Replies Given
|
Your replies to other users's reviews and comments. |
| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1
|
Girls Out West
(0)
|
Reply of
Broncoviz's Review
Good review. I agree with it, though I am fine with the number of updates. It's not s site I stay subscribed on a regular basis, but it's good to come back after awhile to see what's new, since I like this genre of porno. I recently subscribed for three months after being away from it after some time.
Some models also appear on other sites from time to time. I like the very naturalness of the models and scenes, and the way the films are shot; very raw. The videos are the main draw, pictures are not the strong suit compared to other sites. They also have very high quality video downloads, though it is tricky to figure out at first how to download the right format on a Mac (takes a double click, then "save as" to download the file). All in all it's a good site for those that like their style and can put up with the quirks of site navigation.
|
01-28-16 11:35am
|
Reply
2
|
abbywinters
(0)
|
Reply of
Sasha Bones's Reply
I agree with you, I still like the site very much. I've appreciated the a la carte option more lately since I don't view that many shoots a month and they save them on the account so I don't have to worry about backing them up on a hard drive as much.
One thing I hope they work on, is that they redesign the site to work better on mobile devices (tablets, iphones, etc) for streaming, or even have roku channel options. The site is still very well designed as a website for laptops and desktops, but could use serious improvements on other platforms. Some other porn sites I've viewed have a similar issue, especially if they have been around awhile.
Also, another reason to like the site, is that they still don't use photoshop AT ALL to "airbrush" the models' imperfections. Recently they had polled the users on their forum to take a vote on whether or not they should start using photoshop to do minor edits, and I think users voted to keep things as-is w/out photoshop. I thought it was cool they asked the customers what they thought.
|
01-01-15 12:39pm
|
Reply
3
|
abbywinters
(0)
|
Reply of
AWpress's Reply
That's good to know! It definitely has kept me revisiting the site whenever I have left for awhile. And I like the digital locker feature for pay-per-scene to keep past purchases organized, stuff I forgot I'd bought already.
|
08-27-14 06:55pm
|
Reply
4
|
abbywinters
(0)
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Reply
Hi, I'm not sure if I have noticed throttling, but it may be there. I have always downloaded as opposed to streaming. I dont download more than a few shoots a day, if that, some days not at all. At this point I have way too much pornography on hard drives that if it's slow downloading I don't worry about it, and mark something as a favorite to download later. Their pricing does seem a bit steep, especially since they separate it into three sections, paid for separately. But they make it a little cheaper if you sign up for more than one section. Plus it does not include access to other porn sites like some site subscriptions offer.
The a la carte has been a good deal for me, since I have had an account for so long, that I still only pay .99 cents a shoot, instead of the increased $2.49 price per shoot for new accounts. I hope they do not change that anytime soon for the old accounts! Though I just signed up for a month subscription for the first time in over a year, since they have more I want to download lately. With ala carte they also keep purchases "forever" in a digital locker, which I have found handy. If I am only signed up a la carte, I download way less as well.
|
08-14-14 02:22pm
|
Reply
5
|
abbywinters
(0)
|
Reply of
abbywinters's Reply
Cool good to know. I find 720 HD still works great on my macbook. I tried TrueHd vs HD on another site and could not tell enough diffrence to justify a larger download size for trueHD. If used on a larger monitor, though I could probly tell.
Also, I noticed a differnce in which video player is used can effect the quality, with current HD.
|
08-14-14 01:46pm
|
Reply
6
|
abbywinters
(0)
|
Reply of
greg909's Reply
I assure you I am not paid by AW to leave a review, just a long time customer (6 years or so). I am not a photography enthusiast, so if the photos on AW are bad, that's news to me, nor do I care. I don't get off on "good photography", I'm looking at the models. I prefer the amateurish nature of the site compared to some other sites I have visited over all. Maybe their photography is more on the not-quite-pro side of things, but it ain't rocket science and they use good cameras, usually natural lighting, and plenty of resolution (they offer XL high resolution photos besides the regular, on newer shoots the past several years). I also only view this stuff on a smaller Macbook pro and not a large monitor or TV, so maybe I haven't missed the ultra high 5k rez or whatever. The HD they offer and XL pics are enough on my system. Some shoots are better than others on here.
I think you're right, they do mostly have former models do the shooting, I may have called them pros in my review, but I think imeant the camera equipment is professional.
I think the non-pro approach makes it more real, like the models/shoots aren't part of some industry porn site (which of course, they are). Like the girls just got together to shoot some porn and have lots of orgasms (and once a month, one of them brings their boyfriend) .
I've got other porno from other sites, but still come back to this one alot. It's all subjective anyway, there is a lot other sites have not on here, and vice-versa.
Also , I am new to PU, and have not left reviews of other sites yet, I may work on that.
|
08-14-14 01:30pm
|
|
