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 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 Maybe the next best way I can define this site, besides as a tease site, is outdated.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) Review 52 Nubiles.net (0) 90.0 Status: Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review). Pros: Huge selection of models doing just about anything a guy could want. Excellent navigation. You can set favorites and leave feedback, which influences the scores models get. Many outstanding models. Good mix of photos and videos. Also a good mix of body shots and close ups. Probably one of the best all-teen sites around. Cons: Not much in the way of cons. Maybe a few more outdoor sets. Maybe a few more two-girl three-ways... Bottom Line: Bottom line? There is something for just about everyone here. Well worth a visit. Although this is a teen site, there is a decent variety of shapes and sizes and a good mix of solo, guy/girl and girl/girl sets. The set locations themselves are basic but not distracting. This isn't glam stuff, but the girls are nicely done-up. Some of the girls you will recognize as they are popular models elsewhere but there are a few exclusives and a few really show their best stuff here. (Just look up Zoey, Malena or a girl named Ebbi and you will see what I mean.) Navigation is great and there doesn't seem to be any really poor images or videos. The site sorts models by popularity (score) but politely stops in that category at about 9 for the benefit of the models. It also sorts by update date and model name. Note that many of the models have different names here than they do on other sites so you have to sift through them if you are looking for anyone in particular. One nice touch is that on most model's pages, there are a few large images, nude and non-nude wallpaper images and collections across all sets titled "ass". "boobs", "legs" and "close-ups". I have been a member here several times over the years and the quality has been consistent on each visit, perhaps a little better this last time. Overall, very good general teen site. 06-23-12  04:05pm Replies (1) Review 53 Passion HD (0) 68.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Videos are available in a variety of formats including HD. Models are generally very attractive. A few well known models. Cons: The advertising seems a little deceptive. There are only about 120 videos on the site, with Videos dating back only to November of 2011. That would be 1-3 videos a week since inception. Videos rarely depict the same imagery as the teaser images they are linked to (in any quantity at least..10 minute video, 5 seconds of a particular angle or shot and that's what they tease you with.). Bottom Line: Nope, sorry. Stay away from this one until it gets a LOT more content and they tweak the formule a bit. The advertising showing slick scenes, awesome couples or groups and amazing "first person" angles does not really reflect what is on the site. This site includes some Porn Pro-like footage with the objective of selling it in more of an X-Art.com format. It almost works, but very, very little of the material is...artsy enough to pull it off and only a few of the participants look like they are enjoying themselves or their partners. Look at the images depicting the scenes and you think holy crap this is going to be hot! What you get when you watch are a lot of OK, moderaately dissapointing sex scenes in very similar bright white settings with entirely too much footage from the same angle (across the bed on the side). It is almost clinical! Several of the videos look like they take place in the same rented villa in Arizona or California someplace. When there are several videos of the same girl, they are all pretty clearly from the same day no matter how hard they try to change things up. And much of the sex, which should be OMG hot, ends up looking like acting...mediocre acting...not that the industry has any really great acting, but the couples should at least be into each other. There are a few models you would recognize; Zoey and Jessie, for example. I have NEVER seen Jessie or Zoey, two young, vibrant, energetic and attractive models, not entirely enjoying themselves...except here. Here the sex looks like work. (Jessie has a scene where 90% of the time she is getting screwed on a piano bench with her head slamming against a baby grand piano. That So did not look comfortable or fun!) I rarely find a site that I can't recommend. Unfortunately, I can't recommend this one. 09-18-12  08:32pm Replies (2) Review 54 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 55 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 56 Pornstar Network (0) 83.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Incredibly large collection of porn video segments. (65,000 of them!!!) Wide variety of video types. Just about every major porn star out there for the last decade or more. (10,000 of them!) Navigation is not bad considering the size and nmumber of sites. Cons: There is SO MUCH stuff that it is a challenge to sift through if you have specific tastes. Videos are porn movie segments, so the quality of video and performacne varies a LOT. Much of the material is standard def and really old. Many of the videos are very poor quality. Only a few of the videos I've seen so far are HD, making them hard to watch on a large screen. Most of these have OK quality and fair content. (You can search for 1080 in advanced search) The videos are not dated, either for video release date or publication on the site. (But you may see the release date at the very beginning of the video....as far back as 2001!) It is impossible to determine the quality of a video before clicking on it as there is no resolution data. There are a lot of industry "veterans"...only a few of which still look good, if you catch my drift. Bottom Line: OK, I have to start by saying that I am not a traditional porno movie guy. I have a huge collection of solo softcore and hardcore images and HD videos created on sites like Twisty's, Ron Harris, Digital Dream Girls, Passion HD, ALSscan, etc. Typically, videos on these sites are created especially for the sites and are studio grade and HD. I'm only trying to establish a baseline here so you know where I'm coming from. Pornstars Network is like a day on Haulover beach, a nude beach in Miami. There is a whole lot to see, but you have to sift through a lot of really mediocre and a moderate amount of really bad stuff to find the real gems. There are some gems, though, which makes the visit worth it at least once. The first thing that struck me about this site is the incredible volume of videos. There are 65,000 of them spread out across 52+ sites. And the different sites include almost every taste. All of the videos are segments from a DVD lasting about 10-25 minutes in length. The 52 individual sites include niche sites like: Tiny ass My MILF story Hostile Fucking Club Smash Black dick, round ass My first sex video Jizz Mouthwash Only DP And a bunch of sites dedicated to indivdual male or female porn stars. Navigation is pretty good. The sites are listed by both name and type. Once in a site, the thumbnails show a few screenshots of the video and once you click on the video, you can see an entire set of screenshots before watching or downloading the movie. You can also search by pornstar name to list all of a pornstars videos. That's nice if you happen to like, say, Tori Black, and want to see all of her stuff. The site also lists, in order of popularity, every model they have. The list starts with Sasha Grey at number 1 and some girl named Krystal at number 10,057! Really! 10,057 pornstars! And, like I said before, the site lists 65,000 videos! So, if you are into porn videos, this place is a treasure trove. OK, now for the more critical stuff. Like porn movies themselves, the vast majority of videos here just aren't that great. The video quality is marginal, direction is poor, the camera jitters or the angle is bad, the acting is awful, the performers are not appealing, etc. Pretty much ALL of these videos are not HD. Again, there are 65,000 videos! So even if 60,000 of them sucked, 5,000 would still qualify as good or better. That's way more than a lot of other sites, but the challenge is sifting through the junk to find the gems. There are some other annoyances, too, but some of them are more about my tastes than the site. A LOT of these videos are really old by Internet standards. Number 1 on the pornstar list is Sasha Grey. Damn, she is hot, but she stopped doing porn in 2009. Jenna Haze, #4, has videos from 2001. I can understand how several of the top 20 can be, um, veteran porn starts, but none of this material is in HD, making it really hard to watch on a computer or bigscreen. Much of the material is very, very raw. I realize that is the point in some cases, but many of the pornstars that are goddesses on sites like Twisty's or Digital Dreamgirls are just kind of cute at best in these videos. Tori Black, for example, does some terrific stuff on Twisty's and looks about as badass as any girl I've ever seen on that site. In the videos here, she's almost plain. That's more than a little dissapointing. And then there are the European models that show up in niches like "Auditions" and "First time Videos". You've seen a lot of them on other sites and many are beautiful enough to stop a 747 in mid-flight. One of the reasons I sometimes prefer images to videos is because many of these girls are ungodly beautiful until they move, walk, talk or act. Some European and latin women tend to exagerate their expression as part of the culture. This site is the best example of this that I've ever seen. Some of these girls acting is so hideous that it is actually embarrasing to watch! I never thought that was possible before.... (Exception: Bambi) There is a lot of other schlocky stuff too. I know anal sex has been popular in porn for many years, but does it have to be included in almost every sex scene? It also seems like, although they have nearly every pornstar out there, they DO NOT have those pornstars best work. Instead its the star's early work or off-beat or fetish stuff. There are 57 Sasha Grey videos on this site. Sasha was a pretty kinky pornstar but I KNOW she did some really nice one-on-one stuff as I've seen it elsewhere. Not here. Most of her videos here are gangbangs with 5+ guys, group sex scenes where she gets totally creamed or odd fetish scenes. Not a single straight sex scene with her on the whole site. Too bad. OK, I'm out of space... Bottom line: If you are into porn videos, you simply must visit this site, but be prepared to do a lot of sifting to find the stuff that really floats your boat. 02-02-13  09:31pm Replies (1) Review 57 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 58 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 59 Real Jam VR (0) 79.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Good quality VR videos Young Attractive European models Several resolutions available. Navigation is straightforward Images provided are representative of vids. Cons: Site is small (34 vids) Navigation is extremely basic Video download selection process is a little cumbersome. 50%+ of vids are observation only. No release dates or schedule No scoring several formats, but they are not very consistent Bottom Line: OK, real quick.... RealJam is another start-up VR video provider based out of Budapest using Eastern European models. They are still pretty small, but so far they are doing things pretty well in terms of production. RealJam Stats: About 34 videos About 18 models Formats include Gear, Oculus/Vive, smartphone. Largest format for Vive/Oculus is about 3200x1800 but not all vids are that high. Videos average about 10 minutes. Largest format file sizes are about 2-2.5 gigs (That is shorter and smaller than most) Download speeds are good. Overview: When you log in, you get get a listing of videos with representative images and download options right on the listing page. There are 4 videos per page and there are currently 9 pages, so that's about 36 videos. Each model actually produces 2 or 3 videos. At least one is an observational strip show/masturbation video and the others are participatory. They don't always fall in sequence. Sets are nicely done, high end with no real distractions...large homes or hotel suites. Lighting is generally good. There is almost always a kind of funky logo prop someplace visible in the room that Say's Real Jam with the sylized Ass made out of the L in Real and the J and Jam. Kind of clever.....kind of. That logo tells me these are all made by the crew and not brought in by an independent and purchased. I find selecting a download format to be kind of clunky and have accidentally downloaded the wrong format more than once. For each video, there are 4 tabs across the top for the format (Gear, Oculus, Vive and Smartphone). Within each tab are the resolutions available for that format. Oculus and Vive are always the same and could easily be combined. What trips me up is that I think I hit the Vive tab and then hit the high-resolution format to download, then move on to look at the next set. It isn't until the file is downloaded that I realize I forgot to hit the Vive tab before downloading. The tab option is a reasonable approach, but there should be some way to see all or choose a default. Before I realized what I was doing wrong, I opened a Gear video thinking it was the best they had and was very disappointed. Let's see....The models act pretty well and are directed well. There is a surprising amount of English dialog (monologue, really) with heavy eastern European accents. It doesn't detract from the videos any, though,...probably adds a little, especially since the dialog is generally pretty polite. You know, "You like?" and "You want to see?" kind of stuff. The video releases are not dated, which I find a little frustrating. And as I mentioned, the resolution varies sometimes between videos. Bottom line: For $20, go ahead and jump right in! It is well worth it for the collection of quality videos that they have. 01-17-17  03:07pm Replies (0) Review 60 Real Teens VR (0) 68.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Real Teens. Good quality VR videos Cons: From the site format, this might be a bait site. Really small collection (23 videos) Ultra basic navigation Section called VR VOD where other vids are $10 each. Nice try. I'll wait for VR chat rooms. No update schedule Videos are not dated Videos are not scored. No search function No model listing. Bottom Line: As VR sites go, this is a really small one, but the VR and actress quality is not bad. This site is owned by the same group that owns Naughty America. That site includes VR but the actresses used are mature, established porn stars. From what I can tell, in an effort to generate more revenue, they separated out the "teen" VR from the mainstream stuff you can get at Naughty America and created this site. Kudos to those folks because people like me will join this site, even if it is only for a month....or for the few hours it takes to pull down every video on this site. What I really don't like, and am going to score accordingly for, is that the site creators went a little too far and created what appears to be a bait site. A bait site is a site designed to attract subscriptions with no clear intentions of maintaining the site beyond a certain point or providing ongoing, regular updates for the subscribers. Yes, this site has some good quality VR videos of young actresses, as advertised, but there is no clear indication of how often, if at all, the site is or has been updated and the site could very easily have just been created to suck money out of people looking for teen VR. A legitimate site lists release dates. A legitimate site provides regular updates. A legitimate site does not include a "store" selling 50 additional VR videos not shown on the site for $10 each. 50 additional VR videos! Ten...Dollars...Each!? And I'm not even counting the ubiquitous ads to join Naughty America with a single click. To be fair, these might all be oversights on the part of the webmasters, but they are huge, glaring, troubling oversights. Real Teen VR Stats: 23 videos. 23 models (all single girl sets) One fairly representative image per set No zips or screencaps Videos are not dated No indication of new release frequency Videos available in most VR formats. File sizes are not listed. These are actually pretty good VR videos. They are shot in the exact same style as the VR videos at Naughty America, probably because they are the same company and these videos were originally slated to go there. I did a review of the VR at Naughty America VR and many of those points apply here. All videos are VR viewer participatory (i.e. you fuck her) Most videos start (with you) prone and end up actively upright. The Actresses are a little too talkative. Some videos have drop-outs and/or abrupt transitions that hinder the VR experience. The models are 18-19. Although youth is beauty in today's society, several of these girls are young but not beautiful. Bottom line: Mixed. For $20, it is probably an acceptable site to visit for one month just to pull down the 23 videos. But the site appears to be a bait site designed specifically to get your money for those videos and never provide anything more. If you are the webmaster for this site, feel free to prove me wrong by providing past release dates, upcoming release schedules and regular updates to the site. I will gladly change my review and score. 12-14-16  09:41pm Replies (0) Review 61 Rylsky Art (0) 88.0 Status: Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review). Pros: Very high quality material, often outstanding. Beautiful, natural models Many Met Art models but also many unique models Wide variety of sets, locations and models Part of the Met Art network but a separate site Good range of image sizes to view/download Generally good video options Everybody looks relaxed and comfortable Navigation is generally good Fast download speeds Many popular European models Good site layout and navigation Met-Art single sign-on means you can get here from there without having to log in. Cons: Not much bad here. Site updates 4 times a week but more frequent updates in prior years. Like some other MA sites, videos can be a little snoozy Site navigation is not quite as versitile as Met Art but it is still very good. Occasional issues with sign-ups for existing network members. Bottom Line: This is a single photographer, mostly images site that is part of the Met Art network but is marketed and billed separately. Rylsky is a top-notch photographer and the work presented here is an extension of the work he(?) publishes at Met Art. Sometimes there will be a video from a photo session published at Met Art. Sometimes the sets are from the same shoot day in a different location and sometimes the sets are of beginning or hopeful models and for whatever reason this set didn't make it over to Met Art. This includes MANY models that are extremely popular on Met Art from when they were just beginning. Stats (Deduced because the numbers are not published): About 2000 photo sets About 200 videos About 300 models 4 updates a week but prior hears had near daily updates. The site has been around since 2012 The models are generally young and all shapes, sizes, ethnicity, hair color, some hairy, etc. All sets are dated. All sets are scored. images and zips come in 3 sizes up to 3000x4500. Videos come in multiple sizes and formats. Note that this is a relatively softcore solo model site with a few girl/girl scenes. There is no sex, there are no couples, there is no insertion, masturbation, etc. On the other hand, the girls are not shy, there are very few props, hardly any clothes (most sets start naked or very nearly naked) and the shots range from full body shots to close-ups. There are frequent open legged shots, a few naturally open labia and a moderate number of sets that include mild spreading. The girls are generally shaved or close cropped, but there are a few hairy girls. In general, if you enjoy admiring beautiful women in all types of settings, poses and positions, this is a good place to get unobstructed views of the wonderful female form. These sets are of the same quality as the Met Art sets, meaning they are usually excellent. Good lighting, focus, composition and exposure. The models here are just as beautiful and often just as open as they are over at Met Art. Many of the same models are here, so if there are some you like at Met Art, they will probably be here too. Sometimes they are early sets and sometimes they are current. Every time I look through this site I see something wonderful. Looking through the site to write the review, I found two models (Liv and Henrietta, both from 2014) that are absolutely mesmerizing. Plenty of world class models here like Emily Bloom, Astrud, Nancy and Halley. Thee is simply no zooming through this site. Nearly every set thumbnail becons you to slow down, look more closely, take it all in. Enjoy your time with these beautiful women. Current sets are about 80% popular models and 20% fresh faces. Sometimes the fresh models look very young but for the most part, models seem to be in their early 20s. Navigation is basically the same as Met Art with one important exception. Although there are user options so you can customize your experience, there is no option to open images in a new page like there is on Met Art. This means that image browsing is single threaded and you end up having to backpage to get back to sets or the update page. You can right-click of course, but it is clunkier than it should be. Making navigation on all of the Met Art network sites the same should be a priority for them. I am a member of 6 MA sites and there are some inconsistencies in site design and navigation that make it frustrating when switching between them. On the plus-side, Met Art uses a single-sign on to their sites. Once you sign into a new site under it, you no longer have to log into that site individually. To facilitate this, there is a navigation pull-down that can get you to any of the sites in the network. There is also a "status" page that allows you to see all of your subscription details and you can even sign up for or cancel subscriptions right from this pull-down. This is a very nice solution to an often vexing problem. The only reason I'm not giving this site a higher score is because of the relatively infrequent updates (4 new sets a week) compared to the top-billed site on the nework, Met Art. There is one other issue you should be aware of. If you are already a member of one of the Met Art sites, the single sign-on sometimes limits your "new subscriber" options to a higher rate. If this happens, use a different email or contact support. Bottom line: If you like the Met Art style of photography, which I personally think is among the best on the planet, you will not be dissappointed by this site. I have been a member for a couple of months now and still have not been able to look at everything since the last time I was here. If you look around, you can find it for $19 a month. PU has a special right now for only $9.95 a month. FOR GOD'S SAKE, MAN, JUST DO THAT! Plan on spending at least 2 months here. There is a ton of excellent material and you won't want to miss a thing. Highly recommended 12-21-18  07:11pm Replies (0) Review 62 Sex Art (0) 92.0 Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: High quality video and photos of sex scenes and solo scenes. Many Met-Art models but a lot less tame. Excellent production quality. Excellent navigation. Part of the Met Art Network so you know what to expect. Terrific customer service. Excellent download speeds Multiple image size and video file formats settable user options for navigation and viewing (like Met Art) All sets are named and dated. Cons: Really very few. Marketing for the webcam partner is very prominent and the auto-dropdown for this is truly annoying. They've starting this odd bait tactic called "Staff Selection", where they insert a preview video in prominent locations (it looks just like a set). You click on it and discover it is only a preview. Then they want to SELL you the video separately from your membership. The ad for the most recent video-for-sale shows up on every single set listing page. I truly hope this dies quickly. The videos are no different from other Met-Art network videos and this practice is so annoying that it makes me want to quit the site. Many of the sex videos are highly stylized. (surreal as opposed to real) Many of the solo models lose eye contact with the camera when they start getting into themselves. Bottom Line: As a frame of reference, I am a very, very long term member of Met Art and a couple of other sites in the network, but I recently realized I have not been a member of Sex Art since 2012. I'm happy to say a lot has changed on this site since 2012! The site uses the tagline "Erotoc Cinema for discerning adults" but there are far more image sets than there are videos. For me, that isn't a bad thing at all. As others have said, this is Met Art, only harder. Here you will find nearly all of the models you would see at Met Art, except here the no touching, no fingering, no inserting, no spreading, and no boy-girl fucking rules are gone. Many of the models are still just solo, but they are much more open. Much. Somebody mentioned back in 2013 or so that they were doing anal on this site. I did not notice any Anal scenes and a search for anal only brought up a few things from 2013. I don't really care for anal so this is a good thing on my list. Just so you know...no anal here. If you are a Met-Art subscriber, have you ever clicked on a thumbnail because the image looked great only to find that the lower half of the model is completley out of focus? Well, that sort of depends on the photographer but I can tell you that here it doesn't happen nearly as much. Many of the images here are sharp from head to toe and every bit as good, sometimes better than those at Met Art. The models, of course, are Met Art quality, top notch European models. Nearly all are in the 18 to 25 category. Generally slender, some are curvy and some are OMFG gorgeous. They seem a little more playful here with a little more eye contact. And when you throw in that these sets include a lot more shots of, for example, fingering, spreading and generally open labia, then this site becomes a lot more pleasant. Many of the girls do tend to forget about the camera when they start getting into themselves, though. This is fairly common for models that are not full-out porn stars. The videos are sort of a mixed bag and I'm not entirely sure why. Met Art in general tends to stylize their videos and many of these are theme based. The sex in many of these videos is ok, but it doesn't draw you in and hold you like more hardcore stuff can. (There are some notable exceptions, though, where the guy just bangs the hell of the girl like there ar no cameras at all...and it is really good.) Some of the solo scenes are also very good, starting with a stroll down the beach or something and ending with a vibrator induced orgasm with a lot of close-ups along the way. Is it real? Who cares! It often looks pretty real! The girl/girl scenes are also much more realistic, with the girls clearly performing acts on eachother, as opposed to just holding hands and looking like they are sisters, again with an ample number of close-ups along the way. Here are some quick stats (from what I can figure): As of 2/23/18 895 videos 1,259 photo sets 549 models 49 photographers/videographers One new set every day. As far as niche, that is difficult to define. I would put it in with Watch4Beauty.com or maybe MPLstudios as both of those sites use popular, beautiful Eauropean models and put no restrictions on activities. Bottom line: If you like the models at Met Art but are looking for something a little more open, a little more exposed, a little harder, then this is the site you are looking for. I would say join for a month, but honestly, there is way too much good material here, so take a longer term deal if you can find it. I may add this to my annual subscription list. 02-23-18  05:56pm Replies (0) Review 63 Sex Art (0) 80.0 Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: High quality video and photos of sex scenes and solo scenes. Many Met-Art models but less softcore. Cons: Not enough content, although it is improving. Navigation is not consistent with Met-Art. Bottom Line: This is basically all the stuff that the photogrpahers wanted to shoot for Met-Art, but the relatively softcore nature of that site prevented them from publishing it. Or...to put it another way...it is a way for Met-Art to expand thier network and make more money without having to use anything more than ask the assets they already have to have sex, which many of them do on other sites anyway. The emphasis is on glamorous sex scenes but there are a lot of solo acts and decent photo sets with all kinds of toys. The girls, of course, are awesome....as usual for this network. The only problem is that there still is nowhere near enough material. Navigation is fine for a small site, but when it gets big, they will need to switch over to the same system they use for Met-Art. For this site, you have to page forward and back to get anywhere quickly, or you can follow the "back to gallery" links...which ever is your preference. I have accidently left the site many times because I thought I was on Met-Art. The cross-advertising is still very frustrating. They cross-advertised based on models and photographers, so at the bottom of a page, you will see a link back to Met-Art or one of the other sites in the network (all charging separately). I was fortunate enough to see this site for $12.50 because I was already a member at Met-Art. Look for bundle packages and consider doing one $12.50 secondary Met-Art site at a time because there just isn't enough content here for you to keep all four $12.50 sites for long. Overall, this is a pretty good site, especially if you get in on a package deal. But it won't be a great site until they get a lot more content. You see a nice girl on one site, there is a picture of her from another set at teh bottomfg 09-23-12  04:55pm Replies (0) Review 64 Sex Babes VR (0) 90.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Best video quality of any VR site High-def (4K) 3D VR videos Mostly Popular, very attractive European models A few beautiful models I haven't seen elsewhere Mostly participatory videos These vids are VERY well directed. Girls that can be so-so elsewhere are AMAZING here. Very high entertainment level: The girls are into the scenes. Very fast download speeds Good navigation Release dates are posted Videos are subscriber-scored on a 10 point scale. Cons: Still a pretty small site Some videos are observational (i.e. watch b/g sex) A few videos start participatory, but switch to observational. No streaming or previews (minor for this format) No zip files of photos or captures but a few representative images for each set (minor) Tags listed with videos are not searchable. A few girls make a little too much noise but a genuinely quiet compared to some other sites. Bottom Line: I just added a few points to the score because, after watching every single VR video on this site, I can honestly say they are ALL very good to excellent. The girls are beautiful, the sets/locations are spectacular and well thought out (several scenes even have a strategically placed mirror that gives you nice views when the girl is heads-down.), the direction is outstanding and the new vids since I've been a member have been killer. This is the very definition of VR porn. I don't say this lightly: BEST VR SITE ON THE INTERNET! OK, back to original review. ============================= Yeah, this is pretty much what every VR site should emulate. There are a couple of videos on this site that will absolutely blow you away. One, with Nancy A, is probably the best VR video I have seen so far on any site. She's a frequent model on Met Art and does sex scenes on a few sites, but she really shines here like nowhere else. A few other models are at their best here, too. SexBabesVR Stats: (as of 2/1/17) About 40 videos 26 models Updates every 3 or 4 days Formats include Gear, Oculus/Vive low and high, and smartphone low and high 60 FPS typical Highest resolution is 3840x1920 Typical video is about 23 minutes Typical file size is about 5 gigs. Videos include tags 3D Video format is Left/Right Most videos start with the male prone, include a cowboy/reverse cowboy and end up with him in an upright missionary or doggie style with a pull-out or handjob money shot. Several sets includessome in-your-face views and all of them are good. The sets are upscale and attractive but not distracting, the lighting is perfect, the models are nicely done but not overly done up, they are well directed and it looks like they are enjoying themselves. Conversation is minimal and the males in the scenes do not make any sound. Most sets open with music and a brief set-up of some sort. Some of these are surprisingly good and I found myself saying "Woa!" as I realized the ungodly gorgeous girl in front of me was about to virtually fuck me. Lucky, lucky me! Overall, the site and videos have the look and feel of Wow-girls but there is no affiliation to any other site that I can find and the domain owners are different. This is a well run, site, though, so I'm pretty sure somebody with other sites and a lot of resources is running it. Good for them, GREAT for those of us with VR gear. Bottom line: although small, the quality here is among the best anywhere. This site is setting the bar. (I would score it higher, but it is still very small.) Go ahead and join for a month. it is totally worth it to see just how good high quality VR can be. I'll be back around at least annually....assuming I cancel, which I'm not sure I will do. 01-14-17  10:57pm Replies (0) Review 65 Showy Beauty (0) 84.0 Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: HUGE Exclusive content Some exclusive models Wide variety of models in all shapes and sizes. Many top European models Some very early sets of current popular models Tons of content (Since 2011, over 900 models) Good quality images Generally good quality videos Cons: Navigation is OK, but sometimes annoying. Many videos are so so. Some photo sets are so so. Some popular models have videos only. Some models only have one set. Silly props in some sets. Many models have assigned names that don't match other sites. Headshots are sometimes not representative of material. Individual image file names are not unique. Bottom Line: Showy Beauty is a non-Met-Art sister site to Amour Angels. (Some of the sets even have props that say Amour Angels.) This site has pretty much EVERY met-art model, mostly in sets shot before they became uber-popular, plus a bunch of sets of models that only shot one or two sets and maybe a handful that didn't make the cut to be on Met Art for one reason or another. The site is not part of the Met Art network but, as I said, has many models that appear on MA and probably shares several photographers. There is a very broad variety of model here. In addition to several hundred european models, there are a handful of asian models, some south american models and a few (I think) pacific island models. A LOT of models I've never seen elsewhere and I have been around a bit. Most models are young looking and petite, although several are more significant and quite chesty. A veritable smorgasboard of shapes and sizes. There are a lot of popular models here, mostly from early shoots. The majority of the models are shaved but some have very mild or trimmed pubic hair. Models like Emily Bloom and Sarena Woods are on Showy Beauty and there are a few others that you honestly would not recognize at first because they look so different. A few popular Met Art models only have videos here and I suspect that is because the matching photo sets made it to a Met Art site. This is not a B-roll site, exactly, but much of the material is similar to the stuff you would find on the met-art secondary sites. The difference is there is more variety here. Showy Beauty is fairly true to the name, but don't expect anything too extreme. Each model is different. Some models are modest, some open their legs and a very very few have open labia. This is JUST a solo girl model site with an occasional two or three girl "friends" set. There is no sex, no masturbation, no insertion. Even eye contact varies quite a bit between sets and models. The emphasis, for the most part, is simply admiration of the beautiful nude female form. The site is posting images and videos as far back as 2011. They have been posting a photo or video set every other day since then, so that means there are, what, roughly 1200+ sets. There are over 750 models. It is a LOT of material. You can sort by top models, top sets or update date and you can go directly to a specific year and month. Sets are dated and model and photographer names are listed. (About 90 photographers, some of whom I am sure shoot for other major sites.) Models are ranked on a user-generated 10 point scale, but the scale seems pretty whacky to me. Most models are in the 5 to 7 range and many top Met Art models are toward the bottom of the rankings. This may be because the sets of the top models are not as high quality or revealing or just because not very many people vote. There are a LOT of pretty teen models here. Like Met Art and some similar sites, Showy Beauty gets content from many photogaphers so there is a great deal of variety in sets, lighting etc., but image quality is typically very good. Navigation is generally good and download speeds are good but the site is a little clunky at times. Photo sets are presented in multiple pages and there is no way to change it. Navigation "Buttons" throughout the site change color when you hover over them, but they do nothing unless you click on the actual text within the button you want. Super annoying. Zip files have unique names but individual images, either downloaded or in the zip files, don't. File names are "Showy Beauty-001.jpg" to Showy Beauty-xxx.jpg, telling you nothing about the set, model, date, etc. Very frustrating if you keep a "best of" folder. ALL items...sets, models, images, etc., open in the same page so you are single threaded and have to ckick "back" a lot unless you remember to open in a new tab. Because these models are not very experienced, many sets have little or rather tentative eye contact. There is a fair amount of outdoor "girl in the woods" type shooting. Most more recents sets are very well done with plenty of eye contact and, sometimes, fairly revealing poses. Images come in three sizes and videos come in 4 formats (2 mp4 sizes, a WMV and a DIVX format) plus streaming. The resolution of the videos is not listed,although the few files I pulled down were 720 or better. Ther is no 4K. Image sets have from about 70 to about 180 images. Videos are 10-20 minutes with the model undressing and frolicking around. Honestly, the videos are not terribly exciting but the view is usually pretty good. Bottom Line: If your tastes run toward young, psuedo-amatuer or early-career pro models of all shapes and sizes, then this is a site you should visit. There is a TON of material and some of it is quite good. I searched for discounts and found one for $19.95. At that price, there is a lot to like here. 12-13-18  03:18pm Replies (2) Review 66 Stunning 18 (0) 78.0 Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: High quality material Beautiful, natural, mostly very young models Many Met Art models but also many unique models Wide variety of sets, locations and models Part of the Met Art network but a separate site Good range of image sizes to view/download Generally good video options Navigation is generally good Fast download speeds All European models Good site layout and navigation Met-Art single sign-on means you can get here from there without having to log in. Cons: Overall quality and update frequency has declined somewhat in the last 6 months. No consistency in release timing or between videos and image sets. Only one set a week lately and 3 of 4 November releases were videos. Overall site quality is not as good as it once was. Site navigation is not quite as versitile as Met Art but it is still very good. Occasional issues with sign-ups for existing network members. Model names are not consistent with the rest of the Met Art network. Bottom Line: I'm going to go a littel Jeckyl and Hyde in this review. Bear with me. Stats (Deduced because the numbers are not published): About 1000 photo sets About 260 videos About 200 models 1 update a week but prior to 2018, there were 4 updates a week. The site has been around since 2013 The models are generally young and all shapes, sizes, ethnicity, hair color, some hairy, etc. All sets are dated. All sets are scored. images and zips come in 3 sizes up to 3000x4500. Videos come in multiple sizes and formats. Stunning 18 is one of the satellite web sites in eh Met Art network established, I think, for the photographer Antonio Clemens. This is the third or fourth time I've joined this site and I have to say I'm pretty disappointed since the last time I joined. Apparently, Antonio Clemens is no longer shooting for Met Art and, since this was essentially his site, they are scrambling to keep things going. The last time one of his sets was published was in September but it appears that his sets since April or May were from the files. Thierry Murell has stepped in, but things have changed....alot! The number of releases has dropped to one a week, which is pretty awful considering the release schedule was 4 times a week just a year ago. And the sets that are being released are...inconsistent with the prior theme of the site and not up to the prior quality of this site or of the Met Art network. Some sets look like they were borrowed from ALSscan and some others seem like odd videos. Here's another example and this one is DAMN WEIRD! 5 sets in August, 7 sets in July, 8 sets in June and 8 sets in May. These were the last sets by Antonio Clemens and ALL OF THESE 28 SETS EXCEPT 1 were of the SAME MODEL! Now, the model is Irene and she is beautiful, but some of these "sets" were partials and the next release would be the rest. Like I said, this is just weird, especially for a site in the Met Art network. You would think they would have the collective resources to keep this site up and get it looking right again after 6 months. Now, aside from this relatively recent weirdness, there is a lot of great 18-22 YO material here from before about May of 2018 all the way back to January of 2013. About 60-70% of the models are young, pretty and many of these models are girls you will not see elsewhere. You can tell they are new and, although there may be a few open-legged shots, you can also see that many have not yet found their confidence. All of those prior sets between 2013 and earlier this year were shot by Antonio Clemens. They are consistent and generally very good. Focus, lighting, sets, exposure, poses, etc. are all excellent. The other 30-40% of the models in these sets are maybe a little older and much, much more experienced and open. For example, Anjelica, the pretty young porn star, has 8 videos and 3 photo sets from 2013-2015. She's not shy at all. Melena A, the little cat-tattooed gymnast turned flexy nude model is here with 17 fairly early sets, mostly photo sets. Her first set is called "Juicy Pussy". It is an accurate title but it easily could have been applied to any of her sets. There are others here, too, like 21 sets from the glam-style model Danica Jewels, here called Delilah G., and 24 videos from the wonderful naked ballarina Annett A. You get my point. The pre-2018 stuff on this site is a wonderful blend of young, light, fresh, delicate, sometimes a little shy beauties and OMG sexy porn stars and experienced, confident models that usually know how to give you what you are looking for. This is another of the Met-Art sites that almost has the same navigation as Met-Art, but not quite. There is no option to open anything in another window. As a result, you have to either do this manually, or back up a lot. It really needs to be the same for all of these sites. Although pricing is separate for each of the Met Art sites, they do have a nifty single sign-on feature that allows you to access any of the MA sites that you are a member of via a little pull-down menu on the main Met Art site. Once you log in using this option, the sight keeps track of you and allows access to any othe site you have subscribed too. Nice feature. There is one other issue you should be aware of. If you are already a member of one of the Met Art sites, the single sign-on sometimes limits your "new subscriber" options to a higher rate than the one you asked for. If this happens, use a different email or contact support. OK, almost out of room. Bottom line: In spite of the recent failings, there is a TON of great material here. If you haven't visited this site yet, there is a holiday special of only $9.95. For that price, joining is a no brainer. I will keep an eye on this site and update the score and recommendation accordingly when the site theme and new material quality stabilizes. For now it is recommended with some reservations regarding new material. 12-21-18  10:42pm Replies (1) Review 67 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 68 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 69 The Life Erotic (0) 80.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Generally high quality material Beautiful, natural models Wide variety of sets, locations and models Many solo masturbation/insertion and girl/girl scenes. Very "artsy" site Good range of image sizes to view/download Generally good video options Navigation is generally good Fast download speeds Several popular European models Good navigation Cons: Very "artsy" site. Billed as a "kink" site but just kink costumes Very little model 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 The unified login system on the metart network has become a NIGHTMARE! Bottom Line: Stats (Deduced): 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. Some are unique to this site. At some point, MetArt decided to make this more of a fetish network, but it isn't really a fetish network at all. There are some fetish costumes and a few girls that start lightly tied up or wearing fetish clothing (in SOLO sets). Many of the sets are female masturbation sets that range from boring to pretty interesting. And about 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. 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. There is a large section on the right half of th elanding page that highlights active working cam models. 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 psuedo-kinky 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. If you are familiar with other Met-Art sets, you can see that some of these sets seem like they might have been B-roll or too weird to put on Met-Art. 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. There is also a consolidated MetArt web site control at the very top of the page, but it does not work very well.... I've had HUGE issues with passwords and common access across MetArt sites. The pull down menu will say I am a member of 6 sites,for example, but when I try to access them, something breaks. Every time I add a new site or have to reset my common password, I lose access to one or more of the 6 or so sites I've signed up for for and pay for. Sometimes it take DAYS and dozens of email exchanges to get it all fixed again. I'm not sure what the issue is but it appears to be related to the different credit card service providers MetArt uses. Bottom line? Good site to visit once, I guess. I personally don't like it anywhere near as much as other Met Art sites. 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 standard 10-31-18  02:37pm Replies (4) Review 70 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 71 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 72 TMW VR Net (0) 87.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Part of the TMW network so you get a lot of other material Good looking, mostly young European models Many familiar popular models here. Consistently good quality VR videos Decent number of VR videos All videos can be previewed/streamed in 2-D (that feature is unique to this site). Still images available in zip files. File names are numbered, named and include resolution. Release dates are included. Up-next videos are listed. Models and videos are user-scored. Cons: Navigation within this site is kind of basic Searches, etc, bring up all site material. making it difficult to sort out VR material. Model names are not included on the updates or results pages. There are a few more tattoos here than I've seen at other sites. Bottom Line: Although this is a micro-site within the Teen Mega World network, my goal here is to review JUST THE VR material for those who are looking specifically for that. As a result, my impression and rating may be a little different since I am comparing only VR sites. TMWVR is among the top five or so VR sites today. The videos are generally very good quality and the selection is larger than average. TMWVR Statistics: 61 videos About 25 models Models are European Nearly all girls release both an observation and a participation video. Worth noting: Only a few anal scenes here. (I'm not an anal fan, so I appreciate that. You may not.) One new set every 4 days or so. Videos come in Rift/Vive, Gear and mobile formats. Videos also come in PC (flat) format in 1080p and 2-D mobile format. (This is the only site I've seen that consistently provides this.) Sets and models are rated on a 10 point scale. File sizes, resolutions and frame rates are listed Thumbnail images of each set with an available zip file. Typical videos are 25 minutes long. Oculus/Vive files are about 6 GB. If this were a freestanding VR site, it would easily be in the top 5. The fact that it comes with an entire network of other good quality material puts it up there in the top 3. Video quality is very good to excellent. The sets are reasonably well done, although many of the shoots look like they take place in somebody's apartment. There are no significant distractions on set. The models young, attractive, are well directed and they look like they are enjoying themselves for the most part. (A few girls I've never seen before look almost mad...probably just a Russian cultural thing.) A few of the videos are kind of silly (i.e. Nicole Love wearing a Pokeman robe/hoodie/costume thing), but they still are not that hard to watch. (Nicole is in another set that more than makes up for it.) There are a couple of videos here that are really, really excellent. Paula Shy, for example, provides a very impressive performance in a VR video called "Bangin' Bookworm" that will leave you totally satisfied. I would easily put that one on my top ten list of the 450 or so VR videos that I have collected so far. There are one or two other top-ten and/or top-twenty VR vids here, too. One thing I noticed here that I don't see everywhere else was some pretty high-energy screwing going on. The sex often starts slow and then gets crazy intense. (No shortage of seriously flailing boobs or totally slapping crotches here...) In some scenes it seems like, I don't know, these couples were actually trying to get each other off. That is nice to see and, you know, be a part of. Every model provides both a passive VR video where she gets off in front of you and a more active one where you screw her (or more accurately, she rides you.) These come in sort of a set with the observation video first and teh participation video a few releases later. Most videos have you lay prone and you remain that way with no switch to an upright, active position. A few models have more than one complete set. There are more tattoos here than I've seen on the other high quality VR sites including at least one huge back-covering tattoo. One of the surrogate guys has a large chest tattoo also. These are all OK, but they distract a little from the action. "What is that thing supposed to be on her back" or "Hey! Look! I have a tattoo!" are not things I want to be thinking about when a VR girl is bouncing on my dick, but here it happens. Oh well. Although I said I would not bring up the other TMW sites, there are a couple of pros and cons. On the pro side, all of the VR videos come in an HD non-VR 2-D version also. If you are into full POV but don't have VR gear, you just hit the jackpot because by their nature, these are awesome POV videos. On the con side, you will often get tossed into the general pool when searching or browsing and the only way to tell if the video is VR is by looking at the watermark. Similarly, once a model is identified on a video detail page, her other videos also show up at the bottom of the page, but most will probably not be VR videos. This is a great thing if you really like the model and want to see more of her. Not so great if you are just looking for VR stuff. Just for comparison, the TMWVR VR videos are generally better than the TMW non-VR videos. This may be because they are newer, because they are better directed, or because the skill set of the crew is better. I'm not sure. They are just better. Given the requirements, they probably should be. Bottom line? $20 for a site that includes 60+ VR videos PLUS thousands of non-VR items is a no-brainer! And as I said, the quality here is generally very good. Go for it! I recommend it! 02-02-17  06:08pm Replies (0) Review 73 Triple BBB (0) 75.0 Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: High quality light, often playful bondage videos Wide variety of related fetishes as well Photo sets included with most video sets Popular European models and porn stars Roughly 176 "sets" Been around since 2005 Sets are dated. Cons: Very slow release schedule. 1 2-minute portion of a video set or a portion of a photo set every couple of days (6-8 minutes a week?) Photo sets are broken up into multiple 20-30 image releases. One image size per set (varies) One video format (currently 1080p) This is a "one-man operation" so the site lacks many typical features. Very, very simple navigation No search function No scoring or ranking Without a doubt the slowest downloads I have ever seen. Bottom Line: I'm not sure exactly what to make of this site. I really like some aspects of it, but it is a one-man operation for the most-part, so many elements are completely exasperating. The images and videos are actually very good for this genre. The girls allow themselves to be tied up or appear to be unconscious at the beginning of each video. Once tied they then struggle a little (and I mean a tiny amount since their restraints are often loose) and then they are mechanically masturbated or dildoed by somebody else or they do it themselves with barely free hands. The models are pretty consistently clothed in stockings and heels or long boots, with lace body suits or something similar, sometimes crotchless, usually with panties. Many sets have models wearing latex dresses, skirts or body suits. I don't think the girls are completely nude in any set. The doms in these videos are either an unseen man or often another female model or porn star. Ashley Bulgari seems to be a little bit of a fixture in recent sets as either dom or sub. Lorena Garcia, the reason I joined the site, is the current model with about 10 sets. Girls include Eufrat, Monica Scott and many others. The videos are high quality and reasonably well "acted". The girls are usually clearly enjoying things and there is no brutality or hard-forced orgasms. I see a consensual light neck-grab or two and a little light spanking, often with a flat-palm-touch warning to the model. There is no B/G sex at all, but a few of the lesbian scenes are pretty interesting. The videos and shoots are fairly modest with no close-ups, spreading, or things that I perceive the crew thinks would be interpreted as disrespectful to the models. Many of the vibrator close-ups, for example, are over panties. These are site standards since I've seen many of these models elsewhere doing some really open, revealing and close-up things. Still, the sets are more realistic than some of the totally fake bondage I've seen elsewhere, but this is all pretty much bedroom stuff that you would do to your significant other. Fun first, experimental second, limit testing, probably not at all. Before you sign up, I have to tell you about the not-so-good stuff. First, the sets are broken up into multiple pieces. I personally hate that when it happens on a top-tier website, but I can understand why the webmaster here is doing it: If you only have one set every two weeks, people won't sign up. So, you get about 2 minutes of video every few days. Or you get about 30 images of a 90-180 image set. So that is a full photo/video set about every two-three weeks. Fortunately, they have been releasing the entire video at the end of the run for more recent videos, but you still have to go pull multiple videos to get an older set. And the photo sets are rarely combined so you will have to search through the set history to find the images. It makes me feel like I'm groveling for the goods and the Dom is doling them out to me....which, unfortunately, is true. But the absolute worst part of the site is the slow download speed. It takes FOREVER to download files. 15 minutes for a single 200 meg file. That's just insanely slow compared to other sites. I think they need to upgrade their modems... So, do I recommend this site? Well, yes, with reservations. For $25, you get a decent amount of high quality soft bondage material with popular models. But be prepared to spend a lot of time waiting for downloads and an eternity waiting for a complete set update. I joined for a month and will add it to my schedule to consider joining again when there are several more complete sets......in, what, January of 2020? Go take a look if you like this type of stuff. The images and sample videos you find are representative of the content of the site. 01-15-17  11:04pm Replies (0) Review 74 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 75 Twistys (0) 86.0 Status: Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review). Pros: Huge collection of photos and videos. Good navigation. Good scoring/rating and review system that isn't inflated by webmasters or users, 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: Waaay to many ads for other sites. Cross selling at sign-up verges on fraudulent. (I unchecked the cross sales, had a problem and clicked submit again and the other offers rechecked themselves and cost me money...really ruined the initial perception of the site.) Also, the log in page is linked to a pay chat site and there is a live front-room chat in progress WITH SOUND! Some smart marketing gu decided to do this to get your attention, but it is annoying as hell! Bottom Line: Do you remember the original Danni's Hard Drive? You know, before Danni sold it? Well, that site was abused and mismanaged after being sold, but 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 either in nude photography or porn. Wide 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. Among the most highly scored models, you'll notice Kayden Cross, Jana Cova and Heather Vandeven, all looking good in their most recent sets, but probably well into their 30s. Nothing wrong with mature, well endowed models, but the site seems to be pretty heavy with them. To be fair, the site also has some very popular younger models including Malena Morgan, Zoey and Melisa Mendini. 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. The 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. One kind of cool thing about some of the videos is that since many of the girls are american, they actually speak! And oh my god what some of them say! Trust me, you WILL be answering out loud when Shawna Lenee, Tori Black or Kasey Chase ask you questions in their videos. This kind of interaction with the audience (ie directly at YOU) is unlike any other site I've seen since...well...the original Danni.com. Very cool! This is billed as a network, but the other sites that you get free access to are really the same sets that are in the main site, just repackaged into categories like "Euro" and "GirlPlay". There are a couple of other mystery bonus areas that include additional models, most of which are intermediate level ametuers. The site is constantly advertising other sites like Brazzers, Mofos, Wicked and Babes, all available for an additional and sometimes hefty fee. Very distracting and annoying. They have a girl of the month theme with a series of photo and video shoots released throughout the month. Overall, this site is well above average with a huge selection of images and videos. The girls are Mmostly 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 "Please come back" special rate. Absolutely, positively worth a visit at least one a year. 07-11-12  02:41pm Replies (8) 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 © 2003-2024 PornUsers.com. Loaded in 0.36 seconds.