Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Excellent selection of beautiful models
Exclusive content
A few of the most popular European models
Nicely done, tasteful site
Navigation is good
Available file size is up to 5600k
Most videos are in 720p.
Cons:
Single biggest gripe is username/password management
Only one set added every other day or so.
Videos are mostly ho-hum.
Bottom Line:
I've been a member here a couple of times and keep forgetting to write a review. It is up there on the list of erotic/softcore photo sites, but just a tad below the frontrunners. Why? That's the hard part to explain.
Probably because the site only updates a few times a week and the collection is not yet maga-large. They've got about 350 models and maybe 1200 sets compared to, for example, Met Art's 2,000+ models and 12,500+ sets.
No hardcore sex. Just solo and girl girl scenes. BUT, there is a reasonable amount of in-your-face viewing, insertion, etc. and the girls in the girl-girl scenes seem pretty much into each other. Those attributes differentiate this site from FemJoy or MetArt,
There is a broad range of action in the photo sets. Same are nude girl in the woods, some are nude in public and some are girl getting off using her hands or toys. There are also a few peeing scenes if you are into that. There are far more toys in this site than in, say, Met Art. Maybe twenty percent of the sets have a toy involved, but it depends on the model and the toys seem to be included more as a prop than a utensil to be used for a specific purpose. In fact, there are a lot of sets where fruit and other things are included primarily for aesthetics.
The model's interaction with the camera is generally good. Each set has a mix of images with eye contact but this, too, depends on the model. A few of the videos are somewhat interactive but most are not. Many of the videos are just working the photo shoots. The amount of fun in the videos and shoots seems to depend on the model. The energy or playfulness in the sets tends toward reserved...again a function of the softcore genre..and the model.
The mix of indoor and outdoor scenes is good. The girls are mostly petite young Europeans, but there are a few Americans, a few latin americans and several full figured girls in the mix.
All images come batched in 2 zip file sizes and one PDF file compilation (really odd...), videos are a few minutes long and generally in 720p. You can get individual images in 5000x4000 or larger, but these are not in zip files.
Now there is one other interesting thing on this site that I would never have even looked at if it were not for the comments of another reviewer. It's the magazine. It serves a similar function as the tease blog on other sites, but the range of topics is a little broader and more entertaining. What happens, for example, when you give a camera to a model and put her in front of a big mirror? From what I can see, she learns it is harder than it appears to be a good photographer. But sadly, much of the beautiful photography in the magazine section is zipped or catalogued and is not yet available in the photo-sets section. One of the magazine writer's recent obsessions named Emily is not on the rest of the site at all. So it is a teaser blog after all, I guess.
The single most annoying thing about this site is the password management policy. You cannot pick your own username or password so you get a random, impossible to remember username and password that can't be changed. And then on top of that, the site implements protocols that prevent your browser from remembering the username/password. Be SURE to create a PDF of the confirmation page (or a link to ccbill, the biller) if you ever want to get into the site again once you sign up. I understand they don't want passwords to be shared, but the guy who came up with this strategy should be flogged...and not in a good way.
Other annoyances:
-Navigation within a photo set, i.e. going to the next or previous image, is only available if you select the smallest view size.
-All of the images in a set are numbered 001, 002, 003, etc. That might not be a huge problem if you download everything in zip format, but if you want to keep only yor favorate images of a model, be prepared to rename everyting or keep multiple folders. Not cool.
-Although many of the images are available at something like 5760x4800 (that's like 7 feet by 5 feet at 72dpi), many of these larger images either aren't very crisp or clear or they have artifacts in them. I'm not sure why that is because a few other sites that have very large images don't have this problem. Maybe it is the algorithm used to compress or resize the images from the very large raw format they are probably shot in....I don't know. What I do know is that the large images can be dissapointing and they should work on fixing this.
Bottom Line: The site is definitely worth an annual visit. There is a lot to sift through, but once you do sift through it, there may not be enough updates to keep you for more than a month or two. I plan on coming back once a year or so.
Just so you know, I'm not complaining at all about the way the trial was described at TBP. I am complaining about the way it was abused by the site. TBP was told the trial included three partial videos. OK, the site lied. I was charged the upcharge upon the third CLICK on the site. I saw one girl, returned to main, clicked on another. BAM! No warning or explanation of any kind! I was on the site for less than 45 seconds before they hit my credit card for $39.95! That's what I consider inexcusable... Would you accept that kind of crap from Amazon? What about Met Art? Would you tolerate a live chat site that didn't delineate between free and pay links and arbitrarily charged your card for browsing? No? Of course you would not. No reputable web site of any kind would rip off a customer like that if they EVER cared about that customer enough to want to see them again. Well, they will never see ME again! OK, I'm done.
You set this PU site up so people could give their honest opinion about the sites visited. This is my honest opinion.
1-day intro is A FRAUD SCAM! FRAUD! FRAUD!
Only 1 video view allowed and viewing the 2nd video triggers an automatic $39.95 charge (which is more than the regular monthly charge)! NO WARNING OR REQUEST FOR APPROVAL!
Only 23 girls on the site as of 12/8/12
Each girl has 1 video except for doubles (3), so that is 20 videos, total!
$39 for that! Get real!
I saw right away that this site only has 20 or so videos, but they looked interesting, so I decided to give the 1-day membership a try. When the site did not like my username and asked me to change it, the cross-sales I had unchecked mysteriously became checked again. If I had not noticed it, I would have been charged $40 right then for a site I did not ask for and would not have even known about.
Once I got into the site, I started to download one video and was unable to right click and choose "download". As soon as I tried to EVEN LOOK AT a 2nd video, the page changed to an "UPGRADING ACCOUNT, please wait" page. I immediately paged back and tried another page. Same thing on the next page. Within 90 seconds, I got a call from my credit card company asking if I had authorized a $39.95 charge to Segway in Great Britain. Clearly, I did not! To ensure that they did not try to charge me again some other way, I had to cancel the card and get a new one issued.
There is absolutely nothing sleazier than baiting people with a 1-day intro pass and not telling them ON THE MAIN SIGNUP PAGE, what the limitations and expectations are. My experience with other sites in this network (SSC Group, LLC) has not been particularly good and I consider this baiting tactic just plain fraud!
Be very, very careful if you decide to join this site or other sites in this network. Clearly, they are a hit-and-run operation that does not care if they rip you off or not. DO NOT USE the 1-DAY PASS as you will almost certainly be charged the highest possible monthly rate just for clicking on a link to see what you thought you had already signed up for!
Oh, BTW, just to be completely fair, in the unlikely event that the webmaster for this network sees my review. Take a look at my 100% trust rating and then respond if you wish with a justification for the insanely unethical charging tactics you have. I will gladly retract this review if you can justify your tactics.
In the meantime, I recommend to everyone to STAY AWAY FROM THIS SITE AND NETWORK!
In college. Half the frat house was watching as we were on a beach weekend... I saw one or two as they walked by, but didn't know they were ALL watching until we were done and I don't think she ever knew.
I never do the live webcam thing but once I was on Met Art and saw a girl named Mila, one of my all time favorite models, in an active webcam. I got into a 1 on 1 with her. She was everything I imagined she would be and the interaction was terrific! 10 minutes and $50 later (including tip) I was the happiest guy on earth. That will be the only time....probably...
I've known several dancers and a handful of pornstars. I WOULD marry a dancer (most of the ones I knew were financing their educations and got out). I would NOT marry a pornstar. The problem is that literally all of the pornstars I've known have been drawn into pornography from dancing, then nude modeling, then porn. Somewhere around doing porn, the sense of normal gets really messed up. The girls are highly influenced by the folks around them, most of which have a twisted sense of what normal is. The result is implants and enhancements, extreme acts, and other things that the girl might not normally do. And that is just the external influences. Layer on the childhood background some of the girls have which say it is OK to do porn. Something tells me conversations with her dad would not be particularly normal. Then there's the psychology of the girl herself. Ever heard of polyamorous? It is a very poorly understood psychological condition of a person who can't love just one other person. It is one of the effects...or maybe one of the motivators behind many pornstars.
I'm not saying there aren't a few pornstars out there with terrific, perfectly normal personalities. What I am saying is that I would find it difficult to maintain common values with most pornstars, which is a primary basis behind marraige, isn't it?
I am very happily married. Porn is a release and a fantasy. Why screw that up?
Two words...CROSS SELLING! I have unchecked all the boxes, only to find them mysteriously rechecked after something like a mistyped CC was corrected. Once or twice I didn't notice until processing was complete. NOTHING misses me off more than that and I've blasted several sites because of it.
I did not vote on this one since the answer "in whatever location is the least obtrusive" was not an answer. Danni's hard drive had a huge logo but most of the time they put it in whatever corner worked best. Most of th esites I prefer don't have them.
You really need an "Other" here. For me it is the whole package, including the girl, set, quality of photography, etc. So it is a 1x1x1x1 thing where something missing(a 0)= 0.
With most girls, a little makeup is a good thing. I absolutely can't stand the bright color or rainbow eye shadow common in Eastern European countries. Makes a girl look like a clown.
If I find a model particularly attractive, I will move all her stuff into my OMG folder, regardless of name. There are about 10 girls in there now out of about 200,000.
I don't really have TVs. I have A/V setups in 3 rooms with A/V recievers, Tivos, stream-capable Blu-Ray players, and game consoles. One setup is a dedicated A/V room with the setup bove, plus a PC, a projector and 12 foot projection screen.
The problem with TV and TV related services is that they are too clean. I can get PPV porn on any hotel TV, but not in my own home because Amazon and the other mainstream vendors won't carry it. Huge, huge, HUGE market opportunity when you consider what VCRs did for the industry.
Eh, it's more about the ability of the photography team than the location. Well..Although outdoors is usually fine, I'm not thrilled with the girl in the woods shoots where she pretends there is no photographer present or is partially hidden behind a tree.
A good photographer with a good model, good technique and a good demeaner with that model can successfully shoot anywhere.
I was in Vegas several years ago for business and the hotel was hosting some kind of porn convention. Can't recall what it was...maybe Vivid. Everybody had lanyards and badges, but I was able to walk right in because I had a lanyard and badge from my covention...nobody really looks at the things. Lots of toys, dolls, porn stars, etc. Remember Raquel Darrian? She was there. That pegs the timeframe. '92 maybe?
I am all for legalization and taxation at both the state and federal level. It would help the economy and allow the DEA to go after the heavy hitters dealing with the really bad stuff. Bot...
The only concern I have is the impact this would have on kids. For drinking, laws are strict and the impact of small amounts of alcohal on the development of kids brains is generally minimal (as proven by studies and by European countries that allow kids to drink). Don't bash me, but I am not convinced that pot does not have an impact on the development of young brains. As a kid in the 1970's I was 11 when I started smokong pot and was pretty much done with it by college. I do think it had an adverse affect on me. As a kid, I did not delineate much between pot and marginally more dangerous drugs like coke (the snorting kind back then, thank god), speed and quaaludes. (Adults, with a more developed sense of reason, can probably understand the difference and not leap to other drugs.) I also think legalization might make it easier for kids to get weed, especially if it were a common thing around the house (purses, top drawers, etc). Alcohol laws prevent an adult from giving alcahol to a minor, but do not prohibit kids from raiding the liquor cabinet and do not encourage parents to lock up the booze. And as somebody above mentioned, unlike alcohol, second hand pot smoke is still effective at giving somebody, kids included, a buzz.
So, although I'm in favor of it, there would need to be several safeguards in place that I'm not sure are there yet. Some combination of both alcahol and tobacco policies would need to be implemented.
The only non-digital I have could be considered collector stuff, "Oh God, She's Nude!" and similar, hidden away in a dusty box I last saw about a year ago. The best of my digital stuff, dating back more than 15 years now, is on a protected hard drive on one of 3 computers in the man cave. Older stuff and archives are on protected external drives stored away. Like any data, you can't exactly call it valuable, but it is worth backing up because it would be very expensive or impossible to replace.
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Some of the net's most beautiful imagery
Many, many US models you've heard of.
Some files back to 2003 and beyond
Zip files in many sizes for most sets, some up to 3000k.
Many videos now in 720P
Good layout and consistent navigation
Many of the best US models in the industry have their roots here.
Very good variety of models, most of whom have exceptional proportions.
The download process isn't bad if you aren't trying to download every image on the site.
It seems like they may be rescanning older 35mm sets in higher resolution when they re-release them, but I can't tell for sure.
Some content goes back as far as 2003. That's ALOT of images.
No cross selling!
For the price, you can't go wrong. (Part of why I rate them so high)
Cons:
Site seems a bit slow to load compared to others
Recycling of old images cheats number of new releases.
Only 1 release per day and almost ALL of them are re-releases. (Less than 1 new set per week)
Quantity of new releases really seems to be dropping (Quality is good, though).
No original dates on sets so you can't tell if it is old. Chance are very good that it is.
Older videos in 480P or less and with no original dates for the models, you can't tell until you click down.
Bottom Line:
Important bits:
Mostly solo scenes with a few very good girl/girl softcore scenses (good because the girls are usually into each other and not just standing there.)
No boy/girl scenes that I recall.
Very few toys....but a reasonable number of fingers.
Good mix of outdoor and indoor scenes. These guys love sunlight (a very good thing for the images and girls, apparently) so many of the indoor sets are actually set up outdoors.
Nothing hardcore, but if you are the type that likes "unobstructed views", there are a lot of those.
Sorry, but I can't just bullet point this one. There's somehow more to it. As a frame of refgerence, my taste is for well done images.
This site has an ambiance about it that is somehow different from the the other, mostly european softcore sites. One of the fun things is looking at how the girls are transformed from the initial Audtion shoot. When they come in, they are good looking and trim. For the shoots, most are OMFG awesome! Now, it takes a good model to make this formula work. A good recent example of this is Amber Sym. In the audtion shots, she is hot, with a well toned, cheerleader type body. In the photo sets, she is simply ungodly beautiful.
Many models shoot stills well, but are really awkward in videos. The folks at DD (I still want to call it DDG) really know how to shoot video to bring out the grace and beauty in a girl. There are dozens of examples like this.
Another thing this site does is understand what the typical male, um, comes here for. I think the word I would use to describe these types of sets is Inviting. The models are aware of the photographer and use that element to tease or play with the camera a little in a very subtle way. Imagine if a really hot girl said to you "Hey, I'm going to take my clothes off and maybe fool around with myself a little. Stick around and watch if you want because that makes it more interesting for me." It is subtly different from how the European sites do it. "Flirt" sets even have th egirls talking at you...but sometimes less is more. Very good directing on the photography team's part.
Most of the sets include an ample number of really nicely (as in tastefully) done close-ups. And sometimes there is a tiny bit of Astroglide..I guess..in the right place to make things more interesting. It seems somehow more personal...sharing...inviting than the "girl frolicking in the woods" shoots you see elsewhere.
Another subtle thing that makse the experiance nicer is that there is very little cross selling or other advertising going on. This is a freestanding site, so you get what you get. It just seems so much more respectful of my time and privacy to NOT be mentioning that there are also sets of this girl on the blah-blah-blah sister site. (Compared to, say, Met-Art, that accosts you with ads for sister sites.) I guess the reason they don't have more cross-selling is because nobody else does some things the same way that they do. Kudoos for both.
Once a set appears (or re-appears) they are placed into specific categories that you can browse through. Categories include Dreamgirls, XXX Stars, Young and Fresh, Flashback, Interviews, etc. This helps if you are searching for a particular look or Genre, but it appears that they are not producing a lot of new material for many of these categories.
Now that you can tell that I'm clearly enamored with the models and photography, let me tell you a few of the more frustraing things about this site.
It is slooooow, mostly slow for pages to load. Downloads seem to be about average in speed. Not sure what that is about.
As I mentioned above, many of the older sets get recycled, apparently more than once. I don't have a major issue with that as many sites do it, but this site passes them off as new every time they come back around (sometimes multiple times). Fricking QUIT THAT! Introduce them in a different category and include the original dates for the shoots as well as the original dates for the models introduction to the site. Yes, some of the sets are the best they've ever done and deserve to be re-introduced (take a look at Alyssa Lovelace, for example), but re-datestamping them is just plain wrong. It destroys the model timelines and, at best, seems deceptive.
And here's another thing. As I looked back through my 12+ year collection of DDG/DD images, I noticed that a lot of material from the late 1990s and early 2000s is no longer there. Some of it is big-hair and bushy, but a lot of it is completely timeless. You should consider putting more of the images back on the site in the appropiate area so your subscribers can enjoy them.
Ok, bottom line. If you are into softcore, this is absolutely, positively one of the sites to visit as there is over a decade's worth of material. If you were here less than a year ago, there is not much new content, but it might be worth it to visit for the new lower price.
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.
