|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » User Ranks » User Post History |
Post History:
Claypaws (0)
|
| 101-144 of 144 Posts | < Previous Page | 1 | 2 | Page 3 |
| 06-28-12 06:59am - 4561 days | #2 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
I use a projector, giving me a very nice 60" image.  | |
|
||
| 06-28-12 06:42am - 4561 days | #5 | ||
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Horizontal. 1920x1080 is 1920 pixels wide and 1080 pixels high. I am sure it was just a slip, of course.
Also worth adding that the bitrate, as its units imply, is for bits per second, not bits per frame. So, for a given compression level, increasing the frame rate will increase the bitrate. And increasing the resolution (say from 720p to 1080p) will also increase the bitrate. For a given compression level, bitrate is proportional to the frame rate and to the square of the resolution. Frame rates are typically only between 24 fps (frames per sec) in Europe and 30 fps in the US (though US standards are fairly universally adopted) so they do not have a huge effect on bitrate. However, a resolution increase from 720p to 1080p increases the bitrate by a factor of (1080/720)squared, which is 2.25. That is, you need over twice the bitrate to encode 1080p compared to 720p at the same compression level. Bitrate also depends heavily on the codec used to encode the video. As Toadsith explains, compression is required in order to represent the image data in a small enough file to be manageable. So the image data is "compressed", meaning that some information within the data is thrown away. Such compression is called "lossy compression". A codec defines the rules for throwing data away and compressing the remainder; it also defines rules for how to reverse the process and produce the video image from the compressed video file. Different video formats (wmv, mp4, flv and so on) employ different codecs. The filetype does not itself determine the codec. mp4 for example can use mpeg4 part2 compression or h.264 compression, amongst others. h.264 is a very clever compression codec which delivers the same quality as mpeg4 part2 compression but needing only half the bitrate. For a video player to play back the video, it needs to know what codec was used to create the video and it needs to have all the rules for that codec. VLC Player contains rules for almost every codec ever invented - and there are lots of them! There are also loads of different ways to compress and decompress the audio component of a movie. But they have a lesser effect on bitrate than than does video compression. Bitrate will not tell anyone very much unless they also know what resolution (e.g. 720p), frame rate (e.g 30fps) and codec (e,g, mp4 h.264) was used. I must say, I have not bothered to include all that in my reviews (perhaps my bad, as I am not very interested in watching video!). But video enthusiasts get used to what are representative figures for good quality video. So if you can establish (using VLC Player, as Toadsith says) that a site is offering 720p wmv video at a bitrate of 1000 kilobits/s, it would be safe to conclude that the video would not be very good. Toadsith said that much more concisely than I have! I wonder if any video enthusiasts have encountered 1080p video which looks less good than an alternative 720p video due to an inadequate bitrate. My systems cannot play 1080p video at all so I have never been able to compare quality. Similar considerations apply to still images. They are somewhat simpler because we do not need to worry about multiple frames per second. The same considerations of resolution apply though. A 3000x2000 image is 3000pixels wide and 2000pixels high. Uncompressed images are huge and so images are always offered as jpg images. jpg compression is lossy. jpg compression is very clever and almost invariably adequately implemented, despite having many variable parameters which define it. Sometimes sites apply jpg compression using compression parameters which lead to unnecessarily large files. The arty sites are especially prone to this and it results from a misunderstanding of what jpg compression is actually doing (beyond the scope of this answer!). Bigger files are not necessarily better quality. What far more sites (and photographers) get wrong is what they do with colour. They need to get the white balance correct (so that grey and white come out as grey and white instead of orange or blue). And they have to adjust for the colour response of the monitor they used to edit their photos. A lot of photographers and sites get one or both of those aspects wrong. And this is assuming that the photographer has got the picture in focus to begin with. We photo enthusiasts often mentally alter the name of a site so as to include "blur" or "blurry" in its name. I shall not use any real-life examples. But you might alter "BeautyOfSex dot com" to "BlurOfSex dot com"). I tend to regard image resolution more as a mark of what has not been achieved than what has been achieved. A site offering only 1024x768 images in the year 2012 is unlikely to care much about photos. But offering 6500x4000 does not tell me that the images are good. They can still be big but blurry and with incorrectly managed colour. And we have to make allowances for sites which include old content, whether photos or videos, along with recent content. To find the image resolution, Windows Explorer can show it when you display folder contents. Image Dimensions is one of the things available in details to view. And every image viewer (ACDSee, IrfanView, XnView etc) displays the image dimensions. Edited on Jun 28, 2012, 06:55am | ||
|
|||
| 06-27-12 08:02am - 4561 days | #31 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Yes Micha, making words fly is something I enjoy too. I am something of a pedant when it comes to writing and become increasingly disturbed by the inability of native English speakers to use their own language. I was appalled by a set of instructions, written by teachers and posted on a school noticeboard, containing many misspellings, wrong words and poor punctuation. I can forgive non-native writers anything and admire their facility with my mother tongue. I think FETS probably arose as the plural of FET, the latter being an abbreviation of fetish. The site is indeed fets.com and is the one that Cap'n was asking about in his comment. If you go to the "visit site" link, you end up at fets.com and this does certainly refer to leg texture and pantyhose. But near the bottom right of their page is a section called FETS database. It has some search dropdown boxes. One of those is theme, from which you can select from a large list which includes "ballerina", "tennis girl" etc. Ballerina brings up 57 photo sets. I have no idea whether those are still available if you sign up to the site. I was last a member in 2002. The join page says the site has 1020 photo sets, which is tiny by comparison with most photo sites. Edited on Jun 27, 2012, 08:21am | |
|
||
| 06-26-12 04:03pm - 4562 days | #29 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Micha, that is some piece of writing! Both perceptive and very entertaining. "grace, ballet, gymnastics, sports, or simply flexible." Ever checked out FETS? Years since I have but they had lots of those. As for interviews, they can be really cruel to the girl. I don't often download them. Once or twice, it has been a Russian or Czech girl with very little English. The interviewer asks some really complicated and long question and she has no idea what he's on about. Anyway, I don't want to hear a man's voice rabbiting on. | |
|
||
| 06-25-12 06:33pm - 4563 days | #16 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Not necessarily every day. The 1000 is just an average. I suppose it would be more accurate to say about 5 models per week. Some models have far more than 1000 images, even on a single site. Part of the enjoyment is selecting the best images to linger over. There may be only 10 really good ones in 1000. But simply looking at those 10 would not be exciting because there would be no build up. Imagine sitting down to eat only a little portion of your favourite food. It is more satisfying if preceded by a starter and accompanied by some more mundane filler. And you do not have to eat everything on its day of purchase either. A well stocked store cupboard enables you to exercise choice. Mind you, I found some blackcurrant jam that I made 10 years ago. I won't eat it but I can't bear to throw it away. How many empty boxes do you want? | |
|
||
| 06-25-12 06:07pm - 4563 days | #21 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
I am not interested in: video; hardcore bg or gg; toys (i.e. dildos or vegetables or any other objects); masturbation or any finger insertion; outdoor; public nudity; smoking; "arty" poses - strange arrangements of legs and arms and looking away from camera; prominent use of props - e.g. flowers, oranges, apples etc. What I like is solo girl photos, indoors, without insertion of fingers or toys. But I like it very explicit, starting clothed and including open leg shots and plenty of pink. This makes it difficult to find sites I like. I tend to keep rejoining the few sites that have at least some such content. The thing I hate about hardcore, toys and finger insertion is that they all obscure the view of what I want to see. And video keeps losing the view of the face, without which I lose interest completely. | |
|
||
| 06-22-12 12:00pm - 4566 days | #14 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
 That got me laughing. Without giving you "too much information", I can say the total is easy to reach. At about 1000 images per girl, normal for girls who appear on big sites or several smaller ones, and one girl per day, you get about 300,000 images per year. Run that for 10 years and you get 3 million. I never throw anything away. You should see my attic full of empty cardboard boxes. | |
|
||
| 06-18-12 04:32am - 4571 days | #10 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
I am afraid that like2fireone's suggestion is the only way that will work. You have to bite the bullet and create separate email addresses for business and porn. No spam filter will trap this stuff without also blocking legitimate emails. And the spam will keep increasing, since, once your address is on a spam list, it gets sold to further spam lists. NEVER use the same email address for porn and business contacts. like2fireone advises two email addresses. Let me tell you something. I have 27 email addresses! I set a up a new email address for every site I join. Then if I get spam, I know where it has arisen and I can let the site know. I then delete the email address as soon as my billing cycle has ended. So, if I get any spam at all, it is never for more than a month. My porn addresses are completely separate from my business and personal addresses. I have an address for friends, another for banks, another for on-line purchases, another for forums ... and about 15 for porn. You can easily let your existing business contacts know your new email address if they are in your address book. Just make a contacts group (most email software can do that) and add the email addresses for your business contacts to that group. When you have set up the new email address, send an email to yourself, with the contact group as bcc (blind carbon copy). That way, each contact gets told the new address but nobody gets to see anyone else's email address. | |
|
||
| 06-16-12 02:56pm - 4572 days | #19 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Hear, hear!! | |
|
||
| 06-16-12 08:50am - 4572 days | #12 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Now, obviously I want the producers to stay in business. But I think that, in considering the effect of tube sites and other free outlets on the porn industry, there is a danger of confusing correlation with cause. It is true that profitability, and possibly actual sales, have declined; it is true that tube sites have grown. But that shows only correlation and it is not safe to conclude that tube sites have caused the decline. Another possible cause of the decline is simply the changing of tastes with passage of time. In the early days, the material had novelty value. Now it no longer has that and people seek new thrills, such as circulating clips of actual sex lives, in low quality. It is not that easy access to pirated content has caused the decline of the producers of quality material. Rather, it is the general trend for people not to care about quality at all. Those who get their porn via tube feeds would not purchase anyway. They will get it free or not at all. I have not accessed tube sites because I am not interested in video. But almost every picture site I have joined has been a result of finding a complete set, or several, posted in full resolution on one of the bulletin boards. The reason I ever went there was that the producers are so scared of giving anything away that their tours include virtually nothing that allows you to decide whether the content is worth having. They really need to keep up with the times. Producers should club together and set up a quality free site where they upload complete high resolution videos and picture sets. And with links to join the pay sites via reputable billing companies. Certainly, some people, maybe even most visitors to that site, would only grab the free stuff. But they would not have joined the pay sites anyway. If 1% of visitors sign up, that is revenue the pay sites would not otherwise have got. This is the principle that makes spam so profitable. Millions of people see it. Most ignore it. But the 1% who buy as a result generate huge profits for the spammers. I had this discussion with a webmaster of a paysite I was in at the time. He was (IMO) wasting resources trying to fight the pirates in the courts. He trusted me (quite rightly) and actually showed me a site where his entire content was being pirated. I can understand that litigation against such total theft might be justified and might even succeed. But that should not prevent webmasters from forming a legitimate free site with real actual content, not just a few samples. Tube sites will not go away. Pirate sites will not go away. Producers need to learn to use the easy access so as to further their business. Many of us would not visit tube sites and would not want their content. But I would love a "TBP Free" kind of a site where I could read (and write) reviews but also see actual full resolution content uploaded by the participating paysites. I would join more sites than I do now. Hey, I might even join some video sites. That would be a coup for them! | |
|
||
| 06-16-12 08:11am - 4572 days | #36 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Glad you are tempted! And I agree about the landscape format images. I see you have now asked Khan to add it. If there are, say, 50 or more sets that have been added through 2010, 2011 and 2012, I may even rejoin it myself! | |
|
||
| 06-15-12 03:21am - 4574 days | #34 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
It is not listed at TBP (I guess they could be asked to add it) but it still exists and seems to be updating. Just put NaughtyNylonGirls into the address bar of Firefox and it will find it. We have some similar tastes and shared frustration of the difficulty of finding sites that meet all our precise requirements! Never having encountered Camilla, I just found her site. I see what you mean Edited on Jun 15, 2012, 03:31am | |
|
||
| 06-14-12 04:20pm - 4574 days | #30 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
If you love Lexi Blue, I am virtually certain you will like NNG, given that its photography is still amateur, of slightly better quality than Lexi Blue and with at least as much emphasis on the lingerie. I should add that, if I had been writing formal reviews of NNG and VintageFlash, I would have given VF about 83; NNG about 75. But that is because the score would be more objective than a reflection of my personal enjoyment. 75 compared to 82 because of the lower technical quality of both photos and videos and the smaller quantity. However, the personal value of NNG greatly exceeds its objective score because I totally love Laurita and the lingerie theme is very well to my tastes. Laurita most certainly knows how to undress with all the eroticism of the strip and her eye contact is sublime. I agree that a collection of the best from SC would be a good site. The photogs obviously have the rapport with their SOs, so they can capture the playfulness and personality. I would not want to swap the photogs for professionals but I think they could use some help with colour, sharpening and compression issues. DTA does indeed make unzipped sets easier to handle. I think I got around the problem by writing my own autohotkey scripts when I was in SC. The NNG tour says all sets are zipped and that later ones are bigger than 1500x1000 (which is still not great but acceptable for a one off join at its price point). I am glad the info was helpful to you and thank you for saying so. | |
|
||
| 06-14-12 07:49am - 4574 days | #57 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Thank you Capn. The civil nature of the discussion on the forum makes a safe environment for debate. I value your approval, my friend.  | |
|
||
| 06-13-12 05:02pm - 4575 days | #55 | |||||
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Your whole argument is very eloquently expressed. The purpose of debate is to clarify. Even a guilty offender is entitled to a defence in court.
It was not an argument a priori. It was an a posteriori explanation of why europrices might largely be accepted, whether or not they are justifiable. I agree that it does not provide any justification for the practice.
Local taxes are a valid argument only for sites based in the UK or EU. They are required by EU law to charge VAT for intangible, electronically delivered content, to customers based in the UK or EU but not to customers based elsewhere. That is what the British Library do and explain and I am sure they are not motivated by greed.
I absolutely agree that US based sites have no a priori justification for any regional variation beyond a strict currency conversion by exchange rate.
Yes. A very plausible explanation of why US sites believe they can get away with regional surcharges.
Again, I agree completely in the case of US sites, where I think your argument is well put and incontrovertible. The jury would, I am sure, reach a verdict of guilty on the US sites. Whether a boycott would result in US sites lowering EU prices to match US prices, or raising all prices to cover what they were previously making via regional pricing, is something we may never know. I am not opposed to a boycott of regional surcharging by US sites; I merely doubt its likely effectiveness. The verdict may be just and the sentence apposite. Whether that prevents the convict from re-offending is another issue, alas. | |||||
|
||||||
| 06-13-12 03:39pm - 4575 days | #20 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
I think Vintage Flash is my favourite too. I really do hope the webmaster listened (as opposed to echoed, as I believe Cap'n aptly put it) and increased the resolution in response to some very lengthy email correspondence we had. I downloaded their videos as well as their photos. Given that I find the video so unsatisfying as a medium, I was rather surprised by how much I enjoyed them. As I am now signed up for Galleria, I shall make a point of evaluating the lingerie category as it now stands and include mention of it when I review it in a week or two. NaughtyNylonGirls then - to answer your questions. First, a caveat. My membership was late in 2009, i.e. two and a half years ago so I cannot guarantee that the emphasis is still exactly the same. I reckon the content I downloaded then will probably still be available but I don't really know how much they have added. The tour gives suggestion that it is still updating. In 2009, Laurita was the only model and, since I love her, she is why I joined. You know her from AllOver30 - blonde, 30s, with lovely natural breasts and very prominent nipples. I downloaded and have kept 50 photo sets. They are not highres, mainly around 1024x680 but that might have increased in 30 months. The tour is not at all informative. In those 50 sets, there is only one pantyhose. One nightie and a couple of teddies. All the rest are bra, panties, and either stockings and suspenders or stockings with elasticated tops. The materials are variously satin, silk, lace and nylon and in a variety of colours including white black, red, beige, pink and blue. There is some fishnet. And in a few sets she wears what I can only describe as a corset - covers the midriff and under the breasts, but not the crotch (separate panties)and laces up at the back. Her favourite colour for that item seems to be blue. In a few sets, she is wearing the lingerie underneath formal office clothing. In others it is under a dress and in some it is more casual blouse and skirt. All the sets show all the girly bits and most have some finger spreading pink. I also downloaded some sets with toys but the toys do not come into play until well into those sets so the set is very acceptable as a complete set before the toy spoils it. And - Cap'n please note (!!!) - she never gets "fully nude". She keeps the stockings on right to the end and sometimes one or two other lingerie items as well. In this respect, it is similar to Vintage Flash. I reckon you would probably find enough to justify a month, given its extremely low price, so long as you can accept that the photo resolution is no better than Vintage Flash and often worse - or at least such was the case in 2009. I have not rejoined because I reckoned they would not have updated hugely since 2009. And Laurita also has a site on Southern Charms (where she's called Lexi Blue), which I joined. Its picture quality is possibly less good than NaughtyNylonGirls but I was in a phase where I would join ANYTHING that had Laurita in it! For some reason, I ignored AuntJudy though. But I now have about 140 sets of Laurita, which is probably enough even for me. Though, if you do give NNG a try and find updates for Laurita through 2010, 2011 and 2012, I might even give it another go myself. There is also video on NNG that I downloaded - I took about 30 of them. It is wmv, around 4000Kbps, really 720x576 but surrounded with a black border so its stats show as 1280x720. As in the photos, she keeps some lingerie on right through the whole video but we get intimate views of all the naughty bits. There is some hardcore too - with her husband. Anyway, it's your call. I think it is under $10. I hope this is useful. Like a mini review  Edited on Jun 13, 2012, 03:46pm | |
|
||
| 06-13-12 11:01am - 4575 days | #18 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
I am one of those who download based on the model's face and facial expressions. I then try to find everything (photos only) she has done on all sites and get as much of it as possible before I look at any of it, regardless of theme. But I do much prefer it when the theme includes slow strip from elegant clothes, via pretty lingerie, to full nude with lots of pink on show. I think you have already been a member of virtually everything I have joined (and then some) that caters to that preference. When you refer to the site "Vintage Lingerie", I assume you mean "Vintage Flash", which you not only joined but reviewed. I was last a member there in November 2011 and rate it very highly. I asked them to increase the photo resolution and I would be very interested to know if they have done so. I might rejoin in two or three months from now. I notice you have moved to the dark side (are now tending towards video rather than photos). Their videos seemed to be excellent quality but you know that already. I also loved SuburbanAmateurs but I see you have been there too. ATK Galleria has a lot of clothed to full nude via lingerie and it has a defined category for lingerie and a method to search for lingerie sets. I think it is the biggest source of such photos. FETS does not seem to have been mentioned. It is many years since I was there. Its free area appears to give access to full search by category and all thumbnails of all sets. It is definitely a theme site. It has a 7 day trial but I have not poked around enough to work out if it is full access. And, though I am not into video, one performer who has done video that I enjoy - actually I think she is a in a league of her own - is Sophie Moone. I have not checked if you ever joined SweetSophieMoone via 21stSextury. I did, as I adore her to bits. I even downloaded video of her. Yes, even I can occasionally like video. Problem there is the video resolution. 720x540 mp4 is the highest and a lot is 512x384 mpg. But she was sooo hot and she wears some great costumes. I can kind of get used to the low resolution. AllOver30. Yeah, you have been there! WeAreHairy - you have been there! NaughtyNylonGirls is another one to check out. When I joined (for a month at the end of 2009), it was exclusively Laurita, who I like lots. Now it seems to have more models too. It has a very cheap membership (too good to be true?). Best of luck. | |
|
||
| 06-13-12 10:19am - 4575 days | #9 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
That is rotten luck. Best wishes to both. | |
|
||
| 06-12-12 04:03am - 4577 days | #9 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
The way around that problem is to calculate the aggregate score as the median value rather than the arithmetic mean. Arithmetic mean is not always the best "average" to use, but, for some reason, it is almost always used even when it is inappropriate. In the quoted example, the median score would be 80. Median is the best value to use when you want to minimise the effect of extreme scores. | |
|
||
| 06-11-12 04:39pm - 4577 days | #42 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Yes this is certainly a civil forum and I appreciate the respect shown to people with differing views. It could be argued that a "cost plus" basis is actually less ethical than the model Thomas20 describes, whereby price reflects the ability or willingness of the "customer" to pay. It is harder to argue this ethical model for porn than, say, for medical drugs. If a large pharma develops a drug which has worldwide applications and sells it, worldwide, on a cost plus basis, then the poorest 90% of the world's population would be excluded from ever being able to buy it. But charging residents (or their governments)in the 10% richest part of the world a great deal more would enable the company to subsidise its sales to the poorest 90%, or even give it to them free of charge. Surely it could be argued that the latter model is more, not less, ethical. Then it follows that the "cost plus" model is not necessarily more ethical in all circumstances. The ethics are not absolute but depend on the product being sold, its development costs and the consequences to the different customer groups of the different pricing models. I doubt that our politicians would look very sympathetically on complaints from customers about inequality in worldwide porn prices. But producers do need to make a profit in order to stay in the business of fulfilling our addiction. If it is a question of a producer either surviving or not, maybe they have the choice of charging more to those who are accustomed to paying it, or increasing their equitable price for everyone. It is hard to say which choice would give them the greater income. In the UK, are we not used to paying more than the US for everything except healthcare? Everything from hard drives to petrol costs very much more over this side of the pond. But I would rather have it that way than have ambulances require payment before they will take me to hospital. | |
|
||
| 06-11-12 04:12pm - 4577 days | #4 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
I opened up my version of MS Word (which is Word 2000), clicked Help>Microsoft Word Help and typed "maximum size" into the index field, and clicked search. It gave me a "limits for Word" entry. I would guess the same procedure should give you the limits in your version too. For Word 2000, it is 32MB, or approximately just over 10 times the size of your current 2.9MB file. | |
|
||
| 06-08-12 05:14am - 4581 days | #18 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Yep. Count me in on that club too.  | |
|
||
| 06-08-12 05:08am - 4581 days | #8 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Spam has never been a problem for me. I use a unique email address for every site I join. So if I get spam on that email address, I know exactly which site was involved. If it is a site I care about, I can contact the site so they can alter their systems like TeenDreams in exotics4me's post. Either way, all I need to do is delete the email address once I know billing is stopped and then I get no more spam. One or two sites consistently result in spam but I am not too bothered as I sign up for only a month and delete the email address when the month is up. | |
|
||
| 06-07-12 08:17am - 4581 days | #4 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
I hope that what is causing this for you is not what caused it for me (with many different sites, including non-porn sites) a while ago. The only way to solve it was by changing to a different ISP. What basically happened was that the whole range of ISP addresses owned by your ISP can be blocked by the host server of the site or sites you are interested in. ISP ranges are allocated by RIPE and hosts are supposed to add the allocated RIPE ranges to their allowed lists. From time to time, some bad activity occurs, which is not your fault at all, that results in your ISP's addresses being blocked. That is what happened to me. My ISP were aware of the problem and said they could not resolve it since it needed action to be carried out by the hosts that were setting up the address blocking. They said I would need to contact each site that I could not access to ask them to remove the block. I solved it by changing my ISP as I felt it unreasonable to expect a customer to enter into technical discussions with a multitude of sites. The new ISP had no problem accessing any sites. This explanation does seem likely in your case since you can access via the FF Stealthy plugin, which I assume uses a proxy server to hide your IP address (thus also preventing login to the site as they will often not allow login to proxy servers). You could directly try an anonymising proxy, which would probably give you access to clubseventeen's main page but not allow you to log in, just like the Stealthy plugin. Also worth trying to access the site in your browser using the IP address of the site instead of its URL. I could post the IP address but mods might not like that. I assume you know how to find an IP address anyway. If you can access by IP adddress but not by URL, then you have DNS issues that you might solve by changing your DNS settings. But if you cannot access by IP address either, then it is your IP address that is being blocked. It is also possible that the site has blocked only your IP address rather than the entire range of your ISP's addresses. But sure, contact the site as they may have a resolution for you. Edited on Jun 07, 2012, 09:30am (Claypaws: Corrected typo in penultimate para.) | |
|
||
| 06-06-12 12:46pm - 4582 days | #14 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Sorry to hear about the lungs but the story is really very funny. | |
|
||
| 06-06-12 12:40pm - 4582 days | #3 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
This appears to be getting very common too. What I do is input fictitious data onto that first form. Often, you can then alter all of it on the actual join page. If you can't, I go back to the first page and input real data only for what I can't alter on the second page. Sometimes the transmission from you to the website is actually secure, even though the page displayed is not encrypted. The padlock symbol and encryption indicates only that the page was transmitted from the website to your PC over a secure encrypted link. It is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for transmitting your details securely from your PC to the website. If you look at the source of the unencrypted login page, it will sometimes use a secure link within its javascript. In that case, we are being paranoid, because the data transmission is secure even though the displayed page is not. You can set Firefox to warn you if you are about to send data over an insecure link. But it is a pain to have that warning on all the time. | |
|
||
| 06-06-12 12:02pm - 4582 days | #23 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
I agree that market forces and pirating will achieve what the religious right cannot do. Alas, I think that we will eventually have just a few big networks, selling standard formula porno movies, just like supermarkets dominate the food market. The days of getting high quality, exclusive photos are probably numbered now and that makes me very sad. Even the tube sites cannot survive if nobody remains to produce the content in the first place. I am also glad I have all those terabytes of photos saved. | |
|
||
| 06-06-12 11:47am - 4582 days | #22 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
How very true! | |
|
||
| 06-06-12 11:36am - 4582 days | #35 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Yes Cap'n, my friend. I think that is a good idea. CP  | |
|
||
| 06-06-12 08:21am - 4582 days | #33 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
I think Reveen's post is an oversimplification of websites' attitudes because it extrapolates the rogue behaviour of a few and generalises it. Mine is an oversimplification because it implies that local taxes are the main reason for regional pricing. Local taxes most certainly are relevant. Legal requirements are real and not the invention of greedy sites. The example I gave of the British Library is a case of legitimate regional pricing determined by tax law. It is also true that some websites use regional pricing to charge as much as they can. Adding a bit to the exchange rate does indeed allow sites to make additional profit. This is the same kind of thing as high street currency shops, in which there can be huge differences between how much you get for the money you hand over. The problem is determining which category a website's reason for local pricing falls into. Boycotting all regional pricing, including when it has a legitimate reason, will simply force those with legitimate regional pricing out of business and we will be left only with the rogues. Boycotts have no effect on rogues anyway. They will just find another way to screw us. Regional pricing is one of several mechanisms. Others include rotating content over time, offering fewer discounts, making it hard to cancel, using predominantly licensed content instead of exclusive content, and many others. And if they do not screw us, they will screw someone else. What they will not do is change their behaviour as a result of our boycott. We should also realise that sites exist to make money for their owners. The clever ones do it without making us feel bad about it. | |
|
||
| 06-05-12 09:58am - 4583 days | #31 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
And the inthecrack one is a mystery to me. It does look like opportunistic exploitation. I clicked through their difficult signup form. It gave me £27.01 If I selected $ pricing, it gave me $39.46 Converting £27.01 to $ at current exchange rate via travlang gives $41.54 ITC also have a pdf you can print out and mail them cash or money order instead for $34.95 The company is in Canada. As far as I know, Canada has never been part of Europe. | |
|
||
| 06-05-12 08:41am - 4583 days | #30 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
The reason some do it and some don't is because the tax depends on the location of the customer AND the supplier. 1. A site based outside UK or EU must not charge VAT to anyone. 2 A site based inside UK or EU must charge VAT to customers resident in UK or EU and must not charge VAT to customers resident outside UK or EU. All the sites that charge regional pricing are based in UK or EU and are therefore required by law to charge VAT to UK and EU customers. Any site based in UK or EU that does NOT charge regional pricing is (probably) breaking EU law, either by intent or by accident, since ignorance is not a defence in law. There may be some legal complexity round the definition of "site based in UK or EU" that can provide a loophole in some circumstances, but I am not an international tax lawyer. Edited on Jun 05, 2012, 08:51am | |
|
||
| 06-05-12 05:39am - 4584 days | #28 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
I think this is far more complicated than we porn hounds would like to believe. Remember that we are talking about supply of goods or services to EU residents. EU legislation is mind-numbingly complicated. Here is a reference to the British Library's policy for charging EU and non EU customers for the supply of electronically delivered documents. We can assume that the British Library is not motivated by greed. http://direct.bl.uk/bld/Help.do Search in that document for the string: "EU VAT regulations" Without breaking copyright, I can paraphrase but not quote the relevant section. It indicates that UK and EU customers provided with documents delivered on-line must be charged 20% VAT but non EU customers are not charged VAT. And that is what is required by EU law. Such tax will add approximately $6 to the cost of a $29.95 subscription. Further, the biller is also required to provide VAT tax returns to the EU and there is an administrative overhead associated with this which the biller is entitled to recover through its charges, whether it distributes the overhead uniformly amongst its customers, thus charging non-EU residents for EU overheads, or charging the overheads only to EU residents. There is freedom to allocate business overheads as one wishes but there is no freedom as to when and how to charge VAT. The applicable VAT rate depends on both the location of the customer and the location of the billing agent as this even more complicated document shows: http://www.iberpass.com/terms (search there for "European Customers (EU)") We may not like this but the only route available for us to challenge legislation is through our parliamentary systems to the European Parliament. It is not the fault of the websites or the billing companies, who are required to comply with legislation. Moreover, the extra charge is not pocketed by the website or the biller but is paid to the EU through the tax system of the biller's country. I do not like the consequences of the law either. And I am not a lawyer. I would add that it is of course possible for a dishonest website to add further, unjustified charges to the legitimate and required charges, hiding under the cloak of the legitimate charges. A charge to EU residents of VAT plus overheads is legitimate and so a total difference of some $6 to $10 on a $29.95 subscription is reasonable, given that $6 of it is the direct charge of VAT which must be paid to the EU. Anything more than a $10 difference is probably opportunistic and exploitative. Edited on Jun 05, 2012, 05:48am | |
|
||
| 05-31-12 03:39pm - 4588 days | #14 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
I suppose it depends on how "very similar" his tastes are to my own. If he is interested almost or entirely in solo girl photos rather than video, I would first have to recommend what has always been my "gold standard", which is ATK Galleria, for its huge collection of softcore photos of girls who enjoy what they do and without a concentration on toys. It is a similar size to MET ART in terms of number of models though Galleria has twice the number of photos as MET ART. Next, I would suggest Karups, probably Karupspc first and then Karupsha or Karupsow if they enjoyed Karupspc. All the Karups sites have some very hot photography. However, I would recommend MET ART too and Femjoy, both of which have some beautiful photos. For UK women, and we do have some real hotties over here, I think he just has to try Suburban Amateurs. There is some wonderful photography on that site and some seriously hot women. And another source of hot UK women is Vintage Flash with its associated VFA Academy and Pantyhose4you. Photos could do with being bigger but they may well have increased the size since I was last a member. Nubiles has some good photos but its obsession with toys and shifting of the balance towards video has made it much less attractive to me. Many girls have no more than one photoset worth collecting, even when I like the girl, because of the toy thing spoiling the view. That is why I could not fully recommend ALS Scan either. I have joined ALS Scan a few times but I find its endless photos of girls grinning while stuffing cucumbers in their pussies are not sexually exciting, just daft. But it would be a great site to recommend to someone who says that porn involves forcing girls to do things they do not like. The ALS Scan girls obviously have a whale of a time. I just do not find their stuff sexy, with a few exceptions which make it still worth joining for someone who has never been there. I have been a member of Torrid Art, European Glamour Girls and Erotic Destinations. The latter only once since I am not keen on outdoor shoots. However, Martin Krake, who runs European Glamour Girls and Erotic Destinations, is, IMO, one of the most accomplished outdoor erotic photographers ever. He manages to understand and use outdoor lighting to great effect, a skill which few photographers display in their outdoor shoots. His outdoor shoots of Anetta Keys are truly beautiful. I find the DDF network and PixandVideo to be too video based and too toy obsessed. I joined PixandVideo mainly to get their excellent photos of Mia Stone. DDF photos are almost all a rehearsal for their videos. But it is one of very few places that have video I have actually enjoyed. Dominno was the reason I signed up and she does not disappoint. Looking down my list of sites I have joined, I think there are about 30 or so that I have not mentioned. But I think I have named the ones I regard as the strongest. ATK Galleria, KarupsPC, Karupsha and ATKHairy (which I did not mention above as it is much more of a niche) are the ones I keep returning to. Edited on May 31, 2012, 04:07pm | |
|
||
| 05-26-12 02:44am - 4594 days | #35 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Unfortunately, partitioning does not help. The problem arises because of the limitations of the Master Boot Record. This means that the legacy OS (for example Windows XP) cannot see more than 2^32 512byte logical sectors on the physical drive, regardless of how it is partitioned or the physical sector size on the drive. (Drive firmware presents the OS with 512byte logical sectors regardless of the physical sector size). That results in the legacy OS being unable to see more than 2.2TiB of physical disk, regardless of how it is partitioned. I could go into the detail of how Advanced Format drives in manufacturers' external enclosures include a hardware solution to this problem but it is quite complicated. It is a pity that the additional hardware is not available in third party enclosures. I still prefer self assembly with third party enclosures but have to accept the 2.2TiB limit on the size of the physical drive. | |
|
||
| 05-23-12 09:50am - 4596 days | #8 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Can you be more specific then about what you are looking for? What do you want (the software?) to do exactly? Someone might have done precisely the same or see a way to do it with whatever they are already using. | |
|
||
| 05-22-12 05:20am - 4598 days | #31 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Just as a little aside, I would add that I believe you get the best quality and reliability by buying an internal hard drive, a good third party external enclosure and assembling and formatting the thing yourself. I use Icy Box enclosures. They are made of metal and are very well ventilated with mesh on three edges of the enclosure. This contrasts with the products sold as external drives, which are usually in plastic enclosures which are virtually or completely unventilated and cannot be easily dismantled either. If you want a drive which is bigger than 2.2TiB (2.2 thousand billion bytes), the self build option will not work on some OSs. For such very large drives, the manufacturers' external enclosures contain some clever hardware which allows legacy OSs to access them. I am successfully using 2TiB and 1.5TiB drives in Icy Box enclosures with Windows XP. Drive manufacturers quote their sizes as if TB and TiB were the same thing. So what is sold as a 2TB drive is really a 2TiB drive. A true 2TB drive would hold 2*1024^4 bytes, whereas a drive sold as 2TB actually holds 2*1000^4 bytes and so is actually 2TiB. A 2TiB drive holds 1.82TB, or 1.81TB after accounting for drive overheads. Edited on May 22, 2012, 05:26am | |
|
||
| 05-21-12 05:22am - 4599 days | #4 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
I have somewhere between 2 and 3 million photos. I organise my folders by set within girl within site. I wrote a script using autohotkey to copy just the first image from each set but mirror the site and girl structure. Let me call that collection of first images MyIndex. I use ACDSee to view all images and MyIndex. I made MyIndex easily searchable with a nice bit of free software called loc32 available from locate32.net. That site has zips of the software available so it can be put into a standalone folder and it runs without being installed. It enables me to search easily for a girl and find all her stuff in all sites for which I have her photos. For a collection as small as 100,000 images  you could probably eliminate the MyIndex and use loc32 directly on your photo collection.ACDSee itself has a category structure that enables you to define whatever categories you wish and you can then tag any photo with any number of those categories and you can search or list by any of the categories. So, if you want to find girls easily by name, loc32 is great for that. If you want to have categories, such as hardcore, softcore, blondes, small tits, whatever, then ACDSee can do that. | |
|
||
| 05-18-12 01:36am - 4602 days | #6 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Thank you Cybertoad!   | |
|
||
| 05-17-12 12:19pm - 4602 days | #25 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
It may well have been. While you were replying, I was editing my entry It confirms that Femjoy are not regional pricing now, exactly as you said. Also, I just noticed that the CCBill join for Femjoy is also offering me a cross-checked join for Joymii at £9.90 recurring, yes that is nine pounds ninety. joymii's own join page, however, shows 19.95 (no currency) and clicking it takes me to a CCBill for £19.95 with a cross checked join for Femjoy at £13.17. Is there any sense to this lark? Edited on May 17, 2012, 12:27pm | |
|
||
| 05-17-12 11:56am - 4602 days | #23 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
When I queried this with Femjoy about two years ago, the webmaster said: "As for pricing, yes, the higher prices for UK and EU are mainly caused by the tax legislation." I did not debate the point nor ask for proof but that is what he or she told me. Capn's OP suggests though that Femjoy are no longer operating regional pricing. If that is so now, it is hard to understand the validity of their earlier comment. I just tried the join link for Femjoy and though it shows 19.95, with no stated currency, clicking through the join process onto the CCBill signup does indeed show $19.95 and the numbers change when you select a different currency, £13.17 for example. Perhaps the effect of higher taxes is still true but Femjoy, for one, are now prepared to take the hit rather than pass it on to their customers. Edited on May 17, 2012, 12:14pm | |
|
||
| 05-17-12 11:37am - 4602 days | #3 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
Thank you for the friendly welcome Capn. I enjoyed our chats on forums of websites we had in common. Nice to hear from you again. I hope I can make a useful contribution to PU. | |
|
||
| 05-16-12 02:53pm - 4603 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
I have seen a few questions regarding queuing downloads in DownThemAll. Queuing in DownThemAll is easy. Get into its Preferences dialog, from the Tools menu of Firefox. 1. In its Preferences>Network tab, set the concurrent downloads to some sensible number. I use 2 since no site has ever objected to 2 concurrent downloads. 2. In Preferences>Advanced, I set max number of segments per download to 1(=disabled). Many sites do not like segmented downloads and neither do I. 3. When you add downloads from a site, you can do one of two things. a) Click Start. Download will then start immediately if not more than the concurrent number you set are already running. In that case, the download will queue and start as soon as it will not exceed the concurrent limit. OR b) Click "add paused". When all are added, select all downloads and click resume. It will run the number you chose as concurrent limit, queue the rest and start them in turn. I hope I have not duplicated something already posted. There are a few threads on download managers in general. It might be a good idea to have a separate thread for each download manager, so that people who like a particular one can ask questions or share tips about it easily. | |
|
||
| 05-16-12 06:01am - 4604 days | #30 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
You do not need an email. They publish the pass code and an email on their own site on the page from which you download the software. You just download the software and enter those details (they say). I have Easy Video Splitter and it works pretty well on my system, with 1GB of RAM. However, I rarely download or process videos and it is several years since I have used it, so I cannot swear that the registration process works properly as I cannot remember. I did check that I have the same version that is on their website though. | |
|
||
| 101-144 of 144 Posts | < Previous Page | 1 | 2 | Page 3 |
|
