I grew up in Fort Lauderdale literally 3 blocks from the beach and I spent a lot of time there. Because of the times and the location, I grew up thinking EVERYONE under about 40 was fit, sun-bleached and tanned. (I looked like Peter Frampton back then...complete with the long hair.) College in Florida was the same way. I honestly don't remember any overweight girls and only remember 2 guys, frat brothers, that were overweight. I truly didn't know any better. Then I lived in Atlanta, where the refined, poised, well coiffed blonde southern-bell type altered my views of beauty somewhat. After that it was a 20+ year stint in Pennsylvania where I coined the term "Pittsburgh-10" which means a 6. Average age there is about 60 and nobody is even remotely fit.
So historically, I'd say the fit girls of my youth influence the definition a lot. (Look up Gabby Reese at 22...like that.) But I do think there are a few models in porn (on Met Art or Femjoy) that could stop a 747 in mid-flight with their looks (because everyone would want to get a better look)...even with their clothes on.
Oops. Another novel. I guess I pick "Something else"
OK, I went back and looked at the VR vids I kept, which were the ones of girls I thought were reasonably attractive. None had the neon make-up. I did notice a very heavy and kind of unusual use of darker eye shadow though, which may be a signature item for the make-up artist that they use. The most recent one I have is #122. One of the 2 girls in that video has highly exaggerated smoky eyes.
(One thing I didn't mention before is how annoying it is when a VR girl plants a fake kiss on the camera. They do that a LOT here.)
In general, although a few of the girls are quite pretty, I do not think most of them exceed amateur quality and there is a certain roughness to some that defy explanation. (i..e bushy or very thin-line eyebrows, bad teeth, excessive bad tattoos, mediocre figures..) But I'm just an American asshole who likes Met Art and avoids the amateur sites, so my opinion is completely subjective. Clearly there are a lot of people who like this site....probably mostly Czechs! :-)
As for the poll you linked, it a voting poll based on number of votes, quantity, not necessarily quality. A similar type of poll consistently ranks the Olive Garden as the best Italian restaurant in my area. I would and have have ranked Wankz, Sexbabes and Badoink above this one.
Just for the heck of it, I'll give you three videos that I think are perhaps the reference standard when it comes to VR...at least they are my reference standard. They are well produced and make the absolute most of the girls in them.
1st: SexbabesVR - Romance in the Garden with Nancy A.
2nd: BadoinkVR - Patio Pussy pounding with an unnamed actress
3rd: WankzVR - Casting Couch with Leah Gotti
OK, that's it. I should be writing a review or something...... :-)
I tripped over this site again the other day. The photography is awesome and the models are beautiful but I notice several 10+ year old photo shoots among the samples. Has anyone joined lately?
Well done review, thanks. It is interesting how different our perspectives are on this site as for me it is one of the lowest scorers among the 20+ VR sites I've joined so far. I totally agree that the video quality was good (it should be good) but I just didn't think the models/pornstars were attractive and the few popular ones had oddly done make-up. (I'm from the US, so eastern European make-up, especially bright colored eye shadow, is hard to watch for me.) Perhaps it has improved since I reviewed it or perhaps a little time will change my perspective, so I'll go back and watch some of the 48 VR vids that I kept from this site. Thanks!
Even when I'm scanning and only downloading the things that I want, I have hit limits on a few sites, mainly In The Crack. I also think that sites that sign you up as streaming only without telling you are pretty much committing fraud. That includes Playboy Plus, Twisty's and a bunch of other sites managed by the same sleazeball company. Fraud. The expectation is that you will be allowed to download anything you "see" unless specifically told otherwise. Limits are one thing. Bait and switch is fraud.
I went ahead and took this lifetime offer at Mr. Skin. It does include naked news and Playboy Plus, but the PP subscription is streaming only with no downloads. When I tried to pay the $10 for downloads, the PP system says I am not a valid user and won't allow me to upgrade. Kinda sucks, but I'm used to it from the douche bags that run the Playboy site and many others that don't allow downloading unless you pay the extortion fee.
Nubiles.net no longer included in NP subscription.
Today, 1/1/18, I linked to nubilesporn.com from PU and see a good $15 a month rate, but when I look at the sites included, nubiles.net isn't listed. When I got to nubiles.net, the rate is a much steeper $24.00 a month but the list of sites included shows all of the network sites include NP. So apparently, they no longer include NN with the NP subscription. I opened a different browser and went straight to NP and the rate is $24 a month and still does not include NN. So it looks like if you want NN, which is the largest site in this network, you will need to join NN.
That is a really good point, especially since POV used to commonly be used to describe a look-down blow-job video (a lot of sites still call BJ videos POV).
I agree that for those who haven't seen it, the term POV or non-POV might be confusing, but with the advent of POV sites (like POVD.COM), the term is a little more universal than it used to be. In video games, they use the terms FPS and RTS all the time, but unless you are referring to a dick, "shooter" isn't really appropriate here. First person/third person might work, but it isn't used anywhere in VR that I know of. I originally used "participatory" and "observational" to describe the videos, which might make more sense. Iv'e also seen "Voyuer POV" and "Male POV" or "female POV", but again, without a frame of reference, these can still be confusing. In the end, the industry itself needs to decide what terms to use, but I'll try to be as descriptive as possible going forward.
POV and, of course, Virtual Reality didn't exist a few years ago. Those two things have transformed porn into a much more personal experiance for the viewer. The sheer volume of porn today means that there are also genres for every taste from traditional to literally whatever you are into.
On the other hand, I agree with Drooler about the extremity of sex today. (I admit I had to look up Gonzo and apparently not all dictionaries agree on what it is...). Some things, like anal sex, have become way too common on mainstream sites. I agree that the white background thing is annoying, but it seems to be passing. Tattoos? It is a generational (and partially socio-econimc) thing that, unfortunately, will always be more acceptable for younger generations than for older ones. But the tattoo industry has grown tremendously in the past two decades and probably won't go away any time soon.
...I digress. Quality, quantity and variety today are generally better than ever.
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
A few pretty good videos.
Some top models/porn stars
Good layout
Good navigation
All videos are tagged (180,360,male POV, Voyeur POV) and you can search by tag
Cons:
Fully half of the videos are "Voyeur" POV, i.e. VR observational, not participatory.
Video quality varies a lot (upscaling?)
Video format varies a lot
Searching by tag doesn't always work.
Release dates are not listed (although x months ago is shown)
Nearly all of the photo sets are marketing related. A large number of the images include somebody wearing a VR headset...
Several videos are tagged "moving 180" which means the camera moves around a lot on these non-POV videos. (basically a regular porn video shot in 3d.)
Bottom Line:
I think somebody decided they wanted to build a top-notch VR porn site so they put a lot of pieces together including a pretty good website. But then they ran into problems, at least initially, developing and acquiring content. The site has about 86 videos as of 12/28/17. I can't quite tell how many of each type of video the site has (because the tags don't work correctly), but if I had to guess, I'd say there are about 30 Male POV (participatory) videos, 30 non-POV (observational) VR videos, maybe 15 2D videos and 2-4 female POV videos. The last 5 videos offered are all "voyeur POV" meaning they are observational only.
Video length varies from about 10 minutes up to about 28 minutes.
File sizes for the Oculus/Vive range from about 2 gigs to nearly 6 gigs.
Download speeds are OK.
There is roughly one new video a week.
The site has some top-tier porn-stars here and they even have a VR video with Nina Hartley, who I haven't seen in a decade or so. Adria Rae, Chloe Amour, Riley Reid, Abella Danger, Megan Rayne and Adrianna Chechick, to name a few.
So, all of the pieces are there for this to be a pretty good site. But....it falls a little short in my book for a couple of reasons.
First, the videos vary quite a bit. Some are side by side, some are over under, some are 360 and some are 180. Many ore observational and not participatory which, no offence to those who like the voyeur style, defeats the purpose of VR porn in my book. And the biggest issue for me is that many of them are difficult to watch because they are either in lower resolution or where not encoded properly. I have an HTC Vive and only a couple of the videos I downloaded are in high enough resolution to actually enjoy.
My theory is that they purchase VR and other videos from independents who use different methods of filming and encoding. This inconsistency wouldn't be a terrible thing if the end result was a good quality video, but often it isn't. All of the great porn stars in the world don't mean much if you can't comfortably watch the video.
I have well over 400 VR videos now and I have not had any kind of viewing issue since building a new high-end computer a year or so ago. But some of these videos are hard to watch because of resolution or lens or encoding issues. So far, I've downloaded 23 videos (most of the male POV videos) and although the content looks OK, there is something wrong with the Vive versions. I have to say, though, that the 2 or 3 that ARE encoded correctly are very well done, so maybe it is just a Vive thing. Still, I can't really dismiss the poor quality videos because I signed up to use them with my Vive, so the review rating reflects this issue. I am also not into the "Voyeur POV" style, which is about half of the videos on this site.
If you are using something other than a Vive, this site is probably worth signing up to for a month, especially if you are equally into the "voyeur POV" and male POV video styles. They do have an A-list of porn stars here, but be prepared for a wide variety of shooting styles, lens types, etc.
I'll provide an update if anything changes in terms of Vive video quality.
I don't understand why anyone would join a site that has no preview whatsoever. You go to this site and click the I'm an adult link and go directly to the sign-up page. None of the links on the main page are active, so you can't see the models page, any statistics, sample sets, anything. Not a single sample. That makes this site a huge nope for me. I'm amazed that a TBP review can even give this site a 69....
I have a routine that includes checking sites for updates and it seems that I do this pretty consistently. The weather (or season) probably has the biggest impact on surfing frequency. Nice weather means I'm off doing something else. Cold outside? More surfing.
You should take a look at FTVgirls. I don't think there is an exact match to ITC anywhere, but FTVgirls is a similar video style with a little more outdoor stuff and some really good looking unknown models providing some serious close ups. The girls at FTV are almost all American (I think they shoot in Tucson or Phoenix, maybe). ALS is OK. ALSscan is mostly thinner girls and ALSAngels is generally bigger breasted, more popular models/stars, etc. Read my reviews to get an idea or just look at the previews. ALSscan is a Met-Art network site now while ALSAngels is not. Both are run by the same webmaster and both recycle a lot of material.
My reference to 10GB was in regards to the size of most 20-30 minute 3D video files from the most popular 3D sites. You can go look at my reviews for pretty much all of them.
BTW, I did go ahead and purchase the unlimited plan for $70 so I could download the files I want without being treated like a thief and then cancelled it. I think there is a fundamental problem with offering access to a site and then restricting how much a subscriber can actually download from it. Your use of the term "abusers" in your response is particularly insightful, reflecting your attitude toward "subscribers" very clearly. As I mentioned, I offered to pay $100-150 for an annual subscription, but you aren't interested in that, so I'll be back in a year or two and will again buy an unlimited subscription so I can catch up.
And there is one final point I wish to make here. When I subscribe to a site, I want to be able to watch the videos whenever and wherever I am without having to wait for anything to download or having a stream stutter or having it switch to a lower resolution because of traffic. Actually possessing the file means I can play it instantly, fast forward, skip huge sections or replay the section I like over and over, all on the player of my choice and regardless of where I am or whether or not I have an internet connection. So when I sign up for a site, the first thing I do is download a handful of videos so I have them and can watch them any time once they've downloaded. Except for your site. On your site, I downloaded part of a handful of videos before I hit my quota. The downloads stop so I don't get the files, but the portion download still applies to my quota. So on your site I was unable to apply the same download-and-watch methodology that I have applied to dozens of other sites. Why? Because downloading 5 videos is abusing the system? You really need to rethink this logic.
I just looked at my image collection over three years from ITC and it totals 41,770 images, which is probably about 70% of the sets available. Image sizes range from about 1000 x 1600 pixels for the older sets, to 1800x2400 or 3000 x 4500 for the most recent sets. I have videos and images in the same folders, so my computer is having a hard time figuring out how large that is, but it looks like it is about 36GB. So the 300GB level should allow you to download all of the images you want....just not within the first hour. :-)
Ah. OK. Natasha Schon is kind of a mixed bag for me, I've commented on MA many times and these shots of Elin/Aya are a good example. All 3 of the Schon MA sets are fairly dark, stylized and possibly highly altered images that attempt to shroud the model in mood and mystery. We have no idea what else Schon is altering in the name of artistic expression. I can appreciate the effort but prefer a little less alteration. The Hegre shots are mostly exactly the opposite and mostly just show the model in her true and unaltered form. Now, I also notice that Hegre has 35 galleries of this model dating back to 2013 (First set is called 18th Birthday so that says a lot....), so this model is younger and less experienced in the Hegre sets. The Schon sets are all dated 2017, so at this point the model has been working for 4 or 5 years. One huge change? The model's teeth. They are decidedly "European" in all if the Hegre sets including the ones published in 2017. (We have no idea when they were shot and every set could have been from the same 2-3 day shoot many years ago.) In the Schon shots, she's either gotten crowns or Schon has done a lot of editing. Either way, the difference is significant.
In the end, none of this matters. It is all in the eye of the beholder. I like this model's body on both sites. Please hold it against me. :-)
Archiving! The only VCR I still have is a VCR to DVD converter. Pretty soon, though, DVDs will probably be obsolete.
I just went to update the navigation maps on one of my cars, a 2012 BMW, and the update instructions call for 4 8GB thumb drives(32GB total, to hold all the business and point of interest stuff, I guess). All I had was 3 year old 4GB thumb drives, so I ran out to Office Depot. The guy there says "We don't sell them that small anymore. Smallest we have is 16GB." They were stupid cheap, too. That's advancing technology at its finest.
Well....OK, VP9 might not be proprietary, but it certainly is not common. I had to go through quite a bit to get my non-VR video players (VLC and Windows Media Player) to be able to play it and I still can't get my Simple VR player to play it in VR, which is why I'm reverting to the 265 format. For the Vive, Simple VR is a pretty awesome universal player and it is more stable and, I think anyway, a better player than Whirligig or virtual desktop. It is also the only decent JPG image viewer for Vive VR that I know of.
Now if Only I could figure out how to edit these damn VR videos using my Adobe Premier video editing software. (I have 6 TB of VR videos now...) I can pull them in and edit them, but I can't figure out what output settings to use so the edited files will play in VR. Any ideas? :-)
RA, You are not alone. I was in Information Technology for 20 years and am still an early adopter for many kinds of technology. It can be a real pain in the ass. VR is no exception. I had to build a dedicated computer that is essentially an expensive high-end gaming machine. And the HTC Vive platform is still embryonic. The problem is that there aren't any standards and no clear technology consortium has emerged yet. We are in the betamax vs. VHS mode for this stuff and Augmented Reality (projecting things through glasses so they appear in actual physical space) is the DVD coming down the pipe.
Here's a chuckle. I'm watching porn in VR, and Ultra-HD, but Comcast still gets to charge me extra for HD channels. SD over-the-air broadcasting ended 10 years ago, but somehow 75% of the channels I get at home on cable are still SD. If you watch ANY porn in Ultra HD, you are far ahead of the cable companies. (I just read that DirectTV will cease broadcasting in SD in 2019, so maybe Cable will wake up and do the same in order to compete.)
As usual, the porn is driving technology just like it drove VHS. :-)
Thank you SO MUCH for taking my comments in the correct and positive light. In the end, we are all pretty committed to making TBP and PU a great place for people to find out what is good and what is bad. If PU isn't the CU of porn, I think it is at least safe to say you are the tomato meter. :-)
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Relatively large collection of VR videos
(Roughly 270 videos!!!!)
Attractive, young actresses
Several popular internet actresses
Good quality videos
Several formats available
Navigation is pretty good
Thumbs-up scoring
Tags like POV, Anal, etc, for each set.
Videos are Lovense compatible (although I haven't had the pleasure of trying it)
They also have "interactive" videos, which apparently allow you to change the story line, options, positions, skip the foreplay, etc. in some videos.
Download speeds are very good.
Cons:
Videos are not dated
Some Very troublesome and non-standard formats
Proprietary player is difficult to get working, is clunky and does not work consistently for the Vive. For example you have to use a keyboard or an xBOX controller instead of the VR native controls that come with your device. It was a total waste of time for me.
The alternative to the proprietary format is to choose "previous versions" and pull down the much larger H264 videos.)
The site doesn't really explain that the proprietary player is only needed (I think) if you want to run the videos in interactive mode, or use the related sex-toys.
As it turns out, the interactive videos don't work on the Vive anyway.
Bottom Line:
Virtual Real Porn is among the best of the VR web sites with a relatively large number of high-quality videos. By themselves, many of these videos are as good or better than videos from the other top VR sites, but the site has developed a custom video player that, I think, is designed to allow you to use Cyber-toys like the Lovense for men or women. This is a pretty neat concept and if you have used something like a fleshlight, then these toys will probably add a dimension to VR that isn't there for other sites.
All of the videos have a fairly well-developed premise, secretary, student, friends girlfriend, whatever, and the videography is excellent. The girls are all pretty young, mostly fit, and of various nationalities. There are many well-known actresses here, as well as many that you've never seen before but want to see again.
Most of these videos start out in POV mode with the observer laying, sitting or standing. A few videos start out in non-POV with both the female and male actors in the scene, but then it switches to POV. There are also a lot of female solo scenes and a handful of scenes where you are observing a couple having sex. The POV scenes mostly eventually have the viewer in a prone position and the scenes often end in a hand job.
As for the technology, I have a Vive and eventually gave up on the proprietary player and went back and pulled down the H264 videos that will play on most platforms. These H264 videos are much larger than the "VP9" format videos, but they typically look better and do not have the bizarre doubling artifacts that some of the VP9 videos have. (You can find the H264 videos unser "previous version" in each headset selection. In this regard, the site really needs to improve both the selection of video of video formats and the consistency of video coding.
Navigation is pretty good, with the ability to select by model, likes or date, you can also search on some of the tags, like threesome or anal.
A simple introduction to the site explaining what options are available for the various headsets, what the interactive thing is all about and maybe a few other pointers would have been incredibly helpful.
Overall, I would probably have rated this site higher had I not spent so much time trying to get the proprietary video player running on my Vive. Many of the videos are among the best in VR and most of the actresses are quite attractive. If you are into VR porn, then you really need to add this site to your visit list.
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.
