| All Activity |
A summary of all the feedback from this user. |
| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Review
26
|
ATK Galleria
(0)
95.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 4 months prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
-- Extremely large amount of photo content.
-- High-quality photos/videos.
-- Outstanding site layout and user interface.
-- Custom features--user-defined zip files, preferences, settings etc.
-- Daily, high-quality updates. |
| Cons: |
-- Could use a little more diversity in ethnicity(latin, afro, etc.) |
| Bottom Line: |
I would classify this site as tastefull and traditional erotic nude photography. There are hardcore photo and video sets but the main emphasis is on erotic/nudes and exposing the model's natural beauty. No extreme stuff here and everything is in good taste.
Most of the models are of the young, early twenty-something variety. Although the majority fit a cerain profile--thin, well-toned etc, you can find a large diversity of model types spread around the very large number of photosets, once you discover the search feature. This is one of those sites that could keep your interest for quite a long time. There is no way you could manage to get through all of the content in a one-month period.
The only thing lacking is a more diverse representation of ethnicities. If it wasn't for this, I would not hesitate to give the site a perfect score.
The site layout and design is about as good as it gets. Serach utilities, custom zip downloads, and a number of other features are available. Everyting seems to be where it should be and you won't get lost in the large amount of content available.
The videos are of high quality and available in HD, but the emphasis is on photography. The quality of the photography ranges from semi-pro to professional, with most belonging to the latter category. The technical quality of the photos themselves ranges from eye-popping, HD quality to so-so, depending on the skill and experience-level of the photographer. There were times I was thinking, 'I would love to see this or that photographer shoot this model.' It is hard to classify this as a negative, however. It is unrealistic to expect every photoset and photographer to meet one's own personal demands regarding tastes and likes.
The number of photographers is also pretty diverse and you get a good range of styles. You can use the search function to display all sets from the photgraphers you like. In fact, there is so much content that, after a while, you can pick out the photographer just based on poses, settings, lighting, etc.. Most of the photographers seem to be into their work and are not just running around with a camera, trying to churn and burn content.
You will come across a few poorly-done photosets(blown-out images, overexposed, poor lighting, etc). But these are usually older sets and are the rare exception, rather than the norm.
The content is mostly unique. Although you will find a number of professional models here that you have seen elsewhere, the majority will likely be completely new to you.
The only people that probably would not like this site are those into extremes, either in model types or images. There is hardcore action, but no action like atm or other in-your-face kind of stuff.
This site is definitely a photography-lovers gem. |
|
06-03-12 01:36pm
Replies (4)
|
Reply
27
|
Top Heavy Amateurs
(0)
|
Reply of
gaypornolover's Reply
Thanks. I usually try to supply whatever info I can to try to help people get an honest opinion. In this case, there was only so much to supply and it is all negative. I honestly can't think of a positive.
I really feel bad for anyone who actually signed up on the 3 or 6 month plan. I just signed up for the 30 day and always do this as I will cancel it right away if I find it is not for me or not what was advertised. In this case, I got burned for $23. Certainly not the end of the world and it is much better than getting taken for $60 for the 3-month plan.
IMO, there should be something like a warning list that sites like this put together to let people know that people are reporting questionable practices or content. Sites certainly can't ban a site just because one person like me says so and I wouldn't expect them too.
I couldn't write anyone and demand money back because their is nobody to write. No customer service or contact info. I am partly to blamew. I should have paid more attention that this info was missing and with any business, I always like to know someone will field an inquiry.
It is technically difficult to call thease guys crooks as they did not falsely rerpresent what you will see at the site--busty amateurs. However, the total lack of qualtiy of the material and the problems with access is such that it is hard to not believe you were taken and that there is someone accepting the payment from CCBill and thinking, "Enjoy, sucker."
I could let CCBill know but obviously the sensitive nature of this and the stigma makes that unpalitable. What do you say? "The nude photos of boobs are mostly small images that are out of focus and grainy shit" ?
IMO, these kinds of vendors do a disservice to the legit vendors out there and gives the business a bad name. It also causes consumers to lose trust. It just reinforces the stereotype that some people hold that porn is run by crooked and unethical cretens looking for a quick dollar. I do not aggree with that opinion for the entire industry but regarding this vendor, it's hard not to make that judgement.
|
06-02-12 01:03pm
|
Review
28
|
Top Heavy Amateurs
(0)
50.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
None |
| Cons: |
-- Photo quality is abysmal.
-- Photosets are largely screen captures of grainy videos and are saved with high JPEG compression.
-- Video quality is even worse.
-- Site frequently freezes.
-- Advertusing bares no resemblence to actual site content. |
| Bottom Line: |
Anyone who has read my reviews in the past knows I am pretty fair and impartial. In an effort to maintain this reputation, I will limit my comments to the facts.
I am hard-pressed to say anything positive regarding my experience at this site.
The site design and layout is extremely primitive. When I was able to access the content, I was exceedingly dissapointed with the content and quality of images and videos.
The vast majority of images are small resolution photos that are saved with extremely high JPEG compression. The Pixelation is severe in the majority of images. Sets that are displayed as HD image quality consists of one or two images saved with 1400x800 resolution, with the remainder at 700x400 or below. I did not come across an image that did not contain compression artifiacts. More than half the images are blurry enough to be useless and appear to be nothing more than screen captures of videos.
The video quality is, in many cases, worse than the photo image quality and at times appears to be video captured with an older cell phone.
Connecting to the site is problematic. I frequently locked up and often could not access video content.
The advertising images are high-quality, but this kind of content is nowherre to be found in any of the actual content in the members area.
In short, I could not in good faith reccomend this site to anyone interested in this genre, whether it be photos or videos. I would even go so far as to supply an entirely subjective opinion, which is that sites like this give online porn a bad name. |
|
06-01-12 01:01pm
Replies (2)
|
Reply
29
|
We Are Hairy
(0)
|
Reply of
Basil's Reply
Hi. Thaks for the reply.
Thanks for the offer. I wouldn't bust your butt just over me, however. I can get to the afternoon Saturday show when I am inclined. I would think most people would prefer evening shows(After 6PM Local) on weekdays. But that is obviously hard to accomodate, given the diversity of memberships on different sides of the pond.
Maybe it is a just and fitting punishment, as the US Porn Industry is responsibile for starting the whole shaving craze in the 90's. Thankfuly, Europe never fell completely under this spell and kept their senses about them. :)
|
02-06-12 08:24pm
|
Reply
30
|
We Are Hairy
(0)
|
Reply of
monty4321's Review
I just signed up recently, as well. I didn't pay much attention to the video content as that is not my area of interest.
As far as photo quality, I definately have seen examples where focus issues are present. I don't recall seeing any glaring exposure problems, however, and I am pretty anal about things like that. Then again, I ddin't go through every set.
For me, I don't really find the girls unattractive, I think it's just that they are not over-glamorized and elements such as makeup are kept in check so as not to detract from the natural theme of the site.I certainly wouldn't meet any of these girls on the street in person and think they were ugly. Most men would find them pretty if they walked by them on the street and passed them, IMO. I think we are just so used to seeing the heavily airbrushed and post-processed porn with heavy makeup and lipstick, lingerie, and heavy facial cake powder, that when we do come across models in porn that are not made up in this way, we tend to rate them as less attractive when compared to the pro studio standard of perfection. As an example, have you ever seen a news-babe off the set, without being under the soft, flattering lighting and without the professional broadcast studio makeup? The results are quite dramatic. They can look like totally different people and much more 'average.'
Sites like this are the anti-thesis of high fashioin nude glamour and are more about bare natural beauty, IMO. Seeing a glamorized model with fancy lingerie and makeup, sporting a full bush and underarm hair would be totally out of place, IMO.
Anyways, I am not arguing and don't mean to negate any opinions. Just offering a different perspective. Beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder. However, if you come from a site like DDF or other glam sites to a site like this, I can see how one might be inclined to equate the lack of polish to a lack of beauty.
|
02-06-12 08:07pm
|
Reply
31
|
We Are Hairy
(0)
|
Reply of
Capn's Reply
So far, I have no complaints. Questions are answered almost immediately on the forum at the site.
Regarding the focus issue with some image sets, after having looked around more, I found the issue does appear more often in older sets. Newer sets only have this issue sporadically. When these issues do appear, however, they are only usually a major distraction when viewing the image at full resolution. I think it is definitley a gear-related issue and not technique. Sometimes, the focus will be on the wall behind the model or its locking onto the models jewelry or some high contrast object in the scene. This is almost always due to the camera body being a limited point autofocus DSLR or a subpar lense with a squirelly focus drive, or the point bias not set correctly. The lenses also seem to not always be the sharpest. Something like a Canon L series lens will fix that up in a hurry. They are expensive but produce superb results. I have a 300 2.8 L series lens I use for wildlife and the lens is so sharp that you can pick out a fly on the back of a moose at 50 yards. They are that good.
|
02-05-12 04:49pm
|
Reply
32
|
We Are Hairy
(0)
|
Reply of
Capn's Reply
Yes. I do like it. It is definately an excellant site. If there was more diversity in ethnic and model variety, I would categorize it as a truly exceptional site that would score a 100 in my eyes. I think that's the only thing it is lacking.
Obviously, this all depends on whether or not the content is for you. If someone isn't into this niche, they may rate it a 50.
I think the biggest problem is finding models. With the shift away from any hair in the 80's, not too many models are going to be willing to get into this niche and let things 'grow.'
Unfortunately, sometime in the 80's, the US Porn Industry decided it would define for everyone what represents attractive on the female body. At first, my thought as to why the shave craze took hold was that people suddenly decided that any hair on a female was just too masucline. However,this doesn't explain why even the guys in porn started shaving too--their crotch, their legs, even their pits. Somehow, for some reason, hair became contraband in the North American porn industry. After about 1990, Those of us who feel public hair(or, god forbid, an unshaved armpit) on a female can be erotic, were pushed out onto a fringe into the 'odd fetish niche ' category. Look at some porn review sites and see how something like Hairy Bush would be filed in the bizarre fetish category.
|
02-05-12 01:38pm
|
Reply
33
|
We Are Hairy
(0)
|
Reply of
BubbaGump's Review
Ran out of space...
I also wanted to add that this is the first time I have been to a site where I can see myself staying around as a long-term subscriber, instead of downloading intersiting content during a one-month subscription period. The amount of updates and the web cam shows are incentive to stay. IMO, more sites should offer up such ammenities to give a cosnumer the incentive to continue on.
|
02-05-12 12:53pm
|
Review
34
|
We Are Hairy
(0)
95.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ A good range of hirsute content to suit most tastes in this niche,.
+ Wholesome, pretty, amateur models.
+ Large Database of Photosets and videos.
+ Clean and efficient site design and layout.
+ Customizable user settings and search features provide a nice user experience
+ Custom zip files for downloads
+ Multiple Daily Video/Photo updates
+ Free Cam Shows
+ Good customer service |
| Cons: |
- Older photo content can have issues with soft-focus and stray focus.
- Lack of any substantial ethnic diversity in models.
- Web cam show scheduling conflicts with most schedules in north America. |
| Bottom Line: |
I found myself really hard-pressed to come up with any specific negatives beyond those listed above. This is one of the best sites--if not the best--I have come across in terms of the user experience and range of content available to a subscriber. There are extensive photo sets, videos, free interactive web shows, all for a single subscription price. The user experience I can only classify as top-notch, at least relative to the sites I have subscribed to in the past. There are utilities for just about any feature at the site. There are customizable search tools, gallery tools, favorite lists, and custom zip downloads where you are free to choose to select(or deselect) which images go into a zip. There is also a user forum and web masters are very quick to respond to any questions.
The content here is traditional solo softcore posing with some dildo and masturbation action. There is the occasional girl-girl scene as well. If your preference is softcore erotica, the content will meet your demands. If you demand hardcore action, this is not the place to find it and you will be disappointed.
If you are looking for the traditional airbrushed porn star look, this site will likewise not meet your needs. Makeup is used in moderation--it is of the kind you will see on any girl on the street-- and there is no attempt tot hide any blemish or mole with post-processing. The models are pretty and wholesome amateurs but they are not over-glamorized. That is not the look that this site aims for and it would detract from the natural theme. Most of the models appear to be in their mid-twenties, with a few MILF and a few of the just-turned-legal variety.
There is an abundance pf photo and video content and updates happen daily. Galleries are nicely done with semi-pro level photography. Super-high resolution images bring out every subtle detail and nuance on the models. Some of the older sets, however, do suffer at times from stray focus or a soft focus. This issue does not appear in most of the photosets posted after 2010, however. The videos are of high quality and they are clips of roughly 10 minutes in length. The main attraction here, however, is the photography. I found the DL speeds to be more than adequate.
Beyond the occasional image quality issue of older sets, the only other negative that stands out is the lack of diversity in the ethnicity of the models. Most are from Eastern Europe, the UK, or California. It would be nice to see the site expand this range a bit and offer more Latin and ethnic models in the galleries.
There are interactive web cam shows that happen a few times a week. These last an hour Unfortunately, the scheduled times appear to be centered around European time zones. Outside of the 4 PM Saturday show, if you are in North America, you will likely find it hard to attend during the week, out of personal work schedules. Never having attended a cam show in the past, I wasn't sure what to expect as I have no experience with cam media. I did sit in on the Saturday show with the model Raven. One can type questions or comments--or requests--and the model seemed willing to oblige(within reason). The feed quality was decent. The flow could be easily interrupted, however, when users ask questions(or act like toolbags)' Once you find the ignore user option, however, it is less distracting. If you are into cam shows, this is certainly a nice bonus, especially given that it is free of charge and from what I can tell, most fees for cam shows can be ridiculously expensive. Being able to interact with the models adds a personal touch to the site experience.
I chose to join this site as I prefer natural femininity over the glossed-over and heavily-toned airbrushed look of the majority of porn available today. What many people interested in this niche probably want to hear most about is the actual hirsute content available. Based on comments I have read here and elsewhere, it seems that what people find attractive in this niche is all over the board, which one would epect, given the broad scope and relative meaning that the word 'hairy' invokes. There is probably not a niche that has more diversity of tastes and opinions. When reading the review comments for various sites in this niche, I see complaints about models being too hairy or not hairy enough, or not having hair in the right place. What is hairy enough? What is too hairy? What is the right place? The answers are so relative to an individual that I cannot tell you if the content here meets your criteria. What I can say is that this site appears to cater to the middle of the road and it avoids extremes as a predominant feature. This is the way it should be, IMO, as there are so many tastes. No preference is given to any fetish and the content strikes a good balance. You will find just about anything here for most users in terms of hair. However, its unrealistic to expect to see every model always conform to your ideals. |
|
02-05-12 12:42pm
Replies (6)
|
Reply
35
|
Bangbros Network
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Reply
Oh OK. Thanks. I will likely cancel after the second month and might go back in a year or so.
|
02-01-12 03:44pm
|
Comment
36
|
We Are Hairy
(0)
|
|
02-01-12 03:20pm
Replies (2)
|
Reply
37
|
Bangbros Network
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Reply
Yes. I actually signed up on 1/12. I went through this link here. I saw the charge as 24.95. I was not aware there was a discount so didn't even look. Oh well. Worse thing scan happen in life, I guess. Nothing I can do about it.
|
02-01-12 03:14pm
|
Reply
38
|
Bangbros Network
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Reply
When I signed up just recently, it was 24.95 from the start. I didn't get any intro special.
|
02-01-12 12:33pm
|
Reply
39
|
Steve Bones
(0)
|
Reply of
Capn's Reply
That site is pretty different, too, Cap'n.
I wonder how they deal with the 'money shot' on the skeleton. Maybe they shoot dried-up mayonaise flakes out of the dildo onto the models face.
|
02-01-12 11:36am
|
Reply
40
|
Steve Bones
(0)
|
Reply of
otoh's Comment
I was trying to figure out what I was looking at as the screen was loading slow at their home page. I guess there are all kinds of fetishes out there. Can't say I ever thought about having sex with a medical school skeleton as something that would draw enough interest for a pay site to stay in the green.
|
02-01-12 11:18am
|
Reply
41
|
Jugg Master
(0)
|
Reply of
Capn's Reply
A lot of directors today skip any striptease and proceed directly to go. One moment, the model is wearing clothes and heels. The next instant you see her, she is butt naked and the guy is already laying pipe. :( That's why I prefer old-school and don't like a lot of today's high-volume churn-it and burn-it erotica. Impatient boys miss dessert.
|
01-29-12 02:14pm
|
Reply
42
|
Jugg Master
(0)
|
Reply of
Capn's Reply
For me, it depends on the model and atmosphere of the scene. In general, however, I usually find it most erotic when some element of clothing remains present--especially a skirt. One thing that's a pet peeve of mine is when the model has a sexy par of stilettos or heels on and not only strips off all the clothes at once, but then removes the heels. :(
|
01-29-12 02:02pm
|
Reply
43
|
Jugg Master
(0)
|
Reply of
Capn's Reply
Yeah, I understand that it could be frustrating for a lot of people. I like the tease elements, however. I also like it when models have some clothing that complimenets the anatomy and it stays on. I like skirts hiked up and tops folded down to the waist, etc..--those types of things do it for me. Also, for me, nothing like seeing nipples sticking through lace bras or drooping out of a corset :)
|
01-29-12 01:54pm
|
Reply
44
|
Jugg Master
(0)
|
Reply of
Capn's Reply
Hi. Yes. If consistent full nudty is a requirement, this site won't be for you. I would put thise site more in a softcore tease category. There are some full nudes but they are not common and when they exist, they are very conservative. For example, you won't find any images of legs spread eagle or close-in shots of genitals, etc. When it is shown, it's more like full nudity with a flash of bush. This site is R rated and would be something that would pass the censors on HBO.The most hardcore image I saw was a model holding a dildo off to the side. No blowbangs and ATM here.
|
01-29-12 01:44pm
|
Review
45
|
Jugg Master
(0)
85.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ Unique fetish content.
+ Creative photography.
+ Good nostalgic value.
+ Low subscription price.
+ One-month non-reccuring costs the same as ongoing monthly subscription rates. |
| Cons: |
- Low resolution images only.
- Primitive site navigation and layout.
- Site does not appear to be growing much.
- Videos are just a novelty. |
| Bottom Line: |
I can give all the reasons why you might or might not find this site attractive. However, If you know who hese models are without Googling, my guess is that there is a high probabilty that you would enjoy viewing the models at this site--Maria Moore, Denise Davies, Bunny De La Cruz.
If you don't know these names but have a breast fetish or enjoy viewing images of women with truly oversized and natural breasts, meaty nipples, and saucer-sized areola, this site would also be worth a one-month subscription.
If none of the above is true, you should look elsewhere. That's it in a nuthsell. This is a very simple site oriented towards photography. There are videos, but they are simply small low-resolution clips. The videos serve more as a novelty of sorts and really are not worth commenting on.
The site is entirely sofcore. Most of the photosets are of the slow tease variety. They start with the model fully clothed and proceed to various states of undress, with the emphasis always placed on the breasts. You see a lot of images of huge boobs jutting through bras, dangling in the air, or spilling out of clothing items. Many of the sets were taken in natural lighting, outdoors and in pools.
I did come across some full nudes, but this is the exception, not the norm. This is conservative, old-school erotic photography. It is the opposite of today's in-your-face erotica, although there is a section called juggs-eye view, where there are many images of breasts dangling in front of the camera, as if in your face.
IMO, the photographer does a wonderful job with posing. You can tell that he is into the subject. He is just not going through the motions. The photographer has a talent for bringing out the best features of the models and does a good job with angles. The natural lighting and the lack of intense post-processing adds to the natrual appeal of the models. Many of the churn-it-and-burn photographers in this genre simply have the model strip nude and take straigh-on shots of breasts. Post-processing is overused and images suffer from harsh artifical lighting. The approach is very forumlatic. If you've seen one photo, you've seen them all. The photographer here is always creative and uses various angles to capture and profile the breasts-- from the side. the rear, the front, arms in the air, etc.. These won't be the most professional-looking images in terms of lighting and studio backdrops. However, this is more than made up for with the way that the photographer deals with the models.
You will see many of the mdoels elsewhere at the classic breast sites. The sets themselves are all unique, howeve. I know many of the models well from my years of viewing this genre and have never come across these images. Many of the photo sets contain images of popular Big Breast models in their younger years-- Maria Moore, Denise Davies, etc. If you are a fan of these models, you might think this is worth the cost of admission, simply for their nostalgic value.
Where content starts to drop in quality is in image resolution, and this is my only beef about the galleries. This content represents a very unique and sometimes nostalgic cdollection. The photographer should offer these images at higher resolutions. They appear to max out at around 11100x710 and many of the older sets appear to be old chrome scans of low resolution around 700x400. As this is primnarily a photo site, there should be high-resoltion images available.
The site design and navigation is very primitive and has an amateur look to it. I never had any trouble getting to content I wanted to view but the site should be cleaned up a bit to supply it with a more modern interface.
This site obviously wont be for everyone. Unless you can find a way to place natural-looking, ten-pound each breasts on the frame of a ninety-pound runway model, you are left with finding them on women of the voluptuous and BBW variety. If this turns you off, you will likely not find the content appealing. Also, if you cannnot live without high resolution images, you also will be dissapointed.
It was somehwat difficult to provide a score as this site doesn't claim to be a slick and professional studio and is basicallty the work of a single photographer displaying a photo collection that has been accumulated throughout the years. Please take this into consideration when viewing the score. I ended up rating it based on what it meant to me as someone with a breast feitsh and lover of voluptuous women. I would rate it even higher if the not for the relatively low resolution galleries. As a one-month only quick stop for those with a fetish for oversized breasts, its worth a try, especially given the modest price and the unique content. |
|
01-29-12 01:34pm
Replies (9)
|
Reply
46
|
Scoreland
(0)
|
Reply of
malikstarks's Reply
Hi. Thanks for the info.
Just an FYI:
I have not heard a reply from Scoreland regarding my questions. The form said they would respond within 24 hours. Maybe they are just busy or maybe they don't want to reply, or maybe they just don't care. Either of these could be true. I will just leave it there. Readers can draw their own conclusions.
I did notice that I got a truckload of promos from Scoreland yesterday in my E-Mail box, offering me an additional site if I stick around, and special deals on other sites. I signed up for one month, non-renewing. I also noticed something odd. Twice now, I have received emails telling me my password was reset as they have noticed suspiscious activity on my account. This happened the week after I signed up and also yesterday. My guess is they do this to make password sharing on the net more difficult and make sure it is the person who signed up that is using the account. I haven't used the site in a week.
I have no interest in renewing--not because of the HD issue itself, but I have seen what I wanted to and downloaded the photo sets I liked.
|
01-28-12 02:37pm
|
Reply
47
|
Jugg Master
(0)
|
Reply of
Jutti24's Review
Hi. Thanks for the review and info. I had actually came upon this site last week when browsing through the niche link. Signed up for a one-month non-reccuring to replace my Score sub. Will add my review in a bit after I have had time to really go through the site.
I agree about the cost. It's the main reason I signed up. I have always been a collector of boob-mags over the years--Juggs, Gent, Score, Voluptuous, etc.. Considering that the price is only $16.99 and a single magazine today costs about $12, that's not a bad deal, especially when you can download all the galleries. Many of the models here I have seen and know quite well from the past. I have seen photo sets never seen before I so I think this material is pretty exclusive to the site.
It won't be for everyone, however. The models are of the thick and plump variety, and if you're not into BBW, it probably might not be your thing. If you like those huge, natural breasts with those saucer-sized aroela, this is quite good and the photography actually impressess me--much better than I thought it would be based on the rather rag-tag appearance of the site itself. Also, like you said, no hardcore and seeing genitals is rare. The photos are more of the classic, conservative variety and full nudes are rare. It seems to be all about the breasts.
|
01-26-12 04:23pm
|
Reply
48
|
Scoreland
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Reply
Hi. No Problem. It's good to get straight info from others. To be honest, I have always been supiscious of porn review sites because I always felt they were stacked and bisaed towards certain studios--my opinion is a lot of them really are. It's good to find a place where you can feel confident you are not getting some covert sales pitch or slanted reviews by editors. I wish I would have had straight opinions like this in the past.
Never been into online stuff until recently but mainly was a collector or softcore erotica and photography--Score was one of them. If they write me back with a response to the inquiry, I certainly will post the reply.
|
01-26-12 04:13pm
|
Reply
49
|
Scoreland
(0)
|
Reply of
BubbaGump's Comment
FYI..I contacted Scoreland through the members area. I also asked if they would add a comment here(if they know about this place).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am a subscriber to Scoreland and was wondering why HD videos cannot be downloaded? Also, older video content is not available for download either. Are HD videos available for download at Score HD?
I am not asking for a refund as I felt I got what I came for. However, this seems to bit deceptive, as the homescreen displays a HD logo and there is no plain information when signing up regarding what is and is not available for video downloads.
There are also a number of comments and questions about this subject at Pornusers.com and people are wondering what the straight scoop is on this. Is there any way you could leave a reply over there, as well?
Thanks and Regards
|
01-25-12 04:29pm
|
Reply
50
|
Scoreland
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Reply
Hi. Thanks.
I cannot really say for sure if Score HD allows the HD to be downloaded. I would think they would or people would get really upset. I do not have access to that without a subscription so can't check for you. I also do not know how far back in time you can download, but I suspect there are similar date restrictions as can be found at Scoreland.
As far as my review and the comment I added, I agree a lot of people will not like the fact that they don't allow any HD downloads at all at Scoreland. All of the videos on the home page have a HD logo on them and you can indeed stream them in HD. Technically, I cannot call this a fabrication as the movies can be viewd in HD --they just refrain from telling you about the download stuff. There is no statement anywhere when you sign up as to what can or cannot be downloaded. My view is that it is indeed a bit deceptive, however, and I think most will be inclined to see it that way. This will eventually upset people and they won't come back.
To be fair, I think the site should, at minimum, put an asterik next to the HD logo indicating this information. At best, they should include full information in plain view on the signup screen. You will just succeed in upsetting people if they feel like they got deceived, whether or not that was the intent.
I am a bit surprised as, over the years,I have purchased from Score in Miami before--mags and even a couple videos. I had dealings with customer service and they were always helpful and even refunded a purchase once. They never struck me as the kind to play games. As I said before, I will always give the benefit of the doubt unless I have reason to believe otherwise. Without hearing what they have to say, most will conclude this is deceptive.
As far as my opinion, I felt I got what I wanted from the site as I am primarily a photo guy. I mention this in my reviews so people know how to judge my opinions on content. I won't be re-subscribing after my 30 day sub has run out, however. I do like many of the photo sets and others into the genre probably will, as well. However, there is really not a big reason for me to stick around longer. The lack of HD download sealed it. Again, I don't view or DL a lot of video content but I like to do so when something really nice catches my eye.
I did not lower my review score even further as in all honesty, I did enjoy the photo content and felt like I got what I came for in that regards. HD video lovers, however, should definately consider all that has been said on this subject of download limits.
|
01-25-12 04:00pm
|
|
