| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
576
|
Only Tease
(0)
|
Reply of
Capn's Comment
Well Cap'n, seems like they keep suckering you back in... I have to admit there is one site that I always find very irritating, but still join like once a year. Don't know why I do it.
Personally I think tease can be pretty hot, even without a full-nude "payoff", provided it is well shot.
|
11-23-10 01:37pm
|
Reply
577
|
Orgasms.xxx
(0)
|
Reply of
otoh's Reply
joymii is pretty high on my list, I will probably join it sometime soon, I have been curious for a while. Initially it seemed way too toy-oriented based on the preview, but seems better now.
I agree that this site definitely has a broader range of ages than X-Art, but I think the focus here is also largely on younger models, I'd say most are 18-25 (maybe 20% are older than that based on a quick review of the site's posted model 'ages'), although the ages they list are likely bogus - they say Piper Fawn is 24 and Zuzana Z is 27, both of which seem low to me (given what EBI says).
|
07-01-12 10:52pm
|
Reply
578
|
Orgy Max
(0)
|
Reply of
blalock's Reply
I never noticed one, but then i didn't spend too much time on the site. Perhaps someone else here will have an answer for you...
Sorry
|
01-08-10 09:47pm
|
Reply
579
|
Orgy Max
(0)
|
Reply of
rome476's Reply
I am unaware of what is in the DVDs, so can't help you there. They have a link to purchase their movies from their site and a lot of their content is in the preview so you might be able to figure out if it is worth it to you.
The model directory is more or less worthless, they only list a few of the main models on the site (like 30 I think), I'd look but my membership expired. When you go to the scenes it lists most of the models that do anything sexual in the scene in the desription, however it is quite difficult to tell if it is everybody. I doubt the girls that are standing around topless and not really involved are always mentioned.
|
12-16-09 04:03pm
|
Reply
580
|
Paul Markham Teens
(0)
|
Reply of
Wittyguy's Comment
Yeah, I joined about a year ago with the trial, poked around a bit realized there was nothing new and cancelled. I don't think they have added any new content in quite some time...
|
03-31-10 04:45pm
|
Reply
581
|
Penthouse
(0)
|
Reply of
Hooliganzo's Comment
I know this is an old comment, but figured I'd add a response in case someone else was curious.
They have 3D videos, it is side-by-side video encoding, the quality is not so great, and clearly they are not using the best equipment, but it can be entertaining. There are quite a few videos on 3D, maybe like 500, the majority of which is HC with some solo and lesbian. The main problem I have with it (aside from encoding quality) is that they are using wmv, which is not supported on my 3D TV so I have to re-encode everything in mp4.
|
03-16-14 02:46am
|
Reply
582
|
Pix and Video
(0)
|
Reply of
squirrel's Review
squirrel,
this type of annoying navigation is pretty common in porn sites these days, as RustyJ said it is a good idea to open a model page in a new tab, which isn't that much of a nuisance.
i haven't been a member of this network in about a year, but based on the last time i was a member i didn't find the navigation particularly poor (i've seen many that are much much worse).
|
10-22-10 12:37am
|
Reply
583
|
Playboy Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
graymane's Review
Nice review graymane, I totally agree with your points, I made the mistake of joining here, or one of their many offshoots some time ago and was regretting almost instantly.
|
10-09-12 12:17am
|
Reply
584
|
Playboy Plus
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
It is pretty plastic, but I have always been drawn to their coed material for some reason... Probably because the first "porn" (if you can call it that) magazine I bought was one of those Girls of the ACC or something that Playboy puts out.
Outside of those, the shoots are all way over-photoshopped and excessively plastic as you say.
It is humorous to go back through and watch the bush slowly grow as you go further and further back in time.
|
03-18-11 02:50pm
|
Reply
585
|
Playboy.com
(0)
|
Reply of
Wittyguy's Comment
Is it even any different? Seems as though you still might have to pay extra for the .tv site. All it looks like is a revamped front page, who knows what it looks like inside.
|
11-05-11 09:23pm
|
Reply
586
|
Policeman
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Review
Can't disagree with your review, I totally agree it isn't much of a site and totally worthless as a standalone, although I will say that I do really enjoy a few of their scenes, the sonia red scene they have here is for some reason my favorite scene of her. Although curiously they have merged a good portion of this material with their other sites, so not sure why they even bother keeping it.
I'm always curious how accurate the subtitles are...
|
03-18-11 08:49pm
|
Reply
587
|
Polish Busty
(0)
|
Reply of
Roy Stone's Review
You made several good points in your review that I'm sure people will find useful, although not exactly my niche of choice. Welcome to PU!
|
09-03-10 07:40pm
|
Reply
588
|
Porn Pros Network
(0)
|
Reply of
RustyJ's Reply
Ah, I see, thanks for the info.
|
04-09-12 12:36am
|
Reply
589
|
Porn Pros Network
(0)
|
Reply of
RustyJ's Review
Nice review RustyJ, I pretty much agree with all your points, although Passion HD wasn't available that I can recall the last I was a member, so can't comment on that. Good to hear they added it though.
|
04-08-12 10:45pm
|
Reply
590
|
Porn Pros Network
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Reply
I suppose, but this is why I would think most folks setup a spam email account just for online orders, because it never seems like unsubscribing from things works well anywhere (and for a while I was convinced unsubscribing from one just led to your address being sent to someone else to use as there would be an odd jump in unknown spam). Perhaps I'm just paranoid.
|
03-25-12 01:14am
|
Reply
591
|
Porn Pros Network
(0)
|
Reply of
Victorycreed's Comment
Doesn't every site do this? I get stupid emails from many sites I've joined, and unsubscribing from them has generally been pointless. Isn't this the point of having a spam filter?
|
03-06-12 12:05am
|
Reply
592
|
Porn.com
(0)
|
Reply of
danred's Review
Just curious, have the resolved any of the glitches other users have noted? Incomplete files, pixelation, etc.?
|
07-04-10 12:08am
|
Reply
593
|
Pornstar Network
(0)
|
Reply of
martinlongbow's Comment
The sites were reviewed by two different TBP reviewers, so I would say it is natural that they would give it different scores - they are also 8 months apart, perhaps there were changes to the site.
As far as why it is scored so highly, I thought it was a decent site when I was a member a while ago, the place has many sites so it is not surprising some of them are no longer updating - there are lots of networks where this is the case Royal Cash, Deisel, DDF, 21st...
|
01-12-11 09:24pm
|
Reply
594
|
Private.com
(0)
|
Reply of
standard's Reply
No problem, just a pet peeve of mine! All of my friends do the same thing...
Again, welcome to PU, looking forward to hearing more from you.
|
06-11-11 10:55pm
|
Reply
595
|
Private.com
(0)
|
Reply of
standard's Review
hey standard, welcome to PU, nice review.
Too bad download managers still don't work here. I also thought this site was pretty crappy for what you get.
Did you really only get 150kbps, or do you mean 150 KB/s? I seem to recall getting decent DL speeds here, and 150 kbps is aweful...
|
06-10-11 10:49pm
|
Reply
596
|
Private.com
(0)
|
Reply of
rearadmiral's Reply
I actually didn't mind Hustler's new setup without DRM that much. I think they do fill a niche (porn with stories, however half-assed) that sites like Videobox and AmericanVice don't seem to focus on. Although Hustler certainly needs to improve video quality.
If you didn't like Hustler's setup, you'll hate Private. It has significantly worse navigation than Hustler does, and the video quality is equal or perhaps slightly better than what Hustler offers.
peace,
slutty
|
02-10-10 08:44pm
|
Reply
597
|
Private.com
(0)
|
Reply of
moonbyrd's Reply
Maybe they used to have all of them, but I only saw up to the ones I listed... Sorry, man.
|
02-10-10 02:57pm
|
Reply
598
|
Private.com
(0)
|
Reply of
moonbyrd's Reply
moonbyrd,
the quality of the PDFs is excellent, you can zoom in - read the writing easily, very crisp. Definitely not scans. I'd say about 80% or so of the downloadable magazines are available in PDF, however they only have 40-60 or so of each magazine series (Private, Pirate, Triple X, Sex) and they have a few special editions. This is not their older material, the oldest magazine in each series was:
Sex 36
Triple X 45
Pirate 71
Private 180
Hope that helps, I'd wait to join until they make the improvements the Private Webmaster spoke of in his comment, it could get much better with just some navigation tweeks.
|
02-10-10 01:25pm
|
Reply
599
|
Private.com
(0)
|
Reply of
pat362's Reply
Pat, I'll try to write a more thorough review later in the week if I have time. The catalog of downloadable dvds is about 470 titles, so the size of the site is pretty decent. The "High" movies are 640x480 1500 kbps typcially, wmv only.
Like I said, my main problem is navagation and inability to use download managers, I'm sure they have some great scenes - but they are pretty much impossible to find unless you know the name of the dvd you are looking for (can't search by star of films)
In response to Rome, the download speeds were excellent whenever I logged in (1.4 MB/sec), however I was unable to get any download managers to work.
|
02-08-10 07:46pm
|
Reply
600
|
Real Teenie GFs
(0)
|
Reply of
mbaya's Reply
I think I might have used jettis before, but I don't recall ever having seen the other two, and it just seemed weird to me that the billing was listed at 3 different locations - I've never seen that before.
|
03-01-10 07:17pm
|
