Ratings & Reviews
|
All the reviews and ratings from this user. |
| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Review
26
|
Little Lupe
(0)
87.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
- Lupe is gorgeous
- Lots of content
- Large, good-quality pictures
- Decent quality videos
- Hardcore and softcore content |
| Cons: |
- Highly visible and intrusive watermark in pics
- pic sets are repetitive and predictable |
| Bottom Line: |
This is easily the best from the teenrevenue group of sites. Pics are plentiful and range from vid-caps to 1800x1200. Lupe looks great from any angle, and is about as modest as Bill Gates is poor.
Vids look good and range from teaser stuff to hardcore. Good quality offered though not top end: 640x480, 1100 kbps. There are app. 65 vids. Features some of the best girls-kissing suff I've ever seen (though there is not too much of it), as well as masturbation, BJ, and boy-girl.
One gripe about vids: why must Lupe stare into the camera while she's going at it? I've seen this a lot and I don' get it. It's as if to say, "See, look, I really am a horny little sexpot. See? Look what I can do..."
Lupe looks young but in my opinion it's not a problem. Look at some of the other girls in this network: they have them playing kid's games, even coloring in a coloring book for goodness' sake, in addition to all the other teeny-trappings. Lupe looks young but acts her age, in a manner of speaking, and I never felt creepy watching her stuff.
About the males in these clips, which the other reviewers mentioned: One of the things I hate about modern porn is that the guys look like street thugs and seem to hate women. In the clips I saw the guys looked pretty passive compared to some of the net-garbage I've seen. I only viewed about one third of the clips, however, so it could be the other reviewers are right. They are extremely well-endowed. That's certainly true. |
|
12-19-07 05:46pm
Replies (3)
|
Review
27
|
LV Panty
(0)
89.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
Outstanding picture quality.
Complete fidelity to the niche.
Easy to navigate.
Models are (mostly) drop-dead gorgeous.
No degrading terminology.
Not "toy" obssessed.
No penises. |
| Cons: |
Video section is still fairly small.
Image sets are a bit predictable and similar.
Too much emphasis on close-ups, but this is probably a good thing for others. |
| Bottom Line: |
This is a mature site for picture lovers and panty connoisseurs, though perhaps it isn't as popular as some other sites in this niche because, while it features young ladies (18+) it doesn't have that teeny-bopper/schoolgirl atmosphere so typical to this kind of site. The sets are polished and professional and tend toward the artistic rather than the merely titillating. The models are beautiful and varied, though I would prefer more exotics. I think the general same-ness of the sets could be leavened with shots that are more relaxed and spontaneous rather than posed, and I would prefer less emphasis on close-ups. While those shots are fine, they tend to get over-familiar over the long-haul. The variety of panty styles is very good, and I'm pleased to see that thongs are NOT all the rage here. This site will make the old-schoolers happy, I think, because, after-all, thongs are for your feet. |
|
06-03-07 11:32pm
Replies (0)
|
Review
28
|
Monster Pimps
(0)
87.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Lots and lots of material, both pics and vids.
- Zip-files for a large portion of newer sets (this must be new seeing as exotics4me said there were no zips in his review).
- Wide range of very attractive models, including some well-knowns.
- Video quality is excellent in the primary video sites (Panty-Jobs, Lipstick BJ, and Exploited Secretaries). |
| Cons: |
- Terrible name for this network, and doesn't jibe with the largely softcore content. Monster Pimps sounds like something a rip-off site would call itself.
- Pics could be larger, and there are a fair portion of really small pics (400x600). But this is an old site so this is to be expected.
- Site is loaded with video-feed junk (which they do not need) and advertisements.
- Navigation is workable but you can miss a lot of stuff (mostly pic sets) if you don't poke around a bit. This network has three times the material I originally thought it did in my first few days. |
| Bottom Line: |
Quite frankly, this site contains some of the best softcore picture sets in the cheerleader/panty niche that I've encountered. Lamentably, the pics are smallish to very small. The big ones are 684x1024, but many are as small as 400x600. The models are cute to drop-dead gorgeous, and the sets are not toy-obssessed. Whoever is behind the site knows what panty-afficianados want to see.
As exotics4me says, the Panty-job videos are interesting and definitely not something you see everywhere else. My only issue with these vids concerns one of the male performers, who often can't even get it up and who produces some truly pitiful money-shots. Come on, if you're gonna make a girl work that hard for fifteen to twenty minutes, these sessions should end with a bang, not a whimper (to steal a line from the poet, T.S. Eliot).
If the pics were larger I would consider this network to be in the top five percentile for the softcore/cheerleader/panty niche. It's definitely NOT for the hardcore fan or the toy-fanatic. If it were up to me, I would convert this network into one big site and implement a good search function so one can easily locate all the material for each particular model, and I'd put the dinky pics in a separate archive. |
|
01-24-08 01:54am
Replies (1)
|
Review
29
|
My Cute Teens
(0)
73.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- A lot of content up.
- Decent mix of cute European models.
- Seems to update regularly. |
| Cons: |
- No zips.
- Majority of pics in photo sets are named identically: "DSCN0001- etc.", causing extra work re-naming.
- Many vids are not high quality, some very low quality.
- Site has a very "generic" feel to it. |
| Bottom Line: |
I guess somebody ought to do a review for sites like this, though it's easy to see why no-one here has ventured to do one thus far.
I have no complaints about the amount of material on offer here. There are loads of pic sets (60+ pages with app. 10 sets per page), and app. 120 vids. Some of the vids are broken up into sections.
There are some very good photo sets here, if one is willing to look for them. Pic size varies: 1200x1600 on the high end, 1000x750 on the medium, plus many sets with smaller pics. There are also some high quality vids, 2000+k, 640x480, but the bitrates go as low as 359k in the older vids.
The problem here is organization. While the pic and vid sections are separate, hard and softcore content is mixed together in both, and there are no search options. Pictures are divided in two sections, "exclusive" and "other". Sets come ten per page with a thumbnail link and a brief description. The vid section offers a long list of text links, each link being a brief description which takes you to a thumbnail giving some idea of the content, and there is only one option available for DL. The content of the videos left no impression on me. Same old-same old.
By and large this site will induce boredom almost instantly. It has a strong generic stamp and possesses no real personality or any defining characterisic apart from its "teeny-ness" which is strongly reminiscent of Club Seventeen and other euro sites. It comes with the usual plethora of bonus feeds which add nothing to its value.
Spend your money elsewhere. |
|
10-13-08 09:52pm
Replies (0)
|
Review
30
|
Naughty Mag
(0)
87.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Half a million pics+, and lots of video.
- One of the widest ranges of models I've seen, from 18+ to late 60s, from extremely plain to beautiful.
- zips in two sizes.
- choice of size for pictures.
- model index and search function.
- I find the navigation to be easy, because I'm used to it. See cons.
- Access to multiple mag archives: 40+, 30+, Eighteen18, Newcummers, Naughty Neighbors. |
| Cons: |
- Pic quality is not top-notch.
- Lots of *very* plain models.
- toys & dildos everywhere.
- Navigation takes some getting used to. |
| Bottom Line: |
Naughtymag is noteworthy because of the amount of content it now has and for the range of tastes it caters to. I haven't seen this wide a variety of model types at any other site, though ATK's Natural and Hairy comes close. The focus is on amateur, accessible, next-door-neighbor types. I actually find a good percentage of the models here downright homely (I'm being kind), but that's all part of the amateur niche. That being said, there are many beautiful ladies to look at as well, though the atmosphere is never super-glamorous.
While the pictures have that "magazine-y" look to them, I have to say that the majority of the pics ranging from 2003 to present look pretty good, and some are very good. The lack of clarity is compensated for by the fact that the sets are well-edited and comprehensive. I find that most sets show the models in all the ways I like to see them, without excessive shots of the same pose with barely noticeable differences.
The vids I looked at are 640X480, 2000+ kbps. These are the newer "casting couch" or interview vids and they look excellent.
I would certainly recommend this site to picture collectors, and amateur pictures in particular, but not to those who are interested in photography as art. This ain't art, it's naughty pictures. People mainly into video are best advised to look elsewhere.
It's too bad this company is crapping out on their trials. Why they would want to damage their rep in this way is a mystery to me. |
|
04-07-08 11:20pm
Replies (3)
|
Review
31
|
Nubiles.net
(0)
96.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Beautiful, beautiful girls.
- Tons and tons of content, updated regularly.
- Good quality video, numerous DL options.
- Exhaustive browse features
- Decent search function (could be better)
- Options for member involvement.
- Choice of small or large pics.
- Niched galleries of each model: ass, breasts, legs.
- a few super-sized pics for each model, wallpapers
- Zips in small or large size.
- Bonus sites, and these accrue with long-term membership, and they aren't just the usual bullshit.
- Search lets you sift softcore from hard.
- What the hell else do you want? |
| Cons: |
- Model's directory is all laid out on one page and this seems counter-productive, as it sometimes takes a good while to load and because, let's say you want to start with the Z's: I bet you can't scroll all the way down to the bottom without being smitten by some ridiculously cute girl along the way. Try it. Go 'head.
- I would like to be able to search by letter, as in ATK and other places. You can search by model name, but what good is that unless you already know which girl you're looking for?
- Alexis doesn't allow pm's. Doesn't she love me? |
| Bottom Line: |
Though the content isn't absolutely to my tastes (my tastes are admittedly way out of fashion), I can still be objective and say that Nubiles is among a small handful of sites which are truly head and shoulders above the rest in every way. I ran out of room in the pros section and had to edit it. The nits are minor. |
|
03-04-08 12:11am
Replies (1)
|
Review
32
|
Oh La La Glamour Girls
(0)
85.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- A lot of content, pics and video-wise
- Sharp, polished pictures, good-sized.
- Vids are above-average quality, new ones are top-notch.
- Navigation is a breeze, except for the tiny type.
- Very classy site.
- Models are good-looking to absolutely stunning.
- Almost fasitious fidelity to the niche. |
| Cons: |
- Need more variety in photo-sets
- Super-sized photos are too few and far between, and you'll have to guess which ones they are.
- Zero nudity. This can be a pro, depending on your frame of mind.
- No model directory, no search functions. |
| Bottom Line: |
This is one of the classiest tease/lingerie/glamour sites going. "Village Ladies" this IS NOT, as most of the models are stunners. There are a few models here which had me shaking my head and picking my slack-jaw up from the desk.
The pics range from mild teaser shots to the girl spread-eagled with panties on but nonetheless proving without a shadow of a doubt that she's female. Lovers of stockings, panties, high heels, satin and lace, will love it here. Hardcore fans, or people who like to see women degraded, will HATE it.
As far as atmosphere, this is the exact opposite of anything "street" oriented. Getting a teasing glimpse of some of these women is about as much as a guy like me deserves. Open a bottle of Apricot brandy, light up a Dunhill, and enjoy yourself. |
|
09-23-07 09:35pm
Replies (6)
|
Review
33
|
Panties Pulled Down
(0)
75.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Zipfiles for photo-sets
- Very faithful to the panty niche
- Mostly attractive, maturish-looking models in solo strip and faux-lesbian sets, office-girl and college-girl uniform.
- Decent amount of content, fast loading, good speeds.
- Sets are well edited and usually go from full-clothed to total nudity.
- Not too heavy on toys.
- Search utility offered, but is strange and I didn't use it.
- Model list.
- Seem to update pretty steadily.
- 2 options for vid download: WMV or Ipod. |
| Cons: |
- Daily limit for downloading zips. The first time I've encountered this. I didn't count but I did not download many before I was cut off. I am not aware of a limit for videos. I took quite a bit and was not cut off. Will update if this changes.
- Smallish pics for 2010: 803x1200.
- Videos are advertised as HD, when this is NOT the case. Vids ranged from 768x576 to 960x540, 1000 to 3000kb.
- Vids are limited in scope. Girl teases and talks to camera, winds up masturbating, tugging and playing with panties, same old same old. |
| Bottom Line: |
I have two scores for this site: my objective score is the one I posted. Subjectively, I would give this site a 95 for photo content alone, even though the vids are negligible.
I have a wicked, unstoppable panty fetish, and I tend to like old school knickers: full-sized, full-back, cotton, nylon. This site is HEAVY on cotton, and HEAVY on white cotton. So Messmer, bear that in mind! Over the past couple years they have moved towards more modern, "sexy" panties, like thongs, g-strings, lacy things, satiny things. This is not so good for me but may be great for others. The farther back you go through the archives, the more into white cotton and granny-ish style undies you get.
For the bra-lover, who should exist in all of us to some extent, there are some lovely bras here, and some lovely things that go inside the bras, though there is also a near-toxic level of silicone. The Brits seem to be really, really into fake breasts.
I gave this site a low score because I don't want to mislead my PU friends, and I try to keep my personal kinks and preferences in check, realizing that most men cannot stand the kind of skivvies I like; realizing that most men hold them up as objects of contempt and ridicule.
That being said, kudos must be given to the photogs and the editors of these sets. They are very well presented and offer choice views of the precious undergarments in question. Shame on them for not moving into higher res photos, however. I don't need gigantic pics, but at least fill my screen here in 2010.
Those concerned about nudity: this is NOT a non-nude site. Nudity and graphic views of the generative organs are in most sets, though this is NOT Simonscans or In the Crack either.
Subjectively speaking: Panties Pulled Down is my favorite site for panty photo content. Objectively speaking, DO NOT spend your money here if the sight of white cotton panties turns you off. You will be sorely disappointed, and maybe even angry.
And do not come here for video content. It's hum-drum in that regard. |
|
09-16-10 04:16pm
Replies (2)
|
Review
34
|
Panty Amateur
(0)
95.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Site has one mission and carries it out nearly perfectly.
- Video is top quality, with some HD. All vids, even as far back as 05, are top quality: at least 2000 kbps.
- Very attractive British models.
- One new vid every day.
- Tons of content. There may be over 800 videos at present. |
| Cons: |
- Scenarios are repetitive.
- No download options. People with slow connections will need a lot of time on their hands.
- Limited nudity.
- Lighting bad in a few vids.
- If silicone were tea, this site would have more than China.
- Longer videos, with a bit more creative thinking, would be an improvement, though five minutes is pretty good for the material as it's currently presented. |
| Bottom Line: |
If you are looking for hardcore, masturbation, toys, etc, you will absolutely loathe this site.
If you find that panties just get in the way of the good stuff and feel that they are more of a nuisance than anything else, this site will cause you to become suicidal with boredom.
If you feel that the thong is the greatest advancement in the history of women's underwear, this site will cause you to go postal on your monitor, and then you'll have to buy a new one.
If you feel that a "panty video" should include: panties around the ankles at all times, panties being sniffed, panties being inserted into various orifices, you are encouraged to avoid this site, in the same way that anyone with taste should avoid a Pauly Shore movie.
If you come to this site looking for porn, you will not find it, unless you're convinced that any woman who would allow herself to be photographed topless is a harlot in service to the Lord of the Underworld.
**
I didn't take points off because of the limited scope of this site, because it doesn't claim to be anything other than what it is. This is a video site, there are no pics; it's a panty-site, there's no hardcore. It's a site directly aimed at the panty/upskirt video collector, with a touch of voyeurism and mild sapphic play. If you're not interested in those things there is no reason for you to visit. |
|
02-15-08 05:03pm
Replies (7)
|
Review
35
|
Saint Paul Girls
(0)
85.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- 130 models currently, pic sets and vids for each varies widely. Some have as few as 8-10 sets, one model has over 200.
- Models are predominantly from Sao Paulo, Brazil: exotic, beautiful, and exclusive, though many are euro models seen on other sites.
- Site has several hundreds of high quality vids, with many (at least half if not more) at 1920x1080. Vid content ranges from mild solo strip to masturbation to b/g hc.
- Most (perhaps all, I haven't checked all 130 models) pic sets have accompanying RAR files, like a zipfile.
- NO music tracks, and hardly any talking in videos. Girls take whispered cues. Minimal male intrusion.
- Newest pics go as high as 1440x1900. RAR files often have bigger pics than seen in the browser.
- Webmaster was immediately responsive, extremely polite, and helpful. Like someone you've known for years. I was impressed.
- Regular and plentiful updates. This guy is BUSY.
- Blu-ray section, which I haven't gotten to yet. |
| Cons: |
- My biggest issue here is that the videos are accessed via text links. You have no idea at all what the content of the vid will be. No previews, no vidcaps, nada. All vids are viewable solely by downloading to hard-drive.
- No search functions.
- Browsing for pics to save as opposed to taking the RAR files is a chore. First, you have to click each pic individually in order to get the larger size, and when you get the larger size, it is named "fx". All of them, except for some newer ones.
- Some of the sets are huge, 15 pics per page, often extending to twenty or more pages. Without the RAR file, you are forced to do a lot of work clicking and re-naming.
- Pic sets could use some editing. Many pics are the same except for minute differences.
- Navigation can be confusing across the network.
- Many of the older pics have circular watermark in center. |
| Bottom Line: |
First of all, the TBP review here is in dire need of updating. It doesn't take the hi-def vids into account nor give any idea of the size of the network.
A join at St. Paul Girls gives you access to 4 other partner sites: g18spot, g18HDTV, girls18, and 18club. g18spot contains the Autoindex, a jump-station allowing easy access to all of the photo content. There are over 500,000 pics so far. g18HDTV contains the vid content, and there are 723 HD vids available. It is staggering to say the least to look at the list of text links. Some of these files are well over a gig. However, you are flying blind as far as content. You have no clue what the videos will be. So far I've seen mostly solo tease, heavy on masturbation but minimal toys, and one Boy/Girl hc scene. Bear in mind I've only taken about twenty vids so far. All you know when downloading is the name of the model.
Bottom line is simply this: this guy, named Greg, has a motherlode of excellent material on offer, but with only text links for the vids and no categories or search funtion, your feeling at coming at the material is a kind of hopeful hopelessness. Those with short term memory loss: good luck! Some organization, via categories, vid previews of some kind, and search function, would have earned this site a score in the high ninetees from this user.
The models are sometimes breathtaking and the photography is excellent, though there are quite a few blurry shots. The environment is warm, tropical, and WET. Water, water everywhere, gentleman, pools, showers, baths, what have you. I will also say that one of the masturbation vids I dl'd was among the best I've seen, with the model, the gorgeous Ariel, seeming to be shy about it but genuinely getting off.
I would highly recommend the site to those who enjoy exotic models, on the young side, and who enjoy soft photo content. Those video-lovers out there will have to bear in mind the mystery factor when it comes to text-link only video files.
The site has a daunting amount of material, but you will almost certainly experience a good deal of frustration when approaching it. |
|
04-27-10 01:47pm
Replies (3)
|
Review
36
|
School Girls Asia
(0)
70.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Good sized pics
- Good amount of content
- Models are mostly good-looking
- Good adherence to niche |
| Cons: |
- Pics are not hi-res, and the sets are all very similar within their respective categories.
- Site is too plain. One page with all 68 models. Thumbs take you to her pics/vids.
- No updates during my month. None seem to be in the offing either.
- Vids are negligible. I'm not into hardcore, but I doubt those who are will get into these vids very much. Quality is pretty low. |
| Bottom Line: |
I love exotic models, particularly Latinas and Asians, and I've been wanting to see what this company has going for it. "Asia" in the site title could be misleading to some, since most of the models seem to be filipinas. No problem for me, since I like filipinas, but it could be for some.
I get a bit of a bad feeling when I see these sets. Some of these girls are emaciated, for one thing. Rather than feeling desire for them, I want nothing more than to give them a Big Mac. Still others look like they've been put through the ringer: rode hard and put away wet, so to speak.
More often than not, and particularly in the lesbian sets, the models seem like they're merely putting on a show. You'll notice their tongues sticking out in almost every shot, sometimes in contact with nothing - just sticking out, as if men begin to salivate when they see girls with their tongues sticking out. It's cheesy.
This is pure product and little else. Don't get me wrong. There are a lot of very attractive girls here and some good pictures, but when you have pretty girls undressing and a camera nearby almost anyone could produce something useful. The people behind this site need to expand their horizons a bit and be more creative.
I noticed, from various TGPs, that Schoolgirls Asia and LBFM are using some of the same material on both sites. So I certainly won't bother checking out the latter.
Overall, the site is serviceable but only just, and the price is way too high. |
|
08-27-07 11:27pm
Replies (0)
|
Review
37
|
Sneaky Peeks
(0)
74.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Nifty idea.
- Zip files for pics, which is the only way to go with these kind of pics.
- Videos are of good quality.
- Updated regularly. |
| Cons: |
- Small amount of content for the price.
- Vids stick to the core idea but are repetitive and tend to be boring.
- BACK OF SOME GUY'S HEAD IN A LOT OF THE PICS.
- Minimal acting and/or improvisational skills.
- Some REALLY bad boob-jobs. |
| Bottom Line: |
I enjoyed two of this company's other sites, Panty Maniacs and Panty Amateurs, and so I thought I'd give this a try. It's not nearly as good as those other sites, but it has potential.
The picture sets are shot in a frame-by-frame style which unfortunately means most of the pics are redundant. They have the look and feel of high-quality vid-caps. Only voyeur and/or panty afficianados need apply. There is some nudity but not much. And too many implants.
Someone had the "brilliant" idea of placing some guy's noggin in many of the photos, which is supposed to enhance the voyeuristic feel of the sets. This is a gigantically BAD idea. Since when did peeping become a team sport? I don't want to look over another guy's shoulder to get a glimpse of some cutie in her unmentionables, nor do I wish to have said unmentionables obscured by a large male cranium which always makes me think of Shaun of the Dead. Tell Shaun to take a hike and I'll hold the cyber door open, thanks.
As for the vids: the quality is very good and looks decent full-screen on my 22 inch monitor. But, I wish these girls would have something to do in the bathroom rather than stand around gazing into the mirror or off into space. I don't mean watersports or anything like that, I mean, give them a task. Let them do something. Most of the time the girls look bored and are overly conscious of the camera. I wind up embarrassed for THEM when I'm supposed to be ashamed of MYSELF.
Some good fun here regardless. |
|
09-01-07 08:58pm
Replies (0)
|
Review
38
|
Sonia Dane
(0)
79.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Very faithful to the lingerie niche.
- Very classy, adult site.
- Lots of content with Lingerie Pass membership.
- Sonia is a classy, elegant, attractive, mature lady who obviously enjoys what she does.
- Many pics will make old-school undy lovers happy. |
| Cons: |
- Video section is a mess in many ways, see bottom line.
- Pics are small: 480x640 to 1024x737.
- Downloads speeds were consistently slow, averaging 160k per sec.
- Pic sets are arranged all on one page, and it takes a while to load. |
| Bottom Line: |
I have mixed feelings about this site. One one hand, it's extremely classy and mature all around, with nothing tacky or sleezy about it, and for an old-school panty/lingerie fan like me, it is sometimes the best in that genre; on the other hand, I can't help wondering why the physical quality of the content is not up to 2008 standards, why, in fact, it is barely up to 2003 standards; and why, after being online so long, are there all of 16 video clips available, and why, oh why, is the quality of these clips so dismal?
Sonia has a hair over 200 sets up, and with older sets you are looking at pics as small as 480x640, Newer sets offer bigger pics, but still not great, at 1024x737. These people are obviously not hard-up for money, so why continue to sell low-to-moderate quality content when upgrades are almost certainly possible?
Vids: I counted 16 video clips, ranging from 2 to 8 minutes in length, on Sonia's site proper. The newer clips are stream-only and cannot be downloaded. Older clips can be downloaded, but there is no reason why you should bother. One vid I checked was WMV 320x240, 889k; another was a Quick Time vid which was absolutely unwatchable because the quality was so bad. Additionally, I had many problems waiting for the vid page to load. I have a fast connection and all other sites hum along fine, but Sonia's site is slow in general, and excruciantingly slow in regard to the vid page.
A definite plus here is Sonia's guest model section, which now includes 46 models, each with her own little sub-site. Some of these models have upwards of 70 sets, but a good deal have only a handful. By and large there is some excellent, tasteful stuff on offer, but, as with Sonia's site, the pics are small, small, small. Some of the guest models have vids, but these are relatively few.
This site, meaning Sonia's in particular, has the potential to be one of the very best in the panty/lingerie niche, and in fact it's quite ubiquitous in the lingerie/panty newsgroups and is generally highly regarded; but the site itself doesn't live up to its implicit reputation. To go from merely average to exceptional, all this place needs is some serious improvement in the *physical* quality of its content. The strictly aesthetic quality of the content, mind you, is absolutely tops.
Final thought on the vids: either offer something worthwhile or drop them entirely, please. There's nothing wrong with being a picture site. |
|
08-29-08 08:17pm
Replies (0)
|
Review
39
|
Teen Charms
(0)
79.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Gorgeous, often downright stunning, models.
- Lots of content: nearly 100,000 pics and over 300 vids (but see BL re vids).
- High quality pics on newer sets.
- Zips
- A few vid DL options.
- Easy to navigate.
- Very tasteful site. |
| Cons: |
- Site has been dead since 3/07, but the homepage hasn't come to terms with this. What happened? Why do this?
- Video is negligible, unfortunately, since these models deserve better. No sound on any of them, though they say all vids have sound. Could be on my end.
- All zip files simply named "images". Creates work, particularly for those of us with no short term memory. Did I mention I have no short-term memory?
- Way softcore. This is in the con section for those who might be expecting sterner stuff. |
| Bottom Line: |
I ransacked Teenstars and am about half-way through Teencharms. I got a two-fer deal and am not disappointed, except for the crappy videos. Lucky for me I'm a pic collector, or I'd be very diappointed indeed. Some of these vids show a bit-rate of 450 or so Kbps. Now how useless is that in 2008?
I don't understand why they put up two sites instead of just one, except as a means of drumming up revenue. There is no difference at all, thematically or technically, between the two. Not that they share content. They don't.
Basically (and don't you hate people who start a sentence with that word?) this site has value in that there are over a hundred drop-dead gorgeous girls presented in tasteful, often artistic, picture sets of good to excellent quality. Some girls might not be Vogue material as far as their faces go, but I have yet to see one who wasn't a masterpiece from the neck down. Bear in mind, these are mostly 18 year olds, and they've got plenty of time to fill out. I like a full-bodied woman as much as the next guy, but I also love slender young ladies. I can't help it, I just do.
Thing is: these people need to re-do their homepages and take down the false advertising. And they should have offered good videos or simply stuck to being a picture site. Teencharms is a high-quality picture archive and not much more. The girls and the photographers get a 99.9999999, but the webmasters and the negligible vids draw the score way down.
Recommended for the pics. |
|
05-16-08 10:25pm
Replies (2)
|
Review
40
|
Teen Stars Magazine
(0)
79.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Beautiful models
- Good to excellent picture quality
- Models are proffessional, or at least appear so to me, and are very good at what they do.
- Lots of material up.
- Zips for all pic sets.
- Very tasteful over-all.
- Ethel and Martine: practically worth the money just for these two beauties. |
| Cons: |
- Site has not updated since mid 2007.
- Video quality is pretty bad, and there is no sound in any of the vids I downloaded.
- Vids come in one minute to minute and a half snippets, making them next to worthless.
- Several models stay fully clothed. Not even a kini or panty-shot from them.
- For the casual browser or for the guy who doesn't want entire sets, each pic opens in a new window, causing more work. All hail the back button. |
| Bottom Line: |
I got Teen Stars and Teen Charms in a two-fer deal for 29.99, but I've been busy with Teen Stars thus far to the exclusion of the other site, which I'll look at in the future. I want to say first off that these are some of the most beautiful girls going. If you have a thing for young-looking, skinny, leggy, drop-dead-gorgeous girls, this place is ace. It's neck & neck with Nubiles in that respect. But-
The site is dead, and the video on offer is negligible, so what we have here is basically a large picture archive. If you're not a pic collector, and if you're not into softcore - at times extremely soft - then don't bother. I'm having a pretty good time because I'm a pic collector and the scarcity of tats, toys, penises, hair, and flab keeps all my neurons firing happily away.
Pics range from smallish, from 2003, to very large: 3500 on the big end. You don't get the kind of clarity you do with other places, and the emphasis on the portrait-format makes me wonder what the point of having a huge picture really is. Note to webmasters in this niche: landscape, landscape, landscape. While the site is mostly softcore with an artsy bent and a touch of glamour, plus cute in spades, there is some total nudity (pink), and toys, but not much.
I wouldn't call the site a rip-off, but they should either downplay the presence of vids or offer better ones. Since the site is dead, maybe they should just remove the vids, lower the price, and continue as a good picture archive. |
|
04-14-08 04:40pm
Replies (1)
|
Review
41
|
Teens in Wet Panties
(0)
75.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Fair amount of content up, including some 400 videos.
- Very attractive models for the most part.
- Wide variety of undies: from thongs to grannies.
- Navigation OK.
- Vids are mostly of good quality, with choice of mpeg or wmv.
- Pics are of fair to excellent quality.
- True to the panty-fetish niche.
- Plenty of extras like live shows, streaming video, contests, stories, polls, etc. |
| Cons: |
- Zip files do not work. Every one I tried to download returned a "file invalid or corrupted" message.
- "Forum" link leads to an error page.
- Pics in sets are put up out of order. Example: pic #3 might be on the last page.
- Lots of non-exclusive pic sets seen all over Netville, including Nubiles, Paul Markham, etc.
- Too many categories, and too much cross-over among categories.
- No search utility, no model index.
- No response from webmaster, after several days.
- Last pic update: 11/5. Vids update more frequently. |
| Bottom Line: |
This site is more for people with a panty-fetish than the person who enjoys seeing women in their drawers, which means the panties are an object of interest in and of themselves, which means we see them sniffed, sucked, licked, worn on the head, and inserted into various openings (guess which ones). The main theme seems to be the idea of a woman being turned on by her own panties, and her own excreta, which seems a bit silly to me. I never met a girl who was excited by her own panties, but then I've led a sheltered life.
That being said, there are many good pic sets here, although by and large I found them to be too long, cliched, and boring. Pic sizes are mostly OK, ranging from 863x1300 to 1450x963. Many old pics are very small. Inconsistency is a problem here.
I was very impressed by a few of the vids, but mostly bored silly, as the majority of them are uninspired and typical masturbation fodder with panties as the central theme. The lesbian vids are more interesting. Bitrates ranged from 1500 to 2140 on the high-end. Older vids are of considerably lower quality. As with the pics, inconsistency was a problem for me.
Both pics and vids are sorted into several categories, but there are too many of them, and sometimes only a negligible degree of distinction between one and the other.
None of the zipfiles work. I emailed the webmaster and am awaiting a reply, as well as left a message at the site. This greatly reduced my enjoyment of the site. For some reason, many pic sets are put up out of order, causing a sense of randomness and discontinuity, we well as tedium.
This site is near the top of official TBP reviews for panty sites, but there are many sites which are superior and yet are way down on the list, such as LV Panty and Panty Freek. I'll put this down to the fact that my tastes are probably much different than most. My two favorite panty sites are not even listed here.
This site could be improved by better organization of content (more categories doesn't necessarily mean better organization) and conistency of quality. A non-responsive webmaster is also a major problem. The zipfiles have not worked since I joined several weeks ago.
I would recommend this site to people with a fetish for panties, but not necessarily to people who like to see women in their skivvies. There is a major distinction between the two, or at least there is for me. |
|
12-01-08 11:23am
Replies (4)
|
Review
42
|
TNV Girls
(0)
86.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
- True to the niche
- Very pretty girls.
- Lots of content, updated regularly.
- Good quality video, and quality seems to be improving steadily.
- These girls seem to really love smooching with one another. Can't blame them for that now can we? |
| Cons: |
- Too much outdoors material. Kinis are for sunning and swimming, panties are for indoors. Or maybe I'm just crazy?
- Too many tats. Tattoos are nasty, dang it.
- Pic quality needs to be taken up a notch or two.
- *Some* of the best quality vids are DRM protected. |
| Bottom Line: |
TNV rates a higher score than its sister site, Virginal Visions, because there is so much more material here and because the vids are more varied and of higher quality, generally speaking. I think the pics are better (content-wise) at VV, but that's because I'm an old schooler when it comes to ladies' skivvies.
I ended up keeping almost 6 gigs of video and 261 zipped pic sets. The pic sets are numbered up into the 800's, so I obviously didn't get anywhere near all of them. Newer vids come in at 1000 to 1600kbps, 640x480, and run from 15 to 20 mins, and you can usually get them in one file. I don't know if 20 minutes is the 'whole' video in any particular case, but these files are big enough. Most of the pics are small, but the bigger ones are 1024x768. Despite their size they are very nice, for the most part.
I don't care for the fainting vids. There's something creepy about a guy feeling up a girl while she's out cold. I know it's fantasy, but it still bothers me.
The site is very softcore and heavy on soft-lesbianism, and only recommended to those who appreciate pretty girls getting it on in their underwear.
One more note: when I joined the site it was having technical problems: pics not opening, links not working, etc. I emailed the webmaster and by the next day everything was fixed. There was even a message posted at the site about maintenance problems which were being attended to. Good work, and good customer service. Few points extra for that. |
|
01-06-08 09:11pm
Replies (3)
|
Review
43
|
VF Academy
(0)
95.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Navigation simple, haven't had problems.
- Part of a network now giving you access to four sites.
- Very faithful to the panty/flash/upskirt/uniform niche.
- Nice looking British models, mostly blondes, maturer looking, nothing teeny-boppery.
- HD vids offered, corresponding to each photo set.
- Zipfiles for all photo sets, max size (see bottom line). Also three choices for pic size in browser.
- Regular updates, though not terribly frequent.
- Members may leave comments and ratings.
- My download speeds varied quite a bit, from as low as 400kbs to as fast as 1mps. |
| Cons: |
These will be subjective cons here for the most part, except for the first:
- Search function useless. I searched for white cotton panties and got all sorts of mismatches in return.
- Panties tend to be mostly those big, sheer things that you can see right through. That doesn't seem collegiate to me. I want rugged, impenetrable, industrial strength cotton or nylon that makes the "prize" all but unobtainable to my greedy little mitts. These blond beauties should be wrapped up tight and their virtues guarded against such little pervy weasles as myself.
-My major complaint is as it is at most sites: Why the hell must every single solo model video be about the girl masturbating? Watching a girl frig herself has no affect on me, I must confess, and I can never sit through an entire video. The focus of an upskirt/panty/schoolgirl/uniform video should be on how those awesome cuties turn ME on, and they should not devote all of their time in showing us how much they turn themselves on. |
| Bottom Line: |
Anyway, a join at this site gets you full access to VintageFlash, Pantyhosed4U, and VintageFlash Archive. All in all there is an abundance of high quality content to go through.
The vids at VF Academy come in four choices:
- mp4 320x180 for ipod and cellphone
- SD Wmv 540x304 1300kbs
- HD Wmv 1280x720 3000kbs
- streaming at 1500kbs. You can also get a short preview.
The HD vids look very impressive, take a good long while to unfold, and contain no cheesy music; the models talk to you and tease while they strip, and finally straddle a desk and get themselves off. There are also several lesbian vids which are highly erotic. And this is by no means softcore. These ladies really get into it with one another.
The photos are downloadable in zipfiles, and all the pics I've extracted thus far from VF Academy are big, at around 2090x1400.
The photo sets are well edited and the resolution is tight as a drum.
Very highly recommended four-site package with plenty of content for the money!
You guys sure are stingy with your points! I can't see giving this package anything less than a 95. |
|
06-03-11 11:11pm
Replies (4)
|
Review
44
|
Village Ladies
(0)
63.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- A fair amount of nice pictures.
- Site is mature and contains nothing sleezy or trashy.
- The basic premise of the site is good. |
| Cons: |
- A large percentage of the pics have been moved into a separate archive, which requires a separate membership.
- No videos.
- No zip-files.
- Small pictures (avg. 600x800 up to 749x1123), of fair to middling quality.
- Very small thumbnails.
- Pages load slowly.
- Sliding sidebar which moves as the scroll-button is moved. Very annoying.
- Some models in dire need of a dentist. |
| Bottom Line: |
Woody Allen opens one of his films with an old joke: Two women are at a restaurant and one says, "the food here is lousy.", and the other replies, "Yeah, and such small portions."
That joke applies pretty well to Village Ladies. For instance: I could complain that a considerably large percentage of the pictures have been moved to a separate archive which I can't access; but at the same time it would be silly to complain since ninety percent of those pics would do nothing for me anyway. But complain I will, hence the reference to Woody's joke.
As soon as I entered the member's section, disappointment and tedium ensued. First, no zips. Second, the thumbs loaded slowly and were so small I could hardly make out the image. Third, I clicked on one link in the model's index and was taken to a page which invites you to join a separate site where the older pics are now stored. On return to the model's index, that link was now yellow (visited) as were all the links to sets I would not be able to access. The sudden over-abundance of links to sets I could not access was somehow insulting, as if a joke had been pulled on me.
While beauty is certainly in the eye of the beholder, I found *very few* attractive models here. There's nothing wrong with being homely, but if you agree to being photographed, and to having those photos featured on a site where people are paying to obtain access to those photos, and if the intention of those photos is sexual titillation, then you should be prepared to hear some unflattering comments. Unflattering comment follows:
If you have broken teeth, missing teeth, gray teeth, or brown teeth, keep the smiling to a minimum, visit a dentist, or re-consider posing for adult pictures. This comment refers to some of the models, not all of them, of course.
***
This site has been online for a number of years and now costs more than a lot of premium sites. If you have a yen for less-than-glamorous mature amateurs, Aunt Judy's is a much safer bet than this.
Read Duke's review (TBP reviewer). He does a lot less pussy-footing than me, and his five year old review needs precious little updating. |
|
11-11-08 03:01am
Replies (7)
|
Review
45
|
Virginal Visions
(0)
80.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
Good-looking to beautiful models
Total fidelity to niche
Decent looking videos
Inexpensive
No penises |
| Cons: |
Small amount of content
Many pic-sets are vid-caps
Frames! Have to scroll to see complete pic.
Too many tats |
| Bottom Line: |
If you don't like girls in their underwear, and by that I mean white bras and panties, steer clear of this site. If you want to see girls treated like trash, forget it.
There is some lesbian material, but nothing even remotely hardcore. In fact, there's hardly any nudity. This is not porn, folks. It's a small selection of pretty girls walking around in their drawers. Sometimes they roll around in their drawers, and sometimes they take showers in their drawers, which seems sort of silly but has some nice side-effects. They even have pillow fights, for those of us who like to think that pretty girls always strip down to their skivvies and have pillow fights when they get together. It's easy to see why they laugh like crazy as they jump up and down.
All kidding aside, it's a site for panty connoisseurs, and white panties at that. You get a nice but limited variety of sets which have a pleasant "unposed", candid feel about them. The vids look nice but they are nothing extraordinary. There is not a great deal of content, but to tell the truth, I was pleasantly surprised at how long it took me to get through it.
I might re-join, but probably not for at least a year. |
|
07-26-07 12:20am
Replies (0)
|
Review
46
|
Wifey's World
(0)
81.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 6 months prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
- Wifey is beautiful.
- Wifey obviously loves what she does, and does it very well.
- The site has true class in a genre which is usually devoid of it.
- One of the few sites in this genre which recognizes that good sex involves the brain as well as the reproductive organs.
- Good money-shots. No flagging dribblers here. |
| Cons: |
- Only two peformers, and the scenarios are not terribly varied. This opens the way for tedium over the long haul, unfortunately.
- Not much to rave about in regard to the pics section.
- Navigation could be much improved. |
| Bottom Line: |
My profile says I hate most of what is called porn nowadays, and this is true for the most part; but I do like adult video if it is done well.
What caused me to join the Wifey site was recalling a clip I had seen in a Newsgroup a couple years back. Wifey had this intense focus as she did her thing. It was a handjob scene and her eyes were riveted on her "subject" (Mr. Happy). She was not only skilled, but mentally - not just physically - involved in what she was doing.
Whether this intense interest and focus is put-on or not really doesn't matter. Wifey has a good grasp of the male ego and knows exactly what to do, what to say, how to react. With each "money-shot" she seems surprised and impressed, even fascinated. All I can say is, Hubby must be one extremely happy guy.
Despite all this, since there are only two people and since they adhere to a fairly narrow formula - seduction, tease, long build-up, release - taken as a whole the vids can become a bit tiresome and redundant, though this shouldn't take away from their value as individual erotic episodes. |
|
08-07-07 10:58pm
Replies (0)
|
Review
47
|
XX Cel
(0)
85.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Fair collection of very natural busty models.
- Zip files for pics.
- Total fidelity to niche. The site is about breasts and nothing but breasts.
- Excellent picture quality.
- Excellent editing of photo-sets.
- A few beautiful pregnant models. This could be a con for some but why simply baffles me. |
| Cons: |
- Several models are much too large (all around, not just breasts) for my tastes. This is a purely subjective con and for some it will be a pro.
- Breast-sucking videos are useless. This is also a subjective con. No hairy faces in the way of the good stuff, please.
- Videos are hit and miss as far as quality both physically and esthetically.
- Amount of content, and number of models, needs to grow. |
| Bottom Line: |
This is one instance where one's subjective tastes will certainly factor in to how one responds to the site and how one rates it.
For instance I would rather not see so many large women, but some guys will want more of them. Some men will love the inclusion of pregnant women, as I do, but some men will find this a turn-off. And finally, some guys might actually like to see another man suckle away at a big pair of breasts, but to my mind unless this occurs during an actual sex scene it's less than useless. It's obnoxiously useless.
And once again we have a website wherein the vid section is not up to par with the photo section. As for specs, these vids are all over the map. For some reason I am seeing higher bitrates in vids with smaller dimensions. For instance, one vid is 720x576, 764k; another is 640x480, 1339k; and a third is 320x240, 1519k. Could it be that the VLC media player is innacurate, or is this a normal thing? In my experience it is not normal.
Be that as it may, the content of the vids is also all over the map. There are far too many tit-sucking vids; some vids have cheesy music set to them; some are tediously long and some are dreadfully short; and still others are dynamite, as is one featuring a young pregnant model named Lucie. There are a few lactation vids. One I looked at showed nothing but the model squirting milk. That got boring after about ten seconds.
As for the photo-sets, I believe they are some of the best in the genre, or any genre. The pics are mostly 1600x1064, though some are smaller, and Cel has a definite skill in this area. The sets often contain more than a hundred pics and yet they are nicely edited so that you don't get fifty shots from the same angle. Even though it's a breast-fixated site there is total nudity and plenty of spread shots as well as awesome booty shots. I would put Cel in the top 5 percentile in regard to pictures. And for those of us who like our monitors crammed full with beautiful female goodness, Cel makes optimal use of the landscape format.
Bottom line: if you are primarily a pic collector and like big breasts in a softcore format, I believe you will find this site a decent value, although there is not a huge amount of content up.
If you are into hardcore, forget it. And if you are coming here mainly for the videos, you might want to save your money this time around. |
|
10-17-08 05:47pm
Replies (5)
|
|
