To each their own, which means personal tastes differ, I think.
My own preferences are softcore over hardcore, pix over vids.
But I will look at hardcore, and at vids, hoping to find something I like.
It's just that there's more softcore that appeals to me than hardcore.
Also, I think it's easier to make good photos than to make good videos, for a lot of different reasons, and it's easier (takes less effort) to search through pix than to search through vids (less time-consuming, and less expensive). And vids take up much more room on the hard drive than pix.
The important factors of a site to me are quality and quantity and price. I don't require a huge amount of material if the material is highly appealing. But based on the short preview of the site, and your review, this site appears to have little material that is extremely appealing to me, so I will give it a pass (a do-not-join). Someone else might find the models or photos or videos extremely attractive, but there are other sites that I think offer more value for the price (I'm not saying the site has no value, just that it doesn't appear to offer high value to me.).
Or to quote you, in a simple summary of what I've said: "To each their own =)"
Good review. Gives overall site description. I also like the preview area of the site, which gives a good intro to the site itself. I'm into softcore pix, but the site seems too small to be worth even a 1-month membership. But that's just my personal taste, based on your review and what I see from the site preview.
When you find a model you really like, and you want to see what she has been in (photosets + videos), it can be really frustrating to do a search when the same model is given different names at different sites. To make it worse, the same model can have different names at a single site. There is the additional problem that different models can have the same name.
I agree that the videos are mainly a waste of time.
But you get a huge amount of photosets of yummy knockout babes.
You also get a huge number of contributing photographers, so the differing styles of the photography, while not wildly different from each other, should give most softcore teen fans of photosets plenty to find satisfaction with.
This is the best teen softcore site on the net for photosets, based on quality of photosets, quantity of photosets, the huge number of contributing photographers, the huge number of attractive models.
The large number of free live-cam hours for the models (part of the membership) is just a bonus.
This is a minor point that is probably too minor for most people to pay any attention to; but, in the "preview" amateur free gallery, there are 6 photos of a cute blonde girl. I saw one of the photos years ago, never saw a full set.
Cute girl, stuck in my memory.
My quibble is that the photoset (of 6 photos) is dated 05 Nov 2009.
I wish the sites would be more clear or accurate about these dates. 05 Nov 2009 is probably when the 6 photos were posted on the site. But the photos themselves were taken years ago, because, like I say, I saw one of the photos of that set (partial set?) years ago, and have seen that same photo many times since.
I'm also a little disappointed that the quality of the photos isn't higher (better definition or resolution). I wonder if maybe the site is deliberately offering a lower-resolution picture to add to the "amateur" or "reality" effect.
These are just quibbles on my part. Easily ignored.
I agree that the site preview is terrible, in that it does not show short clips of at least some of the site videos or photos.
The preview area states you get full access to over 25 bonus sites, but does not name any of the bonus sites.
I would give the preview a rating of "shit" or "shitty", which would have been a failing grade back in the day.
However, if you haven't been a member of this site or any of the Royal Cash sites, and if you are into teens, you might want to join for a 1-month membership. The network is primarily a teen video site. There are photosets, but the photosets are low-quality pictures that are basically screen-caps of the videos.
There are about 4 sites in the Royal Cash group that have hot teen videos that are the main attraction of a membership: fresh young girls, most models you have not seen elsewhere, in straight-fuck videos with little to no storyline. Straight-fuck means no story, but there is bj, anal, vaginal, whatever, mainly boy-girl, but some girl-girl, some threesome, at the different sites.
A great photographer can capture all of a model's beauty, including her accent. Future photos will include soundtracks as well as smelltracks as well as feeltracks, for a better transmission of the model, as well as foreign language translation.
But the New York spoken word will not be cracked for another 3 centuries, due to its harsh and grating sound.
I seem to recall a similar poll question being asked before. Or else it was discussed in a forum thread.
Anyway, for me, an accent can sometimes add a little to the video, as long as the speaker is understandable. It depends. But I don't find New York accents erotic.
When I'm a member, Met-art is one of the few sites I log into every day, because of the large update schedule, and I just like searching the huge archives. But most sites are not worth a daily visit. When I first join a site, I spend time trying to find the prime material, then spend less time after that because few sites update with material that I really like on a daily basis.
I agree that the Just Teen Movie site is a disappointment. They started out with high-quality short videos (8-17 minutes run time) of lovely models. The videos were mainly boring, in spite of the attractiveness of the models. I say high-quality videos because of the high definition of the videos and the other technical aspects (good lighting, good color for the skin tone, etc.)
But it's been over 15 months since they added a new video. Anyone joining that site for over 1 month is wasting his money. You can download the entire site contents of Just Teen Movie in 2 or 3 days. They only have 42 videos. And most of the videos you probably wouldn't want to watch a second time, anyway, because they are mainly boring.
A real shame. They had a good idea of a high-quality video site of lovely young models, and then didn't follow through on the updates.
I guess you just have to take the good with the bad.
JTS just posted a photoset of Linda named "Merry Xmas", dated 2009-12-23. This Linda is named Masha F at Met-art. She's one of my favorite models. Gorgeous girl. Linda is wearing a Santa-type hat in many of the "Merry Xmas" photos. There's also a border of fake snow around many of the photos to set her off and to remind us of the Christmas season.
Truth be told, the photos would have been better without the fake snow.
But this is a gorgeous girl, and the photoset is worth keeping.
She also had a recent photoset at Met-art, dated 2009.10.28, named "PREXIOSI", under the model name of Masha F.
American Vice has "a series with midgets and some deformed guy". That's what I would call a really specialized niche. Personally, I prefer regular boy-girl videos, or even girl-girl videos, to watching a midget or some deformed guy.
In spite of a number of attractive models, because of the high membership price and other negative factors of this site, it's not worth joining. So what is a reasonable score for a site that's not worth joining? Individual preferences vary wildly, but I think any score of 70 or above is too high for this site. That's just my opinion, of course, but I think that more emphasis should be put on making the score reflect the attractiveness/value of a site, as to whether the site is worth joining or not.
I've never owned a laptop yet, so I've never watched porn while travelling. I have seen R-rated movies while staying in a hotel or motel, but that's not considered porn.
Costumes can add a bit of color and interest to a photo set. Sometimes the costumes can add, other times the costumes add very little or actually detract. It depends on the model and the photographer.
If you are looking for more Japanese sites, Sex Asian 18 is one you might consider. Site has a number of very attractive models, photosets and videos. They have a daily download limit which was 12 GB at the time I was a member back in July 2009.
I hadn't given it a lot of thought previously, but Turboshaft brings up an interesting idea: "I mean if a hot girl needed to have her appendix taken out, who are we to judge the scar that it left behind?" Should we ban all porn stars with appendix scars, or allow them in as long as the scar has been photoshopped with taste? My honest opinion is that most appendix scars are less distracting than tattoos and piercings.
Some photoshop is acceptable if it improves the picture. But photoshop can be overdone and produce artificial-looking results. Some photographers go way overboard in using photoshop so that the model appears to be an alien instead of a beautiful earthling. My feeling is that photoshop (or a similar process) is being over-used lately at Met-art, and the photosets are less attractive because of it.
I try to balance price versus content (quality and quantity of content), to make a rough guess as to whether a site is worth joining. I do read the reviews at PU to get an idea of the site contents (quality + quantity of photosets, frequency of updates, ease of site navigation, and any problems the site might have.
There were no updates in all of 2008.
The updates in 2009 just started a few months ago.
That is why the site is offering a free one-year membership to anyone who had a 1-year membership in 2008.
They are also offering a free 6-month membership to anyone who bought a 1-year membership in 2009 during rhe period it was not updating.
I joined for 1 year in March 2009, so I am supposed to get a free 6-month extension of my membership. I sent an email requesting the extension on Dec. 01, but have received no reply yet.
Porn videos are mainly acting, and most porn actors leave a lot to be desired. Nice looking face and body are plusses, but like pat362 and pinkerton state, if the girl looks like she is making out a grocery list while she getting fucked, or her moans, groans and excitement are so obviously fake, it takes away from the value of the scene.
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.
