Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
This site has been part of the ever-expanding Met-Art Network for many years. (i.e. high quality)
1 exclusive set a day since 2005 (over 3600 sets, easily 100,000 images)
Models are usually beautiful and popular
Sets are very well done.
Many sets are as good as the best Met Art sets.
Models might be a little more revealing here than on Met Art.
Cons:
It seems as though the The site has become sort of a spill-over from Met-Art where archived shoots or perhaps extra shots from a set are packaged and displayed.
Many sets are models we will never see again (because they only did one or two shoots and then quit.)
Navigation, though good, is not quite as good as Met-Art.
Bottom Line:
I published a review of Errotica Archives in 2012 and rated it among the top soft core photography sites on the Internet. That review expired so I thought I would refresh it with my impressions from the 6 or so times I have joined the site since then. It is still up there among the best nude photography sites on the Internet, but I can't rate it as high as I did in 2012.
The collection dates all the way back to 2004 and even the stuff from back then is top notch. Many of the models you know and love were on this site before they were anywhere else...although sometimes with different names. With over 12 YEARS of stuff, it is a lot of fun looking. All but the newest European models have sets here. All of them!
Navigation is good for a site this large. You can search by model or rating or month. Images appear in the same tab, though, so remember to go back rather than close (I STILL wish they would make this more consistent across the Met-Art network sites..)
All set come in 3 sizes ranging from small to extra-large but the size depends on the age of the set. Recent images are 6000x4000 or so, large enough to be lifesize if printed out at 72dpi. And most images actually look good at that kind of resolution. Everything is available in zip files and downloading is relatively fast.
The girls all appear to be comfortable with the photographers. There is a really good mix of full body and close up shots here and, unlike many similar sites, most of the girls are not shy and don't mind showcasing their assets with close-ups.
There is a new set every day. There is a wide variety of photographers and they all have slightly different styles, locations and models. Once in a great while, they will release a much older set but these are not re-releases, just archive or perhaps extra images from a different set. All sets are clearly dated.
Just a reminder that this is a softcore site. There are a few lightweight girl/girl scenes, but there are no sex scenes, no insertions, very little masturbation, no true sex on this site. There may be a few unusual sets from prior years (maybe a girl with her hands tied or something), but this is a 99.9% nude modeling site.
Met-Art links all of their sites together so, for example, you can see links to sets on other sites for a model you are looking at, but each site requires its own membership and associated fee, so the links can be frustrating at times. Once in a while they will allow access to a site on the network for free for a limited time but generally, you have to pay for access to each site. There is a pull-down menu that allows you to jump between sites in the network that you are a member of.
So....what about this site isn't as good as it used to be? Well, I think it might be two or three things. First, this is clearly a site for surplus or archived sets (hence the name). Some of these sets were archived because they were not quite suitable for Met Art. Either something didn't click with the set or, on the other hand, maybe there are too many close-ups! (Not really a problem for me...). But there seem to be more of these B-grade sets than there used to be. Second, there are also a lot of slightly less impressive one-hit wonders in the mix. Occasionally, there will be an introduction set for a new model on Met Art. Then maybe there will be one more set on Met Art, then some time later a third set will show up here. This is because the model only did a few sets and then quit, but there are sets on the shelf. And sometimes....these models were not A-list models to begin with.
In fact, that is the third reason the site doesn't rank as high this time around. Global supply. In 2010-2012, there was this bevy of incredibly beautiful women in eastern Europe that were shooting for the Met-Art, FemJoy and a few other networks. It was a bumper crop of OMFG women! Now, there are still many, many incredibly beautiful women within the Met-Art network, but to produce the kind of volume this network needs to provide 15-20 new sets or videos a day, there has to be a constant flow of new and consistent talent. Personally, I think that talent is becoming harder and harder to find and the result is a higher proportion of sets with unpolished or less attractive women. This is probably pervasive with all of the sites that use Eastern European models and it explains why some photographers are heading to Brazil and central America more often. I'll leave it at that but I'm sure you get the point. The supply, relative to demand, seems to be dwindling. (and I'll bet the popular models are getting more expensive.)
OK, where was I... In spite of my opinion that the site is not quite as good as it was in 2012, it is still an outstanding site! If you like Met-Art, Femjoy or similar sites, you will love this one. And considering the volume of material, it is still an excellent deal.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Exclusive content
Some exclusive models
Many "petite" top European models
Site claims no silcone, all natural.
Some very early sets of current popular models
Tons of content (Since 2006!)
Decent navigation
Over 320 models
Many of the models seem to be having fun.
Good quality images
Generally good quality videos
Cons:
Site design is a little busy
Navigation could be better.
Many videos are rather slow when watching.
Constant use of teen and pre-teen props can get old.
Although all models were legal age when the shoots were done, some sets do seem a little borderline.
Bonus site is marginal.
Bottom Line:
Amour Angels follows a fairly specific formula in that it often attempts to portray its models in a very innocent, young or teen-oriented way. The models are generally very young looking and very petite, mostly A or B-cups although several are larger, and the sets and props help promote that type of fantasy. Most of the time, this portrayal can be very effective. The majority of the models are shaved but some have very mild or trimmed pubic hair. Many of the models here are also on other sites like Met Art, but here they look or are made to look younger. This is in part because many of these models WERE younger, probably just 18+ and just starting out when these sets were shot. A great example is a model named Marika on this site. She is petite and looks extremely young in sets from 2016 with a more mature looking set from 2017. Today she is a featured model on Watch4Beauty who goes by the name of Helga Grey. Other models like Emily Bloom and Sarena Woods are on Amour Angel with several sets from very early in their careers and a few more current sets.
Note that this is JUST a solo girl model site with an occasional two or three girl "friends" set. There is no sex, no masturbation, no insertions and very little spreading, although many sets do include fully spread legs. The emphasis, for the most part, is on the beauty of innocence.
The teeny-bopper effect is achieved by the use of primary colors, props like lolli-pops and hooded pajamas, striped leggins and tights, rainbows and hearts, chocolate, etc. Many of the sets don't include any specific props like this and would probably be just as home on another site like Met-Art, except that the models, as hard to believe this is possible, are even more petite. Just find the youngest looking girls on a Met Art or similar site and chances are good they are here.
The site is posting images and videos as far back as 2006. They have been posting a photo or video set every other day since then, so that means there are, what, roughly 1600+ sets. There are over 320 models. It is a LOT of material. You can sort by top models, top sets or update date and you can always go directly to a specific year and month. Sets are dated and model and photographer names are listed. (At least 120 photographers, some of whom I am sure shoot for other major sites.) Models are ranked on a user-generated 10 point scale. There are top models of the month and year and profiles of new models. Like Met Art and some similar sites, Amour Angels gets content from many photogaphers so there is a great deal of variety in sets, lighting etc., but set quality is typically very good.
Navigation is good and download speeds are good but the site is a little more ornate or busy than most due in part to the teeny-bopper them.
Older material is sort of "girl in the woods" with just posing and varying levels of eye contact. More recents sets are very well done with plenty of eye contact and fairly revealing poses. Images come in three sizes and videos come in 4 formats (2 mp4 sizes, a WMV and a DIVX format) plus streaming. Oddly, the resolution of the videos is not clearly listed,although the few files I pulled down were 720 or better. Ther is no 4K. Image sets have from about 40 to about 130 images. Videos are 10-30 minutes with the model undressing and frolicking around.
Oh, there is a bonus site called "Teen Art Club" that appears to be similar material but much, much older,perhaps the prior generation of this site. The largest images on Teen Art Club are 1024 by 682, there are no videos and I don't recognize any of the models.
Bottom Line: If your tastes run toward young, petite models then this is a site you should visit. There is a TON of material and some of it is quite good. I joined after searching for discounts and finding one for $19.95. At that price, there is a lot to like here.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Good quality VR
Very consistent
Multiple downloadable formats
Many popular US porn stars
Decent navigation
All vids are dated and scored
File sizes are listed
Cons:
Site is still a little small
Highest bit rate files don't work well on underpowered PCs.
(but other formats do and I can't really tell)
You can't sort vids by score or model. (Everything is in reverse chronological order.)
Models are not in alphabetical order (also reverse chronological order)
There are only a few representative images for the sets and no zip files. I get that images seem counter to the technology, but you can't really tell what goes on in a VR video without them.
Bottom Line:
My viewing tools expanded recently and now includes an HTC Vive. If/when you buy one of these, be prepared to lock yourself in a room to binge a little on the relatively indescribable experience of VR porn. Remember to eat.
That said, I joined 3 sites in search of quality VR porn and of those three, BadoinkVR is the best for my tastes, which is full-on straight sex.
You can't rate these the same way as a "flat" porn site because the tech is new and there just isn't that much media out there...yet. So I'm going to score these a little differently, comparing them to each other rather than to a traditional site.
BadoinkVR stats:
About 90 sets
About 90 models (some sets have multiple girls)
So far most models only have one set.
Models are mostly popular US porn stars with a few young eastern Europeans in the mix.
1 New set each week.
Each set is dated and scored on a 10 point scale
The scoring is pretty honest, maybe a bit lower than it should be.
The frame rate is either 30 or 60 frames per second. Most are 60, which is terrific.
File sizes are listed
(Update: I recently built a new desktop computer that is dedicated to Vive VR use. On that machine, all of the High-res Oculus/Vive VR files from this site work perfectly.)
Nearly all of these videos are 180 degree with side-by-side 3D. (This is nice because you can set your player once and not have to change it when the video format changes.) Most are shot with a person's body (AKA you) in the foreground laying on his (your) back. There may be a portion of a scene where you are standing (i.e. getting a BJ or ramming a girl from the rear who is also standing or doggy on a the edge of a bed). Typical POV-like stuff. If you line everything up right, you can be 20 again with a buff porn-dude bod. The males in these scenes never make a sound, which is terrific and correct for the scenario. (You WILL hear a male voice while watching these, but it will be your own.) The thought that I was really watching somebody else fuck that girl truly never entered my mind...in other words, the video crew did it right.
The sets are typically very nice...most are in nice homes or buildings...but not too distracting. The lighting has to be perfect for these things and it is. The acting is pretty decent and the scripts are not embarrassing. Overall, the quality of the sets and the videos is impressive. I swear I could feel breath on my face a few times and caught a whiff of stripper perfume once or twice as well. Funny how the mind works.
The vast majority of these sets include full-on sex but some are just VR masturbation scenes. Whoever runs this site knows what they are doing. There is a solo masturbation/toy scene with Tori Black, who is a world-class sexy-talk teaser. Also, there are one or two straight sex scene from a woman's POV and a few scenes with other couples. (Most notable is a 360 degree scene from 2015 with August Ames and 2 other couples. Yes, August ends up riding you.) Some scenes have an extra girl or an extra guy that the girl you are screwing is messing around with. A few scenes are two girls getting each other off. Noticeably absent from this site so far are any two girl scenes with one girl on your dick and the other on your face. I'm sure they will have that here eventually...
Formats include:
Mobile LQ
Mobile HQ
Vive/Oculus
Gear VR
Playstation VR
(Some of these files are the same, but they spell it out by device to make choosing easier)
These files are HUGE so expect it to take some time to download. A 25 minute video ranges in size from about 2 gigs for low-res mobile to about 5.5 gigs for high-res Oculus/Vive files. Overall, though, download speeds are not too bad considering the size of these things.
Tech stuff:
I have been having trouble getting the Steam-based Whirlygig or Virtual Desktop players to work correctly for my Vive, so I've been using Simple VR and downloading the High def mobile videos instead of the "Vive/Oculus" videos. The high-def mobile vids work fine. Video compression is good and there is no stuttering, although there is some pixelation when I fast forward too much. One minute there's a beautiful girl bouncing on my dick and the next minute it is a block character from Minecraft. Woa! Pressing pause seems to fix it. (My very-fast AMD Opteron gaming rig is only about 2 years old but I had to buy a new 8-gig Radeon RX480 video card to support VR. The card is a little buggy and might be the issue.)
Bottom line: If you have a VR set-up and are into straight-sex, this is a "must join" site for at least a month. The site is well-run and what they lack in quantity, they more than make up for in quality.
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Huge collection of photos and videos. Good navigation. Good scoring/rating and review system that isn't inflated by webmasters or users, a full decade of material available. Newer videos are excellent quality. Models come in all shapes and sizes. Nearly every big-name model you've ever heard of. Mostly US models who actually speak!
Cons:
Waaay to many ads for other sites. Cross selling at sign-up verges on fraudulent. (I unchecked the cross sales, had a problem and clicked submit again and the other offers rechecked themselves and cost me money...really ruined the initial perception of the site.) Also, the log in page is linked to a pay chat site and there is a live front-room chat in progress WITH SOUND! Some smart marketing gu decided to do this to get your attention, but it is annoying as hell!
Bottom Line:
Do you remember the original Danni's Hard Drive? You know, before Danni sold it? Well, that site was abused and mismanaged after being sold, but Twisty's is practically an exact replica of the original Danni site. There is a HUGE collection here that spans over a decade. New material is very good. Most of the models are big american names either in nude photography or porn. Wide variety in the sets locations and models. And people seem to be having fun.
All that said, there are a few things that I feel obligated to point out. First, most of the models, though popular are..um..more mature. Among the most highly scored models, you'll notice Kayden Cross, Jana Cova and Heather Vandeven, all looking good in their most recent sets, but probably well into their 30s. Nothing wrong with mature, well endowed models, but the site seems to be pretty heavy with them. To be fair, the site also has some very popular younger models including Malena Morgan, Zoey and Melisa Mendini. One thing about a site that has been around this long is that you can find sets that span a models entire professional career. For example, if you like Sasha Grey, there is a terrific collection here from 2009 and before. But in general you won't really see any knock-out new discoveries here as the stable is mostly pros, many of whom have had more than a little work done. A few of the more popular models are still unaltered, though...thank god.
The sets are generally good. They are not overly staged, there is a decent variety of indoor and outdoor sets, the mix of full-body and close-up shots is good and the lighting is correct. The models are mostly solo, some with toys, but there are a few girl/girl scenes and two and three way sex scenes. One kind of cool thing about some of the videos is that since many of the girls are american, they actually speak! And oh my god what some of them say! Trust me, you WILL be answering out loud when Shawna Lenee, Tori Black or Kasey Chase ask you questions in their videos. This kind of interaction with the audience (ie directly at YOU) is unlike any other site I've seen since...well...the original Danni.com. Very cool!
This is billed as a network, but the other sites that you get free access to are really the same sets that are in the main site, just repackaged into categories like "Euro" and "GirlPlay". There are a couple of other mystery bonus areas that include additional models, most of which are intermediate level ametuers. The site is constantly advertising other sites like Brazzers, Mofos, Wicked and Babes, all available for an additional and sometimes hefty fee. Very distracting and annoying.
They have a girl of the month theme with a series of photo and video shoots released throughout the month.
Overall, this site is well above average with a huge selection of images and videos. The girls are Mmostly mature, large breasted and in many cases enhanced a bit. The images are good but not too glam-ee and, from what I can tell, not overly touched up. I got in on a "Please come back" special rate. Absolutely, positively worth a visit at least one a year.
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Very Entertaining site
Newscasters of every age, shape and ethnicity
You can download and keep the newscasts
pricing is good.
Cons:
Can be a little monotonous sometimes.
A few of the newscasters are not great newscasters.
Slightly higher percentage of tattoos than I'm used to. (personal preference only)
Bottom Line:
OK, first off, the site is EXACTLY what it is named. Naked News. It is not a porn site, exactly... The newscasters don't have sex and don't do anything more than strip. But... I watch an hour of regular news every morning at 6AM and many of the same stories are on the day's production of Naked News at 7PM. But I have to say it is MUCH more entertaining to watch the 7PM show. This site has been producing news for nearly 2 decades (December, 1999!) so clearly they are doing something right!
Naked News is a softcore site with primary focus on the day's events in a newscasting environment. The only difference between this and a broadcast news show is that the newsgirls strip as the newscast progresses. There are different segments like headlines (called bulletins), sports, movies/hollywood and there is even a travel segment along with guest interviews with porn stars and nude models.
There are 6 HD shows a week and the shows last about 20-25 minutes. You can sign up to get an email when the show is released if you want and the show can be streamed or downloaded in one piece or just in the segments you want. The production quality is every bit as good as most national news shows.
I gave the site an 85 because, although it is one of only two sites in this genre that I know of (the other is a not-so-great Playboy branded production), this site does what it does very well. Just DO NOT expect anything other than what the name implies.
Honestly, a few of these women would make terrific regular news anchors, but they are probably having way more fun doing this. And some of the news interview and remote segments are so good you would not know they were not on broadcast TV.
Let me ask you this. Do you have a favorite news show? Is there a hot newscaster on that show? Well, if the answer is yes, it is because that show has tweaked the newscasting formula to keep you watching. Naked news does the same thing, only they aren't sly about it. They KNOW why you are watching.
There are a few ancillary features of the site also, like a cam site, snapchat subscriptions and even clothing optional vacation options like a naked cruise to Alaska! They have some interesting streaming options, too, like a subscription to watch the show on Roku.
Downside? Well, sometimes they have guest or audition newscasters that are a little rough in one way or another. And once in a while I skip a segment because I don't like the look of the newscaster (personal preference again). And there will be times, maybe, when the news is actually more interesting than the naked girl talking about it.
Bottom line: This is a different kind of site. It isn't porn but it IS entertainment. If you watch the news regularly like I do, but you don't like the boring way news is sometimes presented, than this might be a great site for you. Or...if you just hate watching regular news but feel it is important to stay informed. Ta Da! Naked News is PERFECT for you!
After watching it for over a month, I've found a good balance between actually watching the news and watching the generally hot newscasters strip down to their fully shaved nothings. I don't think you will never find a more entertaining news show! Try it for a month at the discounted price.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Lots of popular porn stars and models of all ages, shapes and sizes but a lot of D-cups and above. (i.e. curvy girls)
Perhaps one of the last "Glam-core" porn sites but with a lot of extra stuff like insertions.
Very high quality all-in-focus images
Mostly solo but some G/G and B/G
Good quality videos that include masturbation.
Several newer sets/videos that are full-on hardcore.
Several download sizes/formats for images and videos.
2+ updates a week.
Affiliated with the Met Art network
Great navigation (search on Model name, tags, etc.)
All sets dated.
Cons:
Number of images in a set is sometimes rather small.
Some of the porn-star models are rather mature...
Some older sets seem a little monotonous (same shoot sequence formula).
Some newer sets may be unreleased older sets.
Bottom Line:
If you don't know who Holly Randall is, she is a 2nd generation past nude model and current erotic photographer. She and her mother both shot for Playboy as well as several other magazines like Hustler. They practically invented that trademark large format everything is in focus image style that was/is common in those publications. She has shot for websites as well, like Twistys. She has won all kinds of awards for her photography and videography - awards she totally deserved.
I haven't been a member of Holly Randall since 2012, so I thought I would join to see what has changed and to collect the best of the 6 years of material that has accumulated since I was last here. I was not at all disappointed. The sets, models, make-up, lighting and image quality are all excellent, just like I remember.
The glam look is still there, too. I really like that done-up look and whoever is doing the doing-up here, um, knows what they are doing without over-doing it. Models you know, like Connie Carter and Candice Luca, look like a million bucks. Every pose is perfect. Nothing is out of place or overlooked.
Just take the best from Met-Art or Femjoy and turn up the glam a little bit. That's Holly Randall.
Couple of things I really like about this site.
In almost every set, there is nearly 100% eye contact. None of that voyeur, girl-in-the-woods or innocent looks into the distance crap. These women are all looking at you because they know exactly why you are looking at them. Nice power play.
There are a few close-ups in every set, but they are almost unnecessary because the sets flow naturally and already show everything. Some photographers on other sites (Met Art, for example) tend to add close-ups into sets as sort of an afterthought. On Holly Randall, the girl is making eye contact and striking many different poses with progressive levels of openness. Also, and this is huge, Holly knows how to use depth of field so EVERYTHING you want to see is in focus in almost every image, from her eyes to her high-heels and everything in between. None of that six shots focused on her face and one identical shot focused ONLY on her not-face nonsense. (I really don't like it when a photographer uses depth of field to tell you where to look.) Here you get the whole picture, all in focus and you get to look wherever you want in every image.
What's new since my last visit is the affiliation with Met Art, which has brought an updated and improved web site. Holly Randall is not on the Met Art pull-down sites menu, though....not sure why.
The site has been around since before 2009, but that is as far back as the sets go. Figure 15 sets a month for over 9 years, that's about 1600-1700 sets. Of course, the older ones are not in today's image resolution, but they still aren't bad. Around 2012, the site started to go a little harder. Many sets include an image or two with spreading, fingering, insertions and/or masturbation and the more recent sets almost always have them.
So....what's not to like? Well, there really isn't much. Some tiny things, really. Like although navigation is generally the same as it is on other Met Art sites, you can't set your preferences so images in a set show up in a new window. Big deal. Maybe a few of the porn-stars are a little past their prime (but Holly makes them look awesome). Not a deal killer. Occasionally, images are a little grainy or soft. Might be because they have ben resized? Not sure. Also not a deal killer. Ok, here's one. The sets are sometimes pretty small. Some are only 40 images or so. But when that happens, the images you get are usually very good. Most sets are at least 50 images and some are nearly 100. And lastly, there may be some photoshopping here and there, but I don't think it is obvious.
Ok, bottom line. If you like glam-style images of past and preset popular models and porn stars (like the images from Twisty's), then this is a site you really have to visit. Unlike Twisty's this site is easy to navigate and is managed by a highly reputable group. The only reason I am only giving it an 85 is because of the more mature models/pornstars that are not my taste.
It has taken me a couple of weeks to sift through all the material that has accumulated on this site since my last visit several years ago and I downloaded a lot, which says a lot.
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
The ultimate reference for every naked actress scene in every A/B and foreign movie ever made.
Good site navigation and search functions.
Auto-login
Montages by topic (steam rooms, GOT, tiny girls, best boobs, year in review, etc.)
Some scenes are slowed down and enhanced for lighting, etc.
Cons:
Not really a porn site, per se, but still...
Videos are streaming only
A few current scene examples have blurred bits.
A few scenes a not on the site.
Older movie scenes, of course, are lower resolution.
Still images are, of course, video caps.
If you are looking for nude actors, this is not the site you are looking for. None here.
Bottom Line:
The site slogan, "Fast forward to the good bits" is totally accurate. Every actress you've ever been enamored by is here in the most naked scene she is in. Alexandra Daddario? Check. Margot Robbie? Check. Turns out very, very few popular actresses have NOT done some kind of nude scene at one point or another. Now, there are a few teases here. A few actresses have had doubles or have been filmed in a way that doesn't really show much, but a lot of the fun is in watching the little montages that they put together and going "Wow, SHE did a nude scene?" And, of course, the best use of the site is when you spot a particularly attractive actress and wonder "Hmmm. I wonder what she looks like naked?" Whoever she is, if she has ever been naked in a film, chances are excellent that Mr. Skin has the clip that answers your question.
To be clear, this is not a site where you will get completely off on watching nude scenes of popular actresses...well...most of the time, it is more like a collection of reasons to go Hmm, Ah, or wow and fully appreciate how awesome many of these actresses are.
It is worth noting that this site catalogs actresses only. No actors. For example the reference for Movie Wild Things shows about 6 scenes of the actresses but the full frontal scene of Kevin Bacon in the shower is absent. (I suppose there is a Mrs. Skin?)
There are also a few nude scenes that are somewhat disturbing, or at least mood ruining. Scenes from horror movies or those odd cinematic cases where they move between a love scene and a bloody war scene, for example.
Can you find many of these scenes elsewhere on the Internet for free? Well, maybe, but they won't be as good quality, as easily found or cross referenced like they are here.
Bottom line: They are offering lifetime subscriptions for $99. I bought one.
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.
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Good quality videos.
Nice looking models.
More fetish material than expected (if you are into it)
Some of the bonus material is very good.
Sets are dated in both main and bonus sites
Everything is HD back to about 2009
Image zips available for all scenes
Cons:
They try very hard to get you to sign up to the other two 21 networks.
Sex is competent, not necessarily exciting. (i.e. slow...)
More fetish material than expected (if you are not into it).
Filter function is counter-intuitive.
Some of the bonus material is better than some of the main material...
Bottom Line:
21 Sextury is now one of three 21 Network sites that are marketed together but subscribed to separately. There is very little logic regarding which videos end up in which network since they all contain straight and fetish material
Here are the stats I could find (as of 5/10/17)
21 Sextury:
About 9700 sets on main site.
About 2200 female and male actors listed
Sets are all dated
Recent Videos are HD up to 1080p.
Lots of older videos that are not HD.
Videos are scored via thumbs up/down.
Videos are NOT tagged so you don't know if you are watching an anal or fetish video until you are.
You can select anal,for example, in a search filter, but you cannot de-select it.
21 Sextury is the original site in this network and as such it is larger and older than the others.
Overall the quality of newer videos is very good. They are are high quality, well directed and well lit. The actresses are good looking and they come in all shapes, sizes, colors and and ages, but most of them are in the 20-30 range with a few more mature gals. The newer material is along the lines of Wow Girls or Joymii. The older material is....not so much. Much of it seems borrowed from old sites from this company, like Club Sandy.
There is a lot of fetish material here like peeing and anal. I thought 21 Naturals was the foot fetish site, but there is some here, too.
There are some backstage videos that include things like shaving and tweezing eyebrows. Meh. There is some light femdom and lesbian bondage, a few "doctor" videos involving a gyno chair and speculum as well as regular sex, and there is something called Nude Fight Club that is a lesbian wrestle then sex thing. You would think that this would be loser gets pinned and has to do whatever the winner wants, but they didn't think it through the much, so it is "Wrestle a little, tear each other's panties off, start munching and, oh here's a dildo. Interesting to watch once or twice...
There is also a lot of bonus content that is excepts from other sites or straight from DVD.
This content appears regardless of which site you have subscribed to.
One of the frustrating things about this site is how much effort they put into selling you subscriptions on their other two sites. The landing page includes updates from all the sites with a little lock over the ones you can't watch unless you purchase access.
Another surprising frustration is in searching for specific things or models that you like. There is SO MUCH material here that you can't just move through the models page looking for the ones you like. Doing that could take days!
There is NO SEARCH function. Instead, they have
a "filter" system that allows you to select options like anal so the resulting videos include it. But the "filter" is backwards. FILTER means exclude, not include. So if I de-select anal, I should not get anal. Instead, when I deselect anal, all I get is anal! Deselect foot fetish and anal? you get both. In the meantime, if all I want to see is latinas having straight sex, nope. I can choose latinas, but it includes all latina scenes including fetishes, behind the scenes, etc. And the options to select are very limited, so I can't search for videos that have, say, reverse cowgirls in them. Oh and lastly, once you select a video from the filtered list, when you return to the filter page, it has reset so you have to start all over. I apologize for ranting about this, but it is clear that the webmasters don't understand how this should work. Although they've put great effort into search functions, these functions are counter-intuitive and pretty-much useless.
Fortunately, there is a list of network sites in the left column. Micro-site names like Asshole Fever, Gapeland, Lezcuties and Footsie Babes help when searching for some stuff.
When you scroll through the models (pornstars) pages, you will see a lot of great looking girls (and guys), many of whom have different names than what you might expect. You can sort by most recent, most viewed, highest rated or alphabetical order. Only "most recent" gives you any idea of the age of a model or set. "Highest Rated" includes several models that have been out of the business for many, many years among the top 20. Also, the dates of the releases often do not reflect the dates of the videos. Bonus videos released recently might actually be videos that are 10+ years old.
Some are straight from DVD and many are not HD.
Bottom line is that there is a lot of material here and much of it is very good. There is a significant amount of fetish material here also.
But be prepared for your favorite models to have names that are different than you are used to. This, and the odd non-filter, means you will have to look very hard to find your favorites.
The site is worth it for a month, especially when you can find it at a discount, but the frustrations start to outweigh the pleasures by the end of your first month.
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Large collection (about 1900 sets)
Huge variety of young models
Many are very atractive
Many familiar models
Photography is generally very good
Recent images available up to 4K+
Website redesign provides excellent navigation
Models are user scored and user tagged
Cons:
Photography and models are sometimes not quite as spectacular as some of the other Met-Art collection sites.
No significant discount for current members of other sites in the Met-Art network.
Re-sampling of older images kind of a mixed bag in terms of quality.
Bottom Line:
I did a review several years ago and decided to refresh it since Goddess Nudes is now a full blown member of the Met-Art network. A few things haven't changed but many have.
This site has about 8 years photo sets at about 5 updates a week. The models are generally Eastern European and a few have been on Met-Art, but the vast majority of models here are NOT ones that you see on other network sites. Some are quite attractive. Interestingly, I was unable to find a few models that were here before, like Mila I from Met-Art....not sure why.
One thing that I noticed immediately was that when I went to the models tab and sorted by "top rated", only a half-dozen or so out of the top 40 were girls I easily recognized from Met-Art.
The top girls here are more earthy. THEN, starting about 40 girls in, you see Emily Bloom and several others that are also on Met Art.
There is some integration, culling and renaming going on, too, because a few girls are listed more than once with different names, with different sets in each name.
The brand new site overhaul is a HUGE improvement, making the site look and feel much more like the others in the Met-Art community. It brings every feature that Met-Art has to offer including the user definable options like default image size and my favoriate, the "open images in new window" option.
All sets are dated and scored and user tags are available. File names have changed throughout the site to a format that closely matches the Met-Art format. (site, date, model, photographer.) This is great going forward. I may end up with duplicates, but I'll deal with it.
In general, many of the sets are not as polished and the models are not as well made-up as they are on other sites in the Met-Art network, especially the older sets. One significant difference that I think I notice is that there is little or no airbrushing here.
I would define many of these sets as "Naked girl in the woods" sets. There are a lot of indoor sets also. None of them are awful. No dorm rooms, laundromats or cheesy offices but no bazillion dollar LA homes either.
Recent sets, starting in about 2014 are much better quality. That probably coincides with the Met-Art merge. That also coincides with when several of the more popular models started showing up, like Emily Bloom....but have I seen these Emily Bloom sets elsewhere?....possibly.
Also starting in around 2013-2014, I noticed a practice that I truly hate. Melena A is named Mariska on this site. She has a total of two sets here that are one set broken up into 2 releases! 84 images in February of 2014 and another 38 or so in March. This is the only case like this that I see, but it is a practice that I truly despise.
It looks like the older sets have been re-sampled to accommodate the default image size ranges provided for download. Even the oldest images are available in 2400x3700, but the re-sampling has an adverse impact on the quality of those images.
Interaction with the photographer is generally very good, depending on the experience of the model, and many look like they are having a pretty good time. Kudos to the photo crew for that.
In terms of clothing, the models either start out with one or two pieces of clothing and immediately get naked, or they are naked throughout the set. Sets that are more than a few years old are pretty conservative in terms of overall view and close-ups, but the sets have changed a little since Met-Art got involved, so many of the later sets are a little more Met-Art-like in terms of what you see. Still, this is a solo-girl softcore site. If you are looking for spreading, insertions, masturbation, B/G, etc., you won't find it here.
Bottom line? Met-Art is doing a lot to improve this site, but in general it remains kind of a b-side site with a lot of sets that, for whatever reason, either didn't quite make it to the main event or, possibly, where once on other sites in the network. In any case, with 8 years worth of content, there is a lot to look at, but unlike Met-Art, there is not enough here to make me want to stay long-term or even return more then once every couple of years. If you have never been here or have not been here since Met-Art started running things, go ahead and join for the $20 price that is available. If you've been here within the last year or two, you might want to pick a different Met-Art site to visit.
Current Member for over 3 months (at the time of review).
Pros:
Very nice high quality HD videos
Generally very nice looking models
Good lighting and sets
A few minutes of awesome close-up or POV footage in nearly every scene
Navigation is simple and functional
Nice layout
Mostly US models that sometimes talk a little
Considerable variety of "petite" girls.
Model Interaction/eye contact with camera is generally very good.
Part of a larger network that is mostly excellent.
All videos are dated.
Cons:
Many links to other sites you have to pay to access.
Infrequent updates for this site (1 a week)
Inconsistent access and download speeds
You have to pay for full access to the rest of the network.
Bottom Line:
I'm not sure it is fair to talk about just this site when it is part of a larger network, so I'll talk a little about both. First the site:
Tiny-4K has a growing collection of very good quality HD videos. Currently, there are about 280 videos that range from 25 to 45 minutes each. These are near-POV or POV style and there are almost always a few minutes of really excellent footage in each video. There is a wide variety of petite models and most, I think, are from the US. Dialogues are in English. Each video is scored (i.e. 9.1) and ranked (1st, 2nd, etc.) so getting to the best videos is pretty easy. Models are rated also and there is a directory. The ratings seem to be pretty genuine...although after seeing them in action, I would probably give one or two models an 11 if I could. Model interaction with the camera is very good. Even when they are getting seriously slammed or are working hard bouncing on some guys dick, they still seem to be having a good time most of the time.
Site Navigation is basic but functional and intuitive. You can save favorites and search.
But this is only half the story. This site is actually part of a network, but you don't have full access to the rest of the network. Instead, you occasionally get to watch some of the other-site videos and maybe download that content, but you don't have access to the other sites, just to a few videos from those sites. Models are cross listed so you can see where else they are, but you might not be able to get to them....typical marketing tease that I'm almost used to these days.
The other sites in the network include Tiny4K, POVD, Casting Couch X, Exotic 4K, Fantasy HD, Holed, Lubed, My very first time, Passion HD, POVD and Pure Mature. All of these sites use the same basic format and share the same overall look, feel and quality of videos, but the niches are slightly different. Again, these sites are NOT INCLUDED in your Tiny-4K membership, but you do get access to some of the videos.
I have joined several of the other sites on different occasions and the quality and quantity at those sites is improving, too. Each of the sites now has hundreds of videos, except the brand-new anal site Holed, which has about 30, and Lubed, which has about 60. POVD now has nearly 400 videos. Passion HD, the most mainstream of the sites, appears to have over 1700 HD videos now, dating back to 2011. That's pretty impressive.
Currently, if you join one site in the network, there is a ONE TIME fee of $69 to gain access to all of the other sites. You will have access to the other sites for as long as you keep your original membership. So technically, you could join one site for a month, then pay the $69 to see if you like the other sites. If you do, then upgrade to an annual membership for that original site and keep access to all of the sites in the network. Personally, after finding myself drawn back to a couple of sites in this network, I ended up doing just that.
Once you throw the entire network into the mix, there is quite a bit of content here, including at least one new video within the network just about every day.
These sites are video sites so the images are secondary and mostly just from the video shoot. Some are screen-caps but it seems that there is often somebody taking pictures as well and many of those images are not bad.
Download times seem a little slower than average and downloads time out occasionally. I can't tell if this is due to a download limit or something else.
The videos themselves are generally very good and all are 720, 1080p or 4k. The 4K videos can only be downloaded if you join a higher tier in the network.
Bottom line? The Tiny4K site has grown to become a very good site in it's own right, but you really need to experience some of the other sites in the network, either one site at a time or with the one-time $69 hit, to get everything. There is a lot of really good content on the network in several niches. Some are truly OMG videos that make it totally worth it to visit.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Many top-notch and popular models
Excellent quality videos
Most videos are full 1080 HD
Good photo sets
Good navigation
Wide variety of models
Lets and lots of masturbation...
Pussy classification system is a hoot!
Lots of details about many of the models
Cons:
Not much variety of activities or sets
5 point voting system seems a bit off
Sort order on many pages seems random
no extra large images (2800x1867 max)
Not much depth (i.e. most models in only one set)
Models are often a little...un-made-up.
Many models don't interact with the camera much
Bottom Line:
Well, the best way to describe this site might be "Forget the foreplay, let's get to it!"
There is very little posing, no glam photography (i.e. not much make-up), not a single "naked girl in the woods" just a whole lot of "Here's a girl. Watch her masturbate!" And masturbate they do! Every single girl! Usually with multiple devices in each photo or video set.
This is also one of those sites where you are so drawn in by the masturbation scenes that you won't notice some of the other features right away. There are a lot of interview transcripts that seem reasonably genuine, but the translation from Russian seems a little too perfect to be 100% correct. They are entertaining, though. There are both "bonus" and an "extras" sections that contain additional sets, some of which are from other sites. Ah, yes, there is a LOT of cross selling advertising going on, but thankfully the webmasters have kept the ads to small banners except at the very bottom of some of the pages. The sites that are advertised are all quality sites and a few have "special offers" that one would not get if one were to go straight to, say, Twisty's. (The offers are about the same as the discounts the PU.com...)
There are a couple of bonus sites: "We like to Suck" and "Wet and Pissy". If that doesn't paint a picture for you, quit sniffing glue. Thay have basically the same layout and quality but are a little more specialized. Not really my cup of....whatever.
The webmaster and photo teams do a really good job of creating a genre and sticking to it. The scenes are well lit, well focused and generally good quality. They are all entirely indoors, apparently in a hotel bedroom or bathroom with a few scenes in a home someplace. In some of the sets, one of the videographers, who I'm pretty sure is not exclusive to this site, gets into the action a little by putting a finger in various orafices of the models. I'm not sure I like this style and can't tell if the models do either.
The models are for the most part, right out of ALScan or Twisty's. The top models here are on those other sites, too. Generally pretty, with maybe a few that are not. Oh, and the "real factor" is pretty high here. Make-up is minimal. Lot's of very shiny faces and plenty of pimples visible just about everywhere you can imagine. One girl has a boot shaped bruise right across her butt! If you like "real" this is the place for you!
The "acting" is OK. Female orgasms in porn is like watching professional wrestling. Is it real? Who cares! It's entertainment!
The stats, curiously posted across the top on th ehome page to make it really easy for me to reference, are:
Models: 507
Scenes: 640
Videos: 622
Pics: 39,138
That is not a lot of material compared to some other sites and it doesn't take a math wiz to see that over three quarters of the models only have one photo set and one video. The price isn't bad, though, so I would say it is worth it.
Navigation is pretty straightforward. You can sort models alphatically or on popularity...but the order of the models seems to change and the ranking system, wich goes to 5, seems a little narrow and somewhat inaccurate. There are two image download sizes and a handful of video format options. There are also a few page preferences like number of thumnails on a page. I would like to see larger image options and the ability to download things directly from the model or scene summary page.
OK, bottom line: If you are into solo mastubation videos, this site is certainly worth a visit.
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.
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Fantastic quantity of material. The girls are all very young, say, under 25. Newer videos are excellent and in HD. Newer photo sets come in high resolution. The girls appear to be having genuine fun. They use ample amounts of oil, lotion, various types of fruits and vegtables and many, many types of battery operated devices. Sets are dated and are available all the way back to 2006.
Cons:
Navigation is not as good as other sites. (For example, you can't scroll through the images in a set but have to page back out to the set menu and select the next image.) About 1 in 4 releases are actually re-releases of older material dating back as far as 2001...OK if you are a first time member but not if you are back for the 2nd or 3rd time. The narrow range of girl types, sets and specific types of odd fetish shots makes the site a little monotonous after a while. The girls wear very little or no make-up, making some that are solid 10s at other sites about a 7 here. Many of the newer models are not as attractive as models from prior years.
Bottom Line:
OK, bottom line? This is a lesbian and fetish site that is interesting to visit once just to see the show, but it caters to a relatively narrow taste. Nearly every girl is young, petite, small breasted and, of course, shaved. On the surface, that's not at all bad. Many of the girls from older sets and a few from newer ones are truly beautiful. A few headliners like Caprice, Malena Morgan and Franzeska, are easily recognizable from other sites even without much make-up. But the majority of recent girls are not particularly memorable and at best rate a notch above amatuer. Maybe after years of visiting this site I'm a little jaded. I apologize in advance if what I'm about to say seems harsh. The success of the site must mean that many people like the signature items they provide. Here are a few of those signature items:
1. There are NO boy/girl sex scenes. None. Lots of girl/girl scenes, though.
2. Practically every model gets fisted at some point. If you like that, this is paraadise.
3. There is an odd fascination with the inside of otherwise unviewable areas on the female anatomy. Examples include almost every model agreeing to use a speculum so you can see what her uturus looks like. Many models agree to use what looks like an ambroidery hoop with clothes pins spreading the labia to provide a more detailed view (think dental headgear for the pussy). Some models use glass tubes allowing a view deep inside the rectum. I guess folks are into that. I find it niether sexy, nor flattering. In a word, it makes the models clinical.
4. Just about every model has to pee at some point. The photographers show you exactly when that is.
5. Ladies, care to have your nipples, clitoris or entire vagina vacuum pumped? Yep, they do that here!
6. The first time I saw a set where a model put a lollipop in her vagina I thought it was interesting and might be tasty. That was about 100 lollipops ago. Now I find myself wondering what flavor the odd color lollipop they use is.
7. This is not a glam site. As such, the girls don't really wear much make-up. You get to see every pimple, freckle, sore, scar and bruise, whether it is on a face, a leg or a butt.
8. Allsscan has a sister site called allsangels. The webmaster/owner has no qualms with showing you a set of girls from auditions in his blog and picking out the more attractive girls to send over to ALSANGELS in an effort to sell you membership in that site much smaller for $25 a month. Sorry, all it does for me is piss me of that these better looking girls should have been but aren't on the site I'm a member of.
Ok, before you send me a nasty email, let me put a thought in your head. ALSSCAN is a bit of a sideshow. Sideshows have an odd combination of allure and freakiness that makes you want to go in to see what is there. I've seen this particular show about 5 times since the late 1990s and every few years I find myself wandering back in to see what the next big thing is going to be. (This time I think it is those emroidery hoop-clothespin things....)
Now, it is clear that the photographers have a tremendous rapport with the models as the models are usually having tremendous fun. I think this is because the models are not forced to please the camera so much. (heck, they hardly even LOOK at the camers.) Instead they are encouraged to please themselves and any other girls that happen to be nearby..and perhaps they are encouraged to experiment. Some of the best photo sets and videos come from annual outings where a dozen or so girls are chosen to go to a tropical island. Once there, they can run around naked and generally have sex with any girl they want...and they do.
So, again, bottom line...interesting place to visit but you might not want to stay for more than a month.
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
HUGE Collection
Completely exclusive
Very good quality images and vids
Many very attractive and diverse models
Many models you haven't seen before
A few of the better models that you have seen
Updated site goes back to 2007
If you like Black and white sets, there are a lot here.
3 images sizes and zip file sizes
Multiple video formats
Search on model or keywords
Good download speeds.
Cons:
Navigation is awful.
Sets are are on multiple pages
Sets are no longer dated except when paging through update history.
Looks like some sets are either recycled or older.
Some sets are very small.
If you don't like black and white sets, there are way too many here.
Bottom Line:
In a prior review, I listed this site as a pleasant surprise and gave it one of my highest scores. Sadly, a few things have changed, including the standards of the other top sites, while Morey Studio has remained more-or-less the same and in some ways declined. The quality of the work is still excellent and most of the models are beautiful, but the halo is gone.
This is a European-style photographer showcase site...sort of a cross between Femjoy and Hegre Art.
Release count has dropped to a set every other day or so.
Sets now only go back to about 2007. (before it was 2001)
About 325 models.
About 1250 sets.
Mostly photography but there are videos too.
Solo girl and a few girl/girl scenes with some toys, penetration and oral sex. Much more than just two girls standing next to each other like you see in some of the more conservative photo sites.
The girls are not shy and there is a moderate amount of spreading in the photo sets. But I have to warn you, a LOT of the models are just glam-style with very conservative sets.
Videos are a mix of photo shoots and dedicated videos. A few of the girl/girl and orgasm videos are quite good.
The models are very diverse and nearly all of them are beautiful. Skinny to large, A to FFF. Shaved, trimmed and full. The top rated models on the site are mostly girls I don't recognize from other sites but there are several popular models, especially in the older sets. You won't find a single apple, grape, watermelon, bouquet of flowers or other dumb prop here. No "naked girl in the woods" sets either. Most sets start clothed or partially clothed but several start out completely nude. The models are nearly all exclusive but there are a few very popular European and US models here as well. Sets, lighting and Colors are generally great.
There are a LOT of black and white (B&W) sets. I understand the artistic concept behind B&W images, but there is a major flaw here because a lot of the harder scenes are in B&W. A girl/girl set or a set with dildo masturbation is pretty much intended to get the viewer off. Converting it to black and white does not make it art, it just makes it a dissappointing set. Many other sites include B&W white images in their otherwise color sets but here, entire sets, sometimes all sets for a particular model, are B&W.
Most shoots are in a studio or someplace with very good lighting.
The sets are simple, not too dramatic, placing emphasis where it should be, on the models. They have a chair to sit in or a bed to lay on.
There is even some light bondage in some sets. Mostly rope-work and a few blindfolds.
Navigation is Poor-to-OK. The site has changed a little since the last time I was here, I think, and it is not up to par with the other top softcore sites. I also noticed that some sections of the site are inconsistent with others.
You can search on model name or set keyword.
When you do that, one set comes up "highlighted" and you have to then open that set, or you can open other, thumbnail sets that are related. Navigation is single-threaded so you have to deliberately open things in new tabs if you don't want to spend half your time paging back.
Sets are laid out with 12 images to a page and multiple pages. If you get to a set from the updates page, it takes you to the set page and you have to click again to open it. Some sets are pretty small and some shoots are pretty clearly broken up into smaller sets. There are also several sets from the "private collection" which translates into unreleased sets taken years ago. They are usually good sets, but there is probably a reason why they were not released in 2010 when shot, and it reduces the amount of new model material on the site.
Sets are no longer dated on the set page itself, which is weird and deliberate. It opens up the likelyhood of recycling old sets. The only way to see dates is to scroll backwards through the incredibly clunky updates pages. There is no year/month index to take you to a date. You have to scroll past 100+ sets to the bottom of each update page and click "previous updates" to
get to the early sets.
Model pages are also a little..off. If a model only has one set, all of the other slots on the model page fill with other models. This makes it very difficult to see how many sets a model has. Very odd approach.
Another thing I noticed is that several very popular models from years ago are here, but they only have one set. And of course, you don't find this out until you join and go to the model page. That seems marginally deceptive. Ther was one model that I saw in a preview shot that I never found on the site. No idea why.
Bottom line: Although this site has lost a little of its previous luster, it still has a ton of excellent solo-model and girl/girl softcore material. For $14.99 for the first month and 9.99 a month after that, it is a very good deal, but be prepared to do a LOT of browsing.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Many popular, young, good looking porn stars and models (180+)
Exclusive, excellent quality videos
Wide vartiety of settings and scenarios.
Good Navigation.
Decent search functions.
Good download speeds.
Video downloads come in 8 sizes and newer vids are in 4k.
Very good separation of the types of videos here into 4 groups.
Erotica-X features sensual sex videos that are perfect for watching with your partner.
All videos are dated.
Cons:
Not much in the con department:
Photo sets seem like afterthoughts.
Photos are only in one size. (1920x1280).
No zip files.
No keyword search.
Only one update a week, on average.
Bottom Line:
I'll start by saying this is a quality site with a lot of great material from some of the best looking female porn stars in the industry. Although the site is billed as a network, it is one well integrated site with material broken down in to 4 categories: Hard-X, Erotica-X, Dark-X and Lesbian-X. These categories are fairly self explanatory, and they do a surprisingly good job of separating Erotica-X, which is mostly straight couples or threesome sex in more sensual situations (stuff you might watch with your girlfriend), with hard-X, which includes anal, DP, some huge dicks in some really small girls (i.e. Piper Perri) and generally more active and aggresive physical sex. Lesbian-X is all about the ladies pleasuring themselves and each other and ranges from solo stuff to some serious jamming and it includes some peeing and other stuff.
This site is pretty large. I count 1120 videos in all categories, about 578 of which are Hard-X, 85 are Lesbian-X , 274 are Erotica-X and 168 are Black-X. There are 200 female porn-stars listed and no male stars listed in the directory although they are listed on individual video page. Videos date back to 2013 and there is one new release a week.
I mentioned that Erotica-X is a really excellent collection of videos to watch with your wife, girlfriend or partner. I say this because they are well done videos, sensual, gentle, caring, very respectful of the women in the scenes (no throttling, rough sex, abuse of any kind). There are a few girl-girl scenes in Erotica-X, but they are really gentle compared to the fuck-fest in Lesbian-X. If you enjoy watching nice sensual sex with your partner, this is probably a really good place to find it.
Site layout and navigation are good. Models are listed, searchable and cross-referenced on each-video page. That goes for male models also (except for some gang-bang and gang-blowjob scenes where the male models are not listed). If you like a model, click on her name and all of the vids for her/him appear. You can create a playlist and you can add models, female or male, to your favorites. There is a thumbs-up/thumbs-down ranking for each video so you can see how they rate on their page, but there is no scoring or ranking system and there are no keyword options, although there are some "categories" on each video page that lists things like Hardcore, Facial, Fingering, Brunette, Blowjob, Anal, Tittyfuck, Big Tits, Pussy Licking, etc. This is a single threaded site, so if you want multiple windows, you have to use your keyboard.
I have to say that most of the sets, lighting, video and, of course, the actresses are beautiful. Somebody put a lot of thought into making sure that you aren't distracted by too much BS in video. The women have no or very few tattoos and, thank god, so do the men (I don't mind really well done tattoos, but some male pornstars on other sites are literally covered with them and that is really distracting. Not here.) Make-up is nicely done, too.
Probably the only shortcoming has to do with the photo sets included with the videos. Many of the images themselves are excellent, but the way they are provided, managed and named, with no zip file options, makes them difficult to download and keep. A few other sites do a much better job of this.
Bottom line: In an internet seemingly overflowing with high-production-quality porn sites, X-Empire is a pleasant surprise. The overall material may not quite be glam-porn like some other sites, but the material is probably comparable to Vixen or much of the Fantasy-HD network and far better than the run-of-the-mill porn site.
The main reason I didn't score this site higher is because they only release one new video every week or so. That makes it hard to stick around once you join for a month and get a chance to see what you want to see. That said, many sites in this category only release a set or two a week, so I don't think that is a deal killer-by any means. I woudl recommend that you visit this site soon if you haven't been here before and then check back every year or so. I took advantage of the PU discounted rate, and for the discounted rate, this is an excellent deal. Happy viewing!
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
HUGE Exclusive content
Some exclusive models
Wide variety of models in all shapes and sizes.
Many top European models
Some very early sets of current popular models
Tons of content (Since 2011, over 900 models)
Good quality images
Generally good quality videos
Cons:
Navigation is OK, but sometimes annoying.
Many videos are so so.
Some photo sets are so so.
Some popular models have videos only.
Some models only have one set.
Silly props in some sets.
Many models have assigned names that don't match other sites.
Headshots are sometimes not representative of material.
Individual image file names are not unique.
Bottom Line:
Showy Beauty is a non-Met-Art sister site to Amour Angels. (Some of the sets even have props that say Amour Angels.) This site has pretty much EVERY met-art model, mostly in sets shot before they became uber-popular, plus a bunch of sets of models that only shot one or two sets and maybe a handful that didn't make the cut to be on Met Art for one reason or another. The site is not part of the Met Art network but, as I said, has many models that appear on MA and probably shares several photographers. There is a very broad variety of model here. In addition to several hundred european models, there are a handful of asian models, some south american models and a few (I think) pacific island models. A LOT of models I've never seen elsewhere and I have been around a bit. Most models are young looking and petite, although several are more significant and quite chesty. A veritable smorgasboard of shapes and sizes. There are a lot of popular models here, mostly from early shoots. The majority of the models are shaved but some have very mild or trimmed pubic hair. Models like Emily Bloom and Sarena Woods are on Showy Beauty and there are a few others that you honestly would not recognize at first because they look so different. A few popular Met Art models only have videos here and I suspect that is because the matching photo sets made it to a Met Art site. This is not a B-roll site, exactly, but much of the material is similar to the stuff you would find on the met-art secondary sites. The difference is there is more variety here.
Showy Beauty is fairly true to the name, but don't expect anything too extreme. Each model is different. Some models are modest, some open their legs and a very very few have open labia.
This is JUST a solo girl model site with an occasional two or three girl "friends" set. There is no sex, no masturbation, no insertion. Even eye contact varies quite a bit between sets and models. The emphasis, for the most part, is simply admiration of the beautiful nude female form.
The site is posting images and videos as far back as 2011. They have been posting a photo or video set every other day since then, so that means there are, what, roughly 1200+ sets. There are over 750 models. It is a LOT of material. You can sort by top models, top sets or update date and you can go directly to a specific year and month. Sets are dated and model and photographer names are listed. (About 90 photographers, some of whom I am sure shoot for other major sites.) Models are ranked on a user-generated 10 point scale, but the scale seems pretty whacky to me. Most models are in the 5 to 7 range and many top Met Art models are toward the bottom of the rankings. This may be because the sets of the top models are not as high quality or revealing or just because not very many people vote. There are a LOT of pretty teen models here. Like Met Art and some similar sites, Showy Beauty gets content from many photogaphers so there is a great deal of variety in sets, lighting etc., but image quality is typically very good.
Navigation is generally good and download speeds are good but the site is a little clunky at times. Photo sets are presented in multiple pages and there is no way to change it. Navigation "Buttons" throughout the site change color when you hover over them, but they do nothing unless you click on the actual text within the button you want. Super annoying. Zip files have unique names but individual images, either downloaded or in the zip files, don't. File names are "Showy Beauty-001.jpg" to Showy Beauty-xxx.jpg, telling you nothing about the set, model, date, etc. Very frustrating if you keep a "best of" folder. ALL items...sets, models, images, etc., open in the same page so you are single threaded and have to ckick "back" a lot unless you remember to open in a new tab.
Because these models are not very experienced, many sets have little or rather tentative eye contact. There is a fair amount of outdoor "girl in the woods" type shooting. Most more recents sets are very well done with plenty of eye contact and, sometimes, fairly revealing poses. Images come in three sizes and videos come in 4 formats (2 mp4 sizes, a WMV and a DIVX format) plus streaming. The resolution of the videos is not listed,although the few files I pulled down were 720 or better. Ther is no 4K. Image sets have from about 70 to about 180 images. Videos are 10-20 minutes with the model undressing and frolicking around. Honestly, the videos are not terribly exciting but the view is usually pretty good.
Bottom Line: If your tastes run toward young, psuedo-amatuer or early-career pro models of all shapes and sizes, then this is a site you should visit. There is a TON of material and some of it is quite good. I searched for discounts and found one for $19.95. At that price, there is a lot to like here.
Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review).
Pros:
Excellent selection of models (350+)
Mostly 18-26 or so.
All shapes and sizes but mostly petite
Very large collection (650+ vids, 200k+ images)
Exclusive content
A few of the most popular European models
Older sets of spectacular popular models
Navigation is good
All galleries are dated
Generally very good photo quality
Newer sets use good file naming convention
Videos have been in 720p for several years
Newer sets up to about 5800x3500 pixels.
Lots of new models you've never seen before
Cons:
The site is often slow.
I had difficulty logging in a few times
All zips named small.zip,medium.zip,large.zip
(meaning zip files are not unique)
Videos are mostly from photo shoots
Good lighting/imagery, but not consitenly great
Color/white balance on some of the sets is off
Some of the sets are pretty short
Top rated model, though beautiful, is from 2005
Not that many new stand-out models
Lots of models you'll never see again
Oddball, quirky 3D sets
Bland color scheme
Bottom Line:
This is a very good site that anyone who is into solo or two-girl modeling should absolutely visit. It has tremendous variety of mostly eastern European girls that are perhaps a tad more natural than what you might see elsewhere.
That said, I find it very difficult to rate this site up there with the best of this class. I've been a member of this site off and on for about 8 years. When I first joined, the site was way up there with the best. It is still very good, but there is just a little something that makes it less appealing for me personally. The folks at MC-Nudes put together a very nice site and I know from my experiences with them that they are conscientious enough to read this, so I'll explain as carefully as I can.
The first thing I notice are the colors...or rather the lack of them. Everything is in tan or cream or some color of rice, wheat or straw. Everything. Even the sets are mostly in these nuetral colors with very low color saturation. I am pretty sure that this is because they think they might want to convert sets into 3D and the red-blue 3D doesn't work well if there are bright colors. But sadly, it is detracting from all the sets and the entire site. Go look at Met Art or Watch4Beauty and the colors on the site and in the sets leap off the page. MC-nudes? The colors stick to the page like this mornings oatmeal sticks to the bowl. If this reduced band of colors is to support 3D, I really think you should dump 3D. The site needs more POP.
OK, next. Years ago, MC-Nudes utilized mainstream models that were among the most beautiful on the planet. Marketa, Monika Vesela, Bambi, Zafira, Eufrat, etc. There are some fantastic sets here if you are into these mainstream models from 2004-2010 or so. They still have several models that have recently become very popular (like Nika and Dominika).
At the same time, they managed to find some ungodly beautiful models that you'd never seen before or since. This unknown but beautiful girl Simona is still their top rated model (from 2005 and with only 3 sets...)
More recently, I think they've gotten into using new and unknown models a little more. This is a great thing for those of us who like a lot of variety, but you have to go through a LOT of girls to find one or two true stars in this field. Nearly all of the MC-Nudes models have spectacular figures, but because of either the lighting, the make-up, the inconsistent eye contact with the camera or perhaps because they are new and don't seem to be having much fun, many of these girls just aren't as appealing as they could be. Some of the brighter or more popular models have figured out how to tease and play with the camera a little. But a really good photography team should be teaching them ALL how to be playful. It makes a huge difference.
Couple of peeves. The site is often very slow. I also could not get in a few times, getting an Apache server-type error message instead of the web site. I know that account management is tricky, but I have several subscripions (and several computers) and I have not had this kind of trouble before...pretty much ever.
Although the file management is better than it used to be, the zip files still need to be named and dated or coded in such a way to make them unique. Webmaster, if you do that once for each set, your thousands of customers won't have to do it at all.
Bottom line? Go check it out! If you like what you see in the samples, sign up! There is enough quality material to keep you busy and happy for quite a while. If you don't stay, check back every year or so. With daily updates, it will be worth your while.
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.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Huge quantity of material.
Many popular models here.
The girls are all very young, say, under 25. Newer videos are very good and in HD.
Newer photo sets come in high resolution.
Mostly solo/lesbian site but some newer B/G scenes.
The girls appear to be having genuine fun.
Sets are dated and are available all the way back to 2004.
Sets are scored
One update per day.
Navigation is good.
Search function is good.
Cons:
About 1 in 10-14 releases are actually re-posts or remastered sets of older material dating back as far as 2001...OK if you are a first time member but not cool if you are returning.
The narrow range of girl types, sets and specific types of odd fetish shots makes the site a little monotonous after a while.
The girls wear very little or no make-up, making some that are solid 10s at other sites about a 7 here.
Bottom Line:
I last reviewed this site back in 2012. Some things have changed since then. Most, not so much.
About 4900 photo sets/videos
Several thousand models
1 set a day (many recycled)
Combination of US and Eastern European models
Most videos are of photo shoots
Solo girl, lesbian and fetish sets
ALSScan is primarily a lesbian and off-beat fetish site. Nearly every girl is young, petite, small breasted and, of course, shaved. Many of the girls from older sets and some from newer ones are truly beautiful. A few headliners like Kimmy Granger, Gina Gerson, Dakota Skye, Caprice, Malena Morgan and Franzeska, are easily recognizable from other sites even without much make-up.
ALSScan "screens" a lot of models, evidenced by the proliferation of casting shoots throughout the sets, but only a small percentage of these girls are above average looking. The really great looking ones have sets that are re-posted, which is serious cheating. There is a lot of new content, but the way the site re-uses content, you can't really tell if it is new or not. Considering there is no recycled content anywhere else within the Met-Art network, this sin takes about 10 points off of my score for the site. This would be a much better site if they stopped recycling content.
But the success of the site must mean that many people like the signature items they provide, even if some of it is recycled.
Until recently, there were NO boy/girl sex scenes. None. Lots of girl/girl scenes, though. Just since 2016, a very small number of B/G scenes have appeared. In typical ALS style, though, many of these scenes are unusual in that the guy inserts something into the girl, like a bottle, her fist, his fist, a vegetable or dildo, before he inserts himself into her. There are only a couple of B/G scenes so far.
Practically every model gets fisted at some point. If you like that, this is paradise.
There is an odd fascination with otherwise unviewable areas of the female anatomy. Examples include almost every model agreeing to use a speculum so you can see what her uterus looks like. Many models agree to use an embroidery hoop with clothes pins spreading the labia to provide a more detailed view (think dental headgear for the pussy). Some models use glass tubes allowing a view deep inside the vagina or rectum. I guess folks are into that. I find it neither sexy, nor flattering. In a word, this stuff makes the models clinical.
Just about every model has to pee at some point. The photographers show you exactly when that moment is.
Ladies, care to have your nipples, clitoris or entire vagina vacuum pumped? Yep, they do that a lot here!
The first time I saw a set where a model put a lollipop in her vagina I thought it was cool. That was about 200 lollipops ago. Now I find myself wondering what flavor the lollipop is.
This is not a glam site. As such, the girls don't really wear much make-up. You get to see every pimple, freckle, sore, scar and bruise, whether it is on a face, a leg or a butt.
To be fair, each set, new or old, starts out with the girl wearing a skimpy outfit or ALS signature tiny bikini and the girl undresses, lubes up and spreads. it can be quite nice up to here. Then they break out the bottles, vegetables, fists, vacuums, inflators, speculums and embroidery hoops. You might like it, at least at first. In one video, Gina Gerson uses an inflator dildo and the photographer keeps saying "Are you OK?" That about sums up my thoughts when I see the stuff they insert into the girls.
Alsscan has a sister site called allsangels that is not within the Met Art network. The "Director" has no qualms with showing you a set of girls in his blog and picking out the more attractive girls to send over to ALSANGELS in an effort to sell you membership there. Models at THAT site include Lucy Li, Dillon Harper, August Ames.....all it does for me is piss me of that these good looking, curvier girls are there instead of here.
The photographers here have a tremendous rapport with the models as the models are usually having a lot of fun. I think this is because the models are not forced to please the camera so much. (heck, they hardly even LOOK at the camera.) Instead they are encouraged to please themselves and any other girls that happen to be nearby..and perhaps they are encouraged to experiment, which they do.
There is a section where some of the girls go to a tropical island. Once there, they run around naked and have sex with any girl they want. Unfortunately, the last time anybody went to one of these tropical islands was in 2009...doesn't stop them from re-posting them as new daily sets though.
Bottom line: I've been to this site about 10 times since 2001. For the last few times, the material has been so similar and so many sets have been recycled that I can no longer tell what is new and what is not. It is a great site to visit once. Just once. I keep forgetting
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Incredibly large collection of porn video segments. (65,000 of them!!!)
Wide variety of video types.
Just about every major porn star out there for the last decade or more. (10,000 of them!)
Navigation is not bad considering the size and nmumber of sites.
Cons:
There is SO MUCH stuff that it is a challenge to sift through if you have specific tastes.
Videos are porn movie segments, so the quality of video and performacne varies a LOT.
Much of the material is standard def and really old.
Many of the videos are very poor quality.
Only a few of the videos I've seen so far are HD, making them hard to watch on a large screen. Most of these have OK quality and fair content. (You can search for 1080 in advanced search)
The videos are not dated, either for video release date or publication on the site. (But you may see the release date at the very beginning of the video....as far back as 2001!)
It is impossible to determine the quality of a video before clicking on it as there is no resolution data.
There are a lot of industry "veterans"...only a few of which still look good, if you catch my drift.
Bottom Line:
OK, I have to start by saying that I am not a traditional porno movie guy. I have a huge collection of solo softcore and hardcore images and HD videos created on sites like Twisty's, Ron Harris, Digital Dream Girls, Passion HD, ALSscan, etc. Typically, videos on these sites are created especially for the sites and are studio grade and HD. I'm only trying to establish a baseline here so you know where I'm coming from.
Pornstars Network is like a day on Haulover beach, a nude beach in Miami. There is a whole lot to see, but you have to sift through a lot of really mediocre and a moderate amount of really bad stuff to find the real gems. There are some gems, though, which makes the visit worth it at least once.
The first thing that struck me about this site is the incredible volume of videos. There are 65,000 of them spread out across 52+ sites. And the different sites include almost every taste. All of the videos are segments from a DVD lasting about 10-25 minutes in length.
The 52 individual sites include niche sites like:
Tiny ass
My MILF story Hostile Fucking
Club Smash
Black dick, round ass
My first sex video
Jizz Mouthwash Only DP
And a bunch of sites dedicated to indivdual male or female porn stars.
Navigation is pretty good. The sites are listed by both name and type. Once in a site, the thumbnails show a few screenshots of the video and once you click on the video, you can see an entire set of screenshots before watching or downloading the movie. You can also search by pornstar name to list all of a pornstars videos. That's nice if you happen to like, say, Tori Black, and want to see all of her stuff. The site also lists, in order of popularity, every model they have. The list starts with Sasha Grey at number 1 and some girl named Krystal at number 10,057! Really! 10,057 pornstars! And, like I said before, the site lists 65,000 videos! So, if you are into porn videos, this place is a treasure trove.
OK, now for the more critical stuff. Like porn movies themselves, the vast majority of videos here just aren't that great. The video quality is marginal, direction is poor, the camera jitters or the angle is bad, the acting is awful, the performers are not appealing, etc. Pretty much ALL of these videos are not HD. Again, there are 65,000 videos! So even if 60,000 of them sucked, 5,000 would still qualify as good or better. That's way more than a lot of other sites, but the challenge is sifting through the junk to find the gems.
There are some other annoyances, too, but some of them are more about my tastes than the site. A LOT of these videos are really old by Internet standards. Number 1 on the pornstar list is Sasha Grey. Damn, she is hot, but she stopped doing porn in 2009. Jenna Haze, #4, has videos from 2001. I can understand how several of the top 20 can be, um, veteran porn starts, but none of this material is in HD, making it really hard to watch on a computer or bigscreen.
Much of the material is very, very raw. I realize that is the point in some cases, but many of the pornstars that are goddesses on sites like Twisty's or Digital Dreamgirls are just kind of cute at best in these videos. Tori Black, for example, does some terrific stuff on Twisty's and looks about as badass as any girl I've ever seen on that site. In the videos here, she's almost plain. That's more than a little dissapointing.
And then there are the European models that show up in niches like "Auditions" and "First time Videos". You've seen a lot of them on other sites and many are beautiful enough to stop a 747 in mid-flight. One of the reasons I sometimes prefer images to videos is because many of these girls are ungodly beautiful until they move, walk, talk or act. Some European and latin women tend to exagerate their expression as part of the culture. This site is the best example of this that I've ever seen. Some of these girls acting is so hideous that it is actually embarrasing to watch! I never thought that was possible before.... (Exception: Bambi)
There is a lot of other schlocky stuff too.
I know anal sex has been popular in porn for many years, but does it have to be included in almost every sex scene?
It also seems like, although they have nearly every pornstar out there, they DO NOT have those pornstars best work. Instead its the star's early work or off-beat or fetish stuff. There are 57 Sasha Grey videos on this site. Sasha was a pretty kinky pornstar but I KNOW she did some really nice one-on-one stuff as I've seen it elsewhere. Not here. Most of her videos here are gangbangs with 5+ guys, group sex scenes where she gets totally creamed or odd fetish scenes. Not a single straight sex scene with her on the whole site. Too bad.
OK, I'm out of space...
Bottom line: If you are into porn videos, you simply must visit this site, but be prepared to do a lot of sifting to find the stuff that really floats your boat.
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Erotic Beauty, formerly MetModels, leans a little more toward old-style softcore nude photos in natural settings. The models are generally not mainstream, so you find a few that are very interesting and different. The site is billed as "Naturally Beautiful amatuer nudes" which probably says it better than I can.
Cons:
Hmm. Can't quite put my finger on it.... a little slow, maybe. Nothing major wrong.
Bottom Line:
This is a really good amatuer nude site. It is good because the photography is good, the models are generally attractive and typically squeeky clean (can't tell if they are photoshopped..), and there is a tremendous quantity of stuff going back to 2005. And remember, this USED to be the site where the Met-Art network put its most beautiful models so even the old stuff is pretty good. (The new stuff is good, too!) Many of the sets are outside.
Navigation is average or a little better than average. You can search by model, most popular, date, etc. Images do not open in a new window, so you have to remember that if you are used to some of the other sites like this.
There is a HUGE variety of models here, all apparently european. They are also all natural. I don't recall a single enhancement. And the models mostly seemed to be enjoying themselves, or at least comfortable with the set and the photographer.
I got into the site this time on a $12.50 special because I was already a member of Met-Art.
Absolutely worth a visit, especially if you like natural nude photography.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Good quality videos.
Nice looking models.
More fetish material than expected
Some of the bonus material is very good.
Sets are dated in both main and bonus sites
Everything is HD!
Image zips available for all scenes
Cons:
Lots of effort to get you to sign up to the other two 21 networks.
Sex is competent, not necessarily exciting.
More fetish material than expected.
Filter function is counter-intuitive.
Some of the bonus material is better than some of the main material...
Bottom Line:
It seems that 21Sextury has decided to add shelf-space and increase revenue by breaking up their network into 3 separate networks. That's OK, I guess, but the lines between these networks are a little blurry and arbitrary and the material in some doesn't make sense.
Here are a few stats that I could figure out.
21 Naturals:
About 780 sets on main site.
About 250 female and male actors listed
Sets are all dated
Videos are all HD up to 1080p.
Videos are scored via thumbs up/down.
Bonus sites contain another 1000 or so videos.
Videos are NOT tagged so you don't know if you are watching an anal or fetish video until you are.
You can select anal,for example, in a search filter, but you cannot de-select it.
21 Naturals is billed as the "natural" site with young, fit girls in the no-longer-trending white-room style of video shooting. If it were a site filled with JUST naturals, as billed, I would be pretty happy...but it isn't. It is also the default location for foot fetish and anal videos. In fact, those types of videos seem to outnumber the videos that I signed up for. If you are into anal there is some decent stuff here. Unfortunately, I'm not. Same with foot fetish stuff. I'm not into that either. Oh well, I guess I should have read on the preview page......oh wait, they don't say ANYTHING about fetishes within 21 naturals on the preview page. They say you have access to over 15 sites and over 100 new videos a month and don't elaborate any further. They show 2 OTHER sites called 21foot-art and 21erotic-anal, but they look like different sites in the preview, not integral parts of 21naturals. Similarly, the images on the 21naturals preview page are young solo models or straight sex images that fit with "natural". No fetishes shown or implied at all. More than a little misleading, especially if you think, like I did, that one of those other sites might be 21sextury. Nope. They are all micro-sites with a specific theme like Asian, big boobs, booty, more anal, DP or whatever. Now, in all honesty, these are awesome bonus sites compared to those offered in some other networks, so I can't knock them. But even the bonus sites don't really lend themselves to categories in some cases. The Bitch Club for example, includes many different types of scenes including, yep, some foot fetish and anal.
The videos are well done, well lit, well directed and the models are usually quite beautiful even in the bonus sites. The bonus sites, by the way, have the same look and feel, both in navigation and in content, as the main site, so I suspect that these bonus sites may be available in the other two networks. Don't know for sure.
Every scene is scripted and acted out. The interaction between the couple is often somewhat limited and you often don't see much chemistry between them. It isn't that the chemistry isn't there, I guess, but you don't see it. Scenes are often slow and the couples often don't even look at each other during sex, with very little kissing or affection. Kind of weird for this style of video, which can be both more affectionate and more kinetic on some other sites.
They do have an interesting "filter" system that allows you to select options like anal so the resulting videos include it. But the "filter" is backwards. FILTER means exclude, not include. So if I de-select anal, I should not get anal. Instead, when I deselect anal, all I get is anal! Deselect foot fetish and anal? you get both. In the meantime, if all I want to see is latinas having straight sex, nope. I can choose latinas, but it includes all latina scenes including fetishes. I apologize for ranting about this, but it is clear that the webmasters don't understand that, although they've put great effort into search functions, these functions are counter-intuitive.
Overall, I would compare this site to WowgirlsX-Art or Joymii. The material is very similar, with interaction perhaps a little less intimate than those sites. But these webmasters really missed the mark on determining where to separate their three networks and how to market them. Half of the material here belongs in a new network called 21fetish.
Is it worth visiting? Well, yes, it is,especially for the relatively low price. If you like anal or foot-jobs, there is some good stuff here. There is also some good straight sex stuff here, all in HD. But I am going to penalize the site a couple of points because of the totally whacked way they threw the fetishes into this otherwise young-girl straight-sex site, how the filters don't work and how the landing page shows you locked sets from the other networks in an effort to bait you into signing up over there.
I hope you found this useful! If so, a trust vote would be appreciated!
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Relatively large collection of VR porn
Many major US porn stars
Huge variety of girls
Generally good quality
You get the entire Naughty America site.
Cons:
Video direction could be better
Videos are not continuous (brief fades out and in)
Many of the actresses are..um..very mature.
Navigation for VR is really poor. There is a VR tab that shows the VR videos by date, popularoty or your favorites based on your scores, but you can't search just VR for a particular actress. You get all of her videos with no clear indicator that any videos are VR until you click on them individually. Somebody didn't think this through.
Bottom Line:
As always, I'm just laying out what I see and experience about a site with a minimal filter. I encourage you to share your experiences as well.
Amazingly, I had never joined Naughty America before joining them specifically for the VR porn. Fortunately, a subscription for one of their areas provides access to the entire network and I generally like what I see in the network. This review is just for the VR portion of the network.
Naughty America VR-specific Stats:
About 95 VR sets
I can't tell how many models there are because they are not broken out into VR only. Probably about 120.
One new set every 3 or 4 days.
Sets are dated and scored on a 5 star scale
One large zip collection of medium resolution images for each set including a strip from the actress (kind of a screen test set) and then images that match the video, possibly screen caps.
Format is side by side 180 degree with a fish-eye perspective. So far, they seem pretty consistent with good optics.
Wide variety of girls and settings here, the same girls that are in the regular Naughty America videos. Some are beautiful, many are a little older and some are much older (40 plus). I have a very hard time watching the more golden-age girls.
I joined this site as an add-on to another site called Real Teens VR, which is all sub-25 actresses. The two sites are affiliated with the young stuff going there and everything else landing here. It's about $$.
As far as I can tell, all of these videos are participatory sex videos or 3-ways. There are no videos where you just watch a girl get off like I've mentioned about a few other sites. I think that is a plus. The scenarios are very basic, which is also a plus. Friend of your girlfriend, best friends girlfriend, friend of your daughter, stepdaughter, stepsister, etc. The category "Your mom's hot friend" is the tip-off that it is an older actress. For the most part, the male surrogate (you) in these sets is silent. There is occasionally some grunting or groaning or talking, which is a little disturbing sometimes.
One thing that this site does a little differently is use multiple male positions in many of the VR sets. So they may start out with you (the male participant) sitting. Then you may be prone, naked and inactive. Then you are standing or kneeling on a bed thrusting away having active intercourse. It is much more of a traditional POV style. The active positions can be nice, but the transitions are instantaneous so you don't have a chance to prepare, mentally or otherwise. Ideally, there should be warning or the set-up should transition as part of the video. A few of the videos lead into the transition with the girl saying an appropriate thing like "OK, now I want you to fuck me doggie style", but most do not.
Actually, I feel like the VR sets here are a little over-produced and under directed. There is a billboard image for each set that reminds me of old VCR video covers, so somebody has the budget to make these, but the direction in some of the sets is marginal. I can sometimes see the girl looking at somebody and clearly being directed to do something differently. And the videos often "drop out" for a second as they splice in two non-contiguous takes or cut out some error. That drop out can be very distracting because often the position will change, clothes will vanish, or an initial insertion will be missing. The removal of clothing and an initial insertion are kind of porn video gold from my perspective. They should never be omitted from a video. In a few videos the drop-out literally happens every few seconds. It really ruins the whole VR vibe. You can do cut-away's all day long in a traditional porn video, but you can't do them at all in POV or VR. Apparently somebody doesn't know that.
Tech stuff.
After looking through the 100 or so VR videos from their representative "billboards" I pulled down the images and about 2 dozen high-resolution Oculus-Rift/Vive videos. Unfortunately, the high resolution vids stutter and pixelate on my Vive set-up, so I had to pull down the medium resolution versions. Those work well and I can hardly tell the difference in the videos. (I am in the process of building a much faster machine for VR and will test with that, but apparently the fastest AMD CPU chip made to date isn't fast enough...Which explains why Oculus only supports Intel CPUs.) In any case, the video files are HUGE and they take FOREVER to download. (My entire VR collection is about 200 videos so far and it already exceeds one terabyte.) Expect it to take 20-30 minutes to pull down several files.
I'm about out of space...
Bottom line: Decent site. Huge variety. Popular and sometimes older porn actresses. It is totally and completely worth it to join Naughty America VR for the handful of VR sets you will like and the bucket-loads of POV and other regular video material that comes with it. But my rating is for the VR portion on
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.
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.
