from badandy400:
Personally I like the content they produce. I just believe they need a to put some serious work to video quality. That is something that most people can agree on whether or not they enjoy the actually content itself.
|
03-10-09 11:01pm
|
Reply
446
|
American Vice
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Comment
from Tree Rodent:
It's one of my favourite sites. Great value for money and customer service. I know Porn.com does a special offer to PU/TBP for $9.95 but you may have a lot of that stuff already. Hope you get some money together soon. Good luck.
|
02-27-09 07:28pm
|
Reply
447
|
Naked.com
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from atrapat:
(RagingBuddhist's Reply)
My experience with cam sites is scarce but I believe 4 or 5 USD per minute for the type of service most performers offer here isn't that expensive. But that's not the main reason why I listed the prices there: unless they are real cons or I run out of space, I usually state the bare technical facts in the pros section of my reviews.
|
02-09-09 11:33am
|
Reply
448
|
Girls Planet
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from WeeWillyWinky:
(RagingBuddhist's Reply)
I asked admins to delete my review, and I deleted my comment here myself.
|
12-12-08 05:46pm
|
Reply
449
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#18
from pinkerton:
(RagingBuddhist's Reply)
Regarding the comment about blowing a load on a girl's face, quite a few girlfriends in my past have admitted fantasising about having a guy cum on their face and chest, and I've obliged them quite a few times. Not saying that all women like it, but obviously some do so cumshots aren't all that unrealistic.
|
11-06-08 01:57pm
|
Reply
450
|
N/A
|
REPLY TO
#16
from The Clyde:
(RagingBuddhist's Reply)
Not really into "keeping it real" this is a fantasy, that DOES NOT include my wife/girlfriend.
BTW.. facials in real life aren't that out of the norm. :)
|
11-06-08 05:58am
|
