Sorry you were disappointed, graymane. You did get a nice price at $29.95 for two major softcore sites. Unfortunately, Metart is famous for its non-erotic videos of lovely young models.
From what you write, it sounds like you should avoid softcore sites, and look for something harder. Most softcore sites, like Femjoy, MPL Studios, etc. would probably be too soft for you.
There are plenty of sites out there. The problem is finding the ones that appeal to your personal tastes, at a reasonable price.
There's also a ton of crap out there. Metart and Errotica Archives are quality sites, they just don't meet your tastes.
500MB x 50 scenes = 25 GB. If that's for 1 month, that would be a tiny download limit.
I joined a Japanese site about a year ago, that had a daily download limit of 12 GB. The photosets and videos only had 1 file size (no low or medium option, just the high quality was offered).
For downloading, my DSL connection maxes out at 150-160 KB/s. That's the best I can hit, and if I download more than 1 file at a time, the total download speed splits the 150 KB/s between the files. So it's no faster to download 2 files at the same time than to download a single file.
Anyway, even with 150-160 KB/s download speed, I could sometimes reach the 12 GB daily limit. Because the video files at that site were large (the photosets are much smaller, of course).
So I downloaded a bunch of videos and photosets, because there are some absolutely gorgeous Japanese porn stars.
But I haven't looked at a single one of those files since downloading them. Lol. And that was over a year ago.
What percentage complete nudity (including photos with lingerie that shows all the good bits) is there in the photoshoots? A wild guess is fine by me.
What is the name of your "real sexy model with tons of picture sets and videos"? Or is she part of your private stash?
Also, why would a recently posted video (August 2010) be of such low quality? Is this a file they dug up from their unused historical trash? Most sites that post updates use files that are their average quality or above average quality. Why would a site post a below average quality file, unless it had some historical or collector interest?
Wild guesses on my part, because I have no knowledge of this site, except for its name. :)
But unless there is a significant amount of nudity, I doubt I would be interested in joining. I like softcore, but I still want to see the "good" bits. (Bits is a British term, you understand. LOL.)
Edit01: I just looked up "bits". I want to see everything interesting, not just the cunny.
I was never very accurate guessing a person's age from looking at him or her.
A few porn models do have a very young appearance, and can still look like a teenager long after they are into their twenties.
Thanks for the links, but I can't really tell much difference in her appearance between the three scenes. The major difference, to me, is that she has a greenish white skintone in one because of the green paint on the walls:
http://picsgall3.tinseks.com/012/10/001/
I'm pretty sure she is also at the teenmegaworld network. But I don't know if I even bothered to download her material there, because I was signed up to too many different sites, and with a slow DSL connection, it takes a long time to download these large files. And when I download, I usually go for the high quality, so it can take 1-2 hours to download a single video file.
I really need to get a faster Internet connection.
Some of these video files are now over 1 GB, which is ridiculous. Especially when I find I don't even like the file, and delete it, after watching it partway through.
There are a number of videos at this current network, TonyBucks, that are 1 GB or more.
Sometimes when I mention that a photographer can make a girl look much better, by makeup, lighting, whatever, I get a response that "natural" is better, and that to some PU members, at least, the less makeup, photoshopping, the better: any change from the real model is for the worse.
But I definitely think, as long as it's not overdone (which is a highly personal opinion), makeup and lighting and good skin tone and colorful costume and other factors can make a huge difference in how attractive and erotic a model will be presented.
I think I started seeing this model maybe a year ago. One of the first sets I saw her in she was really cute (because of the lighting and other factors). Since then, I've seen her at many different sites, and she rarely looks as good as she did in that early photoset. It wasn't that she was wearing a lot of makeup: she just looked really cute or pretty.
Some models can look very different from one site to the next. But this model's only been here a very short time, so, if she doesn't age fast, change hair color or hair style, she is easily recognizable at the different sites.
A few porn models can last for 5-10 years or more, and they don't appear to age that much. Most models don't last anywhere near that long, but in a few years, they are already starting to look much older. The porn business can be very hard on some models, I think.
Relations between the U.S. and the UK have been rocky off and on ever since the War of Independence (1776). But even your fellow European porn sites will charge you in Euros when they can get away with it. Porn operators will normally show no mercy to their customers. That's the law of the Porn Jungle! Eat or be eaten (better when you have a female partner with you).
The idea behind the founding of the FDA was great, and I'm sure that over time they have done a lot of good work and helped to increase the safety of products sold. But just as with almost any government authority, there is a lot of criticism of the way they operate, and how it can take years before a product of questionable safety is recalled or stopped from sales. But even the idea of questionable safety, in practice, becomes a legal quagmire. You stop the sale of a drug from a major pharmaceutical company, and you are going to have billion-dollar lawsuits because of that.
But that's the American way, where lawyers can make a fortune suing everyone in sight. The way I understand it, the only person a lawyer won't sue is himself, and they will probably come up with ways to do that and make still more money.
I think there's a huge amount of truth in your statement that psychology can be as important or more important in sales than logic. And the water example proves it.
But there is also a small minority of people who resist advertising, the value buyers, who focus on price and value. They spend far less than what other people in their salary brackets do.
You certainly express the idea more elegantly/compactly than I am doing. Lol.
That Nathalie is a true slut. The first time I saw her, I thought she was lovely and pink and soft in a photoset, wearing an adorable smile, a white wrist band and a white-and-pink collar around her neck, and nothing else. But then I started seeing her on one site after another, banging away with boy after boy after boy. And my illusions were shattered, because I had thought she was waiting for me to show up, and I was forced to realize she was not really waiting after all. :)
The photography can make a huge difference in how attractive a girl appears. In that one photoset I first saw, Nathalie looked really cute. But in many of the photosets/videos of her I've seen since, she looks just OK to mildly attractive.
I really wish that more sites would pay more time and attention and care to making each girl as attractive as possible, in the photographs and videos. I don't think it would take that much more effort, as long as the photographer/video man was competent.
What about vagina reduction products? Everyone knows that men want a tight fit, no matter what the size of their penis might be. I bet that we could make a ton of money with the right product in that area. And if we could get the PU/TBP seal of approval on our "secrets of vaginal reduction for the one size fits all clitomizer", we could probably make 2 tons of money.
Of course they would still be advertised. I thought there was supposed to be some kind of truth in advertising law, but if there is such a law, it doesn't seem to be enforced widely or strictly. Or maybe the Internet is a different area or field, where U.S. law doesn't always strictly apply.
A brilliant idea. Maybe some PU member with computer programming skills could make a simple program that will be able to make tags for our porn collection files and set up a "use it or lose it" system for deletion. But I would scream if it deleted some of my favorite files that I had not watched in a long time. So it would need an option to tag a file as "favorite" or "to be saved until hell freezes over".
No zips for springtimebeauties is still the case.
I like photos, but the ones I like are the high quality that you find at metart, justteensite, mplstudios, etc. The photos here at springtimebeauties are much lower quality (with no zips). So even if the site had zips, in spite of the cute models, I would not save these photos. That's just me. Because the photos are low quality, in my opinion.
Edit01: I also like a small amount of photoshopping, because I think it makes the models look better. But there is no photoshopping in these photos. You see all the freckles and moles and whatever on these girls. I just like a little glossier appearance.
They do have some very yummy models, though. Thanks for mentioning the site. :)
Denner, I explained this in a comment before, but if you do choose to join this network, it can make a difference which site you join through.
For the last month or more, the network has been offering bonus sites when you join any one of their sites.
For most sites, the 1 month membership is $29.95.
To join the 18 stream site the 1 month membership is $34.95.
With all the the different memberships, you can get a different number of bonus sites. By different memberships, I mean which specific site you choose to join through.
If you choose the 18 stream, you pay $34.95 and get 2 bonus sites.
If you choose the SpunkyBee, you pay $29.95 and get 9 bonus sites.
One of the bonus sites included when you join through SpunkyBee is the 18 Stream site.
If you join through other sites in the network, you pay $29.95 and get less than 9 bonus sites (maybe 6 or less bonus sites).
So join through the SpunkyBee site, you pay $29.95, and get full access to 10 of the network sites.
That is the based on what I see being offered currently. The network can change their offerings in the future. But that is what has been offered for the past month and more.
The network said it would end the special bonuses over a month ago, then they extended the offer by 2 weeks, then they extended the offer by 2 more weeks. That I know of. They might have been extending it in the past that I don't know about.
I've read some comments/replies at PU that state that some of the sites in this network have stated they are/will be streaming only for the newer updates. But I've also read PU comments/rep;lies that seem to indicate that streaming only has not yet actually been put into effect.
If I definitely knew streaming only was in effect, I would not join, even at a lower price. I like the idea of being able to save a copy on my hard drive, even if I don't own it legally. I'm not really sure of the correct wording here. When you download a photoset or video from a paysite, you don't "own" the file, you just have the right to use it. Or something like that. Or maybe you do own it, but you don't have the right to sell it. I don't know what the legal interpretation is on this area. Just like, when you pay for a copy of some software program, I don't know if you own your copy, or what your legal "ownership" means.
I don't usually search for models directly.
What I do is go to the sites I am currently a member of, and look through those contents.
And I also look for other sites I might want to join, and look through the preview pages there.
I go to PU almost every day, but I don't use it to directly search for specific models, though I do use it to search for sites.
I rarely go to EurobabeIndex or FreeOnes. Maybe I should use them more, but I just never got into the habit.
There's supposed to be software to block spam. But if we could come up with better software that really works to block at least some of this spam, we should make a fortune.
I also get a lot of random spam emails for sex, medications, whatever. Most of that goes into my spam box, but some of it gets into my regular email box. The amount of spam I've been getting recently has increased significantly.
And I'm too lazy to get a new email address, because then I would have to change my email for all the accounts that I really want to get mail and notices from.
Edit01: I did open two email addresses, that I was hoping would get the bulk of my spam. But my regular email address has been put on the list for spammers. And they also use my email address as a "fake" email address of origin when they send out spam, because I sometimes get notices that some messages (that are spam) were not able to be delivered, or that I have gone over the limit of the amount of email I can send. And I did not, obviously, send those spam messages, and I send out very few emails in any one day.
The thrill is in the hunt. But it's surprisingly painful to delete, except items that are truly bad or worthless. I want to keep even the average stuff, even though I will probably never go back to view it again.
Slutty, I thought your review was good, I was not trying to criticize it in any way. Please understand that. It's just that I thought you would be more enthusiastic or satisfied with the site when you gave it a score of 82. We seem to have similar tastes, because I have enjoyed many of the sites you have reviewed, and I thought your scores for those sites I knew about were close to what I would have scored them.
So I am not quibbling with your score. I just thought you didn't personally enjoy the site very much. But I was just trying to read more into your review than what you wrote.
But like you say, there are good and bad points to the site, and how much you enjoy it is a personal matter. Even though we are writing a review that is supposed to be a guide for others.
I keep flipping from one side to the other, which can be annoying. LOL. I keep saying the same thing in my own reviews, that "how much you enjoy a site depends on your personal reaction to the contents, and not just the contents themselves".
Nice review, but I get the impression that you scored the site higher than you actually enjoyed the site contents. Or maybe you are trying to become a professional reviewer and giving an "objective" score/rating instead of one based on what you feel. Or maybe I've read too many reviews lately, and need to take a break. :)
My best guess is that they are trying to make those pornhogs with fast Internet connections pay for slurping their site. Lol.
But don't forget that you get a bunch of bonus sites with membership to this site. So unless you have a massively fast connection, it's probably better to go for the 1 month membership.
I haven't been a member myself, so I have no idea whether you would think a 1 month membership is worth the money.
Even if I had been a member, I still wouldn't know, because individual tastes (and values) vary from person to person. :)
I think you are basically right, that your expectation of "DVD" quality was just too high for what is mainly available on the Internet.
I've never watched a porn file I downloaded on a TV either.
My only experience is with PC monitors.
And Maggie and the other TBP reviewers have far more extensive experience with all kinds of porn than I will ever have.
But there is a wide variation in the bitrate and other quality factors in the porn videos you find on the Internet at different sites. There are some sites that have some extremely high quality videos, and the quality keeps going up as time goes on.
So one day, if we are still around, we will be able to watch these porn videos on our TV sets, when the quality becomes good enough. Lol.
The video files you don't like for their "low quality" are low quality as regards bitrate.
Whether you've been spoiled or whatever, it's wonderful to be able to watch a video and see it with good to great definition, which takes a higher bitrate than what is available on many older videos.
A lot of "DVD" quality videos are not really very good quality, especially if you want to watch them full-screen.
I don't like watching videos that are fuzzy or unclear. Most PU members don't either.
So welcome to the club (but I think you were already a member before I was). :)
Edit01: Watching a video in a smaller window makes the video appear clearer. The poor quality is not as noticeable.
The high bitrate videos you think are poor quality might have been remastered (?, not sure what the correct term is) from lower bitrate videos, without really improving the original video.
Someone like Toadsith is an expert in this area, and could give you a complete and accurate explanation of your problem.
Protecting Minors We are strong supporters of RTA and ICRA, two of the most recognized self labeling organizations. Our site is properly labeled to assist in the protection of minors accessing inappopriate content. For information about filtering tools, check this site.
DISCLAIMER: ALL MODELS APPEARING ON THIS WEBSITE ARE 18 YEARS OR OLDER.
To report child pornography, go directly to ASACP! We're proud to be a corporate sponsor.
Have concerns or questions about porn addiction? We recommend this helpful resource.
