Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
- Original, glam-fetish style content
- Lots and lots of fishnets, lingerie, boots
- Many well-known porn stars
- Fun and varied videos
- Tightly edited, concise photo sets
- I discovered B&W can actually be raunchy and erotic
- Frequent updates - approx 5 per week
Cons:
- Very basic search and no tagging
- Some material out-weirds me
- Older videos are not HD
- Many videos rely too much on music soundtrack
- Max pic size of 1600px could be better
- Many will think the photo sets too small
- A few more enhanced boobs than I'd prefer
Bottom Line:
This is a site which had been on my list to try for quite some time; I kept sidelining it since it kind of scared me, but I was eventually won over by the presence of many fetish models I like - eg Jade Vixen, Emily Marilyn, Darenzia and even Dita von Teese. And it turns out that I really shouldn't have worried since it has some really great, original, and sexy material.
A look at the site will probably reveal what scared me about it - there is some heavy makeup, sometimes tidy, sometimes smeared over the model's face and hands; some with their faces fully painted or their whole body covered in glitter. As haagar mentioned - be sure to read his review too - it gets weirder, with some sets focused around the toilet, peeing, or models covered in blood (!) But that's only part of it; and there's just as much material at the milder end of the glam fetish theme - there are lots of heels, nylons, fishnets, boots, corsets and lingerie and the models look in control, assertive, and sometimes dominant... all things that appeal to me. As does the softer material here - more typical glamour shots, beds, lingerie etc - but still in the photographer's same style.
There are roughly 1000 photo sets here, going back to 2006. They are lean, with an average of maybe 25 photos per set; many folk would find that too small, but in the hands of a good photographer, as Richard Avery certainly is, I consider it a plus; they are pruned, tightly edited to leave every shot a good one. Many of the pictures are quite stark, and I think that 100+ pics in a set would lessen the impact; but it's a shame they are only offered at 1600px, which for me is the bare minimum; I'd rather have seen 3-4K.
Some sets have the context of a location but quite a lot are on plain studio backgrounds, some are grainy and many are black and white - themes I usually dismiss as being too arty and boring, but here there's a rawness that makes even these far more interesting. Although there's no hardcore as such - an occasional set featuring the photographer's hand, perhaps - it's otherwise quite explicit, with most sets featuring masturbation, and there are a lot of upskirt shots - usually without the skirt, but you get the idea/angle. The models have a big part in making it so interesting; About 100 or so, including a lot of well-known porn stars (I particularly liked Bobbi Starr, Zoe Britton, Michelle Maylene & Tori Black), but not quite as you've seen them before; there's a quality of it being obviously more glam and staged; but somehow also more real, than typical porn.
Videos have a similar theme, although there's quite a variety - again plenty of quite explicit, raw masturbation, sometimes with toys; some girl-girl but also some BTS and interviews - recently they are shown in a very professional-looking chat show format hosted by Lexi Belle (who incidentally has a lot of material here, if you are a fan). As with the pictures, some are B&W, some grainy, some even with a night vision camera; but not at the expense of being too arty, it's still very erotic. There are about 500 videos from maybe 3-15 minutes - the older ones are quite small, at 640x360 - they are actually pretty sharp considering and look good; but many of them have no sound, just a music soundtrack. It's a mixture of ambient/trippy/grungy/spooky music, which is far better than the supposed sexy music we get elsewhere; but not having sound doesn't really work for me. The approx 100 most recent ones are HD720, but apart from the size, they emphasise more on the model talking/groaning etc and are far more interesting.
Although the style is very different, I feel this has a lot in common with Ed Fox's Foot Factory - another great photographer who shoots porn stars with a quirky, slightly underground-y style; but although I like the material at both, the quality and updates here make it by far the better site. Even if I didn't like the material as much, I'd still score this in the 80s, since it's good to see somebody doing something so unique and fresh. But as it is, although perhaps only the tamer half of it works for me, work it does, hence the score - just the lack of a better search and bigger pictures keeps it from being higher in the 90s.
The update thumbnails should give you an idea of what to expect; if the style appeals, this comes very highly recommended.
How about Velma from Scooby Doo... or, of course Wilma Flintstone - that figure. Betty's OK, but in the words of the Cat from Red Dwarf... 'I'd go with Betty, but I'd be thinking of Wilma'.
Perhaps a bit too niche for me... there was a site listed here that was about boots in general, which appealed a bit more - but I think now defunct.
I think I'm in the minority by preferring winter for girls' apparel; most guys like to see girls in skimpy tops in the summer, but I prefer the winter when they get the boots on :)
720 or 1080 works fine for me. I use a 1920x1080 monitor, so 1080 is good for full screen - but I do agree with elephant that in many cases you don't see a difference between the two. However, given that that video survives some upscaling, even when we are using the next generation of higher-res monitors, 1080 vids should still look good full screen, so I usually go for those.
Looking at the trailers, some of these parodies actually look pretty good. The latest one here is Batman - a la the 60s series - and the cast and sets look like spent some time and money on it.
Having said that, although I can't argue with Lexi Belle as Batgirl, I still think the the original Yvonne Craig is even cuter (albeit moreso when not dressed as Batgirl...)
There's also axxxparody.com - they have another fairly convincing looking trailer for The Big Lebowski, one of my favourite films ever.
Not at all - I'd say it's roughly 2:1 Photo sets to videos. The size of the sets doesn't bother me at all - Ellen Stagg does similar size sets at Stagg Street, a favourite site. It just means the photographer has spent some time editing the set down to the best shots - with a good photographer you respect that decision and the sets are better for it.
And here especially, the pictures are quite stark - I feel they would lose the edge if there were too many of them in a set. The sets are zipped, but only go up to 1600px; I'd have preferred a bit higher res.
Just signed up here (it's not all *quite* as outlandish as the home page suggests) - review to follow but if it's on anyone's list, clicking through to CCBill rather than the default Epoch gives you a $25 price instead of $30. Er, not that I'm a cheapskate or anything...
Hmm... actually, I think I agree with Slutty about the pussy (only if I had to choose, mind).
I've watched a little censored Japanese porn lately and it's really starting to grate; I find the scenes where the nudity or action is not quite seen far more arousing than the bits where we see everything but censored.
So I could manage without the pussy... I do have a fondness for photosets that fetishise other body parts, though; breasts, lips, neck etc.
As others have said, not remotely interested! I guess celebs have to expect to be, er, exposed to the public eye; I just don't get why the public find it so fascinating.
Well, I guess on one hand it's just a job... but the really enjoyable moments come from those who have pride in their job and do it to please and entertain the viewer.
I have a lot of respect for anyone who takes that approach, regardless of the work; I hope that for most porn performers feel that way.
Always good to hear your opinions, EP, thanks. I'll confess, I'm a bit of a lightweight when it comes to fetishwear - I like latex but don't go for the full encasements as much as you.
I actually quite like Forever Vamp and in theory Shiny Sluts is the kind of material I like - but looking at the limited preview, it does look a little lacking in atmosphere.
I'll reread your excellent reviews to see where else I might try, but in the meantime, although it's a different direction, I'm tempted by Alta Heels...
If you like WBA, you should also check out The Life Erotic - it's his work too, but I think featuring racier midcore material. I guess you might see some of the same models on there?
Interestingly, it also seems to be part of Met Art; it would seem that the more straightfoward nude material at WBA would fit better?
I concur - I'm more than happy for something - or some remnant of something - to remain on while the action proceeds.
Otherwise, various combinations work and it depends what fully dressed means. I like to see a strip and tease, but if there's some context to the scene and at least an attempt at plausibility, then starting with less is fine.
Agreed Holly Randall's stuff is great - I also like the solo material, but I do like the odd dash of hardcore and hers works for me very well. Doesn't hurt that some of my favourite models turn up on there too - Mosh, Ryan Keely, Jade Vixen, Aria Giovanni.
You may want to check out Stagg Street - many of the same models are there, but Ellen Stagg's style is very different, and although the site isn't as good, I slightly prefer it.
Thanks for the review, and welcome to PU. I'm keen on this kind of light fetish wear - nylons, boots, latex and the like - so this is an interesting site to be made aware of. A shame the pictures are small, but one to bear in mind!
Very important for me, as I consider eyes to be the sexiest part of a girl. Sure, the other bits count :) but for me it's a sultry or saucy look that make a girl really sexy.
As slutty says, it's different for different types of porn - but eg for G/B I'd be looking for that same engagement in the way she looks at her partner (and him her).
Granted I'm likely missing the point since I'd never bother to look at porn on my phone... but is there really such a demand for, er, brutal dildo action, that folk need it when mobile?
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.
