Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password? Create an account to share your experiences and more! E-MAIL   PASS   Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).

Feedback History A detailed history of activity from this user in all different categories.

User : standard (0)

Feedback:   All (114)  |   Reviews (74)  |   Comments (10)  |   Replies (30) Other:   Replies Received (69)  |   Trust Ratings (0) All Activity A summary of all the feedback from this user. Shown : 26-50 of 115 Page : Page 1 2 3 4 5    < Previous Page - Next Page > Type Site - Score Feedback / Review Date Review 26 DogFart (0) 80.0 Status: Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review. Pros: - Large site with lots of content - Average to attractive women being seen to by black men with large penises - .zip files of photos for every set I looked at. - Epoch is payment processor. - Simple site with simple navigation. Other sites could learn from this layout. - Reasonable video sizes with good quality - Deeply discounted rate was offered after canceling. Cons: - 10GB/day or so download limit. - A bit too heavy on the "they're all thugs playing dice in the alley" black guy stereotypes, but I guess that's part of the fantasy. FWIW, it would be nice to see some (legal) businessman scenes incorporated, too. - Lots of fake tits and thigh tattoos, although I recognize that's the direction the industry has moved towards. - Scene tags don't help much. "Hairy" is anything from a full belly-to-bottom bush, or just a little landing strip. And sometimes it produced scenes where the actress was fully shaved and bald as an egg. Or maybe it's the guy in the video. Hard to know for sure. Bottom Line: Good site with good content. Attractive women servicing BBCs, and different scenarios / fantasies spread over a number of sites on the network. MILFs, cuckolds, black on white, white on black, individual actress sites (Ruth Blackwell, Spring Thomas, others), etc. It's one of the biggest, if not THE biggest, players in the niche, and it has years of content available using lots of big name actresses as well as unknowns. Quite a few of the "big" downloads failed before they finished, and links/pages don't stay alive more than 30 minutes to an hour, so download managers don't work too far beyond the most basic "download this single file and nothing else after it" functionality. I ran into a weekly download limit (somewhere around 10GB/day if I had to guess) that is not mentioned in the terms or on PU/TBP. You still have access after you go over, but you can only stream until their clock resets. I don't remember the reset time limit (sorry), but I'm guessing it's at the end of the week since the page telling me I couldn't download any more since I'd hit the limit specifically mentioned "week". Bottom line: I liked it, but note that it's aimed towards non-collectors with fast connections who are interested in streaming the majority of the content and only want to keep a few items here and there. Would I join again? Yes. 07-23-16  12:39pm Replies (2) Review 27 Babes Network.com (0) 80.0 Status: Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review. Pros: - Attractive models. - Tasteful settings. - Nicely filmed, but a con at times. - Photo zips, too. - Quite often enthusiastic and believable action. The scenes with Szilvia Lauren are possibly worth the price of admission. Holy cow. - Epoch as a secondary biller. - No download limits that I could tell. - Decent size site. 70+ pages of 12 scenes per page. Cons: - Navigation - Questionable lighting and cinematography at times - Not much visual difference to my eyes between 720p and 1080p videos - Download managers are mostly useless. - No photo quality options - CONSTANT login requests. - Not necessarily a con for everyone, but pretty much all white girls. Quite a few extremely attractive white girls, mind you, but don't expect too much variation beyond blonde, brunette, and redheads. - Tasteful lighting and filming, but some scenes are just a step above late night movies on Cinemax. Bottom Line: A nice looking glamcore site that I'd been considering for a while, and I'm pleased overall with the content and glad I finally gave it a shot. Quite a few scenes looked like they could have some sort of relationship with the crew responsible for filming some of the Sexyhub /Dane Jones sites. BUT... - Constant login requests. At one point it let me choose a video, choose the download option, and immediately logged me out after clicking the 720p option. The video didn't begin to download and I had to re-login after the next click one or two seconds after choosing the video. Inexcusable. - Worse still were the login requests that led to an "Oops! It's broken! Try again later" page that was there after refreshing the page without needing to log in again. - Poor navigation. Want to see all the models in alphabetical order? Go to the "Models" pulldown, and look for the... wait, there's not an option. Only "Top Rated, Most Viewed, etc." So you click on "Top Rated" and see that there's another pulldown on the following page that has "All" under the "Sort By" option. And a few days later, after one of your dozens of login requests, you realize the "Models" pulldown button itself is a link to all the models. - Dead links I suspect these are related to their attempts at site security and their constant login requests. Lots of 404 "Page Not Found" errors even when you're logged in and not prompted to log in again. Click on a video and the 404 error comes up. Hit page refresh/f5 a moment later and the page is fine. Very irritating. - Encoding The 480p videos really seem to be the sweet spot for size and quality. I was surprised that the 1080p clips don't look that much better than the 720p ones in most cases. I suspect it has to do with the lighting and whatever filters they use to soften and romanticize the clips. - Download managers work if you consider "work" to just mean "they can be used to download a few clips simultaneously just like if you didn't use one." The system logs you out so frequently that any clips that take more than a few minutes to begin will fault out and download a "default.htm" result. The site *will* allow you to resume a clip that's only halfway downloaded, though, so that's a plus, but I wouldn't say download managers really, truly work with this site. Not in the sense that you can load up the night before and wake up the next morning with a dozen completions. -Bottom line- A pretty good if occasionally irritating glamcore site. Lots of nice looking "couples" filmed in soft lighting with good backgrounds. Lots of solo and lesbian scenes (I'd guess over half of all scenes), and apparently very capable hair and makeup artists since I saw some actresses I don't often find attractive that looked quite nice in their scenes. I'd join again. *** To get to Epoch as the biller, (thanks and credit goes to malikstarks for the tip re: Bangbros user comments): If Epoch isn't the primary biller, enter everything correctly except for your credit card's expiration date on the initial purchase page. Make it a year in the future, and the system will reject it. Do it two or so more times and they'll send you to the Epoch site.*** 03-14-16  09:27am Replies (0) Review 28 Fake Hub (0) 80.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: - Multiple download options. Most videos offer small but decent quality .flv, 720p .wmvs, and a medium quality .flv that splits the difference. Some offer more in-between options. - 720p videos for most if not all of the shoots - Streaming doesn't count against the 20gb/day download limits. - A few pros, but mostly girl (and some boy) next door types. - Very attractive models (majority European) and a few fairly plain ones. - Decent acting, although it probably helps that I don't speak the language. - Frequent internal cumshots Cons: - Downloads limited to 20gb per day (again, streaming apparently doesn't count against it) - No indicator showing what you've used or when the limit clock resets. Midnight? Noon? The hour and minute you joined? Who knows. - The 720p videos don't really look all that great. They're okay, but very few of them seem worth the massive size, and there are often artifacts. Considering the size and download restrictions, they don't make too much sense to download unless it's a model you really like. - Subtitles take up room on the screen - Ads after you get inside. - Banner at the bottom of some of the standard definition .flv clips that are available for download saying something along the lines of "this is a low quality clip from fakehub.com, to get the HD version..." Bottom Line: First thing - I subtract 5 points immediately if there are ads after the login page, and there are three in a row similar in dimensions to the clickable videos. They're at the bottom and not easy to click on, but I still paid to get in and I don't need or want advertisements, especially when there is already a "promos" link at the top that takes you to a page of ads. I'm fairly okay with that one since it's not obtrusive and they are offering discounts, but I greatly dislike constant advertising within a paysite, even if you have to scroll down to see it. - Overall the fakehub network is pretty good. I'm not a huge fan of the "fake" premise, but it has quite a few videos starring Zuzana Z and Szilvia Lauren, and I am a huge fan of both of them. So I joined. There are three "fake" scenarios. A doctors office, a taxi, and modeling interviews. - The doctors office is the weakest, mostly because of the attempt at replicating a hidden camera. If that's your thing, that's fine, but the problem is that it is mixed with decent non-hidden camera clips, but not when you may want them. You'll get a hidden camera scene of oral sex and you can't really see too much, but a standard video clip of intercourse clearly showing the small of her back. And then it's back to hidden cameras for the finale. Puzzling, but, again, not my thing, and it may be exactly what others like. No real point in choosing the downloadable HD videos for this scenario that I could tell. These are mostly male doctor and female patient, and occasionally female nurse and female patient. I don't think I saw any male patient female nurse scenes, although I didn't look too hard. My suggestion? Offer both hidden and non-hidden videos for the same scene. You've obviously got them, and making them available doubles (triples) your video content for the site. - The next scenario is the taxi. A driver picks up a passenger, something happens to require the rider to show her breasts/give oral sex/have sex/etc. to "pay" for the ride. It's okay, although the occasional enormous "FAKETAXI.com" sticker in the rear glass of the vehicle pretty much dispels any illusion. Again, the HD scenes are dark and grainy and not really worth downloading unless you like the specific model. Not too bad overall, though. - The fake modeling agency is the best of the bunch. A male or female "scout" interviews models, gets them naked, takes some photos, and explains that more detailed photos and videos are required to see how the prospective model will perform for the clients. The male scout interacts with females, while the female scout (Zuzanna, Szilvia, Barra, and Jane, a gorgeous brunette MILF) then interacts with both men and women, and occasionally a male scout will join the FF scenes as well. I'd imagine it's because of the controlled environment and decent lighting, but these offer the network's better HD scenes. * edit* forgot that there's a public version as well. Things happen in public-ish area after an "agent" approaches potential talent, often filmed at night or in darker locations. - What would I recommend to make it better? - A limit counter or at least some indication of when the clock resets. - Get rid of the banners on the standard definition .flv files. - Photo options. - Consider offering surprise bi-mmf scenarios with the female agent interviews as well. The setup would be essentially the same as the MFF scenes that are already being done, and it's an underserved niche and could easily be incorporated and draw more customers. Implement a similar scheme as tainster's "fully clothed" offerings so that you offer exactly the same scene with two different outcomes/sites and people who were/weren't interested could choose accordingly. - Would I recommend it? Probably. It has some things I dislike and a few disappointments, but it's worth a look if you can find a deal. 04-22-15  08:24am Replies (1) Review 29 Euro Angels (0) 79.0 Status: Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review. Pros: $5 promos come in your email spam folder. Interesting variety. European women, panty cumshots, anal, shemales, etc. Reliable, easy to navigate, and no captcha. Just a simple login button. I didn't encounter any download limits. Multiple streaming and download options. Good download speeds. Saturated my DSL connection every time. Cons: Wow at the focus on anal sex/play and degrading blowjobs (Could be a pro for some) Weird encoding. One video at 540p may be 400mb while 720p is 1.5gb and 1080p is nearly 3gb, and another video may be 400mb/700mb/1.2gb for the same choices. Lots of shared videos between separate sites. Bottom Line: Decent quality/speeds/selection/etc, especially if you get in on one of their $5 email promos, but: The network portrays itself as MUCH larger than it is, and that's why I couldn't give it an 80. There are 20+ other sites included, but many of the videos are shared between three or more sites. Newer videos offer 720p and 1080p download choices, but, for collectors just wanting to maximize quantity and value, the sweet spot looks to be the 540p (web HD) choice. The quality is good while being half the size of the 720p and much smaller than the 1080p. Download managers work but the network will log you out every few hours and you'll end up with a text or html file in place of the videos. Be sure to save your download list to resume. Euro Angels itself isn't too bad, but I can't stress enough just how much of the network's focus is on anal, ATM, and sloppy blowjobs. The lack of balance was a negative for me, but it could be a positive for some. It's worth $5 if you're considering it, even if it's just to grab a few of your favorite actresses. 03-20-15  07:07am Replies (0) Review 30 Dark X (0) 78.0 Status: Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review. Pros: - Multiple download options - No download limits - Attractive female models - Above-average production values Cons: - Small site - Doesn't seem different enough to warrant a separate site - No epoch or CCBill option that I could find Bottom Line: This is a fairly short review because it's a small site that probably should just be a part of a _____x.com network. I have no problem paying for smaller sites, btw. This one just seems way too close in style and substance to other _____x.com sites to merit a standalone / additional cost site. If you are looking for well-shot, attractive people having fairly vanilla sex but with anal instead of vaginal intercourse, these are probably decent sites to consider. Bottom line: Look at the hardx review to get a feel for the good and bad for darkx, too. This seemed pretty much identical except for having black male leads and fewer clips. 10-31-16  06:55pm Replies (0) Review 31 21Sextury.com (0) 77.0 Status: Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review. Pros: - No download limits (data-wise) that I encounterd - Multiple video sizes - .zip photo sets for shoots Cons: - Actress thumbnails with no content available - Videos have no names, only numbers. - No limits, but download links in DTA die when the site logs you out every day - Newer photo sets are huge to enormous Bottom Line: Not a bad site, but pretty disappointing when you spend any time there. You'll get a folder full of 32234_01_HD type videos, and no idea who is in them or what they're about. Actresses are listed and thumbnailed even when there is *NO* content available. Example: Eveline Dellai shows three scenes, but every scene has a lock icon on it. If you want them you'll need to join these other TWO sites. Betty Style has four pages of videos, and there are up to nine videos on each page. Here's the problem: On page one there are two videos actually available. One on p2. One on p3. One on p4. So five videos available out of thirty shown, with the rest all having lock icons on them and you don't have access to them unless you pay to join the other two sites. I understand wanting to show users that there is more content available and that you'd happily sell them another subscription, but it would be better to have a "MORE CONTENT AVAILABLE AT OUR OTHER SITES!!!" link below her image. If an actress has zero scenes available on your site, which happens to be the same site that I paid money for and have access to, don't show her photo and don't have a clickable link pretending you do. Don't do it dozens (hundreds, maybe thousands, when you count actresses that may have a scene or two but the rest locked) of times, especially. Strange choices regarding what's on the site, too. You get ladies wrestling in an actual ring with your membership (saw a lot of those offered), but a middle aged MILF having sex has a lock on it. It automatically logged me out every evening around 8pm, and queued downloads in DTA would fail. This isn't exclusive to this site, but it was much more noticeable since it seems to be on a schedule. Is it like a restaurant where other users can't have a seat at the server until I leave, or is it just a good way to try to make people stay one more month? FWIW, it does the opposite for me, and I doubt I'm alone. More than likely I'll get the actresses I like and remember "Oh yeah, their site logged me off and killed my downloads every evening" when I'm tempted to re-join. A lot of the non-euro content looked very familiar and like scenes you'd find at Videobox. I'd be shocked if it's exclusive. On the bright side, they don't have pages and pages of thumbnails with lock icons on them that let you know you can buy scenes at Videobox. There are often photo sets available for viewing and downloading, but the .zip files are as big as a video clip. 250MB or the non HD, and 1GB for the HD wasn't unusual. Someone with a fiberoptic connection will have to chime in on quality comparisons, but non-HD photo zips should be under 100MB. I think even at MetArt the big files were only occasionally 500MB or so, and that's a photo site. Overall it's not a bad, and it has a lot of content, but it's tainted with bad decisions. Would I recommend? Maybe. It's a decent resource for some good euro actresses. Would I join again? Definitely not at full price. PU's $20? Doubtful. $5 for a month? Maybe. 09-06-16  05:45am Replies (2) Review 32 Aunt Judy's (0) 77.0 Status: Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review. Pros: Preface: Different strokes for different folks. - I cannot recommend this site enough if you're into old, out of shape, marginally attractive, downright unattractive, and/or outright fat and ugly women, many with varying degrees of three-day stubble hairy armpits, never-shaven hairy armpits that they try to lick, hairy crotches, hairy thighs, and hairy calves. - Some good looking women here and there. - Download managers allowed, but see cons. - Some sets have high quality photos (50-100mb+/set) for optimal viewing of all those hairy legs, thighs, and armpits. - Often .zip files are available for images. - Some of the models have dozens of sets available. - Some of the less attractive models are made slightly more appealing by wearing age appropriate clothing/lingerie and seeming to enjoy what they're doing. Cons: - Only 10-20% of models are, ahem, "traditionally" attractive. Think Victoria Tyler, Mimi Moore, Kayla Synz, Daryl Hannah, Heidi Hanson (still with hairy armpits, though), Betsy Blue, etc. The other 80% or so are Saturday afternoon at Wal-Mart. - A truly shocking number of old, out of shape, marginally attractive, downright unattractive women, and a great deal of outright fat and ugly women, many with varying degrees of three-day stubble hairy armpits, never-shaven hairy armpits that they try to lick, hairy crotches, hairy thighs, and hairy calves. - Download managers will yield a 400 error after X amount of time. I don't know what X is, but I suspect it's logging the member out or changing the long and elaborate download links since there were instances where the download failed while I wasn't required to log back in. - Quite a few models have no picture or video sets, and lots of videos have no preview image whatsoever. Cons continued below... Bottom Line: - Many (most?) sets have standard (7-10mb/zip) or medium resolution images. (10-50mb/set). Larger sets are sometimes available. - Sometimes you get the extra step or two of having to tell the website you want to create a zip file of the images that you can then download. - Depending on your interests there is more softcore posing than hardcore, but there is a bit of hardcore here and there. - Did I mention the main focus seems to be on hairy crotches, armpits, thighs, and legs. - .zip file names are shortened to be unrecognizable or identical. Heidi Hanson's sets might be "hei013XYZ_838320.zip" or dozens of "heidi_all.zip", which might be exactly the same thing Heidi Smith (made up) set's are named. - It wasn't unusual to go through a page of sixteen or so models before seeing one that looked like it might be worth clicking. - In case you missed it, lots and lots and lots of body hair. *END CONS* Bottom line? There's a substantial amount of hairy leg and hairy armpit fetish material on a site that is, according to TBP, simply a mature site. The armpit/leg hair fetish angle may be played down, but when the models are licking their own bushy armpits or a lesbian scene focuses (literally, the rest of the photo is out of focus) on one model licking the other model's hairy legs... well, it's hard to deny. You've got a hairy fetish site. Again, different strokes for different folks. I like a nicely kept bush, and don't mind it going beyond and behind what is typically kept these days (Jamie Lynn on the site is a good example). Thigh hair? No thanks. Calves? Put your pants back on, please. I'd never, and still haven't, considered the underarm genre, so I was a bit taken aback when it began to dawn on me that nearly every model has her arms up to expose her stubbly, hairy, or sometimes shaved (oh thank goodness) underarms within the first five or six images. This is a mature women body hair fetish site, and to a certain degree an armpit site. When it becomes a bit of a game to notice how many shots into the set the woman is raising her arms above her head to show the cameraman her underarms, you've probably got an armpit site. (It's comical to reach the point where you're surprised when a model *did* shave her armpits and legs.) Intentional armpit stubble is a new one for me, btw. /shudder/ Again, different strokes. There's nothing wrong with that, but go ahead and market yourself as the fetish site you are. Sure you won't get folks like me to sign up, but I won't be signing up again, anyway. You probably will get the people who ARE looking for that sort of thing to sign up more than once, especially once they initially know that's what your site is about. There are a few good models here and there, and a decent amount of content overall (and 10% or so are not only attractive but also really nicely shot with business attire, lingerie, etc.) but I doubt I'd come back now that I'm aware of the hair-everywhere aspect. tl;dr - I'm giving a slightly better than average score because I found some previously unknown sets of a few attractive models and the site isn't bad once you accept what you're logging in to, but please consider marketing yourself as a hairy old woman fetish site. 10-01-15  08:13am Replies (4) Review 33 ATK Premium (0) 76.0 Status: Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review. Pros: - Good search engine - Tremendous number of models and sets. - Downloadable .zip files for photos, download links for videos - Looks like the newer sets have three resolutions available for .zip downloads - Links to site's sets by specific studio/photographer - Great selection of women, body types, hairstyles, etc. - No retouching that I could see, although that could be a con in some cases. - No problems opening multiple tabs of a model's sets. Cons: - Underarm fetish is prominent - Ads inside, and not just to other ATK sites - Logs you out fairly often. - No distinguishing features for downloads. A dozen photo .zips of Charisma will each be named the same "Charisma_all.zip" - Art =/= "holding fruit and/or wearing a hat" Bottom Line: A pretty good site with most of its focus on photos but quite a few videos available as well, and some videos are available in HD (newer clips I'd imagine). There are lots of hidden gems, and you'll come across early sets from models like Lucie Theodovora and Addison O'Reilly in addition to hundreds of unknowns. Lots of girls, and lots of different bodies. It's a nice way to appreciate all the various shapes and wonderfulness. There are links to the photographers' sets, so if you like the way one set looks you can click on the photographer's name and see his others on the site. Less good: Lots of average girls, so you're just as likely to see below average as you are above. If videos are available they seem to be mostly masturbation. That's not all bad, of course, but know what to expect going in. I think I saw some of the same models' sets in Aunt Judy, but I'm not 100% positive. They may have just looked extremely familiar. This didn't happen often, but there were one or two models' sets that I'm pretty sure I'd seen elsewhere. Maybe the webmaster can verify this. Like Aunt Judy's, it's sort of comical to watch for the models lifting their arms within the first dozen or so frames. It becomes so obvious that you notice when the girl DOESN'T do it more than when she does. There are some fairly hairy women in there, too, so be aware of what you might stumble across if you join. Not my thing, but I do think it should be advertised more. Of course, it might already be a known quantity in the underarm community and it's a way of not pushing away other customers. Apparently you get a folder when they haven't made a .zip file for a set, and you can't create another zip file until you delete one of the .zip files you had to make because they didn't. "You have more than five zips in your folder. Please delete some of them to continue your custom zip selection." That seems like a weird way to do things. Frankly, not having a simple zip file to download without "creating" when the majority of the other sets on the site have one seems pretty weird, too. Models will be in multiple scenes but link associated with her name leads nowhere. (Amber in Paulina scenes for example). The majority of "artistic" photos are amusing. They look a lot like all the other sets, but the lighting is worse and there might be fruit, hats, or a barn in the frame. Because art. That's not really what the site seems to push itself as, so it's forgivable. Would I recommend? Sure, why not? It's a decent photo site with a lot of variety. 09-15-16  07:08am Replies (0) Review 34 21 Sextreme (0) 75.0 Status: Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review. Pros: - Good looking (mostly euro) actresses - Multiple sizes of videos available to download in newer clips - No download limits that I encountered - Good download speeds - Kink brought to you by the folks from 21 Sextury Cons: - Video count is huge, but padded somewhat by compilations - Surprisingly glitchy site - "Lock" icons over unavailable videos (see below) - No naming scheme for downloaded files - Not terribly "extreme" Bottom Line: A decent but fairly vanilla "extreme" site. Granted there is some fisting, some bondage, some urine here and there, a couple dozen clips of older, lower-quality shemales with men and women, and an old/young angle with MF and FF scenes (and apparently some puking that I thankfully never came across according to another reviewer), but overall it's pretty tame. The eyeball test indicated a great deal of the site is simple female masturbation and stuff you'd find at the sister site "21sextury" or even Team Skeet (literally- it looked like the same filming and directing style). That's not bad, but the site presents itself as extreme while just coming across as an excuse to use content that would otherwise be fine on another nearly identical site or simply on a larger combined network including both sites. The site agrees with me, unfortunately, because I discovered more than a few of the 21sextreme videos with 21sextury watermarks. It's another site without any naming system for the downloads. You can download clips, but you'll end up with a folder full of "88756_03_HD" type files. They work fine, and I'm sure it's convenient for the owners, but there is no useful information in that for the end user other than the first five-string number representing a particular movie that all the clips were pulled from (#03 in this case). That's a made up example just to make the point, btw. Video quality is good even with the non-HD clips, and file sizes are appropriate for the resolution. I ran into a glitch here and there. I would discover an unknown actress in a scene with a known actress, and clicking the unknown actress' name/link would take me to her page. Unfortunately, her page showed her thumbnail but not videos. When I would refresh or return to the page the scenes would appear. I suspect some sort of javascript / flash error. Some actresses' names/links would take you to pages other than #1 when clicking, too. Whee! Biggest complaint: Similar to the sister site "21sextury," the site shows all the videos available across the owner's sites, and not just the videos available to view/download on the site *you* paid for. There will be lock icons over the scenes you can't have, and those locked scenes will quickly begin to irritate you. For example, there are four pages of 50 or so scenes of Cherry Jul available, but only three unique non-compilations are available for download. The rest have little lock icons over them indicating that yes, they exist, but no, you can't download any of them without paying for a subscription at a separate site. Cameron Cruz is the similar, with four pages totalling 40+ videos, but only four or so are available for downloading with the subscription you bought. Bottom line- Would I join again? Possibly, but it would have to be at a greatly discounted rate OR after the three "network" sites are combined into the full network they clearly are meant to be. 12-19-16  06:37pm Replies (0) Review 35 ATK Archives (0) 75.0 Status: Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review. Pros: - Billing through ccbill - Lots of models - Lots of different bodies, hair styles, colors, etc. - Quite a few stars before they were big Cons: - Not entirely exclusive? - That ATK underarm thing. - No distinct names of downloads - Ads inside - Fairly frequent logouts Bottom Line: I thought it's a pretty good idea to have an "archive" site for content going back ten plus years. I'm not personally convinced it should be priced as high as it is considering the quality of the older stuff is often fairly low, but there is a large amount of overall content available. I'm not sure it's exclusive material. I don't doubt it's likely exclusive to the ATK brand, but some of the sets looked like I've seen them before on the other ATK sites. More of the ATK underarm fetish present. I've joined three of their sites now, and it's definitely not coincidence. It's not so bad to be offensive, but it's very noticeable if you're not into underarms. As long as we're here, there are some hairy underarms in there as well. Again, not enough to be a deal-breaker even for those of us who aren't into it, but know you're going to see some when you're browsing. Or, if you're into hairy (or not) underarms, go buy an annual subscription right now because this is an excellent resource. Numerous different studios taking the photos. I thought it was interesting to be able to pick out specific photographers/studios before even clicking the link to take you to the sets. It's neat how distinctive DDF (and others) methods and styles are, and also neat how you might not have noticed it until you see them lumped together with other studios'. There are videos here and there, but it's very much a photo site. The quality of the sets I looked at varied from okay to good, but it's an archive site so that is forgivable. Even in the videos I'd guess the majority of the content is interview and/or masturbation with a bit of lesbian or BG hardcore here and there. Don't go into it for the videos. Accept them as added benefits of the models' sets that you liked. It's fairly common to have 50+ images in a .zip file that is only 5-15MB in size. Don't expect zoomable MetArt shots. Again, everything is tempered by the fact that these are archives and you joined an archive site, so it's forgivable. The files will often share a name, so if you download a hundred sets featuring "Jennifer," and there are a dozen models named Jennifer, you'll have no idea which Jennifer is which or what is happening in any of them until you go through each individually. Bottom line: Not a bad site, and a lot of pleasant surprises finding models I'd forgotten about or didn't know about at all. Would I recommend? Sure, but. The "but" being if I found out all the sets were shared with another larger ATK site. It would be silly to not just join that site, wouldn't it? 10-16-16  11:16am Replies (3) Review 36 Tug Pass (0) 73.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: - Decent sized site/network with lots of clips, but not very large data-wise since the videos aren't huge - Improved video quality since last review - Allows download managers - Good download speeds - Pictures sometimes available along with videos, although sometimes just for viewing and not always as .zip Cons: - Ads behind the paywall. - All videos are named the same thing ("high") - Some links to photo sets that go nowhere other than a "back to video" page. - No video quality choices. - Directing/editing isn't well thought out at times - Older videos are still really low quality - $30 seems a bit overpriced. Bottom Line: I was a member years ago and was unimpressed, but I thought I would give Clubtug another shot since I saw some bigger names listed as models. The network/site has definitely gotten better. It still comes across as amateurish in a lot of ways (yes lots of amateur models, but also an amateur site), but it's improving. My feeling was that it's mostly a handjob network with a bit of intercourse (Tease POV IIRC), but don't expect much beyond masturbation and a bit of oral here and there. There was a large popup ad for other sites after you login that you have to click "no thanks, continue to the site" (or similar) to get to the site you paid for, and ads throughout the site. Each site on the network required an individual login as well, but the sites don't seem to log you out frequently, so I'm okay with the individual login requests. One of the big problems with the site in the past was tube-quality videos (or worse). This has improved, and according to VLC the newer clips are 720. There are no video quality choices, however, and the old tube-quality clips are designated as "high" exactly like the new 720 clips, so there's no way to know which you're getting until you view it. The videos are fairly watchable now, although there are some bad choices like stationary filming, poor visibility from bad angles, or attempting to use a macro ring to light up-close scenes similar to Amateur Allure. I don't care much for it there, and it's even less successful here. The lighting washes out the models' skin and they lose most detail in their face/body, and the cumshot washes out the same way on the stark white, flat face. I appreciate trying something new, but it's a shame the actresses like India Summer and Alexis Fawx weren't just filmed with a good lens on a mid-level Canon SLR with decent natural lighting. Other problems are things like models giving a handjob while fully clothed and then abruptly wearing bra and panties before abruptly being naked. I don't think a storyline is necessary, but 30 extra seconds of transitioning through the models undressing would help the scenes overall. That said, there are some good choices like POV scenes with a naked model sitting between a (laying on his back) man's legs with HER legs open as she masturbates him. Those scenes are fairly inspired and were nice to see. I think $20 is probably a more appropriate non-promo day-to-day price, but the site's owners have brought in some bigger names like Veronica Avluv, Dava Foxx, and India Summer, so the $30 isn't unreasonable in light of attracting and paying talent. I personally would recommend the owners get more of Christina Sky(e?) and the actress named Harley. Both seemed fairly interested in what they were doing, and that goes a long way in making the scenes believable/enjoyable. Not to mention you can probably get five or more scenes for what India or Avluv charges for one. FWIW, there are still some less attractive models and the videos from my first review are still there, but the quality of models has improved over the last couple of years. Bottom line: I reviewed the network under Clubtug last time and they only earned a 62, but the details have improved enough that I'm adding ten+1 points for them putting in the effort and making it a decent site. It's not an especially innovative or outstanding site, but if there are more than a few actresses there doing things you enjoy watching, it's probably worth checking out at least once, especially if you can get a discounted rate. 08-27-16  05:21pm Replies (0) Review 37 Pornstar Platinum Network (0) 72.0 Status: Was a member approx. 3 months prior to this review. Pros: - Lots of content - Specific stars have loads of content, which is a plus if you're a fan of those particular actresses - Allows download managers Cons: - Ads inside paywall - Unpredictable video quality and sizes - Download links missing for some sets - Good PU discount but watch for additional charges at signup. Bottom Line: Pornstar Platinum includes some decent names as a part of the network and quite a bit of content overall. It is one of the most “porn star” of porn sites that I've seen. The recent stuff is a lot of Alura Jenson, Joslyn James, Savana Styles, Ariella Ferrara, etc. Big fake tits and lots of tattoos in general. Not that there’s anything necessarily wrong with that and lots of people probably even like that style, but know what you’re getting going in. For an idea of the actresses involved as well as an idea of varying video quality, visit the preview page, click the “pornstars” link, and scroll down to “full list of pornstars.” There’s a bunch of them, but the “pornstar platinum models” ones at the top that you scrolled through to get to the full list are probably the most represented on the site. A lot of the “pornstar platinum model” actresses will be in solo clips, but they have a lot of overall content available on the site. It’s also worth noting that many of the actresses in the full list only have photo sets available. That’s fine, but again, be aware of what you’re getting. The downloads are named so that you can actually tell what you downloaded and who the actresses involved are. Thank you, pornstar platinum, for not filling up our hard drives with files named 4345_329_HD1080. It’s nice to be able to put a name in the search bar of the file explorer and find the actress you’re interested in seeing in your downloaded files. Photo zips are often HUGE. Unreasonably so for a non-art, non-Metart style site with what usually amounts to a guy with a camera taking pictures of something while using the lighting set up for the video that was being filmed. There were .mp4s and .wmvs available, but the wmv files I downloaded didn’t look that great. More specifically, they looked pretty bad. Many were enormous files (some nearly 1GB) and still blocky and tube-site-using-dial-up looking. For that matter, the videos are huge in general. The mp4s will routinely be 1GB+ and the wmvs (which look pretty bad overall and I recommend avoiding them) are often 500MB-1GB. The scenes will be split into lower-quality five-minute style clips, and that’s a nice option for someone who may want an actress in a particular moment for 50MB instead of the entire 1GB file. There are photo sets that don’t have download links for the set. Not a dealbreaker but it can be disappointing if you find a favorite actress. Bottom line: Not a bad site overall, and a pretty good site with the PU discount, especially if you have any interest in collecting every single thing bit of content available for one of the actresses included in the network. 01-09-19  02:31am Replies (0) Review 38 Karup's Older Women (0) 71.0 Status: Was a member approx. 5 months prior to this review. Pros: - Lots of attractive older women, just like the name implies - A very old site, with content dating back more than a decade - Photos and videos often available - The site administrator is active on PU - Other sites available on network with subscription Cons: - Extremely strict download limits - A very old site that, if you look at realistically, mostly has old content - Videos older than a couple of years look pretty bad - Most videos are fairly uninspired - Probably exclusive, but you might wonder "Is this ATK? Have I seen these shoots on ATK?" at some point. Same photographer(s) apparently. Bottom Line: I'm reviewing each Karups site since they're apparently still treated as individual sites even though they've all recently become part of a network. That's a good thing, since "buy one, get two free" is a pretty uncommon occurrence, but also because many of the models were apparently listed on more than one Karups site. If you wanted all of (arbitrary name) "Cathy 2" photos and videos, you would've needed to join at least two sites. Now you can get all of "Cathy 2"s stuff with the same network membership, which is a good thing. Karups Older Women is, shockingly, an adult site focusing on older women. There are some really attractive ladies, too, along with mediocre and a few unattractive ones. But different strokes for different folks, and there is something for almost everyone here so long as they like more mature and fairly homogeneous (racially) women. There is content going back to 2006. As you would suspect, most of the older photography content looks fairly dated, but that's fine. It's available, and that's the most important part. There is often video content, too, but it can be mostly summed up as "don't bother." Most is uninspired and not filmed at a high professional level. The older stuff looks worse than tube videos, but that can be forgiven since it's old stuff. The biggest "con" is the strict download limits. Not gigabytes, mind you, but time. As was posted by the webmaster on the karups.com "user comments" section, quote: "Standard, you are correct that there are absolutely NO download limits and the links do indeed expire. They expire 10 minutes after a page is opened/accessed, which is a reasonable solution to protect our content from non-members getting access to it. ... We understand that members want to access our content as easily and with as minimal restrictions as possible. We do our best to accommodate that desire while still offering our sites some protection against the infinite amount of surfers/members that share links, share passwords, etc... etc..." What that means is you can download all you want, but you have to do it in ten minute windows. Try to start the download eleven minutes after visiting the page and the download link will not be active any longer. The other big "con" is that total connections seem to be very limited. Want to download a couple of things in a ten minute window and continue to browse the site while you're doing it? Tough. I had two videos downloading simultaneously, using four segments each, and the site slowed to a crawl. Clicking on a model's scene took me to the page, but the thumbnail images wouldn't load. Reducing the segments to 3 per download didn't help. The thumbnails still showed the blank squares where they should be, but no images were inside. The "loading" indicator for the page was still spinning, though, so it's definitely trying. After a couple of minutes I reduced the segments to two per download and waited. Nothing. I finally reduced it to one segment per download and, after nothing happened on the original page that still shows "loading" per the indicator, I opened a new shoot from the same model. And the same thing happened with only one segment being used for each of the two downloads. The link opened the page, but the thumbnails never loaded. The connection was fine and the two downloads were saturating my ISP's download speeds, but nothing would happen on Karup's side while the two downloads were running. You could open a new model's page and it would pull up her available shoots, but trying to open any of THOSE shoots yielded the same result. Empty boxes of thumbnails while the "loading" indicator spun indefinitely. Then, interestingly, the first of the two 300MB+ downloads began slowing to a crawl, eventually trickling down to zero and failing. On the bright side, guess what finally loaded after the site dumped one of my two one-segment connections so that I couldn't finish the first download? Yep. The thumbnails finally loaded. So I queue up their zip files and start them downloading. And then, not too long after that, the second video download failed. Bottom line: Would I recommend? If you want the content, yes, very much. As I said before and will keep saying, paying the subscription fee, constantly babysitting for ten minute intervals, and repeatedly dealing with the irritation and frustration of the site is the only way to legally acquire the pictures and videos, right? 05-22-18  08:04am Replies (1) Review 39 Jim Slip (0) 71.0 Status: Was a member approx. 3 months prior to this review. Pros: - Underserved niche - Decent personalities - Simple but decent production values with the newest videos - Laura, Jim's wife, films and joins in at times - Emphasis on different outfits. - .zip files of photos. Cons: - Older videos are poor quality and not worth the time or trouble to investigate. - Videos are all named the same thing, so you'll end up with a pile of dozens of "540p_fullcomplete" (an example, I don't recall the exact naming scheme) with no idea who is in any of them. - Videos are split in half so that one full clip will be cut and used as two updates. - Broken links or an entire broken website on some pages. - Older clips are nearly unwatchable. Bottom Line: I agree with rearadmiral on a number of his points. Overall it's not a bad site, especially if you enjoy older men with younger women, although that's not exclusively the setup for all the scenes. Unfortunately there's quite a bit to not like about the site, too. For me only a few standout scenes and actresses made up for the technical issues to take it out of the 60s when I scored it. Laura often does the filming and is very involved (hands, sometimes more), and her site is set up similarly with her bringing home men and women. Mix of pro and unknown actresses, although some of the actresses seem to simply be prostitutes (that was the premise at one time IIRC, but that was long before I joined). Many scenes are simply okay, but there are a few that are outstanding. Ava Delush's clips as well as a more recent shoulder-length blonde's scenes come to mind. There were wardrobe changes, often with the same girl trying out a couple of outfits, with prostitutes, airline stewardesses, and ballerinas in the mix. It's not a huge site, but there's a decent amount of material. Video quality is good for the newer half (approximately) of clips, but there are no scene distinctions or actresses in the file names of the downloaded clips, so you'll be frustrated searching through the clips you downloaded to find that particular one you're looking for in order to rename it. Streaming and download options (540, 720, and 1080p) as well as zipped photo files (one size). Bottom line- It's not horrible and probably worth joining at least once if you have any interest in the niche or models. Would I join again? Probably, but a year or two would have to pass for the updates to pile up before I did. 04-20-16  09:49am Replies (0) Review 40 Karup's PC (0) 70.0 Status: Was a member approx. 5 months prior to this review. Pros: - No ads behind paywall automatically adds five points to total score - Loads of photos and video available - Usually two or more sizes available for photos and videos - Newer video content in HD - Material is probably exclusive - Recently began offering three Karups sites for one membership price - Webmaster is active on PU Cons: - Worst download limits I've ever encountered - Strange photo zip sizes - Majority of videos are uninspired Bottom Line: The good? Lots of content, with sets going back over a decade. Tons of different models. They offer videos, and are filming newer stuff in HD. They've also made changes so that you now get access to three Karups sites with your $30 subscription purchase. I think the material is probably exclusive, but Karups' content looks the same as ATK's. I'm guessing they use the same studio and photographer, but the same model's photos on each site tend to look exactly alike except for the poses. Refreshingly, there are no ads once inside. The bad? There is no download VOLUME limit, but there are strict download TIME limits. Per the webmaster in the Karups comment section, the links time out after 10 minutes. https://www.pornusers.com/replies_view.html?id=104665 Quote: "Standard, you are correct that there are absolutely NO download limits and the links do indeed expire. They expire 10 minutes after a page is opened/accessed, which is a reasonable solution to protect our content from non-members getting access to it. ... We understand that members want to access our content as easily and with as minimal restrictions as possible. We do our best to accommodate that desire while still offering our sites some protection against the infinite amount of surfers/members that share links, share passwords, etc... etc..." And that's very much how it works. If you want all of an actress' 15 sets and you open the 15 separate pages and click the 15 separate download links, all of the 15 downloads need to start in the ten minutes that the pages were opened. It was also my experience that the downloads were much more likely to finish and not be abruptly disconnected midway the closer they are to the beginning of that ten minute window. Needless to say, expect a lot of lot of 403 errors where the links are no longer alive. By a lot I mean constant. "Oh," you think, "I've got a 100Mbps connection, so that's not a big deal." But ten minutes is about the time it takes to download one (1) 7GB 4K movie, isn't it? More relevant is to consider how many hours you're at work, asleep, and doing other things. Take the two or three hours that are left. Unless you want to babysit and check in every ten minutes to make sure your downloads are still downloading, you're not going to be downloading much content from this site after you've paid your subscription fee, and it's by design. That's the biggie. Little stuff? Some of the solo videos are okay, but most of the boy/girl and lesbian material is boring, poorly shot, and/or boring and poorly shot. Worse is that many of the fairly recent video clips have substantial interlacing / combing artifacts with movement, and it sometimes occurs even with stationary subjects during slow movement of the camera. (You've probably all seen the artifacts in videos, but here's an exaggerated example of interlacing problems in an unrelated screenshot: https://imgur.com/a/99cxhw8 ) There will also be weird photo zip sizes where the 1024 option is (arbitrary) 60mb and the 1500 option is 67mb. Or the worse resolution offered in a larger size download. Many of the newer photo downloads will be offered in large and extra large, so you may have the option of a 150mb+ set or a 300mb+ set. That's nice except for the strict download timeouts. Occasionally you'll find missing download links for photo sets. Not frequently, but often enough to notice. The older videos are occasionally watchable, but that's forgivable since the site has content going back a decade or more. The newest videos are offered in everything from amazingly oversized 360p clips (500mb+) to 1GB 480p, to nearly 2GB 720p, 3GB 1080p, and 7GB 4K offerings. Needless to say, you're not downloading more than a couple of those at a time. On the bright side, it won't bother you too much because most of the videos are only occasionally interesting unless you like the specific actress and just have to have it for a collection. Would I recommend? Very much. After all, paying the subscription fee, constantly babysitting, and repeatedly dealing with the irritation and frustration of the strict ten minute download time limit is the only way to legally acquire the content. 05-01-18  08:02am Replies (0) Review 41 Lane Sisters (0) 70.0 Status: Was a member approx. 3 months prior to this review. Pros: - Majority of clips are available in HD - Photos available for some sets - Download managers work - Twins. Interesting fetish material, but nothing THAT kinky, you perv. Cons: - No longer updating - Comical "we could not find this photoset" errors when you go to view some photos. - Like most openlife offerings, they pad their site with BTS/Interview filler clips. Bottom Line: The good: There are over 100 video clips. There are lots of behind the scenes/interview videos, but there are also a lot of boy girl and girl girl clips, as well as masturbation. The Lane sisters are attractive young ladies, although you'll need an interest in attractive young tattooed ladies to spend too much time with them these days. BUT, I suppose one advantage (?) to no longer updating your site is that all of the photos and videos apparently took place before whichever sister got the sleeve of tattoos done. This is apparently one of the rare Open Life Network sites that offers most, if not all, of the content in high definition. I didn't click every video, but I grabbed samples sorted by date through the entire site and it appears that the majority are offered in HD. There are some irritations. It *IS* an openlife site, after all, and what did you expect? The most obvious is having behind the scenes clips for the shoots that aren't offered on the site. And it's extremely obvious when it's the most recent video. Yep. The very first video when arranged by date is an outtake from a clip you can't view. Pause to think about that for a moment. The most recent video is a behind the scenes clip from a video that isn't offered anywhere on the site. And the site is no longer updating, so it's probably been sitting there as the most recent clip for two or three years. The site is often broken. When clicking on a random photo set to check the quality and zip availability, I was led to a page that said the photoset couldn't be found. Good luck if that's the material you're interested in. There aren't really that many videos. If you're on a fast connection I'd be surprised if it took you more than a couple of days to grab everything you wanted, even in HD. Bottom line: If you're a HUGE Lane Sisters fan, and if you can get past the broken website, and if you can not be bothered by a complete lack of updates, and if you can keep your expectations in check, and if you find it for $5 or so for a month, it might be worth joining. 12-12-17  08:50am Replies (0) Review 42 21 Naturals (0) 70.0 Status: Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review. Pros: - Very attractive models, mostly European - Great video sizes/quality - Site uses names in the videos now. A+, Gamma. - Images available (zips) - Images available in both lower and high resolution, with appropriate sizes for both (30MB or 300MB). A+ Cons: - Locked videos. - A pretty small site. All those videos you can't watch don't count towards site size, guys. D-. - You'll get automatically logged out fairly routinely. - Way, WAY too much cross-selling baked into the cake. - I encountered some major variations in download speeds - Too many "best of" compilations that seem to just be padding. - Watch for auto checked additional subscription purchases at the payment page. SITE OWNERS- Is it worth that small percentage of affiliate or referral cash to never, ever have a paying customer return to your site after getting burned? Bottom Line: This is another offering from the 21sextury folks. Overall it's not a bad site. It's a bit small, but the quality is good and the models are beautiful. The major problem, as is the big problem with the other 21___ sites, is the preponderance of locked videos that you can't view without joining other sites. On one of Kattie Gold's video's there are 15 advertisements for other sites. They're not discrete, either. The default "Recommended Videos" tab is automatically chosen and shows you the ads, and the "Kattie Gold" tab, you know, the actress you're interested in and are currently viewing, needs to be clicked to see more. Click it and you'll see the other major problem of this site: There are seven videos of the actress listed on the site, but one of them is for the page you're currently viewing, and four of the clips have lock icons on them. So in reality there are only two other videos available, but seven are shown. A more obvious example is someone more popular and who has done more work. Click on Aletta Ocean's thumbnail to view her scenes, and there are 25 pages of the actress. Wow. Twenty five pages. Begin clicking at page one and you'll quickly realize most seem to be "best of" compilations that involve short clips of her along with other actresses in unrelated scenes, or that the scenes are locked and unavailable. I started at page five and clicked through page 14, and there was one clip available for downloading. Ten pages of thumbnails of the actress, and only one clip available for downloading. Worse? It wasn't even really one of her scenes, but one of the "best of" clips. I encountered some substantial speed fluctuations at times. I tested other sites and my connection and speeds were fine, so I'm not sure if it's a problem or an intentional measure similar to auto logouts. Not a dealbreaker, but something to be noted. I don't really understand the automatic logouts. It seems to happen at least once a day. It seems like it would be more secure to allow the user to control the logout, because if a username and password combination is in continual use, an attempt at hacking and logging in using stolen usernames and passwords would be automatically rejected. I'm sure it's something related to bandwidth or the like, but I've also been logged out at the same time I was downloading a file on the same computer. It seems odd that a user actively and continually using the legitimate account wouldn't have to worry about such things. I don't want it to appear that the bad outweighs the good, but the site has so much potential that the bad is extremely obvious. Overall I like the site and would recommend it IF only the available videos were shown and it required a simple click if the user interested in looking at other sites where you could spend additional money to see more work by the same actress. Having to scroll through and click past on the actual site I've paid money to join is very irritating, though, especially when one discovers that the listed, clickable actress only has locked scenes. Would I recommend? Probably not as is unless you're looking for every piece of work from one actress. It's a bit small and irritating for the price. As a part of a combined network with all the ubiquitous locked-icon 21sextury and 21sextreme clips available? Yes. 07-11-17  04:18am Replies (0) Review 43 Futanaria (0) 70.0 Status: Was a member approx. 3 months prior to this review. Pros: - Real life weird Japanamation fetish come to life! - Meets a particular genre - Some fairly popular models at times - Less erotic but more realistic than straponcum.com - Pictures and videos. - Download managers work, no download limits. - HD and SD .wmv and .mp4. HD looks pretty decent and is reasonably sized. - Good download speeds saturated my DSL Cons: - Deceptive bait and switch of available videos. Caveat emptor. More below. - Slow updates. They release photos, then days or weeks later they'll release the corresponding video. - Overpriced at $30. The $15 rebill ( and with such infrequent updates I have no idea why ANYONE would do that) is much more realistic and would have more people re-joining. - Pretty darn specialized fetish and definitely not for everyone. But hey, that can be said for any fetish. Different strokes, etc. - Camera angles don't seem to be much of a consideration. - Nothing fancy regarding the site itself. If you like flashy you're in the wrong spot. - Some models aren't very attractive, and the style of filming/clothing doesn't help. - No zip files for photos. Bottom Line: I liked the site BUT - Quite a few of the videos are pretty ridiculous (exercise ball sized breasts and/or a prosthetic penis the size of two fire extinguishers laid end to end and/or two or three dicks sprouting from the same girl). But hey, the premise is pretty ridiculous to begin with and I'm sure someone likes it, so this fulfills that demand. - Some well known models including India Summer, Alex Chance, Abby Cross, Alexis Monroe, Alison Pierce and others working under silly names like "Zoey Zipperripper" are on the site. A real-name reference (I think it's run by the same folks) can be found at http://futanaria.ws/category/real-names/ - Don't expect much in the way of cinematography. Most scenes are filmed from one or two stationary tripods. - The worst part is how they present their available content. Go ahead, click on the link taking you to the site. Now go to "see all scenes" at the bottom right of the page after clicking through the content warning page. It looks like there are five pages of ~75 videos available for download when you're initially clicking through the site and considering joining, doesn't it? After all, you're "seeing all scenes," right? Now scroll all the way down to the bottom and be sure to catch that little "Note: Older videos are rotated offline and can be purchased at Radrotica.com" text. Now go to radrotica in a new tab (keep futanaria.com open) and see what their latest futanaria video available for purchase is. Remember the name and go back to page 1 of futanaria.com's "see all scenes." You're probably still at the bottom of the page, so scroll up. Up. Up some more. Up. Keep going. Are you around halfway yet? Okay, start looking for the name of the scene that is available for purchase at radrotica. Everything past that isn't available for download unless you pay them $3-$5 per clip at a different website. Now go ahead and count up what IS available for download out of those five enormous pages of clips. It's less than 40, isn't it? 40 clips out of the 300+ shown are available for you to download with your paid subscription. Again, it's not a bad site and definitely fills a niche, but it's extremely deceptive and pretty overpriced for what you're allowed to see of their library. I gave it a 70 because it's such an exclusive niche and the videos aren't horrible, but everything good about the site only brings it up to a 70 since the deceptive available library nonsense easily knocks 40 or 50 points off. 02-17-16  11:00am Replies (0) Review 44 Tainster (0) 69.0 Status: Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review. Pros: - Very reasonable PU discount - Beautiful models in nice clothes - Some videos offer HD - Some videos offer pic .zips - Search function works okay sometimes Cons: - Search function often can't seem to find actresses - Oh well, because a LOT of actresses aren't named anyway - Ads, ads, and more ads. - Site isn't very responsive. I suspect it has a lot to do with all the ads and the 10 chat boxes that load on the side of every page. - Ridiculous outfit choices at times. Is a woman really going to continue to wear a fancy hat or constantly fuss with a long, slinky, bothersome purse on one arm during a half hour threesome in her own home? (Very minor con in light of all the rest, though) - Videos are all named the same thing, so you'll end up with a pile of "540p_fullcomplete" files with no idea who or what is in any of them. - Navigation is crap. It would often send me to the main updates page (for all sites) when trying to click to the next page of a specific site's content. - .zip files often have errors in the included/unzipped .jpgs. - Way, WAY too much focus on the wet-and-messy fetish. Bottom Line: A lot of the scenes on the network share content. Example: Fully Clothed Sex and Fully Clothed Pissing scenes are exactly 100% the same with the addition (subtraction, technically, since those frames are edited out in the FCS side) of urine. I'm not into that, and it's irritating to watch a scene with beautiful women glammed up in very attractive outfits and one lady's blouse is suddenly completely soaked for no reason. Well, no reason in THAT video, since it's not the urine site, but yeah, you know the actual reason and it ruins the scene. They often try to cover it up by pouring water or wasting champagne on the models, but once you realize the scenes are shared it doesn't matter. If her clothes are wet in the FCS scenes, it's urine. Shared scenes and overall video listings for models is not representative of actual content. Take Kate Gold as an example. She has 232 scenes listed (HELL YEAH!), but only about 30 aren't party-orgy scenes. There may be some good stuff in the party scenes, but it's more trouble than it's worth to slog through the photos to see if she's actually involved or only credited because she happened to pass in front of the camera. That means I, and I suspect others, are not going to bother with the party clips (I'm not wasting my time grabbing an 800mb file for 30 seconds of an actress no matter how much I enjoy watching her work- see Rady in the scene titled "720p_fullcomplete" (haha, get it?) for a great example). Of the 30 or so remaining scenes, around half are shared overall (see previous paragraph re:urine), so she only has a dozen or so unique and possibly desirable clips out of the 200+ listed. Siddi? 32 scenes listed, 2 unique non-party scenes. Sindy Vega? 17 scenes listed, 3 non-party scenes. Sweet Cat? 149 scenes listed, a dozen or so non-party scenes. Zoe Fox? 29 scenes, but only 1 non-party scene. It goes on and on like that. Ads and up-sells all over the place once you're inside. Checking the box that says "skip the portal the next time I log in" is apparently meaningless and does nothing to prevent the ads from appearing the next time you log on. When you cancel your subscription a banner appears at the top telling you that you've canceled your subscription and "Please Click here we got a special offer for you." Very irritating. It looks like their sister site "Sindrive" (very easy to find if you just remember to look for the advertisements on every page) is where they're putting the good stuff these days, along with the 4K videos. FWIW, if it were me I would've given the party-orgy clips their own $10 site and made Tainster a cheap $5 hey-let's-get-what-we-can vessel for all the other sites they advertise for. BUT Even after all of that, the worst part of the site is probably that all the newer content has started to be forcibly blended together into the WAM (wet and messy) niche. Parties? Everyone has something poured onto them. Lesbians using a wand massager on one another? Oil. Pornstars ostensibly at home? Urine. Then there are all the actual WAM sites, which are around half the network already. It's a shame, because the site had so much potential. They obviously even had a brief period of time when they tinkered with straponcum.com style lesbian scenes using MILFS/glam, and even had mff threesomes using the same idea, but they stopped that approach and went for large fake rubber cocks spraying ridiculous amounts of lotion out of gloryholes (?) to get the WAM element. Bottom line: If you like attractive, well-dressed European women getting urine or lotion on their clothes, and/or if you are looking for a place that offers lots of carefree women letting strangers pour any number of things onto their nice clothes (and that's VERY much a fantasy, btw) before suddenly having sex in a dance club while none of the other patrons care orgy fantasy videos, this site is probably worth checking out. Would I join again? Unlikely. 07-13-16  10:12am Replies (0) Review 45 Erotica X (0) 69.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Cheap, especially with $5 promo in your spam box. All clips are available to download in everything from low res up to 1080p formats. Good speeds. Decent couples scenes if you and your significant other are into that. No download limits and download managers work. Cons: Small site. At the time of this writing there are 22 pages with four videos on each page, so under 100 clips total. Three BIG "trusted partners" ads on the bottom of each page, and that's 10 points off the score immediately. Bottom Line: Not a bad site, but not when scenes are compared to some similar ones on their Mile High Media sister site. Plus you get the added benefit of having hundreds and hundreds of other clips for the same price as Erotica X, because you and your partner may want to warm up with a nice candlelit romance one Tuesday evening but a raunchy three-way after a few glasses of wine on Saturday. It's a small and okay site, but, honestly, it could just as easily be a "romantic" section in the total Mile High Media (or some other Fame) collection and not an entirely separate website. 03-25-15  08:07am Replies (0) Review 46 HDV Pass (0) 69.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: 1920 x 1080 videos. No sneaky checkmarked gotcha! boxes on the credit card page when initially signing up. Website is pretty responsive while you're repeatedly logging back in. Offers streaming. Seymore Butts' site is included but not the focus of the review (only showing four videos with Shane, btw). Cons: It logs you out every ten minutes if you're downloading videos, and you have to enter captcha to get back in. It doesn't force you to log back in as frequently if you're only streaming the videos. Download managers don't work. Let me rephrase: Queuing doesn't work, and if you try to download two videos at the same time one or both will usually fail. LOADS of 416 errors, and downloads don't resume where failed. Downloads seem to fail 25%-40% of the time. Example: http://imgur.com/2hoHW5x If you try to download two videos you are no longer able to view any pages on the website. Too many connections, I suppose. Put simply, you can download whatever videos you're willing to start, restart, babysit, re-enter captcha, restart, etc. Poor lighting and many washed-out scenes. Bottom Line: This is pretty vanilla stuff and not worth the time and trouble for the too-few videos you're allowed to download. If your focus is on streaming you may be more pleased with it, but there are still too few videos and too much trouble when sites like videobox exist. *** Revised on the 8th. My initial review was too harsh, and I've taken the score from a 65 to a 69. 03-07-14  11:24am Replies (0) Review 47 Kink.com (0) 68.0 Status: Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review. Pros: - Huge. Even if you don't care about half the network, there's still tons of content. - Good quality video - Some storylines here and there. - Big name and unknown models - No constant logouts and re-login demands. Thanks, webmasters. Unfortunately, it makes the download limits much more obvious. Cons: - Strict download limits. Maybe not technically, but very much a thing. - Lots and lots of wrestling. That may be pro to some. - Pretty specific niches that aren't going to appeal to most. - Lots of tattoos. It fits with the theme, I guess, but it's unusual to find models without them. Bottom Line: You've probably heard of Kink, even if it's just as a mental note to avoid. It's an enormous site. Like I said in the pros section, even if you don't have any interest whatsoever about half (or maybe even three quarters) of the content, there will still be tons of stuff for you to investigate. The pros are pretty obvious. It's one of those binary sites that people are either going to say "yes, I'm going to join that eventually" or "nope, get me outta here." With that in mind I'm going to deal mostly with the drawbacks. I was surprised to find lots and lots of rasslin. That might be a big draw to some, and if so then join right now, but it's a safe bet that if you find an actress you like, half or so of her scenes will be wrestling. That's fine if you're into it, but it begins to feel like filler after a while. Tattoos seem almost tame here, but you'll see lots and lots of tattoos. Matraisse Madeline, a lovely dominatrix who has a great deal of work here, has them on her biceps now, which I personally think detracts from her very, very classic beauty. Oh well. That's fashion these days. Whatever floats your boats. There are thumbnails that will be under an actress' page that you'll click and realize you can't access without paying more money at another site. Please stop this nonsense, webmasters. When customers who paid to view content at this site need to pay somewhere else to view content that is presented as available, those customers aren't excited and happy to learn that the thumbnail they just clicked will cost more money. If you insist on bothering members with ads behind the paywall, put the ads in a separate section that requires additional clicks. Don't pretend something is available to your paid subscribers when it's not. There are traditional (not sneaky) ads in the site after you've logged in and are browsing, too. And now the main reason for the below-average score. The site is huge. Did I mention that already? Enormous. Years of content. And you won't be allowed to download jack. Sure, you can get a few movies here and there, but the download links time out very, very quickly. You'll get 403 errors on the next links in your queue after downloading something as small as a 250MB video. I get the feeling they want to make it a streaming site. Eventually it gets to the point where you just give up. It DEFINITELY gets to the point where you aren't going to renew the expensive subscription for another month. Webmasters, paying customers want to pay you for your product and to encourage you to make more of your product. Yes, I know there are pirates out there who don't want to pay for your stuff, and I'm guessing your approach is an attempt to limit that, but I'd suggest focusing more on people who want to, and will, give you money, because we'll just quit paying after we discover the inconveniences placed only on people who want to give you money. And then we'll forget about ever rejoining your site again. Worse, we'll tell other paying customers how bad the experience was, and other paying customers will reconsider giving you their money, too. Bottom line: Lots of content, but unless you're into streaming it's too much of a PITA. 08-28-17  07:53pm Replies (4) Review 48 Harmony Vision (0) 68.0 Status: Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review. Pros: - Attractive models - Epoch as biller - Photos available for some sets - Quite a bit of fetish variety. DPs, rubber, dungeons, etc. Cons: - Definitely a pornstar site. Fake tits, tattoos, etc. - Frequent logouts, have to go through captcha to get back in - Photos intermittently available. When clicking the "download" link for a set's photos I was redirected back to the homepage on more than one occasion. - Questionable lighting choices in a lot of scenes. S&M = abuse your eyes. - Download managers work, but are kind of pointless since the links die when the site logs you out after letting you get two clips. - No distinguishing names for videos. You'll have a folder full of "scene_sd_high" clips and no idea what's in any of them. - Models listed but have no scenes - Missing videos Bottom Line: Lots of decent content but a fairly irritating site. Better overall than Stiffia.com, but still obviously a stiffia site because of site decisions. Possibly the first time I've seen interactive S&M. You're part of the action as you realize your eyes are hurting from bad lighting and poor focus in many of the scenes. Click on a scene and you'll get four video download options, but there is little to no rhyme or reason regarding sizes. Some 1080p clips will be 2GBs, and other similar-length 1080p clips will be 500MB. It doesn't make any sense, and the video quality isn't drastically better between the clips, either. Some download links will be missing after you click on them. ipod, SD, 720p, and 1080p will all be offered, but 720p might have nothing there. You'll be logged off fairly often as well. I'd estimate I could download two or three 500MB scenes before getting kicked out and needing to re-login to the site I paid for. "Size mismatch" errors when trying to download videos. Bottom line: Maybe join if you get a discount and see something you need to complete a collection, but expect to be irritated and disappointed. 10-07-16  02:54am Replies (0) Review 49 Nextdoor Models (0) 68.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: - Average to very attractive models. - Very few fake breasts, and the ones that are fake are nicely done and not cartoonish. - Mostly 20-35 year olds (guessing at ages). Very few teenie-bopper looking girls. - Zip files for photos, but only one choice. No small/medium/large option. - Pictures are adequately detailed, but not at the same level as MET or MC Nudes. You'll be able to zoom in on the tiny hairs shining in the sun on the curve of her hip in a few shoots and with a few models, but most aren't that detailed. That could be a major con for some, but the pro aspect is that very few of the zip files for photo shoots were more than 200MB. - Speeds seemed fine and the website was functional the entire week or two I was paying attention. Cons: - Fairly small site. - Ads on the page for pay-per-view movies that have absolutely nothing to do with the model. That's a huge gripe. Charge less if you want to try to make more money off of me once I've paid to get inside. I took five points off the score for that alone. - No small/medium/large option for zips. - Videos are probably afterthoughts and not the main selling point of the site, but they're still of mediocre quality and either have no sound or have techno music playing over any sound that might have actually been picked up by what was probably the video setting of the SLR being used. I watched a dozen or so clips and don't know what any of the women sounded like. - Not every model is shown nude, although that may be part of the appeal for some. - The attempt to make women who are clearly and quite obviously strippers seem to be girl-next-door amateurs with charming backstories. "Fun Fact: I've been a Hair Model" sort of stuff. Bottom Line: I joined almost entirely because I discovered a model who looks nearly exactly like a woman I was once involved with. Would I join it again in the future? No, probably not. There will be an occasional flash of inspiration, such as the lens looking down a flat stomach so that the bikini straps come up ever so slightly to bridge the area between the hipbones and the mons pubis, but I get the feeling those are mostly pleasant little accidents since most shots are the same poses in front of the same backgrounds, many of which involve corrugated metal buildings. I guess it's visually interesting the first couple of times, but after the tenth or fifteenth time it begins to seem like they just gave up and walked behind the U-Store-It again for another shoot in the same clothes as that last girl. Seriously. The same clothes. Not the same *style* of clothes. I don't mean the girls dress similarly. I mean the exact same clothes, the same swimsuit (a blue one piece spider web pattern comes to mind), the same lingerie, etc. After a while it starts making you feel the same way the U-Store-It backgrounds do. Do I recommend it? I can't recommend it at $30. I may recommend it at $15-20. I would probably recommend it at $10. There are some attractive models and some decent shots, but the site is fairly small and the As it is, and unless you're like me and wanted to get images of one specific model that are not available anywhere else, I think you're probably better off joining the "Only All" sites for $5/month more. 11-22-14  07:02pm Replies (1) Review 50 Club Seventeen (0) 67.0 Status: Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review. Pros: - Lets you choose models by breast size, which is a nice touch and pretty unusual in my experience. - You can create your own video clip from the larger scene (looks like a 5 minute size/time limitation) - .zipped photo sets available for many / most scenes. - Good PU discount - No DRM or download limits. Cons: - Ads, ads, and more ads. - More than a few technical issues. - There isn't enough room here. See below. Bottom Line: I even ran out of room here, too. I'll touch on some of the main points, though. - 540p and 720p clips are identical sizes when downloading. (Catherine E, Carol A., Carina E., and many others). Sorry guys, but that's not possible. And it kept happening. I'd say 70%+ of the clips that didn't have 1080p as a download option were the same size when I checked. It would be okay if the rest of the site were outstanding, but as it is it only serves to make it appear even worse. - Photo sets for many scenes are laughably small (600KB). I understand that many shoots are old, but one would think the images were archived at the best quality, and it doesn't seem likely that it would yield a web-page-promo sized set. Which brings us to: - Not a whole lot of content considering the brand has been around for a very long time. - Wrong actresses pictured in name/scenes. "Jeanine" (Rihanna Samuel) uses a photo of someone else entirely for the main thumbnail, which is a very bad thing on a site where the actresses use aliases. - Scenes' pages have different formats. Some might list download options as "1080p, 540p, and 720p" while others list "High, Med, Low". It looks like it's different because the former is .mp4 while the latter is .wmv. Which brings us to: - Multiple formats, but not in a good way. Streaming for one clip uses jwplayer (java?) but you're prompted to get silverlight for the same model's other clip on the next page. - Lots of ads in the scene listings. Yes, they're listed as "bonus" videos, but you can't download them unless you pay somewhere else, which means they're advertisements for other sites sprinkled directly within the model's scenes. - No useful naming structure or any meaningful identification of files. Oh no, one of the downloads failed. Which one? Who the hell knows, and you'll never, ever know unless you cross-reference each video in the folder full of "540p_fullcomplete" files you've been downloading against the hundreds of available videos on the site. Good luck. What was I looking for again? Oh yeah, her. Hey, there it is. That one. 540p_fullcomplete. Thank goodness I found it. Oh no, it's not that one. Maybe it's 540p_fullcomplete. Nope, not that one, either. 540p_fullcomplete, maybe. Nope. Not that one. 540p_fullcomplete? Crap, no. It's especially irritating since each and every video is clearly given a name on the page you download from. "Christina Sits by the Pool" or "Jenny Is Home Alone" or something similar (each of those is made up, btw) is listed above the download options for every video. What do you get when you click them? 540p_fullcomplete and 540p_fullcomplete. Other than grabbing a specific actress' clips and images, I can't see much of an advantage of this site over just joining Videosz or Videobox. They might not have the *exact* same content, but they appear to have lots of similar content if you just want to sample (24 pages of "Video Art Holland" clips, ~700 or so scenes at VB), and I bet the names have SOME defining characteristic, even if it's just the title of the movie. Not to mention thousands of other scenes from dozens of other studios, too. - Actresses are often not credited and you only know the name because a comment was left by a user who helpfully tells everyone who she is. - "Girl of the Week" repeats. Weeks 193 and 353, and 174 and 108 (and somehow amazingly the same as "Request 348"- why wouldn't the fan who made the request just go to the model's page and download the scene that already exists?) are an example, but there are many others. - Lots of technical annoyances. For example: If you click on an image to view it it will load with the website darkened in the background. If you then press the right arrow to move on to the next image, the background (the website) will shift to the left. If you continue pressing the right arrow to view other photos in the series the website will shift entirely to the left side of your monitor, almost disappearing, and you'll need to move it back to the viewable part of your screen to continue. - On the plus side, there are a few standout videos you should definitely get if you decide to join. 1080p_fullcomplete was almost perfect, with great models, good acting, and really nice action. 1080p_fullcomplete was another one that is a must-get, too. And if you like lesbian scenes, do not miss 1080p_fullcomplete. The energy between those two is amazing. Bottom line: This site, like Private, has such potential, talent, and name recognition that it could easily be competing at the level of the other big-name top tier sites, but the combination of "meh" quality, slipshod site design, and indifference to user experience / user friendliness is really disappointing. Would I recommend? Sure, why not? It's cheap, it's not absolutely horrible, and you could complete a favorite actress' scene collection if that's what you're after. Would I rejoin? Unlikely. 08-05-16  06:44pm Replies (1) Shown : 26-50 of 115 Page : Page 1 2 3 4 5    < Previous Page - Next Page > Home - Sites - Users - Reviews - Comments - Categories - Forum Contact Us - Announcements - FAQ's - Terms & Rules - Cookies - DMCA - 2257 - Porn Review - Webmasters 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. All Rights Reserved © 2003-2024 PornUsers.com. Loaded in 0.53 seconds.