| All Activity |
A summary of all the feedback from this user. |
| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
26
|
Pink Visual Pass
(0)
|
Reply of
desade's Reply
So apparently my taking screenshots for them was all for naught, everything is still the same. Anyway they replied to me with a link that I don't have anymore to a page where I could register at a reduced price of $15.00. This is more than enough for a month, unless you like to see more men than women in your porn (like 3/4 if not more of the shoots are threesomes), and like the "I'll move the camera around at random because I have ADD" kind of camera work (more face than skin, and if they do show the body they move away within 3 seconds). Lots of content at first sight, but nothing to keep or come back to as far as I'm concerned.
|
03-17-09 10:21am
|
Reply
27
|
Pink Visual Pass
(0)
|
Reply of
Tree Rodent's Reply
I received a reply from their customer support.
They are not seeing any billing problem on their end, so I told them about possible regional pricing, gave my current IP address, and made some screenshots. Direct access to PVP: €35.95 ($49.80). Access through the TBP rebate offer: $43.95 ($60.88) - not only it is more expensive from Europe, but it looks like the rebate is being applied backwards.
As to the content, here is what they said:
"Both Pink Visual Pass and Milf Seeker belong to our company and the
available content on both sites is nearly identical in video quality and
model shooots. By signing up for Pink Visual Pass you have access to
Hottest Milfs Ever, our 2.0 version of Milf Seeker. Hottest Milfs Ever
includes our Milf Seeker Episodes along with content exclusive to
Hottest Milfs Ever."
|
01-03-09 12:05am
|
Reply
28
|
Pink Visual Pass
(0)
|
Reply of
Tree Rodent's Reply
Thank you TheSquirrel. I've e-mail the PVP owners about the difference, we'll see if they respond.
Also, I've tried using the link from TBP, I am seeing the "25% Off" popup or whatever, but the join page still wants me to pay €39.95 as a European. Not exactly a 25% rebate, more like a 30% extra charge at the current exchange rate. I've asked them about that too.
|
01-01-09 01:09pm
|
Comment
29
|
Pink Visual Pass
(0)
|
|
01-01-09 06:28am
Replies (5)
|
Reply
30
|
Pink Visual Pass
(0)
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
I too am seeing a higher price from Europe: €35.95 for pinlvisualpass.com and €39.95 for MILFSeeker, while both are advertised as $29.95 after the TBP rebate, that's almost twice the price.
|
01-01-09 06:13am
|
Reply
31
|
Porn Fidelity
(0)
|
Reply of
Pyrenees's Review
"Why are you not a member yet?"
Short answer: how do I put it? Because it's crap.
Long answer: where do I start?
You compliment their video quality. You may want to check ZZ, NA or RK for better video quality. I mean image sharpness and lighting. Adding some kind of film grain and whatnot makes porn worse, not better, they serves different purposes.
"Passionate sex"? Yes, suprisingly the guy is really into it, go figure... The whole site seems to be made for him to have the most fun and have other people pay for it. The camera work, the angles, the positions, everything is done for him to be the most comfortable and "passionate", never mind if we don't see anything. And this whole "he can come 3 times in each scene!" thingy. I should care why? Is this a gay site? How about you make *the girls* come 3 times without fail? I am watching porn to see beautiful girls get fucked and enjoy themselves, not to see a guy enjoy himself, not to see his body in the way 99% of the scene, and all shot by a cameraman who obviously loves him more than the girls.
So here is why. From all they have on both Pornfidelity and Teenfidelity, I may have kept like 4-5 10 second parts, half of them from BTSes. Normally I wouldn't even comment, but with all the girls and his good endowment, it's a shame that everything is ruined by everything being about him and not the girls.
But hey, to each his own.
|
07-04-15 12:34am
|
Reply
32
|
Pornstar Network
(0)
|
Reply of
standard's Review
+1 for starting with Ryan Conner :)
|
02-10-15 10:22am
|
Reply
33
|
POVD
(0)
|
Reply of
skippy's Review
IIRC, all their videos have this fish lens distorted effect, like the ones in Spizoo's PornGoesPro. This "House of Mirrors" effect doesn't do it for me, zero excitement.
I understand that making proper POV is difficult. Even more so when you are a cheapass wanting to do it alone.
So either you do it with a normal lens, and convince your viewers who never had sex that it's exactly how it goes, you either see the closeup of her face or a closeup of your dick as if your eyes were popping out of your navel. The sad thing is that they believe it.
Or you use a fish eye lens to widen the field of view, thus completely distorting her body. Neither of this is exciting for me, and the proper way to do it, by having someone else hold the camera a bit higher that the guy's head, is almost never used.
It seems that mostly it's some guy wanting to get laid, have us pay for it, and make a living out of it. Understandable, I'd do the same :). Why pay a second guy to hold the camera, customers will swallow any crap. Some even think that it's normal to have camera shake, your pelvis is in motion after all and all that. No it's not, IRL your eyes are not fixed in their orbits, they move by themselves so your image is stable. There is no excuse for shaky cam, as there is none for any Hall of Mirror porn.
Anyway, /rant off, sorry. I wish my search for a proper POV site was over. Tired of having to content myself with 5 seconds of non-crappy footage in one video out of 10.
|
05-22-14 09:40pm
|
Reply
34
|
Pure Mature
(0)
|
Reply of
host2626's Comment
[3000 characters limit]
It's like this image that tonightsgirlfriend is often using to promote their site. Another "wow it has everything" moment: the whole body, the face, a good angle showing the curves, the legs, the ass, a good dick sticking out, nothing is obstructed by his ass, legs nor hands. This at least is a real screenshot, but guess what, in the actual movie it lasts like 1.5 seconds while the camera is traveling from his ass to her face. These guys DO know what images and angles to use to entice people, yet they always fail to use them in their movies.
Re: orgasms.xxx
The day I went to see the site they had just released the Zuzana Z. hardcore video. I couldn't believe my eyes, I am a huge fan and instantly joined the site. It was well worth the money just for this video. The rest is generic stuff of the joymii and x-art kind. Half of it is girl-girl which I do not care about. The rest is mostly generic young east-euro actresses, shaved pubic hair, no tanlines, no curves, generic faces, I couldn't tell one from the other if I saw 10 movies of each. And concerning orgasms, Zuzana Z. seems to have had a real one, but the rest that I have watched hadn't even bothered to fake. And the camera work is a bit better in that the guy can stay a bit longer on the same angle without moving, but still most of it is unrevealing filler. Even for the Zuzana B/G movie, I cut and kept only about a couple of minutes of the video.
But hey, don't mind me, the world doesn't mind these things apparently, *I* am the weirdo here. Sorry for the rant.
|
10-18-12 12:44am
|
Reply
35
|
Pure Mature
(0)
|
Reply of
host2626's Comment
Don't get me wrong, the action on puremature.com site is definitely "softer". I mean it's hardcore action, but not for the Brazzers/Bangbros/etc lowest common denominator demographic, the kind that leaves comments like "Take the cock and shut up!" or "Teach them to cum on their cocks" :). It's more like the Pornpros "white room" scenes, in fact it is exactly like that, since they all come from passion-hd.com, which seems to be by the same guys who made puremature.com. The action is definitely of the same type as in joymii and x-art.
I was upset because of two things. As I said the video quality is low, from the blueish-reddish tint on many videos, to the lack of definition and artifacts. Way below what we find on NA/ZZ/RK.
But more importantly it is the camera work. The site and thumbnails give an aura of passion and intimacy, but in reality movies are not shot differently from other sites (and I cannot name a site whose camera work I do like). I shouldn't have had this reaction by now, but the thumbnails built my expectations too high.
What I want to see in my porn is female bodies being fucked. I don't want to see a long closeup on her face, and certainly not of HIS face nor ass . She has a nice body, if you must have a long introduction, why not use that time to build our excitement by showing said body? Not a closeup of the face again, nor waist-up for minutes; stop trying to do art-schmart, you can't even shoot straightforward porn. Then when the action starts, keep showing the girl's body, let us decide what we want to focus our eyes on.
I don't know what angles you want to see in a movie, or even if you care. For instance, here is the thumbnail for the Jewels Jade movie. Wow, it has everything. Whole body shot, legs spread, pussy being fucked, it is like being there. (And her having this landing strip instead of her usual pedo-shave doesn't hurt either).
But then, see the screenshot wall (I used "moviethumbnailer" from sourceforge.net). The screens are taken at 10 second-ish intervals. That angle from the thumbnail is nowhere to be seen. No, it didn't slip in the 10 secs between two screenshots, and even if it did, that'd still be no way to advertise a movie, and again, we have much longer face shots that serve no purpose in a porn movie. The rest of the movie is pretty standard, like everywhere else. Lots of bla at the beginning, long BJ, and 7 minutes in out of 22, the intercourse begins. Non-revealing angles, closeups... I personally care a bit about the doggy around 13:40, 15:00 and 16:00, but the rest is just filler. Same school of camera work (or lack thereof) as in every other site.
[3000 characters limit]
|
10-18-12 12:42am
|
Comment
36
|
Pure Mature
(0)
|
|
10-15-12 11:00pm
Replies (4)
|
Reply
37
|
Reality Kings
(0)
|
Reply of
Vegas Ken's Comment
Nice promo, thanks for this.
Now, when I was subscribing (through Epoch) it also said that after this first month I will be automatically rebilled at the same reduced rate of $9.95/mo (or today's equivalent of €7.83). Do you think they will honor that?
|
03-31-12 01:08am
|
Comment
38
|
Reality Kings
(0)
|
|
10-05-09 12:03pm
Replies (2)
|
Reply
39
|
Reality Kings
(0)
|
Reply of
morgentau's Comment
Thanks for the heads-up. I'm not getting in until they give proper HD downloads and without Brazzers' "6 months of uninterrupted membership" crap, I don't care about streaming at all. Last time I checked RK, some time this summer, their SD content was of too low a quality even compared with non-HD sites. There are at least a dozen sites nowadays that provide HD downloads, some for more than a year now, and once you've been there there is no coming back.
|
09-08-09 09:02am
|
Reply
40
|
Sex Art
(0)
|
Reply of
Parsnip's Reply
WTF do they even mean by "closed mind". Do we go there to discuss some opinion pieces about society, economics, etc., or do we go there to get sexually aroused and relieve ourselves? If I am not excited by things being thrust into crappers and maybe even being turned off by it, no exhorting will make me get excited. What next, introduce TS stuff with guys sucking dicks and ask people to open their minds even wider?
And having a fake model interview is even funnier. Sure, she doesn't want to come to work, do something quick and harmless and go home. She definitely wants to have her asshole pounded "at the office", because of course, these guys are all about her pleasure, they do everything to have each model orgasm ten times per shoot. Sure.
And it's not like they are getting into an empty niche. The vast majority of sites is at least half anal nowadays.
|
12-06-14 03:10am
|
Reply
41
|
Sex Art
(0)
|
Reply of
Parsnip's Comment
I hope that there was an exit form and that you made it clear that it was because of it, not because there wasn't *as much* crapper sex as in almost every other site.
|
12-01-14 10:22pm
|
Reply
42
|
Teen Core Club
(0)
|
Reply of
MargulisAZ's Comment
I completely agree with this and am disgusted by almost all porn getting Anal these days.
Back in the day TCC was more like half crapper half normal porn. And they are still pretty much alive these days, check out http://teencoreclub.com/latest-updates/, they are still updating about as often as they used to.
And it's not like they are going against the flow either. Check out the ZZ forums, crapper porn lovers are the most vocal people on the planet. If there wasn't at least an appearance of all this anal making them lose money, they wouldn't do it. So on ZZ and others more than half the updates are anal. So what you gonna do? Complain? All the closeted anal lovers will at once make it a point to flame you. Unsubscribe? And what are you going to do, it's the same everywhere.
|
03-08-16 02:04am
|
Reply
43
|
The Sandfly
(0)
|
Reply of
TheMoreYouKnow's Review
Wait, so the videos are at 720x576, and it is touted as a huge step up from 640x480? I don't disagree, it would have been a revolution if we were having this conversation 15 years ago. At least it is more honest than what beachhunters do: take these low res videos, re-encode them at a higher screen size and a slightly higher bitrate and label them as "HD". But you can't violate the "Turd in, Turd Out" principle so you end up with a low definition clip at a much higher file size.
None of this is acceptable in 2014, it hasn't been for a few years already. Maybe the site should pay its contributors more so they can afford better equipment? ;) It's not like its impossible in principle to make nice HD beach voyeur videos. Check out jackassfiles.com or ilovethebeach.com.
|
05-22-14 10:05pm
|
Reply
44
|
Try Teens
(0)
|
Reply of
joekramer08's Review
Half the review is about the 25 fps thingy. You are surprised that noone else mentioned it? Here is why: 25 fps is the standard frame rate for the PAL and SECAM standards, used almost everywhere outside of the Americas. It is far from "unacceptable" and is totally smooth, otherwise the rest of the world wouldn't be watching digital videos, TV, DVD, BRs, etc., at 25 fps. Heck, the NTSC-movie standard is 23.97 fps, and nobody ever complained about choppiness.
It can play choppy for many reasons, a problem with your system or codecs, processing speed, encoding issues, whatever. However, TryTeen movies at 25 fps play smoothly on my system.
|
12-07-11 01:34am
|
Reply
45
|
Wow Porn
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Comment
I'm not sure if it's worth its own new comment, but they all seem to redirect to 18onlygirls.com now. As a side note, normally I'd welcome this kind of consolidation, I never considered networks with multiple sites like something with extra value, they are just like folders on the same hard drive (if doesn't matter if you say you have 10 of 50 sites in your "network" if there is one update per day over all of them).
Anyways, now if you click on "Updates" on the new consolidated url, you won't see any actually, just a page touting some kind of awesome "Venus 4K" technology. I don't know if it's a mistake or if they are hiding something, it was the same about a month ago, but to me it looks like they are dead and not updating anymore, and I don't join sites that don't show me what they were really up to these past months. It's sad if they are really dead.
|
10-27-16 09:39pm
|
|
