| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
26
|
DDF Network
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from timeac1:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Yes that too...
At least the only want the number not the expiry date or CID number.
It is sad a site with decient content would resort to crap like that and what I complained about.
|
02-01-13 09:19pm
|
Reply
27
|
Holly Randall
(0)
|
Reply of
cjd2004's Comment
from Drooler:
Holly Randall has good content, but for me it hasn't had the same draw as MetArt. Hopefully, this affiliation will give the Holly Randall content a boost. Two things would help in the process. One is to make sure that the HR site (or sites) are as web-friendly as the MetArt sites are. Just look at the difference between them. MetArt has a nice, subdued visual approach, whereas the Holly Randall site is garish and cluttered. They clearly speak in two very different visual languages.
The second is to make the approach to the photography, especially the types of poses, more consistently like MetArt's as well.
|
01-26-13 04:00pm
|
Reply
28
|
Holly Randall
(0)
|
Reply of
cjd2004's Comment
from KET924aab:
Thanks for the link cjd. Holly Randall is definitely something different for Met-Art. It will be interesting to see how they redesign the site. Did you also see they are now managing ALS Scan and Viv Thomas? I had never heard of xbiz.com--very cool site.
|
01-25-13 05:27pm
|
Reply
29
|
Femjoy
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#9
from Drooler:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Why, yes! Funny, I hadn't noticed the connection. Well, it isn't as though they've cornered the "joy" market. ;) Thanks for pointing that out.
|
01-25-13 05:00pm
|
Reply
30
|
Holly Randall
(0)
|
Reply of
cjd2004's Comment
from lk2fireone:
I'm currently a member of Metart. Years ago it was just Metart and Metmodels. I knew they had added a few other sites recently, but didn't realize how many they have added. I hope it increases the financial stability of the Metart site itself, which is my favorite site for softcore photography. A lot of sites fall on hard times, and either go out of business or become archive sites that no longer update.
And now, Metart is not just a mega-site by itself, but is becoming a mega-network.
|
01-25-13 07:41am
|
Reply
31
|
Holly Randall
(0)
|
Reply of
cjd2004's Comment
from otoh:
Interesting news indeed! I've been a member of her site before, and whereas it's more glam-porn-y than my usual taste, I do have a fondness for it. Seems Met Art are definitely branching out into more racy material... which can only be a good thing IMHO, given the banality (purely subjective!) of the main site.
|
01-25-13 06:29am
|
Reply
32
|
FTV Girls
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#8
from exotics4me:
(cjd2004's Reply)
I'm not for sure on that one. But it's the point I was making. If he's going to just have one update per week, what does it hurt him to post the high superpics of every set instead of the 1600 high end ones? Would it really hurt his profits to offer past members a slightly lower price knowing he only updates once per week and there wouldn't be much new for them to download? As it is, I'm bumping it back to joining maybe once every two years. I do know the webmaster can be a jerk. If you haven't seen that look up how he talked about Eufrat and complained about her "poor English" knowing good and well when he hired her she wasn't a native English speaker. He went as far as leasing that set to other sites and went on a rant about how he would never hire another Euro model, seems like he called them "fake, plastic, robotic". His comments on Danni Yeager's sets were also bad. He blames the models when the sets don't go how he thinks they should go.
|
12-10-12 03:27pm
|
Reply
33
|
Erotic Beauty
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from lk2fireone:
(cjd2004's Reply)
You're right. I wasn't aware of it, or didn't think of it. And they do call it the MetArt Network of sites.
Thanks for the correction.
And if I hadn't already given you a positive trust rating, I would give you one now!
|
11-28-12 04:43am
|
Reply
34
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
cjd2004's Reply from cjd2004:
Oops - I meant upscaled.
|
10-13-12 08:13pm
|
Reply
35
|
Twistys
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from Micha:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Thank you cjd2004 for your reply. It did no help to log off and then log back on. I tried to delete history with cookies un-checked, but that didn't help. Twisty's tech support guy was helpful and seemed more knowledgeable than most. He said all cookies must be deleted, so I bit the bullet and deleted them. Email, Facebook, TV listings and every other site that requires passwords or stores my personal info in a cookie, was affected. Every time I log on to them, the cookies are reset, only to be deleted the next time I wanna see a thumbnail. My browser is the latest version of Firefox.
I have nothing bad to say about Twistys content, it's great. So good that I will struggle through for the remainder of my month, but I will not renew or return. The CAPCHA bullshit is insufferable. These tired old eyes cannot work out their puzzle.
micha
|
10-04-12 12:04am
|
Reply
36
|
Pornstars Punishment
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from marcdc1:
(cjd2004's Reply)
That sucks. I had them on my list of must sees. I guess that's what I get for procrastinating. Thanks for the info!
|
07-30-12 05:18am
|
Reply
37
|
Sinful Goddesses
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from Drooler:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Yes, I've noticed that, too. Sinful, indeed.
|
07-14-12 12:04pm
|
Reply
38
|
Twistys
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#6
from tangub:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Great tip cid2004, I've always found the search engine on CCBill website absolutely useless with a search for Twistys there bringing up zero results but Googling it as you suggest gets the results.
|
07-12-12 04:14am
|
Reply
39
|
Twistys
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from Claypaws:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Thanks cjd2004. The ccbill search found me three different forms with three different prices, one of which was £13.53 (which converts to $20.53). Though if I click the dollar pricing on the ccbill signup page it does show $19.95.
I might give it a go sometime though I am not at all sure there is enough there for me to justify a month's membership. Twistys is kind of a site where I might get a couple of dozen photo sets from a week every two years. i.e. from their updates, about one photo set per month might interest me.
|
07-12-12 03:38am
|
Reply
40
|
abbywinters
(0)
|
Reply of
cjd2004's Comment
from abbywinters:
Unfortunately, Maddison Yong and us did have some problems when she came to shoot with us.
Maddison's report above is accurate, though does miss out some aspects (She had several grooming issues, including a rash, an allergic reaction to sometimes). We engage models well before their shoot date to discuss how seriously we take grooming matters (several emails, and several phone calls), and make it very clear that we will not proceed with the shoot if they do not meet the standards our customers require and expect.
We do this, because we do not allow models to wear makeup (our customers tell us again and again, they want no makeup), and we never photoshop images (to remove blemishes). Ms Young alluded that in her previous work with other companies, makeup and post-production work had solved these problems, and she was mystified as to why we could not use the same tools. We explained that this was one of our selling points, but she was not satisified with that.
We prefer to simply wait until the model is looking her best. Most of our models appreciate this, and let us know in advance if they have any issues (for example, by texting us the night before, or emailing pictues of the affected area from their phone).
Unfortunately, Ms Young had a pressing schedule, and was unable to wait a few days for the blemishes to go away.
In our emails to her, we apologised for our harsh rules, reminded her that we did make this very clear that it was a condition of working with us, complimented her on the excellent shoots she did do for us, and invited her to return to do more shoots at her convenience. That invitation is still open.
We have shot around 1500 models over the last 12 years, and never had a model so upset about our grooming requirements as Ms Young was. We reviewed our procedures in several meetings afterwards, to idnentify where we "went wrong", with a view to improving our processes, and identified that we made every reasonable effort to communicate clearly.
At the end, we resolved that we just "rubbed eachother the wrong way".
|
07-10-12 01:11am
|
Reply
41
|
Humiliatrix
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from humiliatrix:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Guess who loves Humiliatrix? Sissies. I know, crazy.
Lol seriously I told my twitter followers I had a sissy mission for them, and posting some new reviews here was one of their tasks.
https://twitter.com/humiliatrix/status/218390172608376832
|
07-01-12 09:19am
|
Reply
42
|
Humiliatrix
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from rearadmiral:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Yeah, but in fairness to these guys if Tanner Mayes had a site and told me to review it, that would be the first score of 200 ever awarded on PU.
Seriously though, there might be some bias in these reviews...
|
06-29-12 08:23pm
|
Reply
43
|
Twistys
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from Gazette Risque:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Darn!
Well, you mentioned it! Thank you. ;)
|
05-14-12 07:48am
|
Reply
44
|
Twistys
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from atrapat:
(cjd2004's Reply)
Thanks for the info. I see Manwin is the company that owns both Brazzers Network and Twistys.
|
05-10-12 11:02am
|
Reply
45
|
Twistys
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from atrapat:
(cjd2004's Reply)
The Brazzers Network from a couple days ago was her first released b/g, wasn't it?
|
05-09-12 03:17pm
|
Reply
46
|
Sex Art
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#10
from Abel Semen:
(cjd2004's Reply)
I've seen bits of their stuff, they often get recommended in the same breath as sites I know I like. Unfortunately I don't find the ladies they use as attractive, on average, as those at a lot of other site. Still, they might be worth checking out.
|
05-03-12 11:48pm
|
Reply
47
|
Sex Art
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#6
from Abel Semen:
(cjd2004's Reply)
What are some good examples of such porn that don't fall under my other objections? (I.e., should be hardcore, and male characters should be more sympathetic than I currently find Jack to be - I realize the latter is somewhat subjective, but that shouldn't mean there isn't enough common ground to make an educated guess...) I'd be genuinely interested in checking such material out, for lots of reasons not the least of which is that people seem to think I should do more reviews. (There is one that I am *ahem* researching that I hope to write up soon - probably in about three weeks, but more likely to be sooner than later. But more suggestions would be good.)
|
04-24-12 12:10am
|
Reply
48
|
Sex Art
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from Monahan:
(cjd2004's Reply)
That's very interesting.
I'm a four month member of Met Art and was previously subscribed to their newsletter. But when I finally joined MetArt, they must have dropped me from the mailing list because I've gotten nothing.
MetArt members will see the announcement but are charged the full price.
The TBP/PU price is $17.99 which is the best deal I can find.
|
04-14-12 09:14pm
|
Reply
49
|
Meow Misti Dawn
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from pat362:
(cjd2004's Reply)
The new stuff is free. You can only stream it but then again I don't see the point in saving it anyway.
|
04-11-12 05:51pm
|
Reply
50
|
Meow Misti Dawn
(0)
|
Reply of
cjd2004's Comment
from pat362:
I'm glad that she's honest about her quitting porn so that anyone joining her site is aware that only past scenes are porn in nature.
The sticking around part makes very little sense because all you are going to do is pay 15$ for an ex-porn girl talking about her private life and sharing phtos and videos of her doing non-porn things.
|
04-11-12 10:11am
|
