| All Activity |
A summary of all the feedback from this user. |
| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
126
|
True Amateur Models
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Comment
No, mes, there are no zips.
Interesting, me finding your comment here, since I gave you a passing thought almost as soon as I joined. Why? Because every single picture is in landscape format! All of 'em, at least the ones I've seen thus far, and that's four full sets with over a hundred pics each. I joined last night after seeing some dazzling pics at a TGP.
Latest pics are big, at 1500x1126, and they look great on my 22 inch monitor, even though they don't completely fill it.
BUT: **no zips**. My arm is still hurting from all the clicking I did last night. The models here run the gamut from dead plain to cute as hell. Most of them are average to nice looking young ladies you'd see anywhere: true amateurs. This site gives you a real sense of intimacy with the models, even though there are hardly any videos. I'm not a photography buff at all and I can't judge these pictures in a technical or artistic context, but they certainly are stimulating. I found myself being truly, physically turned-on, which hardly ever happens to me at an adult site anymore. I had all but given up hope! My pic collecting has for a long time been mostly a spirit-lifting hobby, without much lift anywhere else, if you get my drift.
Each to his own, they say, and this site won't be for everyone. I'm a panty-lingerie nut but there is hardly any of that here; and yet these pics still work for me, in the way that naughty pictures are supposed to work. ;)
Not many mature models, but there are a few. I will do a full review after a bit of time here. I am very happy I joined, though it is a lot of work without zips.
|
01-15-09 10:10pm
|
Reply
127
|
Asian Spreads
(0)
|
Reply of
mbaya's Reply
Hi mbaya,
I always manually imput the U and P after sign-up, never cut and paste. I thought of the second possibility, being that with some sites there is a 30 minute to an hour delay in accessibility, but this wasn't mentioned anywhere on the sign-up page, or in the confirmation email.
I did get it sorted out via email (something about a problem with shared passwords and such), but it took a day and a half. They apologized and graciously extended my trial period. True, TBP doesn't mention the trial but it was offered on the join page, and I went for it. Maybe it's something new.
I wouldn't know about the DRM issue because I went in looking for pics and didn't bother with video, especially after seeing what a mess the site is. From what I can tell the vids are stream only. Maybe the trial limits you to streaming? I don't care because they all look like crap anyway.
I can't do a full review since I only took the trial, but I will say that for what this site offers, the regular sub price is highway robbery. The pictures are very small, averaging 512x768, and the material is dated. I saw a lot of this stuff on Newsgroups years ago. One could collect far better pictures on a semi-decent TGP.
The official TBP score is way too high, in my opinion.
|
01-15-09 09:15pm
|
Comment
128
|
Asian Spreads
(0)
|
|
01-13-09 12:05am
Replies (6)
|
Reply
129
|
Snot Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
mbaya's Comment
I've seen ads for this kind of stuff in Japanese TGPs. Nothing surprises me anymore. I visit a clips for sale site frequently and I've seen some strange stuff. Girls chewing gum and blowing bubbles, girls posing among balloons. I can understand a lot of the bodily function fetishes, since those deal with the naughty bits. But snot? None for me, thanks.
|
01-11-09 08:38pm
|
Reply
130
|
Jenny's Handjobs
(0)
|
Reply of
pissedatporn's Review
4-5 days? Holy crap. I'd be near insane. However, I've often had the thought that porn would be much improved if the male performers came to the performances only after a considerable downtime. It might be harder for them to go very long but the action would be more intense and more genuine, and the finish more of a spectacle, rather than the usual dribble, which you eloquently refer to.
As for handjob porn, this is surely the way to go. Handjob porn with a dribble at the end is useless. I am tempted to check this out - but your review is lacking in certain technical details. What is the quality of the vids? I mean size, bitrate. How many are there? How long are they? Are there various DL options?
|
01-08-09 07:50pm
|
Comment
131
|
Real Spankings Institute
(0)
|
|
01-04-09 10:19pm
Replies (0)
|
Reply
132
|
Karup's PC
(0)
|
Reply of
Karup's Reply
Thanks Wittyguy, and Jeff. I've just signed up at KarupsPC and am liking it a lot so far.
|
12-30-08 03:22am
|
Reply
133
|
Karup's PC
(0)
|
Reply of
TheRizzo's Reply
Thanks, TheRizzo, for the quick reply.
|
12-29-08 06:40pm
|
Comment
134
|
Karup's PC
(0)
|
|
12-29-08 05:39pm
Replies (7)
|
Reply
135
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
ummm...yeah...I guess that's what their called.
DOH!
|
12-23-08 12:17pm
|
Reply
136
|
N/A
|
Reply of
sitsat's Poll
I dislike all of the above, but bad boob-jobs are the worst, followed closely by big tats. I don't mind those little ones at the small of the back, hennas, I think they're called?
By the way, anyone know what to call those two little indents at the small of a girl's back? They are mostly noticeable with very fit, slender girls. A friend of mine said he couldn't stand them, but I think they're cute as hell.
Some guys have them too, but I prefer to pretend they don't.
|
12-22-08 08:25pm
|
Reply
137
|
N/A
|
Reply of
elonlybuster's Poll
My son came into my room late one night before I was able to close out a picture of a woman topless on my monitor. He said, "Whoahhhh!"
But a picture of a woman topless isn't porn by my reckonning, so I voted No-one.
Door-locks are a good thing.
|
12-19-08 04:33pm
|
Reply
138
|
Girls Planet
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Reply
I asked admins to delete my review, and I deleted my comment here myself.
|
12-12-08 05:46pm
|
Reply
139
|
Mature Erotic
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Comment
Thanks for the heads up, messmer.
|
12-12-08 03:08pm
|
Reply
140
|
Mature Erotic
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Comment
I've been looking at this one too, so I'll be checking back to see if someone answers. The webmaster responded to someone else's comment hereabouts.
|
12-09-08 11:21pm
|
Reply
141
|
DDF Busty
(0)
|
Reply of
badandy400's Reply
True, badandy, but allow me to explain why music ruins the experience of video for me, especially regarding solo models.
First, I am at an age where I don't look for this type of stuff solely to get off in a sexual way. For me, I enjoy the whole sensual experience of watching a beautiful woman strip and move and do various things, on video, and particularly if the vid is of decent quality. I've got good speakers and I like to keep the volume up a good ways. I want to hear the sound of high heels on a solid wood floor - something that you get in spades at a site like In The Crack. I want to hear the sound of the girl's clothing crinkling and rustling, the sound of her hands on it, the sound of female hands on nylon, the jingle of jewelry, the clicks and clacks and thuds and bumps of a warm human female in close quarters with ME. I like the ambient sounds in the room to a certain extent, though these should be kept to a minimum. Each sound generated by the girl, the floor, her clothes, her body, constitute another point of contact between her and me. If there is music, all these subtle points of contact are destroyed, or non-existent, and watching in silence doesn't help to generate a sense of union with the model, a sense of actually sharing the same and space.
It isn't just music that destroys the experience for me, but a chatty narrator is also a downer, in a serious way. The person behind the camera should be as anonymous as possible, a silent conduit between me and the girl.
Many sites seem to be doing silent videos now - silent as in no music and no talking - and I hope the trend catches on. In The Crack is by far the best for a one-on-one sensual encounter with a beautiful woman, with Panty Amateur a close second. I was hoping that DDF would give me much of the same, but thus far I am finding that at least half of the newest solo vids feature a music track, and the ones that don't seem to be deficient to some degree in sound quality, although that may be on my end. I must say I am a bit disappointed thus far, although the pic sets are top notch.
|
12-06-08 07:57pm
|
Reply
142
|
Aria Giovanni
(0)
|
Reply of
nygiants03's Reply
Aria's married to a guitarist? Cool, I'm a guitar...um...stylist, does that count?
Personally I'm glad she doesn't do hardcore.
I want to marry Aria.
|
12-05-08 04:54pm
|
Comment
143
|
DDF Busty
(0)
|
|
12-05-08 04:49pm
Replies (4)
|
Reply
144
|
N/A
|
Reply of
messmer's Reply
messmer, you and I think alike, at least a good deal of the time.
I HATE toys. I hate the sight of them. The most erotic masturbation vid I ever saw was of a girl with the corner of a glass table. The runner up was a woman on the arm of a sofa.
That being said, I can be objective and realize that there might be something wrong with me, since the vast majority of guys like watching women with toys. It bores me to no end.
|
12-05-08 03:27pm
|
Reply
145
|
Teens in Wet Panties
(0)
|
Reply of
littlejoe's Reply
OK, littlejoe, I reviewed a bunch of vids.
Most of the girl/girl vids I saw feature what sound like American girls. A few of the solo models have accents. My favorite, Vanessa, sounds German, and she has nine or ten vids where she feasts on her own dirty undies as well as those from her "panty girlfriends", as well as masturbating feverishly with them. Unfortunately, while I think she's very hot - she reminds me of a woman I worked with once and on whom I had a terrible crush - her vids are just too whacky and hectic for me to enjoy. I prefer much more subtle stuff. BUT, if a woman "tasting herself" is your biggest fetish, you would probably like them, although her vids aren't of the best quality. The best quality vids are mostly solo/strip/tease/masturbation scenes.
I didn't mention it in my review, but there are some b/g vids as well.
From what I can see, the content at this site seems to come from several different sources.
|
12-01-08 11:18pm
|
Reply
146
|
Teens in Wet Panties
(0)
|
Reply of
littlejoe's Reply
Well, if that's your biggest fetish you are bound to find something to like at this site.
I can't look through what few videos I've kept from here since my kids are over at the moment, but may give a better answer later on...
I can't tell you if most of the girls are European. Many of them have accents, but the dialog is so silly, for the most part I usually turned the sound off. Not only that, most of what I downloaded were solo vids.
Will try to give a better answer later.
|
12-01-08 05:59pm
|
Review
147
|
Teens in Wet Panties
(0)
75.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Fair amount of content up, including some 400 videos.
- Very attractive models for the most part.
- Wide variety of undies: from thongs to grannies.
- Navigation OK.
- Vids are mostly of good quality, with choice of mpeg or wmv.
- Pics are of fair to excellent quality.
- True to the panty-fetish niche.
- Plenty of extras like live shows, streaming video, contests, stories, polls, etc. |
| Cons: |
- Zip files do not work. Every one I tried to download returned a "file invalid or corrupted" message.
- "Forum" link leads to an error page.
- Pics in sets are put up out of order. Example: pic #3 might be on the last page.
- Lots of non-exclusive pic sets seen all over Netville, including Nubiles, Paul Markham, etc.
- Too many categories, and too much cross-over among categories.
- No search utility, no model index.
- No response from webmaster, after several days.
- Last pic update: 11/5. Vids update more frequently. |
| Bottom Line: |
This site is more for people with a panty-fetish than the person who enjoys seeing women in their drawers, which means the panties are an object of interest in and of themselves, which means we see them sniffed, sucked, licked, worn on the head, and inserted into various openings (guess which ones). The main theme seems to be the idea of a woman being turned on by her own panties, and her own excreta, which seems a bit silly to me. I never met a girl who was excited by her own panties, but then I've led a sheltered life.
That being said, there are many good pic sets here, although by and large I found them to be too long, cliched, and boring. Pic sizes are mostly OK, ranging from 863x1300 to 1450x963. Many old pics are very small. Inconsistency is a problem here.
I was very impressed by a few of the vids, but mostly bored silly, as the majority of them are uninspired and typical masturbation fodder with panties as the central theme. The lesbian vids are more interesting. Bitrates ranged from 1500 to 2140 on the high-end. Older vids are of considerably lower quality. As with the pics, inconsistency was a problem for me.
Both pics and vids are sorted into several categories, but there are too many of them, and sometimes only a negligible degree of distinction between one and the other.
None of the zipfiles work. I emailed the webmaster and am awaiting a reply, as well as left a message at the site. This greatly reduced my enjoyment of the site. For some reason, many pic sets are put up out of order, causing a sense of randomness and discontinuity, we well as tedium.
This site is near the top of official TBP reviews for panty sites, but there are many sites which are superior and yet are way down on the list, such as LV Panty and Panty Freek. I'll put this down to the fact that my tastes are probably much different than most. My two favorite panty sites are not even listed here.
This site could be improved by better organization of content (more categories doesn't necessarily mean better organization) and conistency of quality. A non-responsive webmaster is also a major problem. The zipfiles have not worked since I joined several weeks ago.
I would recommend this site to people with a fetish for panties, but not necessarily to people who like to see women in their skivvies. There is a major distinction between the two, or at least there is for me. |
|
12-01-08 11:23am
Replies (4)
|
Reply
148
|
ATK Premium
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Reply
I don't know, messmer, but I never noticed anything "darkish" or otherwise physically different about Toby's sets on ATK's various sites or in his work elsewhere. I did notice that his sets were extremely predictable and instantly recognizeable, at least with the older material, which comprises most of what I've seen since I'm not into the new style of softcore at all. Predictable as in: girl in doorway, expose one breast, expose other breast, lift skirt, turn around, get on floor, lift knees, open knees, turn on side, turn over...done. The models spent WAY too much time on the damn floor in most of Toby's vintage sets.
Over-all, however, I do agree that ATK lags behind some of the premier sites and are resting on their laurels technically and esthetically. I have always enjoyed my visits to their sites because of the sheer amount of content and the wide variety of photographers they use. But I do visit now far less than I did in the years past.
|
11-20-08 11:04pm
|
Reply
149
|
Only Cuties
(0)
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Review
Great review, Cybertoad. But one question. You said 800 *pics" zipped, did you mean 800 "sets"? 800 pics seems pretty chintzy.
|
11-14-08 12:52pm
|
Reply
150
|
Old Spunkers
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Reply
Top-notch review, messmer.
In regard to the site's title: I would never even wind up at the welcome page of a site with a name like that. I ended up subscribing at one site, or network, more correctly, with a real dud of a name because of a rewiew here. It's called Monster Pimps. The network is very docile and tame and is mostly about softcore shots of cheerleaders, with a few mild HC sites. Monster Pimps sounds like the EXACT opposite of that. Old Spunkers makes me think of gray-haired retirees at a Pinocle table suddenly feeling an itch in the diapers.
**No dis-respect to aged persons intended.
|
11-14-08 12:47pm
|
|
