I took them up on the Nubile-films and Joymii 2-for-1 offer. It was a great deal. I also saw a Femjoy $14.95 for a month offer but apparently it was only valid for a few days and I missed it. Make sure to sign up to their newsletters so you don't get left out of the deals!
Thanks. Try Joymii if you are looking for something a little edgier. Many of the models are the same, the photography is good and the sex is pretty real.
OK, I know what you mean, but I really think they have improved a LOT at Femjoy in the last 4 or 5 years. I keep all my images by year (10 years worth for Femjoy) and I just went back and opened some zip files from 2007. They are good, but sometimes these images are a little darker and sometimes the emphasis is on the overall locale with the model included in the image periphery someplace. This was pretty common in softcore several years back and was a technique made popular by Holly Randall and others from the days of Penthouse magazine (the "artsy" dark hazy look, the halo look and the High Dynamic Resolution look sometimes still used by Michael Ninn and others can go straight to hell as far as I'm concerned.) Honestly, a panoramic shot with the model in the image can sometimes be very beautiful, but it does not appeal to everyone, it should be used very sparingly and it distracts from the reason for the set, which is the model. Dark sets do crop up occasionally and I too get very frustrated with them. Fortunately, those sets are very rare. Digital cameras are much better these days, too, so the softness we used to see sometimes is also rare.
One thought....sometimes they mess with the thumbnail image to brighten it up for the text they are adding, not simply to improve the image. This may be why you sometimes see brighter thumbnails.
These days I download and unzip the zip files of entire sets instead of just individual images. I also have a single folder where I keep the very best high-resolution images because of the model, the pose and the image quality, not because of the locale. If an image I want to keep happens to have a little too much space at the bottom or top (often they are formatted portrait but could easily be cropped to be landscape), then I just load up Adobe Photoshop and crop it myself. I just looked at my jumbo best-of collection, about 1000 images, and I've probably cropped 75% of them, but I've only messed with color balance and brightness on about 10% of them. These are the cream of the crop models and images across about 30 sites, but they still required a little cropping to suit my tastes and emphasize the model over the locale. I imagine that may be the case for others as well.
Photographers these days need to be all things to all people. That means they need to do panoramas, full body shots, close ups, hands and feet, face shots, coy shots and open shots, all with both direct eye contact and averted eyes. A little of everything. Amazingly, probably 80% of the Femjoy sets and 60%-80% of the images in those sets for last few years are keepers for me. That may not sound like much, but that is an incredibly high percentage compared to the average soft core site I visit. Of course, your mileage will vary, but I think the photographers at Femjoy do a very, very good overall job these days of keeping their audience happy.
Current Member for over 3 months (at the time of review).
Pros:
Some of the best European models
Wonderful sets and lighting
Top notch photography
Great interaction
2 sets a day
Models generally are not shy
Good site layout
3 image file/zip file sizes for each set.
Images up to 5500 x 3700 pixels(a 6 foot poster)
Excellent value for the money
Cons:
Navigation not up to par with the best sites
Videos are a bit snoozy
Image/zip file sizes are odd/archaic
Site is not quite as reliable as some others.
Bottom Line:
I've been a member of this site 5 or 6 times over the years and keep forgetting to write a review. It keeps drawing me back.
Here's the good and bad (absolutely no ugly).
This is a site with photography that ranks up there with the best in this genre...perhaps THE best. The photo sets and models themselves are generally spectacular. In fact, there are a few exclusive models here that are the absolute pinnacle of beautiful female form. Translation: They have perfect, perfect bodies, pretty faces and bright eyes. The models are 18 to mid-20s, fit, clean, totally natural, mostly clean shaven and just drop-dead gorgeous. Very few piercings and next to no tattoos. The more recent models are very open. I've never used this word in a review before. Delicious.
Lets talk about content:
The site has been around since 2004. I can't get a good read on sets, but it is at least 3000 or so, plus about a video or two a week for at least the last few years. Of course the older sets tend to be a little more "observing a naked girl in the woods" but for the past few years, the shooting formula has been damn near perfect. Great mix of full body and close-ups in various poses. Sets and outdoor locations are great. Interaction is great. Lighting is consistently terrific. Posing is great. Nothing awkward or uncomfortable anywhere.
The videos are sometimes of the photo shoots and sometimes shot separately on the same set. The girls start naked or disrobe and are usually undressed by the halfway point. Any close-ups, etc are reserved for the last few minutes of the video and there is rarely any masturbation. These are not bad videos, but they are not terribly exciting unless you really want to see how a particular model moves. They come in multiple sizes and formats from standard definition (272p) to 1080p. Older ones are in 720p.
Just a reminder that this is soft core. There is no guy/girl sex, no toys, no insertions, etc., with maybe a little bit of masturbation and few girl/girl sets just touching and leaning. (If you want that in this format, go over to Joymii.) At Femjoy, you just get beautiful unobstructed view.
So..what's not to like? Well...I know the webmasters are working on improvements, but there are a few things that keep me from rating this site right up there with the best. I know they will be reading this so forgive me if I direct some of my points to them.
First, the navigation is a little off. there are a few too many clicks to get where you want to be and not enough new-window options. When you click on a set from the home or updates page, a new window opens for that set and then all actions happen in that window. Click to see images, and a limited number of images appear in a gallery. Click on "show all" (nice pun, I guess) and all of the images appear. What, are we still in dial-up times? Just show me ALL the images when I ask to see ALL images, please. This doesn't sound like much, I know, but it is a little odd to navigate through. ..Then there is selecting a picture. When you click on an image from a gallery, it opens up in the same window that the gallery of images was in. Click back and you are taken back to the top of the gallery page regardless of where the image was that you clicked on. This may also seem like a little thing but when looking through many images, it is unnerving. What SHOULD happen is that each set should open a window/tab and each image within that set should open a window/tab. Or better yet, the whole thing should be user selectable like several of the other top-tier websites are. To their credit, the navigation options once looking at an image are pretty good (larger image, next, previous and back to gallery).
And my last little nitpick is with the file sizes. There are three image size choices: "Quickview Edition" images are 800k wide. "Collectors Edition" images are 1200k wide and "Poster-Size Edition" images are 4500-5500k wide. Wait, what? (Insert captain Piccard meme here) Who the fuck looks at 800k images anymore? Even iPhones are 960 pixels wide/tall! My smallest computer screen is 1900 pixels wide. So the two smallest images sizes are waaaay too small to fill my computer screen and the only other option involves 5500 pixel, 2 meg images and a zip file that is a third of a gig! There is just something seriously outdated with this thinking. I appreciate the larger images, but they are a little too large to be loaded and kept exclusively. What is needed is a 1200, a 2000 and a max resolution (4500+) image size. I have been told they are working on fixing this and will happily report when it is fixed.
Bottom line? If you are into soft core and like young, OMG beautiful girls, don't hesitate. Just join this site. This is one of the few sites that I would recommend for an annual membership because of the terrific soft core content. There is enough here to keep you entertained for months.
Not life, just one or two sites. As you know, most of my reviews are quite positive and I really do try to give sites a 2nd chance by rejoining when a bad experience may have been a fluke.
I would suggest Irish Creme but since you are lactose intolerant, maybe some warm brandy? It's not eggnog but you won't notice after a while... :-)
I got another "please come back" offer today for, get this, $7.95 a month. The teaser shows a new site called "brutalPOV" which looks like an interesting concept of POV bondage sex. So I went to the site. Entered all my info and clicked Join only to be presented with a new page that shows the monthly rate at $39.95!!!!! If you get this offer and you have been a member before, it looks like the only way to actually cash in on it is to use a different browser and different email address...maybe. That's what I had to do last time. Fetish Network...where the biggesst fetish is fucking over the customers. If I decide to run the gauntlet and sign up again, I'll update my review.
Also, it looks like the link in PU for $9.95 is broken.
First, the site has stopped creating new material for most of the old sites and created a few new ones that are even lamer than the old ones.
Second, cancelling is even more difficult than before. There is a cancel page, but all it does is offer you a discount and does not confirm you have been cancelled. THe only clickable option on the page is to continue your membership. They are now using a "service" from Segpay called Segpay gateway. If you call, email or chat with Segpay, they insist that they have no record. I had all of the billing information right in front of me and he still said he had no record. (Really sucks on their part....I guess I'll never use Segpay again). The ONLY way to cancel is through the web site. I have seen a lot of crappy billers before, but this one, supported and condoned by an otherwise decent biller, is the worst. After 10 minutes chatting with a guy at Segpay, he basically said that the only thing I can do is contact the webmaster at Fetish Network. Wow. That's incredible.
So all of the folks here telling you about cancellation issues are absolutely correct. Cancelling at Fetish Network is a pain much more real than any of the simulated fetish crap they post.
Looks like these guys are sending out $9.95 offers to former members or to some list they got. I decided to re-join, but when I rejoined using the same info as before, I got some kind of "not eligible for offer" response. Interesting... When I tried it again and used a different email address, there was no problem. Goofy. It looks like there are some new micro sites but it also looks like a few other ones I wrote about before have stopped updating. I'll write a revised review within the next few weeks.
Well, it looked like updates were happening every two weeks or so, but I've been a member for almost a month now and there have been no updates since February 2nd. More than a little disappointing.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Young attractive models.
Newer sites seem to have found a niche.
Newer video quality is good.
Site layout is pretty good.
Navigation is pretty good.
Videos are user scored on a 5 point scale.
Updates are dated.
Download speeds are OK.
Current sites are 1080p.
A few videos are 4k.
Cons:
Many older sites no longer update.
The newer sites are not BDSM sites, they are "Simulated Peril" sites. (Can we coin that phrase, maybe?)
Only 1 update a week across all sites.
HUGE video blocking watermarks on every video
Infuriating page load delays until you scroll down to view the next sections.
Images but NO ZIP FILES!
File resolutions and sizes not listed.
Video file naming could be better.
Repetitive nature of themes is unfortunate.
Very limited set and male actor variety.
OH. Cancellation process is worst on Internet!
Cancel fine print says you have to cancel at least 30 DAYS prior to next billing. That's nuts!
Bottom Line:
I'll start by saying that my review is primarily about the dedicated, updating micro-sites in this "network".
When it comes to BDSM material, I think the gold standard is probably the Kink network. That network provides a lot of really raw, tie-the-girl-down-and-make-her-come-a-million-times true BDSM that is consensual but incredibly intense. Some of it is a bit too brutal for me, though, although it is clearly all consensual.
In the middle, I don't know, several sites where a model/actress is tied down and you can't quite tell if she is acting or not when the guy puts a vibrator to her clit. BBB comes to mind, but there is a moderate amount of acting there.
Then there are these "simulated peril" sites. The girl is tied up loosely or only has her hands tied together during sex, with a backstory that implies peril. Sites in this category include the main micro-sites here and those on the sister site punishteens.com. These sites may have popular models and porn stars, but the scenes are nowhere near as intense as scenes found on true BDSM sites. (The best of this simulated type that I ever saw was on the Hustler site. Guy breaks in and attacks the girl, girl gets a gun, girl makes guy seriously fuck her, then at the end the girl points the gun at him and after fade-to-black, shoots him. Awesome Karma!) Sorry, I digress, but it was best-of-genre and memorable.
All that said, there are 7 micro-sites here that I consider current and not a purchased collection.
They are: (scenes in p
Teen Creeper (8 )
Teens in the Woods (12)
Helpless Teens (42)
Brutal Casings (56)
Brutal Pickups (12. last update: 5/16) Sexual Disgrace (130. last update 8/16)
Strap-on Squad (60. last update 9/16)
Sexual Disgrace is a pretty good traditional dungeon-style BDSM site with a lot of content. Strap-on Squad is an all girl dungeon-style site. Both of these seem to be no longer be updating.
Note that there is 1, one, one, ONE primary male actor on all of the sites listed above, except Teen Creeper, and he is also often found on punishteens as well. He is a very, very busy guy.
There are also 11 "collection" sites that do not update, many of which are so old (i.e. 2011) as to be all medium to standard def. There are a total of about 1,130 videos in these collections. There is some true BDSM here and some good images.
Just in case you can't guess, here are the themes:
Teen Creeper: Break-in and forced sex. 1 or 2 girls. A few of these scenes are pretty good but all are nearly identical in format. This site uses a different male actor who is a good creeper.
Teens in the Woods: Girl(s) in the woods find their way to a house where a forest ranger serial rapist lives.
Helpless Teens: Stranded girls who need a ride do stuff in the front and the back of a van for that ride. Many get dragged back to a dungeon-like bed for additional sex.
Brutal Castings: Exactly as it sounds. Starts out nice, then the guy goes ape-shit on the girl, ties her hands and screws her.
Brutal pick-ups: Girl on a street gets pulled into an alley, hands tied and screwed.
They all sound pretty good, don't they? Well, although the first one of each of these that you watch will be entertaining (Ava Taylor in Brutal Castings, for example, or Gina Valentina in the first few minutes of Teen Creeper), they are all so similar that they quickly get boring. Add that the girls are usually not really tied up and are clearly just doing their usual porn acting stuff, complete with the usual porn sequences from blow job to money shot, and the whole thing goes pretty limp. Honestly, the best part of each scene is the moment when the guy "grabs" the girl and you can't quite tell if the initial reaction from the girl is acting or not. (That sounds really creepy, but, hey, that's why I joined!) The limited themes and settings, the repetition and the occasional re-use of an actress on different micro-sites, detracts from the overall entertainment value.
Overall, the sets are well done and well lit. The guy does a pretty good job of acting and the girls' acting varies. Video quality on these is good,although the actual video size is not consistent across all the sets. You don't know if "HD Hi" is 2K or 4K until you start the download and file sizes are not listed.
The newer sites have a frustrating "feature". When viewing the 4-8 sets on a page, the section of the page that is not visible does not load until you scroll down. So you spend a truly stupid amount of time waiting for the page to load as you scroll. This is unnervingly slow during peak internet hours. 4 to 8 sets per page? Why should I have to wait?
Oh, and there is no easy way to cancel.
Uh oh. Ran out of space. I would recommend this site to those who really like the simulated BDSM style, or for anyone looking for a bargain in older true BDSM. I downloaded what I wanted and will probably not be back
I joined a few days ago after seeing this site on the TBP frontpage. Saw the other messages here and thought I would get a jump on cancelling. Support page is totally useless for cancellation. Waiting on response to my email cancellation request. Hopefully, the part that says (exact quote)" All cancellation requests MUST be made 30 days before the next billing cycle." is not correct because if it is, they will almost automatically get everyone for 2 months.
Update: I did get an email back from support today confirming they had cancelled my subscription and I will not be charged again. Email request was on the 8th. Response was on the 12th. Keep that lead time in mind if you sign up and decide to cancel.
Somebody "not-trusted" me because I dissed this site so I signed up again thinking maybe it had changed. Navigation is a little different. Sets are still not dated. Still one set a week. Now only about 275 sets total. One new model I recognize from Hegre.com (Ageta here, Magdelena on Hegre, one of the circus twins...) The rest are amateurs. Still very little make-up. Still very clinical. Sstill very little eye contact. Mostly horrible photo-set videos showing how gawky most of these girls are. Many recent release videos are not full HD and several recent videos have opening credits listing a different web site (so it is older purchased content). I wrote an updated review but it dissappeared when my PU login timed out so all I have time to write is a comment. Still rate it less than 70. There are a few much better "flexy" sites and several softcore sites that do flexy occasionally, but much better than this. I just spent $30 to see if maybe my impression of this site was wrong. It wasn't.
That's fair. I think all of the new stuff is in HD but many of the better looking models are in older SD stuff. The popular models I mentioned are in HD. I'll change the review to reflect "many" instead of "most"
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
A few attractive models.
2 models you've seen that are now pretty popular
Decent number of sets
Newer videos are full HD (1080)
Straightforward navigation
A few pretty good videos
(I'm really..um..stretching here to find Pros)
Cons:
No dates on sets
No indication of frequency of updates
Mediocre photography
Older sets have no video or really poor video
Several of the "Naked Gymnasts" aren't naked
Very basic navigation
Image downloads in one size (medium or small)
Many videos are SD
No model pages or search.
Site layout and design is ancient.
Bottom Line:
This was a clone site for Naked Gymnast, which apparently is gone, but this site is identical. My original review was for NG, but since that site is gone, all of the reviews are gone also. So...I'm writing an updated review here.
I saw a couple of very nice sample images from this site someplace and decided to sign up. The site is somehow affiliated with Club Seventeen and there was a cross-check that would have signed me up for it if I had not unchecked it.
I like the flexy-sexy type of images and the girls in this category are usually very fit. For this site, the analogy is more like that of a nude beach. What you think of and what you experience are usually two very different things. This is the reality version of nude beach. A few honeys and a lot of forgettable things. It isn't that the site is horrible, it's just nowhere near where it should be compared to other sites today. Even among sites in this niche, this site is sub-par and a little less than truthful in the way it presents material.
This site has about 500 sets that are not dated. There is a little log that announces updates about once a week. An update might be a set or a video. No idea if they are recycling. Most sets have between 50 and 100 images. One size, 1670x2500 or so max. Older sets are 1200x700 or so. Older sets also have NO ZIP FILES. Most models have 2 ore 3 sets, so there are probably about 100-130 models. Just 4 pages of sets with about 140 sets per page. The sets on the last page are really odd and many are not nude at all. There are no model pages so if you see a girl you like, too bad, you have to look through 500 sets to find her again. A few sets are linked though, but the logic of why some are linked and some are not escapes me. A few girls have different names in their different sets. Purchased stuff? Maybe.
Watermarks on the images say different things: Most say Flexyteens.com. Many say naked-gymnast, which was a clone site.
The models are typically young, but there is an odd lack of sexiness that one would normally associate with young, fit gymnasts. Most of the sets are practically clinical and many of the poses are neither gymnastic nor flexy and certainly not sexy, just strange. Curl up like a ball on a bar-stool strange. These are all eastern European girls with eastern European names. There is very little make-up...well...maybe it is gymnast make-up, I guess. And zero glam. Most girls start out dressed and in some sets the girl stays dressed. Oh, and for most models there is little to no eye contact with the camera. That is a significant factor in the clinical feel.
The two models that I see here (I went through the entire list of 500 sets in about an hour with a lot of "nope, nope, nope" on the first page), are Melena A. and Annett A. from Met-Art, both very popular. The sets of these two models here are different from the other sets on this site...better...almost like they are the marketing teasers. Purchased, maybe. Certainly shot in a better studio. And unlike pretty much every other model on this site, these models know how to look sexy...and how to look at the camera.
Here's another gauge. I just looked to see what I saved from the 500+ sets on this site. 6 photo sets and 6 videos from 4 girls I considered attractive (two were the ones I mentioned above, more recently at Met Art.). The rest were totally forgettable.
Bottom line? Pass. Maybe if it is a side-bar on club Seventeen for $10 or so, but for $30 this site is not worth visiting by itself. There are better sites in this niche for your money.
I signed up for naked gymnast and was surprised to see watermarks that said flexyteen. So I went to Flexyteen and was able to log in with me NG account info. EXACT same site! The only difference was the text across the top of the 1999 web page. I would have been really pissed if I had signed up for both. See my review under Naked Gymnast.
I don't understand why anyone would join a site that has no preview whatsoever. You go to this site and click the I'm an adult link and go directly to the sign-up page. None of the links on the main page are active, so you can't see the models page, any statistics, sample sets, anything. Not a single sample. That makes this site a huge nope for me. I'm amazed that a TBP review can even give this site a 69....
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Good selection of videos.
Many different sources.
Amateur and pro material.
Preview images provided
Cons:
Site is a pay-per-download marketing venue for other VR sites.
NO original material
VERY SLOW download speeds
Frequent download failures
Bottom Line:
This is one of a growing number of pay-per-download sites. Downloads average about $10 each and come from various other sites that are seeking additional ways to get their videos seen and/or are looking for extra revenue.
In this new age of unlimited downloads, I don't really approve of this type of site, but there are a few that provide independent material on behalf of their clients. This site is NOT one of those sites. This site resells videos that are otherwise available from other websites. They make a few bucks for distribution, the author-site makes a few bucks in roylaties and they also get their name out there. Unfortunately, what these author-sites don't realize is that it is far too easy to provide a negative impression when a pay-per-download site does a poor job like this one does. My impression of Badoink, for example, is somewhat worse than it was when I wrote a review on them last month.
Bottom line? Considering that 3 downloads here equals a one month subscription to most sites, check to see the SOURCE of the video you are purchasing and go there to see if simply subscribing to the site would be a better option. If the content-source site looks like a better deal, sign up! If not, go ahead and download it here but be prepared to wait longer than you should for it to download.
I just spent $10 at Gamelink to download a VR video of Megan Rain. Looked OK so I thought I'd try it. (I do not normally buy pay-per-download services because they usually suck, but I thought I would try this one and write about it here.... Ha!) It took 3 HOURS for the 5 gig file to download and 2 hours along the download failed. I tried to restart it but could not so I started over. While waiting I decided to take a look at the piece that had already downloaded. Opening credits? BADOINK! It was a Badoink video! I went back and looked and there in tiny text one one of the pages it says studio: BadoinkVR. My Badoink subscription just expired and this video was new. So this file was either authorized by Badoink or stolen and loaded here so somebody could make some money. Either way, selling the video on a pay-per-download website is an INCREDIBLY SLEAZY thing to do. I'll be reaching out to the Badoink webmasters to let them know. Be very careful to check the attribution on these videos. You may be MUCH better off just going to the source web site.
Update: I heard back from support at Badoink that they use Gamelink VR to "market" some of their videos. Well, that really sucks and is incredibly disappointing. When a web site places their material on Pornhub, you can preview it and it is incredibly clear where the material is from. Here, there is no preview, you get a couple of pictures and it isn't really obvious where the material is from. And the download speeds are SO BAD. So I'm still saying don't waste your money here. If you can tell where a video is from, just go to that site.
Nice review. It looks like a genuine and natural amatuer site. But a 97? Really? That is your 3rd highest review rating EVER out of several hundred reviews that include prety much every soft and hardcore site that ever was. Looking at the models and the available videos from this site, I am hard pressed to figure out why it rates so high. I suppose I will just have to join to find out. :-)
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Several very popular Czech nude models here
Site layout is decent
Updates every other day or so.
Top notch photography
Models are tastefully done-up
As the name implies, this is a glamour site.
Cons:
All of the sets are older.
Site sometimes makes you log in again.
Kind of pricey for what you get.
Not all models are fully nude.
Most sets are not very explicit.
Downloads are very, very slow.
Sets are not dated, just numbered.
No original shoot dates.
Bottom Line:
Glamour.CZ is a fairly well done site overall, similar to the photographer-centric sites in the Met Art network, probably most similar to Arrotica Archives. The models are familiar and most are OMG beautiful, Iveta, Little Caprice, Monika Vesela (104 sets!), even a bunch (33 sets) from Marketa Bolonova(which is why I joined). But although the sets are generally very good to excellent, they are older material. Monika and Marketa have not been modeling for at least 8 years, probably more like 10+.
The overall format of the site is model-centric, so if you go to a model page, you will see a listing of all o the sets and some thumbnails. Click on a set and you will see thumbnails of every image in that set.
Most of the sets are not very explicit, although the models do look pretty amazing just posing. Monika Vesela, who is known for relatively explicit sets elsewhere, is for the most part just standing around in most of her 104 sets here. She is quite young in several sets, but they are not in any kind of order. All of Marketa's sets are from later in her career and when she was no longer very explicit. This is well done glam stuff mostly.
This is an image-only site and images come in small and large. Large is 4000x2666. No idea what small is. Downloads are very, very, VERY slow. A 145MB zip file takes about 12 minutes to download. Images take painfully long to display. I can almost hear the modem crackle.
Sets are between 25 and 45 images each and it is fair to say that they break up sets a little....well...a lot.
Overall, this isn't a bad site, especially if you fancy some of the models that they seem to have a lot of. Go browse through the model directory in the free section. If there is anyone there that you lust over, go ahead and sign up.
I'm looking at the pages I can see (not at all a tour or set of samples) and I recognize a lot of models that have not been shooting since 2011 or earlier. Awesome models, but long gone from this business.
Can anyone tell me if they are updating and, if so, is it new shoot material or archive stuff?
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 less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
Decent collection (about 1000 sets, I think)
Generally very attractive models
Many familiar models
Excellent value for the money
Photography is generally very good
Images available up to 3200x4800
For the price, you will not be disappointed!
Cons:
Navigation is extremely basic
Site formatting is also very basic
Only a couple of videos (it is a photo site...)
Only 2 zip file sizes (but good choices)
Only 2 image file sizes (but big enough)
Bottom Line:
For less than $10, I figured I didn't have much to lose and I ended up getting MUCH more than I expected.
This site has several years worth of about 5 updates a week. The models are generally Eastern European. Many have been in Femjoy or MetArt, but there were also many, some quite beautiful, that I had not seen before. Some of the best European models on the planet are on this site, although most have different names. If you like Dominika, Katya or Mila on Met Art, they are all here. There are even a few nice sets of the now-retired but forever revered Marketa.
Neither the site nor the sets are quite as polished as some of the more expensive softcore sites, but I guess that is to be expected in this price range. There are many models that I've seen elsewhere and I just cant tell if the sets are from when they were younger, or if the girls just aren't wearing make-up. The tendency here is to use less or no make-up, so if you are not into the glam look, this is another treasure-site.
The sets are generally good quality, both indoors and outdoors. Lighting is good. The amount of "reveal" depends on the models, but most sets start out in lingerie or fully nude and about half have close-ups. There are no toys, insertions, etc., although there are a few scenes with two girls. This is not an "in your face" site...more of a girl-in-the-woods or girl-in-her-bedroom thing. 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.
All sets are dated on the main thumbs page for each year. File names are reasonable for both the images and the zip files, so you don't have to go through hoops to save them. Since each set is listed since the site was created, you can tell that there is no recycling going on like at some other sites.
The navigation on the site is very, very basic. The update page is not formatted, so the update thumbs just go down the left side of the screen for ever. The two choices under each thumb are "screen sized" (currently 934x1400) or "print sized" (currently 3930x5988) older images are slightly smaller, but still pretty big.
So for navigation, you click on an option under a set image (screen or print) and then click on an image. To get back to the main page, you back out with your browser. There are no pop-ups or viewers. Once in a set, you can also download a zip file of images in the size you chose to get into the set (screen or print). NO toggling between image sizes or even choosing multiple zip file sizes once you commit to screen or print for the image sizes. No forward or backward movement once you chose an image to look at. Just page back and pick another image (or shift-click to open a new window). This works, but it seems so 1990. Perfectly acceptable, though, for the no-frills price.
I would have scored this site a little higher if it were not for the navigation. It is an honest site that is in the business of providing quality softcore images. They don't fluff it up and they don't steal your money. That is a rare and terrific thing in this industry and I will be back both for the images and to help ensure they stay around.
Bottom line? This site is a terrific deal! If you are tired of paying $30 to get into a new site only to be disappointed with quality or quantity of content and you like the softcore genre, then this site is a must-visit. C'mon! for under $10, you've got absolutely nothing to lose!
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.
