Replies Given
|
Your replies to other users's reviews and comments. |
| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
201
|
21Sextury.com
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
That's a good idea. I'll try do that! :-)
|
02-18-17 07:52pm
|
Reply
202
|
ALS Scan
(0)
|
Reply of
ALS Eric's Reply
Hi Eric, Thank you for your timely and eloquent response. I can appreciate that the older photo sets have been remastered and additional images have been included. And I now see that the remastered sets are labeled and appear every 12-14 posts. So I was mistaken about the frequency of reposts, but I can tell you this with some certainty. It FEELS like there is more older stuff here that is being re-used and there are probably a couple of pretty good reasons for it.
First, with the exception of the vacation shoots, all of the material has maintained an absolutely identical look and feel for a long, long time. Some subscribers may love this, but I find it a little frustrating to see current photo sets that look exactly like 5-10 year old sets in terms of image quality, set-style, direction and content. Most sites are diverse enough that you can tell different sets have been shot on different days in different locations. Here? Not so much. Second, although, some sets of certain models may have never been published before, they may look like older shoots when the models involved were younger. That can be pretty confusing.
Now, to be fair, I see Kimmy Granger, Blake Eden, Alex Grey and Gina Gerson on the site and they are clearly contemporary models/porn stars, but the lack of make-up on Gina, for example, makes her look years younger than she does on other sites. She's been on your site since 2012. Are the most recent sets from 2017 or from 2012? Can't tell. This gives me the impression that these, too, are older shoots.
A simple solution to this might be to include a "first published" date on the remastered sets or perhaps a "shoot" date.
I will be sure to go back through the site and look at the sets with an open mind regarding the feeling that sets are somehow older. I'll also compare the remastered sets with the ones I got from prior memberships. My collection goes back to about 2004.
As I said in my review, Alsscan is a very good site. I will update it later this month to reflect your points.
Thanks again!
Skippy
|
02-17-17 09:52pm
|
Reply
203
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Yosemite's Reply
Your plan has a 1024GB limit? Well that is interesting. I'm not aware of any limit here. Are you in a metro?
What I find is that if I use the Comcast speed checker, the speed given is usually faster than if I use Ookla. I attribute that to being internal to the Comcast system.
|
02-17-17 07:16am
|
Reply
204
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Wittyguy's Reply
Hi,
I've run several tests with a packet sniffer and can see that there is no overall bandwidth decrease, but download speeds decrease pretty significantly over the course of a few minutes for downloads only. This can be any downloads, not just porn sites and this is not site specific. I complained about it and they said it was my house wiring (CAT6 and a dedicated cable-modem link to the street...I don't think so). I forced them to come out. They ran tests and found nothing. Then when I complained again, they changed connections to the local demarcation point. Still didn't help. That's when I brought the sniffer home and tested. When I called them back, they said they don't do that. When the cable guy came back out, I showed him what I was seeing and he said...."It must just have something to do with where you live out here in the country." I live in a housing plan less than a mile from the Comcast relay station for the region. He didn't have a clue.
I called and kept asking for a supervisor. After an hour on the phone, the "supervisor" told me it was because I have an older cable modem and, of course, offered to sell me a new one. When I went to their site to see what other modems they had, I saw that they are selling the modem I currently own. Nice try. I own my cable modem and, just to be sure, went in to make sure that prioritization was turned off.
They are throttling. They might never admit it, but they are.
|
02-16-17 02:52pm
|
Reply
205
|
N/A
|
Reply of
LPee23's Poll
Although I do not have a cap, it is fairly clear that Comcast throttles my download speed after a few minutes of downloading. They probably have prioritization turned on for streaming.
|
02-15-17 05:42am
|
Reply
206
|
Playboy Plus
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
Done. I'll leave it on for a day.
|
02-12-17 11:09am
|
Reply
207
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
I store pretty much everything by site and year but have created a few image "collections" folders of my top 5 or so favorite models, a few of whom have different names on different sites. I'll use the most common name. These days, most sites do a good enough job of naming files that I can just search my hard drives to find specific girls.
You know you've got too much stuff in your collection when you notice a hot girl, seemingly for the first time and then realize you've got other great sets of her that you never really noticed..... Not sure if that is more like Alzheimer's, or finding a lost $10 bill in your jeans pocket.
|
02-09-17 03:40pm
|
Reply
208
|
Wow Porn
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Review
Nice review. Still trying to figure out how they decide something goes to WowGirls or WowPorn. Much of the content seems completely interchangeable.
Also, just FYI, in Met Art and a growing number of site on their network, there is an "options" link in the upper right hand corner on the main page that allows you to personalize you preferences. One of the options to sets whether or not images open on separate pages. Personally, I like the "open images in new tab" option, although it can create a lot of tabs of the images are really good. :-)
Easy enough to turn it off, though.
|
02-08-17 10:20pm
|
Reply
209
|
Yanks VR
(0)
|
Reply of
Yanks's Reply
Hi,
Thanks for the response. It means a lot when a representative from the site responds.
From what I can see, your VR videos are well done. It looks like your intended audience is lesbian (as opposed to a girl-only "view" site like In-The-Crack), correct? I think it would probably clear things up a lot if you just come out and say that. Nothing wrong with that at all. Call it Sapphic VR. You will still get a lot of men and it will be clear that it is girls only sex. (Of course, I'm a guy and I'm pretty dense so it wasn't obvious to me when I made my first comment.)
When it comes to straight sex, I truly believe that using VR to shoot strictly observational scenes is not the most effective use of the medium. You shouldn't shoot a VR of a roller coaster from the ground, you don't create a VR game in the third person, you shouldn't shoot a VR car demo from the street watching the car go by and you shouldn't shoot straight porn VR sex from a chair next to the bed.
That said, I understand that it is incredibly difficult to do sapphic sex in participatory VR because there is no common position or orientation to shoot from. There are a few non-VR POV sites that do it pretty well, but I'm sure there is less gear involved and the actors are often pros. In your case, it would probably interfere with the genuine lovemaking that you are striving for. Your girls are not pros so working around and staying close to a fixed rig would certainly have an adverse impact on your videos. I can appreciate all of that.
As for the price, yes, 30 videos is just about average or maybe just shy of average. If you look at my review history here, you will see that I've joined nearly every VR porn site out there and am constantly joining more. The price for your site is 30-50% higher than any other VR site out there, even the ones that are approaching or exceeding 100 videos and are part of a large mixed network. But I understand. You've got a budget. You've got expenses. You have to determine how to stay solvent, what the market will bear and what your unique niche will support.
Rather than reducing your price universally, may I suggest reaching out to the folks at The Best Porn and working out a discount deal? It will almost certainly get you positive reviews and will help make your site a bigger blip on the VR map while limiting the discount to the most savvy viewers. Please consider that.
I applaud your efforts and truly hope you succeed.
|
02-07-17 08:53am
|
Reply
210
|
N/A
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Poll
If you look at the reviews I've posted here, I'd say anything that I rated above about an 85 gets a visit every year or 2 years if I don't already have an annual subscription. PLUS a few specialty sites, like VR sites, that I like that are not rated as high. So that's about 15-20 sites a year. Wow. That is still cheaper than a night or two in any metro strip club.
|
02-05-17 09:05am
|
Reply
211
|
N/A
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
I'll chime in on that and agree also. These sites are walking away from money if they don't offer a deep discount to returning customers for a longer term membership. For the most part, though, looking at it from their perspective, if you are interested enough to come back at full price, why should they give you a discount?
What I have found is that some sites offer a re-join discount through their biller. Sometimes the cancellation email you get will say "If you want to rejoin, you can do so at $" and they provide a link. There is no time restriction on a lot of these so it never hurts to try. You can also sometimes go to the biller's website and find your original subscription and see what the rate is if you rejoin from there.
Here's an interesting one. Going to my old membership through the biller is my first choice for rejoining. I have been able to do this a few times when a site's rate has gone up. That probably saved me $60 last year. Once I even opened a chat and asked about it and was given the lower rate. Only the best billers will consider this, though. A few are complete asses.
Check with your billers!
|
02-05-17 08:58am
|
Reply
212
|
X-Art
(0)
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Reply
OK, that makes sense. Maybe porn is like Chior or drama in high school. If we had known the ratio of straight girls to straight guys in those groups, we almost certainly would have joined in when we had the chance. :-)
|
02-05-17 08:02am
|
Reply
213
|
Twistys Network
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
Hi,
Interesting. I joined Diesel network in December, was only given a $29 option and was not given a streaming only option. Then I was offered access to the other sites for an additional $20 a month, so I took it. I let that one lapse as I only drop in for one month a year. I don't mind being told a full subscription is $29, but getting a $19 offer only to find that it isn't a full subscription is criminal.
One thing I noticed is that Twistys prices vary a LOT for no reason at all. For Twisty's, I got 3 different rates from the same computer by going to the join page with different browsers. PU price was $19. Regular price via Chrome was $29 and regular price via IE was $25. And of course I could not tell if any of them included downloads. I would be really pissed if I spent $29 and found that downloads were extra.
I recall that In The Crack has a view-only rate and they have different rates all the way up to 4K downloads, but the information is absolutely clear when you go to sign up...clear enough that I remember it without looking. View-only starts at $10. The rate including 2k HD downloads is $39. I even asked them if they have an annual rate and they said it didn't fit into their pricing structure...so I go back once a year.
If a view-only rate works for web sites, I think that's great for all involved. But changing a regular price to a view-only price in an effort to quietly raise prices, or worse, using a bait-and-switch without telling customers up front, like Twisty's is doing, should not be tolerated.
I take comfort in knowing that historically, every site I've ever seen where the webmasters get too greedy has either failed or dropped in ratings to a C level site. Judging from recent comments and ratings, clearly Twisty's is well on it's way.
|
02-04-17 09:12am
|
Reply
214
|
N/A
|
Reply of
nadiencendia's Poll
As any industry matures, there are ups, downs, advances and closures. New technology often acts as a propellant, taking an industry farther. For this industry, the smaller, poorly funded or one-man players have generally been absorbed or closed. Many of the established sites of the '90s, and some from the 00's were bought-out and run into the ground in the name of profit. Once dominant brands, like Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler are now practically on life support. This is how any industry works. New, innovative companies succeed and Luddites, poor products, poorly managed and underfunded companies fail.
What we are seeing now is a consolidation of the established porn channels into stable, high quality networks. There are still plenty of niche sites out there, but they will only survive until their owners give up, retire or sell out.
But this isn't necessarily a bad thing. Although the high-glam porn of the 80's and 90's is probably long gone, there are plenty of new things to experience and look forward to. With higher download speeds, video resolution continues to get better. (Heck, All porn is HD now. Comcast is still 90% 480P!) Quality improves. And new technologies like live web chatting and Virtual Reality provide opportunities that consumers have never seen before. (I'm not a big fan of web chats, but try a VR Web chat...It is amazing!) The fact that these technologies require capital and a new skill set bolsters the importance of new players on the production side.
The politics of porn is interesting, too. Some 50% of the connected PLANET watches it according to some statistics (Chive, maybe). Mainstream political groups don't even discuss it. Heck, Trump HAS to watch porn. He probably even has investments in it. With all the other crap he has on the table, making America button its blouse is SO not an issue. Besides, as an industry , porn is well organized and it spans borders.
So...better. Definitely better.
I see two threats to porn and they aren't what you think. The first is that in a connected world, models may become more concerned with the consequences of modeling and decide not to do it. Fortunately, there are many societies outside the US where nudity is not a big deal, so that is where we will continue to find models.
The other issue is an odd legal one. There are several predatory patent lawsuits going on in the porn industry where one sleazy company is sueing small porn producers over patent infringements. The patent is a very basic one that covers broadcasting video over the internet to groups of people. If the patent owner sued Youtube or Google, those companies have enough money to have the patent deemed unenforcible. But the patent owners go after small companies that don't have the resources to do that. It is total bullshit, but a few porn sites have paid-up and/or closed because of it.
|
02-03-17 11:17am
|
Reply
215
|
Czech VR
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
I reread and edited the review (2am reviews are not always the best...) and borrowed your "conventionally attractive" term. :-)
Thanks again!
|
02-03-17 08:56am
|
Reply
216
|
Czech VR
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
Thanks! I try to be as detailed as possible and when I run into something that is far from the norm, good or bad, I like to elaborate. This one had some cool features, but compared to the leaders out there, the quality just wasn't there.
Your term conventionally attractive is perfect. Very few 18-24 year- olds are not attractive in some way. But very few look like Anjelica or Malena Morgan. Very hard to describe that without sounding like a complete ass.
You should get a set of Google cardboard glasses for your Android or iPhone, just to try it. There are a few sites that will send you a pair for free when you sign up. VR is very cool, but using a full-blown VR headset takes a little more effort than just sitting down at your desk or whatever.
|
02-03-17 08:18am
|
Reply
217
|
X-Art
(0)
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Review
Hi,
Nice review. It reminded me to go back and join again.
OK, got a question. Define Heartcore for me. I am pretty sure I understand what it is and have been looking for a definition for the style, but I can't actually find one for the context.
Thanks,
Skippy
|
02-02-17 06:30pm
|
Reply
218
|
X-Art
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
Ah. My bad. I read X-Art and thought MetArtX. I wrote an X-art review back in 2012 and haven't been a member since 2015, so it looks like it is time to rejoin! Sinc X-Art and Colette are part of the same group, it is entirely possible that some of the sets are duplicates.
I'm a current member of TMW and, again, you are absolutely correct. I'm not sure where I was looking but I must have been confusing it with something else I had open at the time....or I was having a stroke. It was only 9:00 so alcohol or sleep deprivation could not have been the culprits.
Thanks for the response and for the corrections. All good!
|
02-01-17 10:19pm
|
Reply
219
|
Passion HD
(0)
|
Reply of
rearadmiral's Reply
Hi,
Just to clarify, the $60 lifetime thing is contingent on maintaining one membership. So I'm paying $10 a month for one of the sites but have access to all of them. If/when I quit that one site, I will lose access to the other sites too. It is kind of a gimmick, but it seems worth it.
|
02-01-17 09:58pm
|
Reply
220
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Amanda's Poll
I just measured my hands. I have HUGE hands! :-)
|
02-01-17 09:13pm
|
Reply
221
|
X-Art
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Comment
Looking around a little more, I do see a few common models on Colette and Met Art. Heck, I just found Leah Gotti on Met Art from 2015 (disappointing sets of her, though, considering she has quickly become a really popular, full blown, do everything porn star now...interracial 5 guy gang bang on Colette? I'm more crushed than curious.) But I am still sure they are not sharing material. I may join Colette since it looks interesting and I haven't before.
|
01-29-17 09:56pm
|
Reply
222
|
Passion HD
(0)
|
Reply of
rearadmiral's Review
Rearadmiral,
I wrote a review for Passion HD several years ago and was just reading through yours when I realized I'm a current member! I joined POVD a while back and, not satisfied with the infrequent updates, went ahead and paid the $70 for the one-time fee to join the whole network. I wrote reviews for POVD and Tiny4K that included some comments about passion HD, I think. Just be sure you are paying the smallest monthly fee you can, then buy the one-time ticket.
I also wanted to let you know they have a new site in the network package called "holed.com" that is probably, um, right up your alley. It is a brand new site that only has 24 scenes, but some of them are really good and I'm not into anal. And you already know the network has some great and very popular young US models. There are some other anal scenes in the network in POVD and Lubed also. The best thing about joining the network is that there are often one or two updates a day and the quality is very consistent across the board.
Looks like I need to write a new review....
|
01-29-17 09:28pm
|
Reply
223
|
X-Art
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Comment
Easiest way to figure this out is to look up model names at indexxx.com
I am 99.9% sure that the material at Met Art X exclusive. It is not the same stuff at Colette and TMW. MetartX uses many of the same European models as Met Art and, with the possible exception of Nancy, I have seen none of these models at TMW. TMW is primarily US porn models. I have not been a member of Colette, but it looks like those are mostly US porn models also. If you look at the model listing and check names against Indexxx, you will see that these TMW/Colette girls might be at ALSScan, but I didn't see any at MetArt or MetArtX. There are a few models that might be at both, but it isn't the same material. Now...I do see a couple of lesser Met Art models at WTF, but that is not too surprising since WTF is a European site that collects material from all over. I have never seen any authorized Met Art network material on any sites outside of their network, so I am pretty sure that it isn't the same material there, either.
|
01-29-17 08:57pm
|
Reply
224
|
N/A
|
Reply of
skippy's Poll
So....for those WTF-ers out there. VR videos are 3d, and have a 180 or 360 view. You sit or stand there and look around and it feels a lot like you are in the room. So they are highly immersive. When you watch, you are essentially there with the model/models. Think of it as POV in steroids. Many sites really take advantage of the format and get pretty creative. I call participation the vids in which you actively have sex or the model/actress is doing something to you, like (nearly) sitting on your face. Masturbation or observation are the ones where you just watch. To me, the masturbation videos are OK, but they do not really do the format justice. On Sexbabes-VR, for example, Watching Paula Shy get herself off is nice, but screwing her in full VR is simply amazing.
If you have not tried this format, go buy a google cardboard for your phone and give it a try! There are plenty of free samples on Pornhub. I think VR eventually will do at least as much for porn as the VCR did!
|
01-26-17 07:24am
|
Reply
225
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Amanda's Poll
I'm originally from south Florida but now I live in Pennsylvania, so I REALLY miss the boating and the beach. I crewed charter yachts as a teen and can tell you about deserted beaches in the Bahamas that nobody knows about (the REAL Bahamas, far from the pandering cruise ship ports...no offense intended, Pyrenees, I've been on some nice cruises, too). My wife and I still charter farther down in the Caribbean on vacations.
|
01-25-17 09:19pm
|
|
