Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password? Create an account to share your experiences and more! E-MAIL   PASS   Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).

Feedback History A detailed history of activity from this user in all different categories.

User : skippy (0)

Feedback:   All (584)  |   Reviews (75)  |   Comments (98)  |   Replies (411) Other:   Replies Received (289)  |   Trust Ratings (0) Ratings & Reviews All the reviews and ratings from this user. Shown : 51-75 of 89 Page : Page 1 2 3 4    < Previous Page - Next Page > Type Site - Score Feedback / Review Date Review 51 Porn Mastermind (0) 78.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: High quality videos and images Great variety Reasonable download speeds Many pornstars and models you've heard of Sets have dates added Cons: Alot of non-exclusive content Some "teaser" scenes from other sites Navigation can be circular at times No counts or easy way to see how often updates occur. "in-network" sites don't have much content. Bottom Line: Whoever owns this site probably really is a porn mastermind. He managed to talk several other sites into giving him content for referral. Unlike a few other sites that I've really complained about, this one is pretty clear about the source of their content and the list of other sites that some of the content comes from is pretty impressive. The only thing I can't figure out completely is which sites are part of THIS network and which sites are referrals. So, here goes: The sites that look like they are in-network, meaning you get all of the content, includes: NewgirlPOV.com: This site has maybe 25 video sets. The girls are attractive and the sets are well done. Some good POV stuff here. Fuckedhard18.com/massagegirls18.com: This is two sites, but the sets seem almost interchangable. Several popular porn models in this mix. Massagegirls18 has about 218 videos dating back to 2009. Some good stuff here, too. Fuckedhard18 also has over 200 videos but it appears that some overlap with the other site. All of these sets can be watched or downloaded either complete or in smaller pieces. Most are in HD. All of these sets for these two sites start out on a massage table. The girls get oiled up and fucked. The next site is called fuckedhardGFs.com. This is a collection of videos in many different locations and scenarios. Lots of popular porn stars here. Some good, some just OK. Looks like about 96 videos here. Next is a site called Epicsex.com. Similar to the site above, but more of the "white room" style shooting. Not bad. About 45 videos here. The last site that appears to be in the network is called bangable.com This is a solo model video site that is totally softcore, kind of playboy-esque. There are a few nice models here, but nothing special going on. OK, in addition to that, the site includes a few videos from several other sites. The sites include: Girlsdoporn.com, nubilesporn.com, mrPOV.com, petiteHDporn.com, mrskin.com, joymii.com, nubilefilms.com, jeffsmodels.com, harmonyvision.com, puffynetwork.com, nutabu.com and gloryholeswallow.com I've had memberships to a couple of these sites and the material they are providing seems pretty complete and exemplary of their sites. You can download these videos, too. What makes this interesting is that there are a few sites here that I have not tried before that I might sign up for because of the samples here. I suggest you check out pornmastermind.com for a month both for the videos in the network and for access to samples from several other sites that you might not otherwise know about. 10-06-16  12:03am Replies (0) Review 52 Hegre Art (0) 90.0 Status: Current Member for over 1 year (at the time of review). Pros: Easily one of the top 5 softcore sites on the Internet. Models are 18-25-ish, generally petite Europeans...all of them are fit. Lots of popular European models plus a bunch of newbies and exclusive models. Very nicely done sets and videos. Mostly studio shoots with minimal props. Navigation, search and voting (with "likes") are all pretty good. Extra features of the site include orgasm videos, tantric massage and some "tutorials" that you have to see to appreciate. Daily updates. Images available in up to 10000k! Over 268,000 images! Sets dating back to 2002. Cons: The photography, which is about 80% of what goes on at the site, is often studio work shot in a plain, white studio. This is intended to show off the models, which are often amazing, but it can get a little monotonous sometimes. There have also been occasions lately where one or two models dominate the daily sets. Great if you like the model(s)... Bottom Line: Hegre-art.com is an excellent softcore photography site with some interesting and remarkable features. It differs from a lot of other sites in that Peter Hegre usually just wants to show you how amazing the female form can be. He does this very, very well! The girls are generally beautiful and the photography is often stunning. Most of the imagery is excellent. This site is dominated by really well done single model photo shoots and softcore single-model videos. Most of the models are stunning and the photography is among the best anywhere. The models are probably mostly 20-25 with a few 18 year olds in the mix. I think the point here is that this is NOT a teen or hard core site. It pays homage to the best of the female form. The models are all ethnicities, often very shapely (probably some of the best breasts on the net here) and generally very fit. (I just looked through the last few months of sets and can find not find a single model that doesn't look like she wakeboards or kite-surfs....translation...no fat on any of these models anywhere. Really. None!) Models are usually completely nude throughout the set, but the shoots are conservative, meaning very few close-ups, spread eagles, etc. The majority of images are full body, natural pose shots. These models don't need a lot of props or pretense. Unlike a lot of other sites, these models don't have a bad side or angle. Still.....I do find myself wishing they would turn around if they are going to pose in a crab or bridge position like that.... There are beach/outdoor scenes and a handful of group shots where it appears a gang of girls was rounded up and shipped off someplace exotic for photo shoots. Again, these are not romps, but more like showcases for the models and the photographer. It isn't ALSscan because it isn't supposed to be. .....still, even without overt posing, close-ups, etc., there is often something here that will float your boat. The signature item for the site is erotic massage, basically taking a beautiful girl, covering her with oil and giving her a professional massage, complete with happy ending. These are nicely and professionally done, with no talking, no artificial moaning and no acting involved. There are sessions like this with men, too along with some other unusual sets or videos ending with a male-model orgasm. There are, according to the site, over 268,000 images in 4332 galleries dating back as far as 2002! The images from that time-frame, although generally good quality and consistent with the theme of the web site, are small by today's standards at about 2000x1320 max. If you are into large images, this site has some of the largest and best on the net, some as large as 7500x10000 pixels (That's close enough to see pores or print it out for an image that is over 11 feet tall at 72dpi!). Do you want to line your room with life-sized images of amazing women just standing there in totally naked splendor. This site is your nirvana, then. There are, on average, about 4 sizes per image ranging from very small to larger-than-life. Older sets have almost-as-large-as-life images. I would recommend this site to anyone who is tired of the teenybopper or hardcore porn sites and is just looking for a place to appreciate the amazing female form for a while...just take the massage-orgasm videos as a bonus! 10-05-16  10:32pm Replies (0) Review 53 Tiny 4K (0) 85.0 Status: Current Member for over 3 months (at the time of review). Pros: Very nice high quality HD videos Generally very nice looking models Good lighting and sets A few minutes of awesome close-up or POV footage in nearly every scene Navigation is simple and functional Nice layout Mostly US models that sometimes talk a little Considerable variety of "petite" girls. Model Interaction/eye contact with camera is generally very good. Part of a larger network that is mostly excellent. All videos are dated. Cons: Many links to other sites you have to pay to access. Infrequent updates for this site (1 a week) Inconsistent access and download speeds You have to pay for full access to the rest of the network. Bottom Line: I'm not sure it is fair to talk about just this site when it is part of a larger network, so I'll talk a little about both. First the site: Tiny-4K has a growing collection of very good quality HD videos. Currently, there are about 280 videos that range from 25 to 45 minutes each. These are near-POV or POV style and there are almost always a few minutes of really excellent footage in each video. There is a wide variety of petite models and most, I think, are from the US. Dialogues are in English. Each video is scored (i.e. 9.1) and ranked (1st, 2nd, etc.) so getting to the best videos is pretty easy. Models are rated also and there is a directory. The ratings seem to be pretty genuine...although after seeing them in action, I would probably give one or two models an 11 if I could. Model interaction with the camera is very good. Even when they are getting seriously slammed or are working hard bouncing on some guys dick, they still seem to be having a good time most of the time. Site Navigation is basic but functional and intuitive. You can save favorites and search. But this is only half the story. This site is actually part of a network, but you don't have full access to the rest of the network. Instead, you occasionally get to watch some of the other-site videos and maybe download that content, but you don't have access to the other sites, just to a few videos from those sites. Models are cross listed so you can see where else they are, but you might not be able to get to them....typical marketing tease that I'm almost used to these days. The other sites in the network include Tiny4K, POVD, Casting Couch X, Exotic 4K, Fantasy HD, Holed, Lubed, My very first time, Passion HD, POVD and Pure Mature. All of these sites use the same basic format and share the same overall look, feel and quality of videos, but the niches are slightly different. Again, these sites are NOT INCLUDED in your Tiny-4K membership, but you do get access to some of the videos. I have joined several of the other sites on different occasions and the quality and quantity at those sites is improving, too. Each of the sites now has hundreds of videos, except the brand-new anal site Holed, which has about 30, and Lubed, which has about 60. POVD now has nearly 400 videos. Passion HD, the most mainstream of the sites, appears to have over 1700 HD videos now, dating back to 2011. That's pretty impressive. Currently, if you join one site in the network, there is a ONE TIME fee of $69 to gain access to all of the other sites. You will have access to the other sites for as long as you keep your original membership. So technically, you could join one site for a month, then pay the $69 to see if you like the other sites. If you do, then upgrade to an annual membership for that original site and keep access to all of the sites in the network. Personally, after finding myself drawn back to a couple of sites in this network, I ended up doing just that. Once you throw the entire network into the mix, there is quite a bit of content here, including at least one new video within the network just about every day. These sites are video sites so the images are secondary and mostly just from the video shoot. Some are screen-caps but it seems that there is often somebody taking pictures as well and many of those images are not bad. Download times seem a little slower than average and downloads time out occasionally. I can't tell if this is due to a download limit or something else. The videos themselves are generally very good and all are 720, 1080p or 4k. The 4K videos can only be downloaded if you join a higher tier in the network. Bottom line? The Tiny4K site has grown to become a very good site in it's own right, but you really need to experience some of the other sites in the network, either one site at a time or with the one-time $69 hit, to get everything. There is a lot of really good content on the network in several niches. Some are truly OMG videos that make it totally worth it to visit. 10-03-16  09:34pm Replies (2) Review 54 Punish Teens (0) 69.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Decent quality videos All seem to be in HD Several download options Some attractive girls Cons: 60 TOTAL videos (August 2016) Site is extremely slow No preview photos Can't view photos, just download them. Teaser photo rarely reflects the scene Scenes are so contrived as to be laughable No model listings No search ONE New set every week or two Bottom Line: I'm just going to try to write a quick one for this site because, frankly, that's all there is to write about. 60 scenes. Each scene has a screenshot photo set Extremely slow navigation No model credits or search 60 sets. The only reason this site exists is because it advertises as a "punishment" site. It isn't really a punishment site and isn't really a "play" punishment site because the scenes are not set up to depict playful punishment or any kind of real bondage. The images they use for the teasers are rarely representative of the sets. That teaser advertising video you see every place where the girl is getting abused by a bunch of guys? It is in fast motion and I can't seem to find it on the site. 60 sets. What I was hoping for was some kind of bedroom bondage or playful punishment site. This is neither because it tries to be much more serious than it is. The images show girls tied up in what could be fun for both partners. Then the videos makes it out like the girl is being punished for writing about another guy or doing something that the guy didn't like. But throughout the scene the girl isn't tied down and clearly has to be in control of things to have sex. She looks like she's upset, but it is usually pretty bad acting. In the meantime, the guy is yelling at her like he's teaching her some kind of lesson. Lame. 60 sets. There are a couple of sets that look pretty interesting at first, like a wax-play set where the girl is tied down and looks like she is enjoying herself. He leaves her hands tied to the bed and gives it to her, then there is a fairly ordinary, not particularly memorable traditional sex scene...well, except that they guy is fairly aggressive...like he is in most sets. I remember that. Perhaps this is the most compelling argument why you might want to skip this site. The highest member-rated score on the entire site is 95%. Only 8 of the scenes on the site rank 90% or higher. Translation: a lot of people who paid to join the site do not believe the material is first rate....because it isn't. The guys who run this site and/or direct these sets seem to be trying pretty hard to make this work and they aren't doing a bad job considering the limited resources they must have. But in this day of kink.com and hogtied dominating the BDSM scene, they need to adjust either their name or their format a little to avoid misleading a lot of users. It looks like they've tried several different things in an effort to find a niche, but they have not really found it yet. Bottom line: You might like this site if you like the fake interview sites or other fake B&D sites. The price is cheap, but there are some slightly better sites in this genre. 08-13-16  06:00pm Replies (0) Review 55 Morey Studio (0) 90.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: HUGE Collection Completely exclusive Very good quality images and vids Many very attractive and diverse models Many models you haven't seen before A few of the better models that you have seen All sets are dates No recycled material Site goes back to 2005 and sets got to 2001 3 images sizes and zip file sizes Multiple video formats Search on model or keywords Great value! No advertising!is generally very good. Cons: Navigation could be a bit better in some areas. Sets are are on multiple pages Bottom Line: Every once in a great while, you stumble over something that you should have known about but somehow didn't. Like finding that great restaurant that has been in your neighborhood for years. That's the way I felt when I stumbled onto this site. Wow! What a great collection! How is it possible that I didn't know about this? No idea, but I do now and I can tell you that there is something about it that I really like. OK, here's the scoop. This is a European-style photographer showcase site...sort of a cross between Femjoy and Hegre Art. Although it is European style, I think the photographer and most of the models are American or at least English speaking. Currently releasing a set a day. Been around since about 2005 or so. Sets date back to 2001. Mostly photography but there are videos too. Solo girl and a few girl/girl scenes with some toys, penetration and oral sex. Much more than just two girls standing next to each other like you see in some of the more conservative photo sites. The girls are not shy and there is a moderate amount of spreading in the photo sets. I can't tell exactly how many photo sets there are, but it looks like there are about 400 sets and maybe 80 videos. Videos are a mix of photo shoots and dedicated videos. A few of the girl/girl and orgasm videos are quite good. In general, these videos seem more interesting than the average met-art video, possibly because there is audio. Watching the photo shoot videos is interesting because the photographer is often in the video so you can see an hear how the photographer and model interact. This isn't necessarily something to get off to, but it makes you part of the shoot. The models are very diverse and nearly all of them are beautiful. No amateur shoots here but the sets are...not quite as glamour-oriented as Met-art perhaps...this may be because the color saturation is more realistic here than it is there. Colors are generally great. The models come in all shapes, sizes and ethnicities. Skinny to large, A to FFF. Shaved, trimmed and full but (thankfully) none of that totally unkept could-never-wear-a-bikini stuff you sometimes see at other sites. These models seem all natural and un-enhanced. Popular models here include Connie Carter, Nessa and Gisele. The top rated models on the site are mostly girls I don't recognize from other sites. You won't find a single apple, grape, bouquet of flowers or other dumb prop here. No "naked girl in the woods" sets either. Most sets start clothed or partially clothed but several start out completely nude. The models are nearly all exclusive but there are a few very popular European and US models here as well. Most shoots are in a studio or someplace with very good lighting. The sets are simple, not too dramatic, placing emphasis where it should be, on the models. They have a chair to sit in or a bed to lay on. Model interaction with the photographer is generally excellent. Watching the photo shoot videos with sound confirms this. It adds a nice quality to the shoots. There is even some light bondage in some sets. Mostly rope-work and a few blindfolds. Navigation is generally very good. You can search on model name or keyword. Personally, I really dislike having to page through an individual set, though. There are only 12 images on a set-page and many sets have 4 or 5 pages. That is painful, frustrating and no longer needed except to reduce the load on servers. Download speed is good and I never had a fail. I do not use a Download Manager, but on occasion had 3 or 4 downloads running at once. This didn't break anything. About the only thing I am not fond of in this site is the large number of black and white photo sets. even a few of the videos are in black and white. I get that it adds drama and is the photographers prerogative. I just prefer realism and true-to-life detail. On the other hand, the black and white sets completely remove any preconceptions that an observer might have about, say, a darker skinned model. Eliminating the color allows one to see just how beautiful a model really is. Nice touch. Bottom line: If you are into nude photography and enjoy sites like Met-Art, Femjoy, MPL Studios or Hegre-Art, you owe it to yourself to try this place. For $14.99 a month, it may be one of the best bargains on the internet. I hope you found this useful. 08-09-16  08:55pm Replies (2) Review 56 Amateur 18 (0) 70.0 Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: A few recent videos are pretty good Layout is OK Navigation is straightforward (28 pages, 24 videos per page) and consistent. Choose your own PW and it can be saved for future logins. (There is a very easy captcha at login.) Cons: One new video per week Seems like a lot of 3rd party stuff Many more recent Japanese videos are Pixelated Only HD since about 2013 All HD videos are 720p Videos are average quality Many videos are non-nude No photos Only one video format per set Older videos do not stream and must be downloaded No video details No model details No search Many, many broken videos in the bonus sites Nobody seems to be enjoying themselves. Bottom Line: I joined this site because the previews show very flexible, relatively fit looking women, which happens to be a niche I like a lot. But the site was a pretty big disappointment as the updates are only weekly and the video quality is generally pretty bad. There are a few pretty good videos, but you really, really have to look for them. Here are some stats: Site has been open since 2004. 1 update a week 672 videos. NO images. HD videos began in 2013 (about 150) About 60 HD videos (2013-present) are Japanese and pixelated due to Japanese porn laws. The models are a mixed bag of mostly eastern Europeans with some western girls and the aforementioned Japanese videos. There are very few memorable/savable girls in the entire collection, which took me about an hour to go through. This is the only site where "flexible" does not always equate to fit. I now know that even the plumpest girls can lift their legs over their heads. That's not something I ever really wanted to know...or see. Each video provides just two options: Watch or download. The older videos will not play in Chrome or IE11 and MUST be downloaded, which means you will be downloading, watching and deleting a lot of videos. Fortunately, they only take a few seconds to download because they are small. A large number of bonus videos are broken and The video sets are broken down into 3 or 4 videos/segments for each shooting of each model. So, since they release one new video a week, it takes a month to get one complete video shoot. Sometimes they are sequential, sometimes not. Perhaps the most disappointing thing about this site is that although the girls are flexible, and a few are even attractive, the video and choreography is so poorly done that it really feels like a couple of horny middle school kids filmed their older brother's girlfriend. The videos are are not stable, not framed well, not focused and rarely positioned in an appropriate way. The girls rarely look at the camera, rarely pause in open positions and only a few recent videos actually provide an unobstructed view of things while the girls are flexing. Most of the sets have a video of the girl flexing while clothed, flexing while partially clothed, flexing naked from the side or back (not showy), then BAM some guy shows up and, without the slightest hesitation of foreplay, starts fucking them. The sex is not particularly good and the girls are either clearly not enjoying it or making faces that are the worst porn orgasm faces on the planet. These videos could have been so much better! All they needed to do was slow down, let the girls enjoy themselves a little and showcase the natural talent from rarely seen angles for a few minutes. Before I forget, the site uses a couple of different charge providers. Make sure you get one you trust like Epoch as it is easy to cancel through them. I tried to cancel through the cancel page on the website and they were unable to find my account. Fortunately, I found it immediately on the epoch site and cancelled it there. Now, to be fair, the site advertises free access to a bunch of other sites in their network, which is called "Extreme Movie Pass". I found these sites, at least the ones I ventured into, to be about the same or a little worse than Amateur18. These sites have names like EXGF Sexxx, Crazy Monster Cock, Crazy Beauties, Crazy Old Moms, Big Breast, Asian Hot Bunnies, Rubber Babes, Nylon Worlds (sic), Extreme Tranny Movies and many more. One, called Flexidolls.com, is both interesting and creepy. Each video starts with a guy taking a girl out of a box, a suitcase or a closet like she is one of those real girl dolls. He then poses her in an impossible looking position and immediately proceeds to do something to her with a dildo or his dick. The entire time, the girl has a totally blank expression and is staring into space because, you know, she's supposed to be a doll. I recall that most credit card servicers will not allow site videos to simulate drugging a woman in any way. These are as close to a "play with an unconscious girl" videos as they can get away with, I guess. Meh.... In general, all of the other sites are mostly standard def and fair-to-poor videos. Many videos are broken. Bottom line: At $30 a month, this site is not really worth it when you compare it to all of the other top-quality sites out there. It might be worth it for a month at $20, though. with all of the bizarre other sites that comes with it, there might be something you like but there almost certainly will not be much of it and you will have to sift through a lot of junk. Be careful about cross-checks when you sign up and be sure to use a known service provider. I've put about three hours into looking at ALL of the content on this site and most of the network sites that look interesting. I will almost certainly never be back. 07-10-16  11:24pm Replies (0) Review 57 Naked Gymnast (0) 65.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: A few attractive models. 2 models you've seen that are now pretty popular Decent number of sets Some videos are full HD (1080) Straightforward navigation A few pretty good videos (I'm really..um..stretching here to find Pros) Cons: No dates on sets No indication of frequency of updates Mediocre photography Older sets have no video or poor video Several of the "Naked Gymnasts" aren't naked Very basic navigation No model pages. Bottom Line: I saw a couple of sample images from this site someplace and decided to sign up. I went ahead and did this in spite of there being no reviews for the site. here on PU. The site is somehow affiliated with Club Seventeen and there was a cross-check that would have signed me up for it if I had not unchecked it. I like the flexy-sexy type of images and the girls in this category are usually very fit. For this site, the analogy is more like that of a nude beach. What you think of and what you experience are usually two very different things. This is the reality version of nude beach. A few honeys and a lot of forgettable things. It isn't that the site is horrible, it's just nowhere near where it should be compared to other sites today. This site has about 500 sets that are not dated. There is a little log along the left side that announces updates about once a week. An update might be a set or a video. No idea if they are recycling. Most sets have between 50 and 100 images. One size, 1670x2500 or so max. Older sets are 1200x700 or so. Older sets also have NO ZIP FILES. Most models have 2 ore 3 sets, so there are probably about 100-130 models. Just 4 pages of sets with about 140 sets per page. The sets on the last page are really odd and many are not nude at all. There are no model pages so if you see a girl you like, too bad, you have to look through 500 sets to find her again. A few sets are linked though, but the logic of why some are linked and some are not escapes me. A few girls have different names in their different sets. Purchased stuff? Maybe. Watermarks on the images say different things: Most say Flexyteens.com instead of naked-gymnast. On a hunch, I went to Flexyteens.com, which has a very nice looking front entrance, and signed in my Naked-Gymnast login. Surprise! I got the exact same site, except at the top it now said "Flexy Teens"! So I will be dropping this review there also. I would be so pissed if I had signed up for the same site under two different names. Fortunately, I did not. The models are typically young, but there is a general lack of sexiness that one would normally associate with young, fit gymnasts. Most of the sets are practically clinical and many of the poses are just strange, neither gymnastic nor flexy. Curl up like a ball on a bar-stool strange. These are all eastern European girls with eastern European names. There is very little make-up...well...gymnast make-up, I guess. And zero glam. The two models that I see here (I went through the entire list of 500 sets in about an hour with a lot of "nope, nope, nope" on the first page), are Melena A. and Annett A. from Met-Art, both very popular. The sets of these two models here are different from the other sets on this site...better...almost like they are the marketing teasers. Purchased, maybe. Certainly shot in a better studio. Bottom line? Pass. Maybe if it a side-bar on club Seventeen for $10 or so, but this site is not worth visiting by itself. 03-23-16  08:29pm Replies (1) Review 58 Teen Mega World (0) 80.0 Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Pretty massive site Wide variety of videos and images Wide variety of models and types Good layout Reasonable navigation Good search capabilities Most of the new stuff says it is 4k video. Cons: Marketing is deceptive "Network" of sites is all the same stuff One update per-day for entire network? All scores start as 10. Lot's of inflation. Mostly similar indoor sets Videos are competent, not stellar You get a lot of trailers when you think you are getting videos. Main page shows next week's releases instead of showing you what is available now. Some of the sites have only older, SD stuff. Bottom Line: I'm not sure what category I should use for this "network" other than "Mega-site". Like other mega-sites, the emphasis is on quantity over quality and, although there is a lot of material here, a very small percentage of it is going to find it's way into my collection. I would put this site a couple of notches below the top mega-sites, which probably include Brazzers, Porn-Pros, Teamskeet, 21 Sextreme, etc. But that's just me so let me give you some stats (self reported by the site): (As of December 12th, 2015) Sites: 28**** Models: 1144 Images: 696,671 Videos: 4065 So...no matter how you slice it, there is a ton of material here. Almost all of it is hardcore. This is all mainstream, trendy porn. Lot's of anal, lot's of cream pies, something that passes as traditional (hand job) POV site, another site that passes as a progressive (full session) POV site, an old-man/teen girl site, etc. At the bottom there is even a gay site and 2 she-male sites. There is a 4K site at the top that get's updated about once a week. But as anyone who has a seen a close-up of their favorite actress or model in 4K, just because you can do something in 4K doesn't necessarily mean you should. There are a few sites, like the "athletic girl" site, that appear to only update one a YEAR. This probably has a lot to do with why I am so unimpressed overall. I saw an amazing video ad for a site called "Dirty Coach" that started with a very fit girl in it doing things that impressed me. Then, when I joined, I NEVER found the video I saw marketed and discovered that the site I signed up for only updates once a year. That is pretty deceptive in my book. The "28" sites listed (I count 32 on the main page) are mostly just a rehash of the material from the main page. A few sites at the bottom are so poorly done that I don't blame them for not counting them in the total. (1 hasn't updated since 2006 and another since 2009.) Overall, there is one, 1, single update for the entire network per day. Probably the single most annoying thing I experience with the site is that the main page shows updates that are happening up to a week in advance and there is no way to discern them from current releases other than the date. You might not realize this until you click the link and only get the trailer. This happens throughout the site as the related upcoming sets are mixed into the display for each sub-site. The navigation is pretty good. Once I realized that most of the scenes are on the main site, I started using the sub-sites as category searches. That works well for the true network sites, but for the really obscure stuff, you have to go to the bottom of the sites list and search in whatever way that site provides....sometimes none. There are a few models you know, but most are folks you've never seen before and may never see again. Almost entirely Eastern European from what I can tell with a handful of English-speaking folks mixed in. Anjelica is probably the most well known model on the site and behind her comes....no idea because the ranking system doesn't make any sense. Maybe 3 girls I recognize in the top 50 or so. Every model starts as a 10 so there are several models with 0 or a few votes that are rated higher than Anjelica who has 2700+ votes, almost double the votes than the next girl. Suffice it to say that the rankings are kind of strange. Bottom line? This is a high-volume, medium quality site with moderate variety and too-infrequent updates. I do not approve of the marketing strategy, which involves marketing the individual sites even though they don't update and are only subsets of a mega-site you may have already joined or are not particularly interested in. There is absolutely no indication of how frequently a marketed site is updated until after you've joined. However, there is a ton of decent quality hard core porn here so if you are into just watching other people fuck, than add this to your list. Personally, I prefer the sites that glam it up a bit and would rather have a few really good videos (i.e. Wow-Girls) than thousands of mediocre ones. What is the use of having a boatload of porn if takes forever to find something good enough to excite you? So I probably will not be back unless they dupe me into joining again. Sorry Teen Mega World. I hope this review is useful. 12-13-15  01:02pm Replies (0) Review 59 Twistys (0) 81.0 Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Huge collection of photos and videos. Good navigation. A full decade of material available. Newer videos are excellent quality. Models come in all shapes and sizes. Nearly every big-name model you've ever heard of. Mostly US models who actually speak! Cons: Be careful with the cross-listing when you join. Waaay to many ads for other sites. Once you log in, you are redirected to a page with dozens of other sites to join. You have to scroll down to find the site you paid for. Not cool. Oh, and any discount offers to join the other sites are only valid for as long as you are a member at Twisty's. So if you want to join one of those sites, go find the discount someplace else. Main sign-up is through Pro-biller in Europe someplace. These guys are pretty obscure and the only way to cancel is to contact them. One of the most important quality metrics about any website is the ease with which you can cancel. This one? Not impressed. Scoring/ranking/search system used to be top-notch but seems to be broken now (See below). Old categories that made it easy to find the talk-dirty-to-you videos are gone. Bottom Line: My old review expired and I joined again, so I'm updating that review....there are several changes since last time. Do you remember the original Danni's Hard Drive? You know, before Danni sold it? Twisty's is practically an exact replica of the original Danni site. There is a HUGE collection here that spans over a decade. New material is very good. Most of the models are big american names, mostly in porn. Decent variety in the sets locations and models. And people seem to be having fun. All that said, there are a few things that I feel obligated to point out. First, most of the models, though popular are..um..more mature. To be fair, the site also has some very popular younger models including Malena Morgan, Dakota Sky and Michaela Isizzu. One thing about a site that has been around this long is that you can find sets that span a models entire professional career. For example, if you like Sasha Grey, there is a terrific collection here from 2009 and before. But in general you won't really see any knock-out new discoveries here as the stable is mostly pros, many of whom have had more than a little work done. A few of the more popular models are still unaltered, though...thank god. I noticed one thing that has changed since my last visit. Most of the older models have slipped down in the "top models" list, but the sorting of "most popular" or "top rated" no longer works. Instead, what you get for both options is a list that looks like it is ordered by the webmaster's belief of what the ranking should be. Top rated lifetime model today? Dakota Sky, even though she only has 4 sets, an 84% approval rating and 483 votes. By comparison, Malena Morgan, number 4 on the list, has 7494 votes, 35 sets and a 94% approval rating. In fact, there are a lot of models rated higher than Dakota (No offense Dakota...) Something funny here... How much do you want to bet that Dakota will be a Twisty's Treat of the Month in the next few months? That kind of manipulation... uh..weirdness is a little too common here. Lately, it looks like there has been a shift from solo model sets to full guy/girl or girl/girl sex. This might just be based on the recent models preferences, but I can't tell. I also can't tell if this is a good thing or not because it is hard to video or photograph sex well and the site will be competing with a much, much larger section of the porn market than they did with the solo girl being bad niche. What I really liked about this site before were the videos of girls paying attention to ME, talking to ME, showing themselves to ME. Lately, that attention is going to somebody else. Apparently, they've figured out that this is what live-sites are for and that there is much more money in just promoting the live sites for those who liked the "talk' sets. Too bad I don't buy live sets. A few of these talking sets show up once in a while, but they are no longer a category and don't seem to be as frequent as they used to be. If you like that kind of set, there are still some very good ones here but you will need to look through a lot to find them. The photo sets are generally good. They are not overly staged, there is a decent variety of indoor and outdoor sets, the mix of full-body and close-up shots is good and the lighting is correct. The models are mostly solo, some with toys, but there are a few girl/girl scenes and two and three way sex scenes. There are NO shy girls here. Eventually, every girl in every solo set puts it in your face. The network structure has changed a bit, too, but the other sites that you get free access to are still the same sets that are in the main site, just repackaged into different categories. In fact, once you enter one of the other sites, you can't tell it is a different site at all. They have a girl of the month theme with a series of photo and video shoots released throughout the month. These range from interviews to hard core, depending on how far the models go. Long ago, these models were chosen by the subscribers. These days, I think it might be more a matter of availability or something. No real formula that I can figure out. These sets are good if you like the model. Overall, this site is well above average with a huge selection of images and videos. The girls are mostly mature, large breasted and in many cases enhanced a bit. The images are good but not too glam-ee and, from what I can tell, not overly touched up. I got in on a discounted rate but since it is difficult to cancel, I ended up getting hit for a second month at the full price. Ouch. Still, it is positively worth a visit at least one a year, especially at the discounted rate. 12-13-15  10:05am Replies (0) Review 60 Team Skeet (0) 78.0 Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Good variety Several niche sites Many attractive models and porn stars Video quality is generally good Navigation generally good Good search functions Cons: You get one update a day for ALL sites Many sites have not been updated in YEARS! "Premium" sites you are supposed to pay more for. Bottom Line: Have you ever noticed how on some web sites, there will be an article that looks interesting, so you click on it, only to find that the actual article has a slightly different name and you've read it before? That's how I've signed up to Team Skeet 2 or 3 times in the past couple of years...by not realizing I've been been here before..because that's what the webmasters want you to think. That sounds a little odd, I know, but the individual sites don't advertise as "Team Skeet". They advertise as one of the many sub-sites under the umbrella of "Paper Street Media". (Even PU doesn't immediately show this as a network...you have to go to a site and then look at the company profile to see the sites in the network.) Most recently, I got pulled in by "The Real Workout" which looks like a site full of fit models working out and then getting boned. The site is listed separately and gives no real indication it is part of the Skeet network. What it doesn't tell you on the teaser page is that you are looking at EVERY video on the site..73 videos in total SINCE 2007!!!! That's one video a month and some are tiny! I was duped. Consolation prize? Team Skeet and access to all of the same stuff I purchased as part of "Exxxtra Small", another sub-site, 2 months ago. To be fair, it does look like they provide 1 new set a day these days, but I can't really tell. What I do see is 2088 sets TOTAL across all the sites and the earliest sets date to 2005. That is 4 sets a week for 10 years. Oh, and this is almost 100% video. There are no images of sets. The quality of material is generally pretty good but it is mostly shot in little skits. Think classroom, dorm room, office, car, gym, etc. the solos are done in hotel rooms, mostly. As a result, the lighting is not always great, the settings are OK and the scenes are usually very real-world-ish. (Not necessarily what I'm personally looking for in a sex scene). The names of the sub-sites are about as self-explanatory as can be. Titty Attack, Teen's Love Money, POV Life, Teen Curves, This Girl Sucks, Teens Love Anal, Teeny Black, Exxxtra Small, Innocent High, the list goes on and on...at one update a month per site for many of these sites. And I also notice that many of the videos could be on any of the sites, it's just the way the video is edited. The models are generally 18-24-ish, good looking and professional. Many are porn stars or video starlets. The top rated girls are Riley Reid, Cassidy Banks, Lola Foxx and Kaylee Haze, all in sets dated 2014 or 2015. Navigation is OK. You can see all updates or you can drill into a particular site and see what is there. You can search by model or keyword/tag and there is a list of tags down the left hand site of the main page. There is a LOT of cross selling. the skeet live-models site take up the top of every page. Other sites are listed down the right side and along the bottom. That leaves about 50% of the main pages for listing things that are actually on the site you have paid for and are looking at. Bottom line? I would classify this as similar to Porn Pros, Pornstar Network or maybe 18 girls. It is an all video site that is worth visiting once. But once you do visit, double check to make sure the next site you stumble over isn't just this book with a slightly different cover. 10-21-15  07:11pm Replies (2) Review 61 The Life Erotic (0) 80.0 Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Generally high quality material Beautiful, natural models Wide variety of sets, locations and models Very "artsy" site Good range of image sizes to view/download Generally good video options Navigation is generally good Fast download speeds Many popular European models Good navigation Cons: Very "artsy" site. Very little eye contact with camera Creative edge takes precedent over practicality Landing page focus is on cross-selling live site Entire site including all sets are very dark! Many sets in black and white or oddly tinted Many shorter sets Many models only have a set or two There are more tattoos here than other Met-art sites. (not always bad, but not good on otherwise beautiful models) Seems like some is B-roll from other sites Bottom Line: Stats (Deduced): About 1500 photo sets About 500 videos About 320 models 1 new update a day Some older sets are not exclusive The site has been around since 2009 but some of the sets pre-date that. The models are generally young and all shapes, sizes, ethnicity, hair color, some hairy, some tattoos, etc. This site is, to a large extent, sort of an evolution of the "girl in the woods" theme with the idea that you are observing a model in a more natural environment instead of a studio environment. Often the idea is that the model doesn't really know you are there or doesn't pay much attention to you, the viewer. About 50% of the sets are solo girl in a straight modeling scenario. Many of these sets are of very, very attractive girls that are just standing or in other conservative poses. Another 40% are female masturbation sets that range from boring to pretty interesting. And the remaining 10% are girl/girl scenes. I need to say that the majority of these are very conservative sets with few money or close-up shots. (There are some Oh My God models, but they are not necessarily doing OMG things....) There are notable exceptions, though. It depends on the model, I guess. There also is a wide mix of eye contact. Some sets have models that never make any eye contact with the camera at all. Earlier sets are better, but the quality of those sets is not as good. Oh, most of the sets start out with the model(s) clothed. I noticed some models remained clothed for 75% or more of some sets. The first thing that strikes me about this site is how dark it is. Everything is dark. The site, the sets, the lighting, the videos, EVERYTHING! Older sets are a little better in this regard, but you will generally think there is something wrong with your display. Newer images are dark, contrasty, very shadowy. Distracting. Annoying. Generally awful. I batched a couple of sets through Photoshop and auto-adjust increased the brightness in most images by 50% or more. That is a heck of a lot and it is not accidental. They are deliberately turning down the brightness on these sets. You have to work to make images this dark. Really work. The second thing I noticed was how hard the webmasters are trying to get you to go to the live site. When you get to the landing page, you don't see a single girl on the site you are paying for. instead you get a full page of images from the two live-cam sites that seem to be taking over the Met-Art network. You have to scroll down to see the contents of the site you already paid for. The webmasters are apparently experimenting with where best to put these live-cam ads as they can be found in different places on the various Met-Art sites. This is the most intrusive placement, right at the top of the main page and present on every page on the site. Stop it! Really. Just stop. Another thing is the almost complete lack of playfulness, compassion or interaction with the viewer in many of the sets. Some of these models have all of the expressions of a check-out girl at K-Mart, meaning none. Even models that normally shine are somehow less expressive here. This is not in any way erotic as the name implies. And the last thing to note is how inconsistent many of the sets are. More recent sets seem to follow that dark theme for the most part, but some sets are not like that at all. Some sets are very short, some are filled with close-ups, some are not. Some girls are almost entirely fully clothed for the whole set, some are not clothed at all. Some have eye-contact, many do not. You can tell if you are familiar with other Met-Art sets that some of these sets seem like they might have been B-roll or too weird to put on Met-Art. For example, there is an outdoor set of Lorena, beautiful Met-Art regular, where she is entirely covered in red mud in every single image. Really? Has to be a B-roll. Navigation is generally good. There is an options section that allows you to set defaults for image size, number of thumbnails on a page, etc. like some other Met Art sites. The search function has user defined tags, which helps if you are looking for a particular trait that others are likely to define, like ginger or spread. But it could be better. Bottom line? Good site to visit once, I guess. I personally don't like it anywhere near as much as other Met Art sites like Met-Art itself or Errotica Archives. You can actually see the weird evolution/devolution from a site similar to Met Art in the beginning to a site that now looks more like a bad graphic novel than a soft-core porn site. There is a decent amount of material here and some of it is pretty good, but be prepared to sift through a lot of dark, odd and often slightly off pictures to find things that really float your boat. I wish I could be more enthusiastic, but this site just doesn't live up to Met-Art standards. 07-02-15  01:22pm Replies (2) Review 62 DDF Network (0) 82.0 Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Huge collection Several niches 14 "sites" plus 2 pay sites Models are generally attractive Reasonable variety of girls Lots of nice looking porn starlets Sets go back to 2001! Good navigation Cons: lots of overdone porn stars Many, many enhanced body parts Average model age is late 20's early 30's Ads on every page Image download options could be better Had a fairly hard time with logins and customer support (they require a captcha for EVERYTHING) The regular price is insanely expensive. Bottom Line: I've been around long enough to remember when DDF was owned by Dennis De Franco, a European photographer who shot for magazines and made Sandy famous. His work was simply spectacular. That was nearly 20 years ago. Since then, DDF has gone from his name, to DDF productions to DDF network. Dennis has either sold the site or no longer has very much to do with it. That's a shame because whoever runs things now is trying to be all things to all potential customers. The site feels a lot like Twisty's or the long gone Danni's Hard Drive. The collection is huge but the girls are...let's just say many of them have moved a little too far down the porn star path to be really attractive. There are a LOT of enhancements, tons of porn moans and the percentage of anal is far above my threshold of tolerance. (Why so many beautiful or once beautiful girls subject themselves to anal is completely beyond me. And what is with all the gaping asses? If you are into anal and gaping asses, sign up now! You won't be disappointed!) But I digress, let me tell you a bit more about the sites: "1 by day" is one of the original sites that provides one video/photo set a day. You know many of these models, but it could be from years ago. Zafira (current), Peaches (last set in 2008) and Eufrat (2013) are among the most popular. Almost every set starts with the girl clothed, then a strip, then maybe a few straight nude shots, then come the fingers and toys. Lots and lots of toys. (If you like toys, then sign up now!) Many of the newer sets look truly new and are of girls I have not seen before. But the formula is generally the same with every set including (simulated moaning) masturbation or insertion. The oldest sets in 1 by day go back to 2001 and the old ones look almost exactly like the new ones except there are no anal shots and not as much insertion in the older sets. With 15 years of sets, you WILL get lost in here if you aren't careful. DDF Busty is a site full of...huge, huge boobs! These are mostly double-Fs at least. Some look pretty good but many are clearly not well done and a lot of the girls have the full figure to support that mass up front. This is more of a full porn site with sex, fisting, blow-jobs and boob sex, with the obvious feature up front. If you are into truly ginormous boobs, you will get your fill of them here. DDF Busty goes back to about 2005 with a set every two or three days for that entire time. Hands on hard core is pretty much as it sounds. These sets go back to 2003 with SV videos and images in each older set. I can't quite tell when these went HD but I see some 720 as far back as 2005. This is the site that is...um...filled with anal and there is some double penetration and multi-way stuff as well. Hot Legs and Feet is a fetish site for stockings, shoes and feet. Most of the sets are regular porn with the camera or video emphasizing the feet. Lots of shoe heel insertions... If you are into that stuff, the sets are not bad. The sets go all the way back to 2001 with a few sets a week for that entire time but there are a lot of duplicates to the other sites. One other site I want to mention is House of Taboo. This is supposed to be a B&D and kink site but if you have ever seen any of the better commercial sites of that genre, you will be pretty disappointed here. Maybe 1 scene in 15 looks even remotely genuine. There are some pee scenes if you are into that, though. There are several other much smaller sites including "only blowjobs", "Euro Girls on Girls", "Euro Teen Erotica"(6 sets with Anjelica here), "Hairy Twatter" and "Sex Video Casting" which is a collection of casting videos. There are also a handful of one-girl sites like Sandy and Cherry Jul. So, the bottom line is that there is a LOT of stuff here and there are micro-sites that look like they fill most niches. The quality is decent, the models are mostly popular porn stars and the navigation is consistent and fairly intuitive. But the problem is that they try to fill so many niches that the site doesn't really excel at any of them. I'm not really into hairy twats, feet, peeing, fake bondage, watching blowjobs, fake orgasm moans, bolt-on F-cups, massive insertions, double penetration, anal or gaping. So the sites that feature those things are not something I want to pay for. Fortunately, there is a reasonable amount of good quality solo and straight material spanning a decade and a half. is it worth the $44 or so regular rate? Well, sorry, no. I waited and finally got an intro deal for $25. If you see it for $29.95, go ahead and try it. If you are into a wide variety of different niches I mention above, sign up now. If you aren't into some of those things, look around for discounts and sign up when you find one. But if you are into any of these niches exclusively, you should probably sign up for one of the many other niche sites out there. I hope you found this review useful! 05-15-15  05:53pm Replies (5) Review 63 MetArt (0) 95.0 Status: Current Member for over 1 year (at the time of review). Pros: Top rated softcore site Some of the most beautiful models on the planet! The site is HUGE! Spectacular imagery and sets Dozens of outstanding photographers across Europe 4-6 updates PER DAY! Excellent search capabilities Excellent navigation and "window" management Excellent range of photo and video resolution Download speeds are consistently fast. Customer service that ANY on-line company would be proud of. Cons: Only one thing in the CON category: Too much cross-selling to the other sites in the network. Bottom Line: I noticed there were no current reviews of this site so I thought I would write an update to a review I wrote two years ago. I've been a member of this site off and on for over a decade now and am a loyal, permanent customer. It is without a doubt one of the best softcore sites on the internet. The models are spectacular, the sets are great, the clothing, hair and make-up are usually perfect, the variety is great and the girls generally look like they are having a good time. Nothing cheap or poorly done anywhere, period. Navigation is also very good and the way the site opens tabs for sets and individual images is the best I've seen. I've actually used this site as a reference to other webmasters with sites that have mediocre navigation. There are several exclusive or nearly exclusive models on this site that words cannot describe. Many are well known European models but many are women you've never seen before but will want to see again and again. The girls are almost entirely all natural. The images you see on the main page and tour are perfectly representative of the images in the site as are the scores of the models (over 150 legitimate 9+ models). To be clear here, this is a SOFTCORE site. If you enjoy looking at incredibly beautiful naked women positioned in ways that tastefully show off their assets, this is a great site for you. The site is mostly solo sets with a few two-girl sets and an occasional masturbation set. Sexy, but no sex. If you are looking for hardcore, insertions or kink of any kind, you will need to look elsewhere. Pretty much the only gaping here will be your mouth just before you say "Oh my fucking god this girl is beautiful"....and you will say that a lot! There is really only one negative that I'm going to mention here and it is more of a customer service thing than a fault with the site. Met Art is part of a pretty big network which includes Sex Art, the Life Erotic, Errotica Archives, Erotic Beauty and a few others. Unlike many other networks, you have to join each of these sites separately. OK, I can appreciate that the individual owners want to maximize revenue. What I find a little annoying is that in Met-Art, when you look at a set of a model, a section sometimes appears at the bottom of the set that says something like "more of this model:' with a bunch of images that are links. Well, although there may be more of this model on Met-Art, the links are NOT WITHIN THE MET ART SITE. They are links to offers to join one of the other sites in the network where more images of this model exist. Since I first mentioned this a few years ago, I have seen a few other networks that do it but some of those are all inclusive networks with free access to the other sites. There is always a link on the top of each page that will get you to the models "profile card" within Met-Art (just click on the model's name), so after a while you will learn to ignore these links at the bottom. Now, in-spite of that cross-selling tactic, the guys at Met-Art are gracious enough to discount the other sites once you join Met-Art, sometimes providing significant discounts, as low as $5-10 for a month for each site. To be fair, these sites have their own flavor and plenty of unique sets. And pretty much every site on the network is the same or nearly the same quality as Met-Art, although some of these other sites are considerably smaller. Oh, and here's an interesting one. They have a cam site called MetCams.com. I do not partake in cam sites very often but browsing this one brings up several of the top models that are showcased on the Met-Art site. A few years ago I, um, came across Mila I., one of my all time favorite Met-art models, on the cam site and I could not resist. She did not disappoint, I was completely satisfied and I have a memory that (oddly, I admit) rivals a few from high-school. Clearly, the cam site is not soft-core.... I also want to say that the customer service for Met-Art and their network is simply outstanding. They are very responsive and have cleared up billing and other questions/issues immediately whenever I have had to contact them. So...if you have not yet been to this site and want some seriously great softcore imagery and video to add to your collection, Met-Art is a MUST. I have an annual membership and have joined nearly every one of the other sites in the network for at least a month. This site and every other site on the network is totally, completely worth subscribing to. 03-22-15  08:02am Replies (4) Review 64 18X Girls (0) 50.0 Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Some nicely done videos Some great looking models Decent collection Cons: This is actually a referral site. All or most of the content is from third party libraries or sites getting referrals. Site layout and navigation is inconsistent and generally awful. Preview page is not representative of content Preview page makes many models look under 18 (scary) Update 3 times a week, maybe. Cross selling on every page. (From the sites with the content) Bottom Line: I've reviewed a pretty significant number of websites, So I hope the PU webmasters understand that as the consumer reports of porn, they need to watch out for misrepresentation. At first, this seems like one of those sites that is trying to model itself in the image of WOW or W4B. The recent videos, though not exclusive, are very nicely done and follow that genre. There is a section called DVD movies. Click on it and you are taken to an area with commercial streaming DVDs. It is a really poorly implemented area, though, because each video includes an option for HD, but generates an error when you click on HD. These are mostly old DVD from before 2008 or so, probably from a commercial re-licenser/aggregator. Then, as you navigate through the site, there is also a large collection of videos that generally remind me of the stuff you can find on RedTube or other free sites. It is not bad, but I've seen much of it elsewhere. Funny thing...once there, you can't get back to the main page. This is because you are no longer on 18X. You are actually on a different site called Webmaster central. Another content aggregator. Another funny thing. Many of the videos have the lower corner blurred out or have been cropped to eliminate a watermark. This is probably because the aggregator bought the rights to these videos from sites that no longer exist. But here is where the really sleazy website garbage comes in...stuff this site deserves to get slammed for. The Thai girl on the preview page named Eaw is not on the site. She can only be found by clicking on the "tour videos" link at the top. "tour videos" interesting description. I'm thinking it really means "Browse videos".... Ah, there she is, 2nd one down. Click on it, and up comes a video of the girl and some screen shots along with "click here for more" So I click on it and....What the fuck?...I'm redirected to a site called "Thai Girls Wild" and invited to join! Are you f-ing kidding me!!?? There below Eaw is a nearly famous picture of the beautiful Melena from Met-Art, also on the preview page. I follow the link and, BAM, it actually takes me to a Met-Art sign-up page! The girl on the top of the page, named Alyssa Hart here, is actually a referral to a site called Petite18.com. Wow, so I've paid to see models from the preview page who are actually not on this site at all except for a few images and one video that are REALLY on sites that are paying this site for referrals. NOPE! NOPE! NOPE! DON'T DO THAT! IT IS AMONG THE MOST DECEPTIVE THINGS A PORN SITE CAN DO! So...bottom line? Well, as far as I can tell, there is either no or very little original content on this site. It is an aggregation of libraries and referral agreements that provide content from other sites. And in addition to that, the site is deceptively advertising models on its preview page that are actually bait images for referrals to other sites. As unlikely as I think this is,it is entirely possible that the webmasters of this site do have some unique content, are trying to create something and are only a referral site while they build up their collection. If that is the case, I apologize. However, you are deceiving people and my score reflects my disgust for this kind of deception. I have never had to say this in a review before, but STAY FAR AWAY FROM THIS SITE! 12-06-14  06:13pm Replies (1) Review 65 ATK Premium (0) 77.0 Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Huge collection. Many reasonably attractive girls Network includes multiple sites, depending on what you signed up for. Many models have different types of sets listed (masturbation, foot fetish, lingerie, etc.) There are early sets of a few popular models here. Site is multi-lingual File download speed seems pretty good. What you see in the previews is representative of what you get. Every set is exclusive to ATK Cons: Site is often slow Site often crashes (lots of 504 server-database errors) Pages time-out so you can't go back or refresh Lots of cross selling Can't tell how many images there are. Can't tell how many videos there are. Navigation is a bit more challenging than it needs to be. Many sets are nearly identical. Some sets appear to have been recycled (Sets in only small resolution from 2011?) Since every set is exclusive to ATK, chances are good you will see it elsewhere on an ATK site. Bottom Line: I'm having a hard time finding a lot to like about this website. Perhaps the best way to describe it is middle of the road. The models are your basic cross section of college-age Kmart or maybe Target shoppers. Some are attractive, many are not. None are truly stunning and almost none are truly hideous. This is a side effect of the amateur-type site status, I guess. There is a wide variety of body types from super skinny to...um...super plump, so if you like bigger girls, this might be a good site for you. These girls are all natural, ranging from nothing up top, to some giant melons, but breast size is proportionate to overall body type (i.e. fat is distributed evenly). There are no really fit or smoking hot bodies here, but a lot of nice 18-24 year-olds. The grace/awkward ratio is about even. Overall, there is a huge collection. Navigation Is difficult. It is single threaded, and if you try to open multiple windows, the servers either throttle access or time-out...in other words getting through the images quickly is simply not possible. You can set how many thumbnails you want to see but, again, everything is single threaded so you have to wait to open a picture and then wait to return to the gallery. The photography on this site is about average. The images are clear and consistent, but the lighting in the mostly indoor sets is not well developed or particularly flattering. You can tell that many of the sets with a model were shot on the same day in a different corner of a room or a different room in an apartment or hotel room. The sets are a very standard formula. Girl starts out standing, clothes on, peekaboo, strip (often bottom first for some reason), show ass, spread, gaping spread, then depending on the type of set, on to other things like toys, masturbation, foot fetish, watersports, etc. "Artistic" is really just a normal set that they converted to black and white. Really dumb. This image shooting sequence makes many of the sets monotonous, even boring. In general, the girls do not look like they are having a very good time. It is all pretty much just straight show-me-the-money stuff, not very glamorous. Lots of gaping close-ups if you are into that. A handful of sets are girl/girl or guy/girl scenes but the vast majority are just solo. Images come in three sizes, 682x1024 (who uses this?), 1080x1600 and 2000x3000. Make-up is generally very good. No goofy eastern European eye shadow that I can find. I also noticed that the girls are generally very clean and well groomed. Mostly no pimples (anywhere), slap marks, bruises, razor burn, bad tattoos, etc. I don't think there is any or much photo-shopping... The ranking of the models is a little odd. On a 1-5 scale (5 highest), there are a lot of unknown young models at the top of this list with only a few votes. Shyla Jennings is a 28th, Tiffany Thomspon is 15th. Early Zoey Kush is 94th. Early Jessie Rogers, complete with original Brazilian tan lines, is 62nd. Riley Marks is 85th. These model scores are not the sum of the scores of the sets, but a separate score for the models themselves. The reason I mention this is because it is not really possible to find the "best" girls or sets using the ranking system. You might find a model you like down in the 100-200 range. Oh, there are 657 ranked models. Surprisingly, most at the bottom are not bad looking, just victims of a bad photographer. Just reinforces my point about how useless the ranking system is. Might be more about the images than the girls. There are quite a few videos of the models. Some masturbation videos are quite good, but many are just videos of the photo sets. Even a few guy/girl videos are just the photo sets, which is immensely disappointing. There are also a handful of behind the scenes videos...a big NOPE on those. Some of these girls you simply do NOT want to see before they put on make-up. Finding a video with the right combination of attractive girl and decent videography is very, very rare, but there are a few. Forget about anything hardcore, though. There are a couple, but it is extremely rare. Perhaps the thing that taints my opinion of this site the most is the navigation speed and server response. When you try to open multiple windows, even to view images, the site times out. Oddly, download speed seems OK, though. Bottom line? Well...if you are into amateur-ish solo photography, there is a huge collection here. Take a look at the previews and determine if this is the type of thing you like. 12-06-14  04:11pm Replies (1) Review 66 Femjoy (0) 88.0 Status: Current Member for over 3 months (at the time of review). Pros: Some of the best European models Wonderful sets and lighting Top notch photography Great interaction 2 sets a day Models generally are not shy Good site layout 3 image file/zip file sizes for each set. Images up to 5500 x 3700 pixels(a 6 foot poster) Excellent value for the money Cons: Navigation not up to par with the best sites Videos are a bit snoozy Image/zip file sizes are odd/archaic Site is not quite as reliable as some others. Bottom Line: I've been a member of this site 5 or 6 times over the years and keep forgetting to write a review. It keeps drawing me back. Here's the good and bad (absolutely no ugly). This is a site with photography that ranks up there with the best in this genre...perhaps THE best. The photo sets and models themselves are generally spectacular. In fact, there are a few exclusive models here that are the absolute pinnacle of beautiful female form. Translation: They have perfect, perfect bodies, pretty faces and bright eyes. The models are 18 to mid-20s, fit, clean, totally natural, mostly clean shaven and just drop-dead gorgeous. Very few piercings and next to no tattoos. The more recent models are very open. I've never used this word in a review before. Delicious. Lets talk about content: The site has been around since 2004. I can't get a good read on sets, but it is at least 3000 or so, plus about a video or two a week for at least the last few years. Of course the older sets tend to be a little more "observing a naked girl in the woods" but for the past few years, the shooting formula has been damn near perfect. Great mix of full body and close-ups in various poses. Sets and outdoor locations are great. Interaction is great. Lighting is consistently terrific. Posing is great. Nothing awkward or uncomfortable anywhere. The videos are sometimes of the photo shoots and sometimes shot separately on the same set. The girls start naked or disrobe and are usually undressed by the halfway point. Any close-ups, etc are reserved for the last few minutes of the video and there is rarely any masturbation. These are not bad videos, but they are not terribly exciting unless you really want to see how a particular model moves. They come in multiple sizes and formats from standard definition (272p) to 1080p. Older ones are in 720p. Just a reminder that this is soft core. There is no guy/girl sex, no toys, no insertions, etc., with maybe a little bit of masturbation and few girl/girl sets just touching and leaning. (If you want that in this format, go over to Joymii.) At Femjoy, you just get beautiful unobstructed view. So..what's not to like? Well...I know the webmasters are working on improvements, but there are a few things that keep me from rating this site right up there with the best. I know they will be reading this so forgive me if I direct some of my points to them. First, the navigation is a little off. there are a few too many clicks to get where you want to be and not enough new-window options. When you click on a set from the home or updates page, a new window opens for that set and then all actions happen in that window. Click to see images, and a limited number of images appear in a gallery. Click on "show all" (nice pun, I guess) and all of the images appear. What, are we still in dial-up times? Just show me ALL the images when I ask to see ALL images, please. This doesn't sound like much, I know, but it is a little odd to navigate through. ..Then there is selecting a picture. When you click on an image from a gallery, it opens up in the same window that the gallery of images was in. Click back and you are taken back to the top of the gallery page regardless of where the image was that you clicked on. This may also seem like a little thing but when looking through many images, it is unnerving. What SHOULD happen is that each set should open a window/tab and each image within that set should open a window/tab. Or better yet, the whole thing should be user selectable like several of the other top-tier websites are. To their credit, the navigation options once looking at an image are pretty good (larger image, next, previous and back to gallery). And my last little nitpick is with the file sizes. There are three image size choices: "Quickview Edition" images are 800k wide. "Collectors Edition" images are 1200k wide and "Poster-Size Edition" images are 4500-5500k wide. Wait, what? (Insert captain Piccard meme here) Who the fuck looks at 800k images anymore? Even iPhones are 960 pixels wide/tall! My smallest computer screen is 1900 pixels wide. So the two smallest images sizes are waaaay too small to fill my computer screen and the only other option involves 5500 pixel, 2 meg images and a zip file that is a third of a gig! There is just something seriously outdated with this thinking. I appreciate the larger images, but they are a little too large to be loaded and kept exclusively. What is needed is a 1200, a 2000 and a max resolution (4500+) image size. I have been told they are working on fixing this and will happily report when it is fixed. Bottom line? If you are into soft core and like young, OMG beautiful girls, don't hesitate. Just join this site. This is one of the few sites that I would recommend for an annual membership because of the terrific soft core content. There is enough here to keep you entertained for months. 08-30-14  09:40am Replies (5) Review 67 Babes Network.com (0) 75.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: High quality videos Top rated models Decent photo sets Good lighting and sets Cons: Site is small Must pay extra to access "network" Far too much cross-selling Difficult navigation Site is oddly generic 1 New video released every other day or so. No scoring system, just "likes" Really?! Acting reminiscent of 16mm porn movies Almost no model interaction with the photographer whatsoever. Very little chemistry...either between models or between models and crew. Nobody is having any fun! Bottom Line: Note: I think it is possible that they reworked this site since 2013 as I can't find some of the features mentioned in prior reviews. This is not the same babes.com website I was a member of 10+ years ago. Well, here's another one of those sites that looks good from the outside, but it leaves you oddly unexcited when you finally buy in. It has all the right components, top models, great quality videos, nice settings, but there's something just a little...um...off about it. You would think that a video, for example, of Ariel and Caprice getting each other off in every way possible would be pretty heavenly, right? Well, it is nice, but the acting (and moaning) is a little artificial, the rhythm is a little too slow, the chemistry is lacking, the music is a little too 80's cheesy and the sex is just so-so. There are lots and lots of videos like this. Maybe the best image I can conjure up is this: These are like porn versions of Met-Art videos. Beautiful women but really, really boring videos. I have NEVER seen a boring Angelica video....until now (the fact that she is moaning while on her knees jerking the guy off doesn't add much). The more I think about it, the more I think it is just really bad direction. Really bad. The photo sets are OK, but each follows the related video very closely and I can't tell if they are shot together or not. My guess is that they are. Some of these shots are at odd angles and a little off center like the photographer is standing beside the videographer. This odd photography and video quality and the way the site is laid out makes me think these webmasters are much more about making money than they are about making quality product. They've put all the elements in place to make masterpieces, but every video I watch is a disappointment. I'm a jaded old guy who has seen a lot of porn, though, so feel free to think I'm crazy. So, here's the kind of odd money-hungry thing I'm talking about. Across the top, you have options to join Fuck-now, Brazzers, Twistys, Digital Playground, Reality Kings or MOFOS. You can join ANY of them with what they call UNLIMITED ACCESS, for $69.00! Like any Ronco ad, they show that a lifetime Twisty's membership, for example, as a $349.00 value! I'm thinking, woa, that's a great deal! Ah, but of course, THERE'S A CATCH! It is unlimited access for AS LONG AS YOU MAINTAIN YOUR MEMBERSHIP IN BABES.COM! Wait..what? No, I would not keep my membership to babes.com for more than a month (not enough content), so the unlimited membership would be pretty useless. They do have $10 off deals on the monthly rate for these other sites, but again you have to remain as a member of babes.com Bottom line: Sorry, with so many other great sites to choose from, I can't recommend this one. This is the porn version of that movie with all the great actors that you ended up falling asleep in. My apologies to the webmasters. 06-12-14  06:04pm Replies (1) Review 68 POVD (0) 75.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Very nice high quality videos Generally very nice looking models Good lighting and sets A few minutes of amazing POV footage in every scene Navigation is simple Nice layout Mostly US models that sometimes talk a little Considerable variety of girls Cons: Very little content Some video is very distorted (think go-pro) Many links to other sites you have to pay for A few videos FROM other sites. Infrequent updates Inconsistent access and download speeds Bottom Line: On the face of it, this is a pretty interesting site and I joined because of their amazing POV videos peppered around the Internet. I knew the content would be small, but not THIS small. There are only about 40 videos TOTAL that are native to this site as of 5/15/2014. Fortunately, the site owners take pity on you and give you limited, rather inconsistent access to a few other sites. This site is actually part of a network, but you don't have full access to the rest of the network. Instead, you occasionally get to watch one of the other-site videos and maybe download that content, but you don't always have access to the other sites...maybe there is a view limit to external material or something...I'm not sure. I am thankful, though, that the site owners recognize that giving away some content from their other sites is a good idea, but there really isn't enough content within this whole network to compete with some of the bigger sites out there. If you DO want to join the whole network, it will set you back $69.00 a month or so for a monthly subscription. Thanks, but no thanks. I've been a member of some of the other sites, and they are also very small (Passion-HD, Casting Couch-X, Fantasy-HD, Pure Mature and ExGF) although the video quality is usually very good. I get that these guys have to make money, but Geeez.... explain the rules to me, please. This site is a video site so the images are secondary and mostly just from the video shoot. Some are screen-caps but it seems that there is somebody taking pictures as well and many of these are not bad. Download times seem a lot slower than average and downloads time out a LOT and once stopped cannot be restarted. I can't tell if this is due to a download limit or something else. Again, it would really help to know the rules. The videos themselves are generally very good and all are 720 or 1080p. I have no idea why it has taken so long for POV videos to take off. There is nothing quite like a virtual scene where you are looking down at a totally naked girl who is on her back with her legs in the air as your virtual dick rams into her. And you get to see it from your POV for pretty much every sexual position. There is one scene where "you" are lying on a bed and a girl sits on your face, but then as the camera angle changes (you tilt your virtual head a little), you see another girl bouncing on your dick. That just seems like the pinnacle of virtual sex to me....at least until they start creating porn for an Oculus Rift! There are a few nitpicks that I am not fond of, but other people may really like. For one, the male actor in many of the scenes is into licking assholes. A POV close-up of somebody licking a girls asshole is something you can't really un-see and I prefer not to see another tongue going into an asshole from that close....ever again. Also, there are a couple of girls that, although generally very attractive, just are not ready for their close-ups when you are talking about being a couple of inches away from their snatch in the glory of high-def. Fortunately, only a few girls fall into this category. But the most disturbing oddity is that occasionally the POV switches to that of the woman. It is sometimes interesting when the girl is in the shower or something, but this is really, really weird when the girl is getting fucked. There you are drawn into an amazing scene imagining you are screwing the lights out of this awesome girl and suddenly, the POV perspective changes, you are the girl and YOU are getting screwed! Sorry. HUGE NOPE! Same thing happens occasionally while the guy is getting head. I suppose when it comes to POV, there is "give and take", but I am not a taker in this regard. Some Day I'll fire up my Adobe Suite and edit all the junk out of these...some day...maybe. My suggestion to the camera crew and website owners is to take that stuff and create a separate girls POV site. One hetero and one lesbian, even. How about gay POV? You never know who might show up....well, except it won't be me. Sorry. Bottom line? There are a few OMG videos here that make it worth it to visit, but try to do it at a discount and don't sign up for more than the minimum time-frame....at least until they get their video count up quite a bit. The quality is great, but the quantity is just too low for now. 05-18-14  12:42pm Replies (6) Review 69 MPL Studios (0) 92.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Easily one of the top 5 softcore sites on the Internet. Models are 18-25-ish, generally petite Europeans. Lots of popular European models plus a bunch of newbies and exclusive models. Very nicely done sets and videos. Set management is among the best in the business (make-up, lighting, wardrobe, location, atmosphere and composition are all superb.) Most of the models are beyond beautiful. Some could stop a 747 in mid-flight! Models are generally not shy. Model Eye contact with photographer is generally excellent. Nice mix of full-body and close-up shots. Outdoor sets are the best I've ever seen (no stalking-style girl in the woods sets here!) All of the models appear to be enjoying themselves! Navigation, search and voting all pretty good Customer Service was prompt and courteous. Cons: Really not much to list here...I have to dig deep to find things: A "User settings" option would be nice. (Image size, thumbnails-per-page) I'd like all set thumbnails to be on one page. Typically you have to click through 4 pages of thumbnails to see all of them in a set. Navigation could be a little better (browsing is single thread from updates page to model-set page to individual images. No new windows for sets, thumbnails or images.) Page back sometimes takes you back to unexpected places like the log in page. These are all REALLY minor things, though. I had some minor issues with IE-11. Chrome is fine. Some might not like that there is no comment section for each model, but seeing how that tends to get abused at other sites, I don't blame the webmaster for that decision at all. Bottom Line: I promised that I would try again to get into this site and I'm really glad I did. It is simply top-notch. Gorgeous models, really well done sets and excellent overall. Customer service when I contacted them was prompt, helpful and courteous. This site has been around since 2003 and the collection is pretty massive. About 195,000 images and 395 videos. 1 set a day would put it at around 3600+ sets. Older sets are very well done but not quite as revealing and the resolution is not quite as high. (A few sets prior to about 2008 are non-nude or partially nude.) There appear to be about 250 models, the vast majority of whom are simply stunning. Al of the models are completely natural. I see a lot of sites where the model ratings are artificially inflated to 9. Not here. Here they are almost all 9s...or better. Images come in three sizes both for viewing and in zip files: 4000, 2000 and 1200 on the long side. Older sets are at least 1600 and 1200. As I mentioned above, the sets are generally excellent. In fact, I can't really recall seeing anything I didn't like. The girls are happy, friendly and open. Lighting, focus, composition, etc. are excellent. This is generally a solo-girl softcore site, but there is a toy occasionally and some of the video sets include masturbation. Girls usually start out clothed or partially clothed but many of the outdoor sets start out completely nude. Sets are usually about 30-40 images each. Some older sets are a bit smaller. Older sets are also a bit more conservative, although the imagery is just is good. Some older sets are also continuations (I.e. 30 shots in one release and 30 more from the same set sometime later), but it isn't enough to be a bother and they don't seem to do that anymore. The videos, though not as common, are somehow better than many of the comparable sites. I think this is because the girls tend to interact with the camera more. In many of the videos, You get this little "you like?" look once in a while. Why yes, yes I do! All sets are properly dated and there is NO recycling. Every set all the way back to 2003 is unique as far as I can tell. Some sets seem like they might be a little older, but they are otherwise unpublished. And the girls in those "new old stock" sets are gorgeous enough for you not to mind at all. Another really nice thing is that the highest resolution of each image is native. An image displayed in 4000 was actually shot in 4000 or higher. (Occasionally you may find an low-light inside set shot near the ISO limits of the camera, which tends to make the largest images a little grainy, but that's not because of resizing.) Older shots at 1600 or 2000 were shot in that and not resized. there isn't a single fuzzy or up-sized image on the entire site as far as I can tell! Kudos to the team for that! About the only negative I can find on the entire site is the single threaded browsing. No new windows open when you drill down. This is probably to keep the website traffic down, but I prefer the met-art or FemJoy style where either sets or images appear in their own windows. Yes...I can type a key while clicking to open pages in a new window, but it seems like it should be a preference setting. Otherwise, navigation is good. Once in a set, you have forward, back, thumbnail and open image in any available size options. There is another option I discovered eventually that makes navigation a little easier...there is a flip-book on the lower right side of the main page for each set. You can flip through it to an image you would like to look at and click on that image. When you do THAT a new window opens starting at the first page of thumbnails (not the image or page of thumbnails you clicked on). This little flip-book is actually pretty nice because you can quickly flip through all the thumbnails in a set. Not sure why it doesn't just take you to the image, though... Bottom line: If you like the Met-Art or Erotica Archives sites, you will also really like this one. It easily rates up there with the best. 12-21-13  05:48pm Replies (0) Review 70 Goddess Nudes (0) 82.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Decent collection (about 1000 sets, I think) Generally very attractive models Many familiar models Excellent value for the money Photography is generally very good Images available up to 3200x4800 For the price, you will not be disappointed! Cons: Navigation is extremely basic Site formatting is also very basic Only a couple of videos (it is a photo site...) Only 2 zip file sizes (but good choices) Only 2 image file sizes (but big enough) Bottom Line: For less than $10, I figured I didn't have much to lose and I ended up getting MUCH more than I expected. This site has several years worth of about 5 updates a week. The models are generally Eastern European. Many have been in Femjoy or MetArt, but there were also many, some quite beautiful, that I had not seen before. Some of the best European models on the planet are on this site, although most have different names. If you like Dominika, Katya or Mila on Met Art, they are all here. There are even a few nice sets of the now-retired but forever revered Marketa. Neither the site nor the sets are quite as polished as some of the more expensive softcore sites, but I guess that is to be expected in this price range. There are many models that I've seen elsewhere and I just cant tell if the sets are from when they were younger, or if the girls just aren't wearing make-up. The tendency here is to use less or no make-up, so if you are not into the glam look, this is another treasure-site. The sets are generally good quality, both indoors and outdoors. Lighting is good. The amount of "reveal" depends on the models, but most sets start out in lingerie or fully nude and about half have close-ups. There are no toys, insertions, etc., although there are a few scenes with two girls. This is not an "in your face" site...more of a girl-in-the-woods or girl-in-her-bedroom thing. Interaction with the photographer is generally very good, depending on the experience of the model, and many look like they are having a pretty good time. Kudos to the photo crew for that. All sets are dated on the main thumbs page for each year. File names are reasonable for both the images and the zip files, so you don't have to go through hoops to save them. Since each set is listed since the site was created, you can tell that there is no recycling going on like at some other sites. The navigation on the site is very, very basic. The update page is not formatted, so the update thumbs just go down the left side of the screen for ever. The two choices under each thumb are "screen sized" (currently 934x1400) or "print sized" (currently 3930x5988) older images are slightly smaller, but still pretty big. So for navigation, you click on an option under a set image (screen or print) and then click on an image. To get back to the main page, you back out with your browser. There are no pop-ups or viewers. Once in a set, you can also download a zip file of images in the size you chose to get into the set (screen or print). NO toggling between image sizes or even choosing multiple zip file sizes once you commit to screen or print for the image sizes. No forward or backward movement once you chose an image to look at. Just page back and pick another image (or shift-click to open a new window). This works, but it seems so 1990. Perfectly acceptable, though, for the no-frills price. I would have scored this site a little higher if it were not for the navigation. It is an honest site that is in the business of providing quality softcore images. They don't fluff it up and they don't steal your money. That is a rare and terrific thing in this industry and I will be back both for the images and to help ensure they stay around. Bottom line? This site is a terrific deal! If you are tired of paying $30 to get into a new site only to be disappointed with quality or quantity of content and you like the softcore genre, then this site is a must-visit. C'mon! for under $10, you've got absolutely nothing to lose! 11-30-13  12:49pm Replies (3) Review 71 CL Erotic (0) 74.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Attractive, fit and flexible models Images and videos all the way back to 2000 About 65 models 5-30 sets per model Exclusive content All sets are dated Probably 60+ HD video clips Sets are nicely done (all studio) CCBill generates a random username and password, (at sites request) but the site allows it to be saved. Best site that I know of for the genre Good honest site in a tiny niche Minimal cross-selling Cons: In order: Image size is 800x1200 MAX!!?? No image size options. What you click is what you get. Navigation is truly awful! No zip files of sets!!!?? File numbering is 001.jpg, 002.jpg (making file management diffcult) Older vids are tiny Older images are REALLY tiny (800x524) Many of the models are only partially nude Some are not nude at all Updates maybe 2 times a week with partial sets. Simply too expensive for quantity of material. Bottom Line: I tripped over a video from this site on Dailymotion.com and, after looking and leaving several times because of the high price, finally decided to see what was there. I was not really disappointed, but it was immediately apparent that this site is not run by any of the big players. All of the girls are fit, which I suppose they have to be to be flexible like they are. Many are very attractive...some even beautiful The sets are all very similar, with the model starting out clothed in a dance outfit or something similar and then paring down to whatever their personal minimum is. Some of the sets start out with the girl nude. The sets are well done and the girls seem to interact well with the photographer. (suggestion: get a ladder! A full-body straight-down shot of some of these girls would be amazing!) Sets are generally between 25 and 50 images. These are all Eastern European girls, I think, and I have never seen any of them on any other site that I can recall. Kudos to the talent scouts for that. This site does not have any sex, insertion, masturbation, etc. The models simply flex in incredible ways and give you a nice view. This webmaster has another site called perfectflex.com where there are toys and insertions. Personally, I'm more into the view, but I may and up over at the other site at some point. Clearly he's got models that are willing to pose nude. He needs to up the volume with those models here. It looks as though there are a few "regular" models that have 20 or more sets. It looks as though this is the "stable" now, as the updates are dominated by these girls but I can't tell for sure because updates only come twice a week. Now....on the down side... That collection of 60 mnodels dates all the way back to 2000, so you can get some idea of the volume and frequency of updates. The images on this site are much too small for today's monitors. I'm downloading 4k images from other sites, so 800x570 is really unacceptable. And as good as some of the older sets are, I'm going to have a hard time keeping images that only fill 1/5 of my screen and are grainy at full-screen. The webmaster really needs to go back and post the larger master images. Navigation is pretty basic. Click a model, click a set, click an image, click "page back" to go back to set, click another image. No forward or backward, etc. No zip files???? Come on, really? That makes no sense whatsoever...unless the server can't handle it... Bottom line: I really like the type and quality of content, but the site really needs a lot of work to attract and keep subscribers in this 2-updates-a-day for $20 world. $39 to sign up? Somebody needs to take a marketing class to learn about elasticity in marking, not just modeling. I would be recommending the site like crazy if it were $19..but have a hard time telling anyone to check it out for $39. So....my apologies to the webmaster...but if you are interested in this site, keep your money until the price comes down or they offer a mega-pass for all of the super-flexi sites for $39. After this month, that is probably the only thing that will get me back. 10-26-13  10:58am Replies (1) Review 72 MC Nudes (0) 84.0 Status: Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review). Pros: Excellent selection of models (350+) Mostly 18-26 or so. All shapes and sizes but mostly petite Very large collection (650+ vids, 200k+ images) Exclusive content A few of the most popular European models Older sets of spectacular popular models Navigation is good All galleries are dated Generally very good photo quality Newer sets use good file naming convention Videos have been in 720p for several years Newer sets up to about 5800x3500 pixels. Lots of new models you've never seen before Cons: The site is often slow. I had difficulty logging in a few times All zips named small.zip,medium.zip,large.zip (meaning zip files are not unique) Videos are mostly from photo shoots Good lighting/imagery, but not consitenly great Color/white balance on some of the sets is off Some of the sets are pretty short Top rated model, though beautiful, is from 2005 Not that many new stand-out models Lots of models you'll never see again Oddball, quirky 3D sets Bland color scheme Bottom Line: This is a very good site that anyone who is into solo or two-girl modeling should absolutely visit. It has tremendous variety of mostly eastern European girls that are perhaps a tad more natural than what you might see elsewhere. That said, I find it very difficult to rate this site up there with the best of this class. I've been a member of this site off and on for about 8 years. When I first joined, the site was way up there with the best. It is still very good, but there is just a little something that makes it less appealing for me personally. The folks at MC-Nudes put together a very nice site and I know from my experiences with them that they are conscientious enough to read this, so I'll explain as carefully as I can. The first thing I notice are the colors...or rather the lack of them. Everything is in tan or cream or some color of rice, wheat or straw. Everything. Even the sets are mostly in these nuetral colors with very low color saturation. I am pretty sure that this is because they think they might want to convert sets into 3D and the red-blue 3D doesn't work well if there are bright colors. But sadly, it is detracting from all the sets and the entire site. Go look at Met Art or Watch4Beauty and the colors on the site and in the sets leap off the page. MC-nudes? The colors stick to the page like this mornings oatmeal sticks to the bowl. If this reduced band of colors is to support 3D, I really think you should dump 3D. The site needs more POP. OK, next. Years ago, MC-Nudes utilized mainstream models that were among the most beautiful on the planet. Marketa, Monika Vesela, Bambi, Zafira, Eufrat, etc. There are some fantastic sets here if you are into these mainstream models from 2004-2010 or so. They still have several models that have recently become very popular (like Nika and Dominika). At the same time, they managed to find some ungodly beautiful models that you'd never seen before or since. This unknown but beautiful girl Simona is still their top rated model (from 2005 and with only 3 sets...) More recently, I think they've gotten into using new and unknown models a little more. This is a great thing for those of us who like a lot of variety, but you have to go through a LOT of girls to find one or two true stars in this field. Nearly all of the MC-Nudes models have spectacular figures, but because of either the lighting, the make-up, the inconsistent eye contact with the camera or perhaps because they are new and don't seem to be having much fun, many of these girls just aren't as appealing as they could be. Some of the brighter or more popular models have figured out how to tease and play with the camera a little. But a really good photography team should be teaching them ALL how to be playful. It makes a huge difference. Couple of peeves. The site is often very slow. I also could not get in a few times, getting an Apache server-type error message instead of the web site. I know that account management is tricky, but I have several subscripions (and several computers) and I have not had this kind of trouble before...pretty much ever. Although the file management is better than it used to be, the zip files still need to be named and dated or coded in such a way to make them unique. Webmaster, if you do that once for each set, your thousands of customers won't have to do it at all. Bottom line? Go check it out! If you like what you see in the samples, sign up! There is enough quality material to keep you busy and happy for quite a while. If you don't stay, check back every year or so. With daily updates, it will be worth your while. 09-22-13  02:02am Replies (0) Review 73 Wet And Puffy (0) 85.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Many top-notch and popular models Excellent quality videos Most videos are full 1080 HD Good photo sets Good navigation Wide variety of models Lets and lots of masturbation... Pussy classification system is a hoot! Lots of details about many of the models Cons: Not much variety of activities or sets 5 point voting system seems a bit off Sort order on many pages seems random no extra large images (2800x1867 max) Not much depth (i.e. most models in only one set) Models are often a little...un-made-up. Many models don't interact with the camera much Bottom Line: Well, the best way to describe this site might be "Forget the foreplay, let's get to it!" There is very little posing, no glam photography (i.e. not much make-up), not a single "naked girl in the woods" just a whole lot of "Here's a girl. Watch her masturbate!" And masturbate they do! Every single girl! Usually with multiple devices in each photo or video set. This is also one of those sites where you are so drawn in by the masturbation scenes that you won't notice some of the other features right away. There are a lot of interview transcripts that seem reasonably genuine, but the translation from Russian seems a little too perfect to be 100% correct. They are entertaining, though. There are both "bonus" and an "extras" sections that contain additional sets, some of which are from other sites. Ah, yes, there is a LOT of cross selling advertising going on, but thankfully the webmasters have kept the ads to small banners except at the very bottom of some of the pages. The sites that are advertised are all quality sites and a few have "special offers" that one would not get if one were to go straight to, say, Twisty's. (The offers are about the same as the discounts the PU.com...) There are a couple of bonus sites: "We like to Suck" and "Wet and Pissy". If that doesn't paint a picture for you, quit sniffing glue. Thay have basically the same layout and quality but are a little more specialized. Not really my cup of....whatever. The webmaster and photo teams do a really good job of creating a genre and sticking to it. The scenes are well lit, well focused and generally good quality. They are all entirely indoors, apparently in a hotel bedroom or bathroom with a few scenes in a home someplace. In some of the sets, one of the videographers, who I'm pretty sure is not exclusive to this site, gets into the action a little by putting a finger in various orafices of the models. I'm not sure I like this style and can't tell if the models do either. The models are for the most part, right out of ALScan or Twisty's. The top models here are on those other sites, too. Generally pretty, with maybe a few that are not. Oh, and the "real factor" is pretty high here. Make-up is minimal. Lot's of very shiny faces and plenty of pimples visible just about everywhere you can imagine. One girl has a boot shaped bruise right across her butt! If you like "real" this is the place for you! The "acting" is OK. Female orgasms in porn is like watching professional wrestling. Is it real? Who cares! It's entertainment! The stats, curiously posted across the top on th ehome page to make it really easy for me to reference, are: Models: 507 Scenes: 640 Videos: 622 Pics: 39,138 That is not a lot of material compared to some other sites and it doesn't take a math wiz to see that over three quarters of the models only have one photo set and one video. The price isn't bad, though, so I would say it is worth it. Navigation is pretty straightforward. You can sort models alphatically or on popularity...but the order of the models seems to change and the ranking system, wich goes to 5, seems a little narrow and somewhat inaccurate. There are two image download sizes and a handful of video format options. There are also a few page preferences like number of thumnails on a page. I would like to see larger image options and the ability to download things directly from the model or scene summary page. OK, bottom line: If you are into solo mastubation videos, this site is certainly worth a visit. 02-28-13  08:06pm Replies (0) Review 74 Petites Parisiennes (0) 79.0 Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Very unique, playful style - a true "indie" web site Unique look and feel Fairly exclusive European models 57 of the girls are French according to site A few popular models True High resolution images to 4000k- crisp images HD videos for most models Newer site so no old low res material! Great search options Model mouseover summary and "exposure limits" very helpful Newer models/sets are very good Coolest "Shop" area I'v ever seen. A good deal for the price! Cons: Collection is not that large, but growing Information is sparce once at the model pages Rating system is confusing (model or set?) Can't search by model score. Many Models are not very engaging Many models are pretty but not knockouts Many models/sets are not nude Navigation/viewing options are limited (i.e. 10 models per page, 18 sets per page) There are a few minor navigation issues (page back does not work so you have to reload a lot) A few broken/incorrect links (might be in the middle of upgrading ) Set dates are not universally available. Bottom Line: This is the type of site that reminds me how incredibly difficult it must be to run a popular, successful porn site. They do many, many things really well here, but the overall package falls a little short, overall score-wise, of the big players. This is currently a nude and non-nude modeling site. mostly passive, candid, single model, photography. No sex, nothing kinky in any way with the exception of a very small number of VERY light B&D sets. In this regard, it is kind of like the local strip club....the girls you WANT to see more of are not the girls you ARE seeing more of, if you catch my drift. If you have an appetite for sex scenes, toys, bondage, close-ups, spread legs, anything more than passaive nude modeling photogrpahy, this may not be the site for you at the moment, but check back as it looks like the folks here are making some very positive improvements in both the site and the collection. If you are the type who likes passive scenes, dressing room shots, that kind of thing, then this may be an EXCELLENT site for you. Frankly, there is a lot of variety here and my tastes, admittedly, run toward more engaging solo scenes. Here are some basics from what I can tell... About 100 models About 350 sets 1 new set every 2-3 days Sets have between 30 and 60 images Models all seem to be 18-24 Model are, as the name implies, petite. Most sets are in studio. The design of this site makes it fun and different. I think the webmasters were trying to incorporate a Moulin Rouge kind of feel, and they came very close to pulling it off. Model thumbnails are shown full sized and they go nude with a mouse-over. Saw the technique in a french body study years ago and it is VERY effective here at showing you exactly what the models look like. Clicking on a model brings a pop-up that shows all of her sets. Once you select a set, you get about 36 images per page, a "stars" score, and a thumbnail slider that allows you to go to other sets of the same model. Very nice concept. In execution, though, the name of the model does not show up on the model page anywhere, only in the hard-to-read thumbnails, the stars scoring is not immediately clear (model or set? SET!), the model bio is not available from here, the sets are not dated here, the cover images are included for sets scheduled for up to a month away (so you click on a model and a set and THEN find that the set isn't on the site yet). Some navigation options are missing, but don't hit back-page here (or ANYWHERE) or you will have to reload your browser. (I also clicked on something once or twice and got dropped into a shell directory where I shouldn't have been...looks like they are in the middle of upgrades.) I love the navigation style here, but it could be much better with a few small tweaks. When you first look at the site, it really does give a Moulin Rouge feel. The sample images are representatative, so you honestly see what you get. The photography, though competent, is sometimes a little weak. There are some excellent studio sets, but many sets are passive, so you feel like you are following the model around through her apartment or something. There is a little model interaction with the photographer (and therefore the viewer), but not much. This may be more about the models,as the more popular models are more interactive (it is part of what makes them popular) than the neophytes. But the incongruity between the playful feel of the site and the passive feel of many of the sets is what makes things a little...off here. They need a little more of the sexual energy you find at Twisty's or ALSscan...you usually only get that with the hyper-confident pro-models or with a photographer/shoot team that is ungodly talented. I noticed that many commenters like the passive stuff and frankly have no idea how one would balance the two styles. I have to say, though, that the newer photography is much, much better in terms of interaction and content than the older stuff, so clearly somebody here gets it. I really want this site to be a success. It is different. It is unique. It is not a formula web site. It deserves to be successful. I could easily and rightfully compare it to an Indie in the movie industry. But the problem with indies is that, although they are often critically acclaimed, they just as often don't get the popular vote simply because they are not following the popular formula or because of one or two faults. This site COULD be a Kill Bill, a Pulp Fiction, A Quentin Tarantino kick-ass example of a web site. Unfortunately, it isn't quite there....yet. Clearly, I am rooting for it, though. Bottom line: A very unique site that is worthy of a look. With a few tweaks in the site and content, this could be among the top players and it seems as though the webmasters here are figuring that out. I will absolutely be back in a year or so to see how things have progressed. 02-17-13  09:56am Replies (3) Review 75 Nextdoor Models (0) 73.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Some of the models are really beautiful Most are at least good looking Most are natural, not enhanced. 100% original content Exclusive models as far as I can tell Reasonable variety of body dimensions Cons: Well.... Sets are not dated. Unknown update frequency. Can't tell if sets are recycled. No HD found so far Images and zips are 1600x1067 MAX!! Navigation is a little clunky Site is mostly bathing suit and lingerie shots. Models are not very animated (most just standing) Softer than soft core...really a bikini site with extras. Not a particularly good value at $29.95. Bottom Line: About 210 models and 1475 sets. Very few videos but all are decent quality. Sets have between 30 and 120 images. Vast majority of sets are bikini/lingerie sets. This is an odd, sort of misidentified site and I just can't understand why they didn't define it better. (Sorry TBP...) Probably 97% of the girls are NOT NUDE! This would be a classic tease or bikini site if it were not for the occasional nude set. Even the nude sets, most of them anyway, are not particularly revealing. I've seen more on the Chive, Maxim or free web sites. Much more. But then, oh wait, there are two or three models that get naked and provide extreme close-ups. Waaaat? What's THAT about? No wonder TBP had such a hard time defining the site. It's like the sock drawer of nude sites! Most things in there match up with a specific genre ou would expect, but rogue loners to make you wonder what's going on.... Maybe the next best way I can define this site, besides as a tease site, is outdated. Navigation is good but not ideal. You can filter the models by odd preferences like "wet" (as in water),"fishnet", "see-thru", "blond" and, oh yea, "nude" and even "extreme close up" which is just wierd compared to the rest of the site. You can't select multiples, so no way to see wet blonds, etc. And "see-thru" applies to a top worn over a bathing suit as often as something you can actually see parts through. When you select a model, you get a list of her sets. The sets have tags like "fishnet", bathing suit", "nude", etc. that match the search parameters. These are site defined. Select a set and you get the first batch of 30 thumbnails. If there is nudity, it is often very late in the set. Some sets have over 300 images, so you have to go through 10 pages or more to see everything. You can also navigate directly to a page. Or you can download the entire set in a zip file. The sets are not dated, so you have no idea how old they are. You also don't know how many images are in a set until you look. The image or file sizes are also not listed. The tags are helpful, but "nude" in this case might mean a nip slip. Ad if the model is nude, chances are pretty good that they superglued her legs together. Many of the girls that are nude are all crossed up like they have to pee! Some are only topless. One kind of interesting thing is that the girls may go nude but cover up everything with thier hands....until they turn around. That all of a sudden you'll get this beautiful standing rear view. The photographer seems to have a knack for these rearview shots as they occur pretty consistently in clothed and nude models. Oh, yeah. The photography. Competent. Nothing special. No photoshopping. Some studio sets. Since most of the girls are clothed, it looks like the photographer often takes the models to a local hotel pool or maybe some gardens someplace. You can tell that many of the model sets were shot on the same day with the same locale. Nothing even remotely exotic in the locations. Now if you are LOOKING for a bikini site, this one is probably not bad, but the occasional rogue naked close-up model kind of messes up that niche. If this were my site, I would probably break it up into a "network" of three sites that might include bikini, lingere and nude sites. The price I paid, $29.00 was probably about $10.00-15.00 high considering comparable sites with tens of thousands of high-resolution images and HD videos. Bottom line? If you are looking for some exclusve non-nude photography and don't mind a little nudity mixed in, this is a good site for you. If you are used to the top softcore sites, pass on this one...at least until the price comes down. 02-08-13  10:32pm Replies (0) Shown : 51-75 of 89 Page : Page 1 2 3 4    < Previous Page - Next Page > Home - Sites - Users - Reviews - Comments - Categories - Forum Contact Us - Announcements - FAQ's - Terms & Rules - Cookies - DMCA - 2257 - Porn Review - Webmasters 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. All Rights Reserved © 2003-2025 PornUsers.com. Loaded in 0.34 seconds.