Watching American porn where the girls talk (as in, talk at YOU) in English is great, but many American models are...um...too enhanced. The volume of young, fresh, natural interesting European models is just amazing. One category you missed is Brazilian. Holy shit some of those women are unbelievable...even with the enhancements.
I have three that I now buy annual subscriptions to...no brainer when they go on sale for, like, $89.00 a year (that's three months if buying monthly). Then I buy monthly subscriptions when I see something interesting, so I probably have 4-5 at a time.
I have several home-built computers and keep them for 5+ years but do incremental upgrades between major overhauls. I bought the fastest AMD CPU made about 2 years ago and it is still up there, so I recently upgraded the motherboard (new chipset), memory and installed 2 SSD drives...one for the OS and one for cache. The thing boots up in 7 seconds and pegs the top of the Microsoft Experience index (for what that is worth) at 7.9 in every category. The biggest bang for the buck speed-wise these days is in Solid State drives. Just upgrade your drive. Seriously. Do it.
The problem with the 3D technology sites use today is that it is old tech, as in red-blue tech. I have not seen any decent polarized (modern TV) 3D porn yet. Making polarized 3D look real takes a LOT of processing power when rendering (creating) and a decent amount when displaying. I'm not sure the industry can afford it.
A lot of sites don't really separate video from photo updates, so it is really by the image or thumbnail. It also depends a lot on what I'm in the mood for. Some sites are predominantly video so I will browse until I find a model I like and then browse for more of her. Bottom line though, it is the thumbnail that decides if I click to watch the video. There has to be something really appealing in that thumbnail for me to click on it.
It's all about the package. There needs to be beauty, some softness and some firmness. ...and absolutely no hard steroid face. Huge muscles on a girl? Pass. Ballet dancer body? Yes, please. Flexibility turns me on, too. There are a couple of girls on Met Art that are athletic and flexible but not too muscular.
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Huge collection
Several niches
14 "sites" plus 2 pay sites
Models are generally attractive
Reasonable variety of girls
Lots of nice looking porn starlets
Sets go back to 2001!
Good navigation
Cons:
lots of overdone porn stars
Many, many enhanced body parts
Average model age is late 20's early 30's
Ads on every page
Image download options could be better
Had a fairly hard time with logins and customer support (they require a captcha for EVERYTHING)
The regular price is insanely expensive.
Bottom Line:
I've been around long enough to remember when DDF was owned by Dennis De Franco, a European photographer who shot for magazines and made Sandy famous. His work was simply spectacular. That was nearly 20 years ago. Since then, DDF has gone from his name, to DDF productions to DDF network. Dennis has either sold the site or no longer has very much to do with it. That's a shame because whoever runs things now is trying to be all things to all potential customers.
The site feels a lot like Twisty's or the long gone Danni's Hard Drive. The collection is huge but the girls are...let's just say many of them have moved a little too far down the porn star path to be really attractive. There are a LOT of enhancements, tons of porn moans and the percentage of anal is far above my threshold of tolerance. (Why so many beautiful or once beautiful girls subject themselves to anal is completely beyond me. And what is with all the gaping asses? If you are into anal and gaping asses, sign up now! You won't be disappointed!)
But I digress, let me tell you a bit more about the sites:
"1 by day" is one of the original sites that provides one video/photo set a day. You know many of these models, but it could be from years ago. Zafira (current), Peaches (last set in 2008) and Eufrat (2013) are among the most popular. Almost every set starts with the girl clothed, then a strip, then maybe a few straight nude shots, then come the fingers and toys. Lots and lots of toys. (If you like toys, then sign up now!) Many of the newer sets look truly new and are of girls I have not seen before. But the formula is generally the same with every set including (simulated moaning) masturbation or insertion. The oldest sets in 1 by day go back to 2001 and the old ones look almost exactly like the new ones except there are no anal shots and not as much insertion in the older sets. With 15 years of sets, you WILL get lost in here if you aren't careful. DDF Busty is a site full of...huge, huge boobs! These are mostly double-Fs at least. Some look pretty good but many are clearly not well done and a lot of the girls have the full figure to support that mass up front. This is more of a full porn site with sex, fisting, blow-jobs and boob sex, with the obvious feature up front. If you are into truly ginormous boobs, you will get your fill of them here. DDF Busty goes back to about 2005 with a set every two or three days for that entire time.
Hands on hard core is pretty much as it sounds. These sets go back to 2003 with SV videos and images in each older set. I can't quite tell when these went HD but I see some 720 as far back as 2005. This is the site that is...um...filled with anal and there is some double penetration and multi-way stuff as well.
Hot Legs and Feet is a fetish site for stockings, shoes and feet. Most of the sets are regular porn with the camera or video emphasizing the feet. Lots of shoe heel insertions... If you are into that stuff, the sets are not bad. The sets go all the way back to 2001 with a few sets a week for that entire time but there are a lot of duplicates to the other sites.
One other site I want to mention is House of Taboo. This is supposed to be a B&D and kink site but if you have ever seen any of the better commercial sites of that genre, you will be pretty disappointed here. Maybe 1 scene in 15 looks even remotely genuine. There are some pee scenes if you are into that, though.
There are several other much smaller sites including "only blowjobs", "Euro Girls on Girls", "Euro Teen Erotica"(6 sets with Anjelica here), "Hairy Twatter" and "Sex Video Casting" which is a collection of casting videos. There are also a handful of one-girl sites like Sandy and Cherry Jul.
So, the bottom line is that there is a LOT of stuff here and there are micro-sites that look like they fill most niches. The quality is decent, the models are mostly popular porn stars and the navigation is consistent and fairly intuitive. But the problem is that they try to fill so many niches that the site doesn't really excel at any of them. I'm not really into hairy twats, feet, peeing, fake bondage, watching blowjobs, fake orgasm moans, bolt-on F-cups, massive insertions, double penetration, anal or gaping. So the sites that feature those things are not something I want to pay for. Fortunately, there is a reasonable amount of good quality solo and straight material spanning a decade and a half. is it worth the $44 or so regular rate? Well, sorry, no. I waited and finally got an intro deal for $25. If you see it for $29.95, go ahead and try it.
If you are into a wide variety of different niches I mention above, sign up now. If you aren't into some of those things, look around for discounts and sign up when you find one. But if you are into any of these niches exclusively, you should probably sign up for one of the many other niche sites out there.
So I'm back. Go to the site through PU and the monthly price is now $38.95!!!! I open Chrome and go direct to the site and get a $29.95 option. I tried to purchase that repeatedly but the option will not load the Epoch pay site (the $99 annual option will, though.) (Yes, I cleared the cache, etc.) Tried Mozilla and it is $38.95. Three months in a row I've tried to join this site. Three months in a row I've gotten something that bothers me enough to pass. Off to Joymii, I guess!
So I am sitting here looking for another site to join and again came back to DDF. This time, when I followed the link from PU, the sign up link only shows 2 options. Sign up for 3-MONTHS at $89.99 or sign up for a year at $99.99. Wow, that is just ballsy. On a whim, I went direct to the site in another browser and there is a one month sign-up for $29.95 but it renews at $44.95! So they are randomly changing their pricing and options and might even be thumbing their noses at PU. I'm going to pass...again...
Well, I just tried to sign up and see two things that are a little frustrating.
First, the discounted price is up to $33.95. That is not a cache or related issue but is a revised discount from their new regular price of $44.95 a month. Wow...that has to be the most expensive monthly porn site price I have ever seen. Good luck with that.
And perhaps more annoying is that when I first went to the discounted sign-up page, I entered my site-unique username and password for this site into the form. Then I saw that the credit card handler is somebody I haven't heard of before (DDFsupport), NOT one of the ones listed on the charge page (like ccbill), so I backed out. After a few minutes, I decided to sign up anyway and came back to the sign up page. This time, the site said my username was already in use....because I typed it in 5 minutes earlier! This was unfortunate and was enough to make me decide to spend my money elsewhere. I hate getting jerked around before I even sign up for a site. Sorry, DDF, FTVgrls.com (and ccbill) gets my money today.
Current Member for over 1 year (at the time of review).
Pros:
Top rated softcore site
Some of the most beautiful models on the planet!
The site is HUGE!
Spectacular imagery and sets
Dozens of outstanding photographers across Europe
4-6 updates PER DAY!
Excellent search capabilities
Excellent navigation and "window" management
Excellent range of photo and video resolution
Download speeds are consistently fast.
Customer service that ANY on-line company would be proud of.
Cons:
Only one thing in the CON category:
Too much cross-selling to the other sites in the network.
Bottom Line:
I noticed there were no current reviews of this site so I thought I would write an update to a review I wrote two years ago.
I've been a member of this site off and on for over a decade now and am a loyal, permanent customer. It is without a doubt one of the best softcore sites on the internet. The models are spectacular, the sets are great, the clothing, hair and make-up are usually perfect, the variety is great and the girls generally look like they are having a good time. Nothing cheap or poorly done anywhere, period.
Navigation is also very good and the way the site opens tabs for sets and individual images is the best I've seen. I've actually used this site as a reference to other webmasters with sites that have mediocre navigation.
There are several exclusive or nearly exclusive models on this site that words cannot describe. Many are well known European models but many are women you've never seen before but will want to see again and again. The girls are almost entirely all natural. The images you see on the main page and tour are perfectly representative of the images in the site as are the scores of the models (over 150 legitimate 9+ models).
To be clear here, this is a SOFTCORE site. If you enjoy looking at incredibly beautiful naked women positioned in ways that tastefully show off their assets, this is a great site for you. The site is mostly solo sets with a few two-girl sets and an occasional masturbation set. Sexy, but no sex. If you are looking for hardcore, insertions or kink of any kind, you will need to look elsewhere. Pretty much the only gaping here will be your mouth just before you say "Oh my fucking god this girl is beautiful"....and you will say that a lot!
There is really only one negative that I'm going to mention here and it is more of a customer service thing than a fault with the site. Met Art is part of a pretty big network which includes Sex Art, the Life Erotic, Errotica Archives, Erotic Beauty and a few others. Unlike many other networks, you have to join each of these sites separately. OK, I can appreciate that the individual owners want to maximize revenue. What I find a little annoying is that in Met-Art, when you look at a set of a model, a section sometimes appears at the bottom of the set that says something like "more of this model:' with a bunch of images that are links. Well, although there may be more of this model on Met-Art, the links are NOT WITHIN THE MET ART SITE. They are links to offers to join one of the other sites in the network where more images of this model exist. Since I first mentioned this a few years ago, I have seen a few other networks that do it but some of those are all inclusive networks with free access to the other sites. There is always a link on the top of each page that will get you to the models "profile card" within Met-Art (just click on the model's name), so after a while you will learn to ignore these links at the bottom.
Now, in-spite of that cross-selling tactic, the guys at Met-Art are gracious enough to discount the other sites once you join Met-Art, sometimes providing significant discounts, as low as $5-10 for a month for each site. To be fair, these sites have their own flavor and plenty of unique sets. And pretty much every site on the network is the same or nearly the same quality as Met-Art, although some of these other sites are considerably smaller.
Oh, and here's an interesting one. They have a cam site called MetCams.com. I do not partake in cam sites very often but browsing this one brings up several of the top models that are showcased on the Met-Art site. A few years ago I, um, came across Mila I., one of my all time favorite Met-art models, on the cam site and I could not resist. She did not disappoint, I was completely satisfied and I have a memory that (oddly, I admit) rivals a few from high-school. Clearly, the cam site is not soft-core....
I also want to say that the customer service for Met-Art and their network is simply outstanding. They are very responsive and have cleared up billing and other questions/issues immediately whenever I have had to contact them.
So...if you have not yet been to this site and want some seriously great softcore imagery and video to add to your collection, Met-Art is a MUST. I have an annual membership and have joined nearly every one of the other sites in the network for at least a month. This site and every other site on the network is totally, completely worth subscribing to.
I took them up on the Nubile-films and Joymii 2-for-1 offer. It was a great deal. I also saw a Femjoy $14.95 for a month offer but apparently it was only valid for a few days and I missed it. Make sure to sign up to their newsletters so you don't get left out of the deals!
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Some nicely done videos
Some great looking models
Decent collection
Cons:
This is actually a referral site.
All or most of the content is from third party libraries or sites getting referrals.
Site layout and navigation is inconsistent and generally awful.
Preview page is not representative of content
Preview page makes many models look under 18 (scary)
Update 3 times a week, maybe.
Cross selling on every page. (From the sites with the content)
Bottom Line:
I've reviewed a pretty significant number of websites, So I hope the PU webmasters understand that as the consumer reports of porn, they need to watch out for misrepresentation.
At first, this seems like one of those sites that is trying to model itself in the image of WOW or W4B. The recent videos, though not exclusive, are very nicely done and follow that genre.
There is a section called DVD movies. Click on it and you are taken to an area with commercial streaming DVDs. It is a really poorly implemented area, though, because each video includes an option for HD, but generates an error when you click on HD. These are mostly old DVD from before 2008 or so, probably from a commercial re-licenser/aggregator.
Then, as you navigate through the site, there is also a large collection of videos that generally remind me of the stuff you can find on RedTube or other free sites. It is not bad, but I've seen much of it elsewhere. Funny thing...once there, you can't get back to the main page. This is because you are no longer on 18X. You are actually on a different site called Webmaster central. Another content aggregator. Another funny thing. Many of the videos have the lower corner blurred out or have been cropped to eliminate a watermark. This is probably because the aggregator bought the rights to these videos from sites that no longer exist.
But here is where the really sleazy website garbage comes in...stuff this site deserves to get slammed for. The Thai girl on the preview page named Eaw is not on the site. She can only be found by clicking on the "tour videos" link at the top. "tour videos" interesting description. I'm thinking it really means "Browse videos".... Ah, there she is, 2nd one down. Click on it, and up comes a video of the girl and some screen shots along with "click here for more" So I click on it and....What the fuck?...I'm redirected to a site called "Thai Girls Wild" and invited to join! Are you f-ing kidding me!!?? There below Eaw is a nearly famous picture of the beautiful Melena from Met-Art, also on the preview page. I follow the link and, BAM, it actually takes me to a Met-Art sign-up page! The girl on the top of the page, named Alyssa Hart here, is actually a referral to a site called Petite18.com.
Wow, so I've paid to see models from the preview page who are actually not on this site at all except for a few images and one video that are REALLY on sites that are paying this site for referrals. NOPE! NOPE! NOPE! DON'T DO THAT! IT IS AMONG THE MOST DECEPTIVE THINGS A PORN SITE CAN DO!
So...bottom line? Well, as far as I can tell, there is either no or very little original content on this site. It is an aggregation of libraries and referral agreements that provide content from other sites. And in addition to that, the site is deceptively advertising models on its preview page that are actually bait images for referrals to other sites.
As unlikely as I think this is,it is entirely possible that the webmasters of this site do have some unique content, are trying to create something and are only a referral site while they build up their collection. If that is the case, I apologize. However, you are deceiving people and my score reflects my disgust for this kind of deception.
I have never had to say this in a review before, but STAY FAR AWAY FROM THIS SITE!
A little rash or a slap mark is OK. Lots of pimples, razor burn or "other" can be kind of distracting. Many models go to great lengths to make sure their lower extremities look pristine, front and back. It does not take a lot of abuse to change a close-up view from Yum! to Yuck!
Oh, and I've seen a few great close-ups ruined by a FLY! A BIG FLY! WTF! Edit that out! :-)
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Huge collection.
Many reasonably attractive girls
Network includes multiple sites, depending on what you signed up for.
Many models have different types of sets listed (masturbation, foot fetish, lingerie, etc.)
There are early sets of a few popular models here.
Site is multi-lingual
File download speed seems pretty good.
What you see in the previews is representative of what you get.
Every set is exclusive to ATK
Cons:
Site is often slow
Site often crashes (lots of 504 server-database errors)
Pages time-out so you can't go back or refresh
Lots of cross selling
Can't tell how many images there are.
Can't tell how many videos there are.
Navigation is a bit more challenging than it needs to be.
Many sets are nearly identical.
Some sets appear to have been recycled (Sets in only small resolution from 2011?)
Since every set is exclusive to ATK, chances are good you will see it elsewhere on an ATK site.
Bottom Line:
I'm having a hard time finding a lot to like about this website. Perhaps the best way to describe it is middle of the road. The models are your basic cross section of college-age Kmart or maybe Target shoppers. Some are attractive, many are not. None are truly stunning and almost none are truly hideous. This is a side effect of the amateur-type site status, I guess. There is a wide variety of body types from super skinny to...um...super plump, so if you like bigger girls, this might be a good site for you. These girls are all natural, ranging from nothing up top, to some giant melons, but breast size is proportionate to overall body type (i.e. fat is distributed evenly). There are no really fit or smoking hot bodies here, but a lot of nice 18-24 year-olds. The grace/awkward ratio is about even. Overall, there is a huge collection.
Navigation Is difficult. It is single threaded, and if you try to open multiple windows, the servers either throttle access or time-out...in other words getting through the images quickly is simply not possible. You can set how many thumbnails you want to see but, again, everything is single threaded so you have to wait to open a picture and then wait to return to the gallery.
The photography on this site is about average. The images are clear and consistent, but the lighting in the mostly indoor sets is not well developed or particularly flattering. You can tell that many of the sets with a model were shot on the same day in a different corner of a room or a different room in an apartment or hotel room.
The sets are a very standard formula. Girl starts out standing, clothes on, peekaboo, strip (often bottom first for some reason), show ass, spread, gaping spread, then depending on the type of set, on to other things like toys, masturbation, foot fetish, watersports, etc. "Artistic" is really just a normal set that they converted to black and white. Really dumb. This image shooting sequence makes many of the sets monotonous, even boring. In general, the girls do not look like they are having a very good time. It is all pretty much just straight show-me-the-money stuff, not very glamorous. Lots of gaping close-ups if you are into that. A handful of sets are girl/girl or guy/girl scenes but the vast majority are just solo.
Images come in three sizes, 682x1024 (who uses this?), 1080x1600 and 2000x3000.
Make-up is generally very good. No goofy eastern European eye shadow that I can find. I also noticed that the girls are generally very clean and well groomed. Mostly no pimples (anywhere), slap marks, bruises, razor burn, bad tattoos, etc. I don't think there is any or much photo-shopping...
The ranking of the models is a little odd. On a 1-5 scale (5 highest), there are a lot of unknown young models at the top of this list with only a few votes. Shyla Jennings is a 28th, Tiffany Thomspon is 15th. Early Zoey Kush is 94th. Early Jessie Rogers, complete with original Brazilian tan lines, is 62nd. Riley Marks is 85th. These model scores are not the sum of the scores of the sets, but a separate score for the models themselves. The reason I mention this is because it is not really possible to find the "best" girls or sets using the ranking system. You might find a model you like down in the 100-200 range. Oh, there are 657 ranked models. Surprisingly, most at the bottom are not bad looking, just victims of a bad photographer. Just reinforces my point about how useless the ranking system is. Might be more about the images than the girls.
There are quite a few videos of the models. Some masturbation videos are quite good, but many are just videos of the photo sets. Even a few guy/girl videos are just the photo sets, which is immensely disappointing. There are also a handful of behind the scenes videos...a big NOPE on those. Some of these girls you simply do NOT want to see before they put on make-up. Finding a video with the right combination of attractive girl and decent videography is very, very rare, but there are a few. Forget about anything hardcore, though. There are a couple, but it is extremely rare.
Perhaps the thing that taints my opinion of this site the most is the navigation speed and server response. When you try to open multiple windows, even to view images, the site times out. Oddly, download speed seems OK, though.
Bottom line? Well...if you are into amateur-ish solo photography, there is a huge collection here. Take a look at the previews and determine if this is the type of thing you like.
I submitted this poll a while ago and would have updated if I had known they were going to use it again. Funny how things change in a year. I'm also at around 4 TBs.
I rejoined EB as part of a special with Watch4Beauty. The EB site has had a slight freshening, but I'm not terribly impressed with the most recent content. First, it is all "B" roll! It seems as though these are sets of slightly less attractive models or, if mainstream models, slightly lesser quality sets. So they may not have been good enough for the main site, Met Art, when they were taken. Second, it is an odd collection of old and new sets. I recognize several models that retired back around 2008 or earlier and here they are in "new releases" this month with different names and the exact same look. A few models have sets from 2007 and new sets in 2014 and they look exactly the same...because they are old sets just being released now. (To their credit, EB lists the age of the model when the sets were taken, but I don't think those ages are accurate.) That usually only happens because the set was not rated very highly back when the model was popular but now, what the heck, who cares, release it! Fourth, some sets of once popular models might be a bit off because when these sets were taken, these models were very near retirement. There are a few sets where I looked at the model, recognized her and although she was still very attractive, she was several years older than she was at her peak. My typical male reaction was "Wow, what happened? She used to be really hot!" There is nothing that reminds you that YOU are getting old more than images of a favorite model showing that SHE is getting old. Depressing. There are also a few sets from the time before a popular model perfected her look. A lot of eastern European girls took a little time to perfect their looks and some of these sets are the "before" pictures. And lastly, releasing a set in 3 parts is positively annoying. There is no reason for this other than to string us along and get more money. Many Met Art sets have 120-160 images in them. These EB sets usually have 40-60 images spread over 2-3 or more pages of 20 images a page. They either do that to minimize load on their servers, or to make it look like there are more images. Either way, its a really cheap trick!
This site is still better than a lot of others out there, but it is really unfortunate when a good site goes mediocre.
I'm with you on the anal thing. I can't think of her name, but there was a beautiful tall, athletic dark haired eastern European model that appeared on the scene a few years ago. First saw her on Met Art, I think. Then she popped up everywhere and soon had her then perfect boobs enlarged. Next time I saw her (not on Met Art, of course), she's doing anal. All I could think of is "awww". You can't unsee stuff like that.
So...the reason I wrote the survey is to see what people think about seeing certain models EVERYWHERE and their thoughts on models that just don't seem to have the same, um, bounce that they once did. The girl named Malena/Maria seems to be everywhere these days. Caprice and Melissa Mendini are very, very popular models that, although beautiful and versatile, just seem, uh, a little over exposed. Malena Morgan is another very popular bombshell that I have seen in some sets lately where it just doesn't look like she's having any fun. I don't know if they are just crappy sets or what.
I just joined Twisty's for like the 10th time on a bargain sign up. There are a lot of great models there (including 35 sets of Malena, 31 sets of Caprice and 41 sets of Melissa Mendini), but also some older (30+) models and porn stars that I would prefer to think of from...kinder years.
Some models look great forever, some are one-shot wonders (pun intended) and a lot kind of evolve or devolve from the pressures of the business.
In the end, though, there are models we like no matter what, models we don't like very much and a whole lot of models that we will gladly look at until somebody more interesting comes a long.
Eufrat is a great example of somebody who has been modeling for a awhile but still has a great attitude and appearance. Lorena is another really lively one. There will always be great models that will look good well into their thirties or until they retire (Like Marketa Belonoha).
Yes, I had a chance to look through things in more detail and agree that it doesn't seem to be as good as it used to be. The advertising alone seems like it has doubled and I complained about that in 2012. It is funny that you mention score rigging as there are a lot of new , pretty average videos of pretty average girls rated 9.6 or higher, something I've never seen in any site. Now I know why. It is remarkable how many good sites have been destroyed by new owners that are just out to recoup their investment. This is probably one of them. Probably still worth it for $10 once every couple of years or so.
They are running a promo for $10! (watch out for the cross-check) I just re-joined so I haven't seen much, but so far it looks about the same as it did in 2012 with more content. They still don't display sets on one page. Videos are 720p max and images are 3000 across max. Many very (too) familiar models here. Very easy to download zips. A lot of advertising...
For $10 I don't know how you can go wrong! (Read my old review.)
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.
