Ratings & Reviews
|
All the reviews and ratings from this user. |
| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Review
1
|
Brazzers
(0)
50.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
-- A lot of content available.
-- Beautiful models.
-- Image quality on videos is very good.
-- Photo sets available with each scene. |
| Cons: |
-- Subscriptions are now ala carte. The monthly rate is now just a basic price of admission to the show. Downloads are now extra. $14.95 is quite a lot to add to a a $29.99 monthly fee.
--Extremely slow streaming speed. I am not sure if this is a ploy to get you to purchase the download options. I found it impossible to even watch ten seconds of video without lengthy pauses.
-- Studio is pushing out high volume at the expense of quality. Scenes are boring.
-- Content and visuals lacks imagination or erotic potential. 90% of every scene is simply closeups of genitals going in and out of vaginas or rear-ends.I find everything to be literally too in-your-face.
-- Acting is atrocious. Not expecting A-quality Hollywood acting here. But the actors try too hard and its over-the-top and forced. Too many fake screams and moans that make everything sound like a wounded chicken in distress more than an ecstatic romp. |
| Bottom Line: |
I do apologize for the negativity. But it is my honest opinion that this site has gone to hell in a hand basket.
I last subscribed a few years ago. I normally kept a subscription for a few months then moved on. This time, I cancelled three days after subscribing. It is nearly impossible to watch streaming video due to throttled video feeds. Ordering the upgrade to the download option resolves that issue but the content is just atrocious compared to days past. Granted, it is visually impressive and the girls beautiful. But the imagery lacks any erotic depth or imagination. Everything is formulaic. Acting is terrible.
I could handle the new fee structure if something was offered of high value. However, I do not find that. The site and its content has regressed dramatically. The new strategy appears to be to put out high volume at the expense of quality content.
If anything, the scenes are anti-erotic and the videos are like watching a medical procedure in a doctors office. Sterile. No imagination. No Depth. No excitement. Just the same in-and-out formulaic porn that could literally put you to sleep.
If I could score lower than 50 I would. Whoever runs the studio these days has destroyed this once-great erotic fixture. It's a hollow shell of its former self. And it's just not worth $29.99, let alone $45 with the addition of downloads. No Más. |
|
02-26-20 12:35pm
Replies (4)
|
Review
2
|
DDF Network
(0)
99.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
-- Best erotic photography I have come across so far. Clearly professional-level photography. Perfect lighting. Non-forumlatic and dynamic poses.
-- Classy and conservative style erotica. No extreme stuff, bizarre angles, or depictions of rough sex/choking the models etc.
-- Layout and menus are up their with the best.
-- Photo galleries are put together niceley. No repetitve content in each gallery.
-- Plenty of HD content for those into videos. |
| Cons: |
-- I really struggle to find negatives beyond the nit-picking variety. I guess the only thing I could offer in terms of tangibles is the price. Obviously, the premium price for the network is higher than others. |
| Bottom Line: |
My score is somewhat biased as I am a photography buff and my review is based on what the site means to me. buff so I appreciate the professional work at this site. There is a tremndous amount of high-quality photo content at this site. The galleries are well laid out and the models are all beautiful.
The details in the high-resolution photos are quite stunning. In many cases, you can count peach fuzz hairs.
Clearly, this is not the typical site that offers a large amount of photos where the majority of them are simply repetitions of the same pose as the model stands in front of a muslin and the camera and lighting is set on rapid fire.
Most every gallery I have browsed so far demonstrates impecible lighting and technical expertise. The artists clearly put a lot of thought into the work. There is photoshopping evident, but it is not overdone to the point that the colors are over-saturated and the images look unreal or the models plastic. IMO,
DDF is one of those sites that qualifies as art as well as it does porn.
The models themselves range from petite to busty, depending on what site you view. I have only browsed a few videos. However, the presentations should appeal to most of those itnerested in videos. There are quite a few HD selections to choose from.
The models appear quite engaged most of the time and do not look like they are just standing around bored while scratching their butt.
The site does demand a premium price. But considering the amount of content and the number of sites offered in the network, I find it palitable. For me, it is worth the admission price.
If you are a photography fan, I would not hesitate to reccomend it. It is a must see. If you are into videos, you will likely find the content appealing as well. But for me, the site shines in the photo department. |
|
01-11-13 01:14pm
Replies (8)
|
Review
3
|
Divine Breasts
(0)
50.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
-- Creative photography
-- Unique content.
-- A good number of classic photosets.
-- Site delivers what is advertised--images of women with Large BBW breasts. |
| Cons: |
-- Technical quality of images can be hit or miss.
-- Primitive site design and interface.
-- Exceedingly poor streaming speeds of both photos and videos throughout my entire memberhips period.
-- Site is not growing much.
-- Limited content.
-- Vdeos are just a novelty.
-- Site owners play games with content(hold back content and offer to let you view more content if you stick around longer or sign up somewhere else)
--Bandwidth Limit imposed to 550 MEG per day. |
| Bottom Line: |
Most of the models at this site are of the BBW variety and most sport large EEE size breasts. There is very little silicone here. These are well-endowed amateur models for the most part, with a few glam types thrown in.
Full nudity is rare and the site is mostly softcore. It's all about catering to those with a breast fetish. The photography, in many caes, is actually quite well done and creative. There are a few poorly done sets but this is the exception. However, the owners skimp on resolution at times and the actual technical quality of the displayed images can vary from fairly decent 1600 resolution to grainy and out-of-focus 1024.
If you are into this genre and natural, large breasts are your thing, you would likely find the photo content here to be interesting. However, that interest will fade pretty quickly, as the amount of content is a bit limited and the site seems to be growing at a snails pace. Unless you view only a few photosets once or twice during a one-month subscription period, you will find the content runs out pretty quickly.
Videos are pretty much a novelty and the main show are the photosets. With very few exceptions, most videos are small 350 clips that run perhaps a minute or two.
The site designers also have a habit of 'padding' the numbers when it comes to overall photosets available. For example, they have created a fair number of photosets for each model. Model X may have twenty photosets available for viewing on her page. However, what they do in most cases is split up a single photo shoot into a number of different sets. For example, a lingerie shoot might be split up into three or four seperate sets. The first set on the page would be perhaps fourteen photos of the model disrobing, the next would show the model reclining while partially disrobed, etc etc. In essence, you are being given ten different photosets for a model, when in reality, they are really just one or two actual photo shoots split up.
This type of presentation is annoying and similar things happen in other areas. There are a lot of cross-sell marketing tools being used. In more than one case, a popular model will only have one or two photosets(or perhaps none at all and a few videos will be in the model area) and a marketing link advises you that "btw..this model has her own page !". Unfortunately, that page requires a seperate memebership.
The owners also let you know that the longer you stick around, the more content you can see. For example, Model X may have only a few photosets or a video that is incomplete and ends with a tease. They will then advise you that the longer you stay past 30 days, the more content you get to see --"Want to see more of her? blah blah blah.."
Given the limited content already available, this may be a good business model to get people to stick around, but the content isn't that great that I would eprsonally pay more just to see a bit more of Model X. IMO, this tactic will simply rub people the wrong way and they will just move on. Also, who says you aren't going to do the same thing if I sign up for Model X's page? I would advise the owners to rethink this strategy. You will more often than not just succeed in ticking off your customer base instead of given them a reasont o want to stay around with knowing they won't get the same treatment for next month's rent.
As far as the site design and layout, it is quite primitive. It gets the job done. However, the menus and navigation tools are primitive. The actual streaming speeds of content is about the worse I have ever experienced at any time with any online service of any kind. Strangely, the quickest way to get content on this site is to download the photosets. Usually, the opposite is true.
Without fail, I could view perhaps one or two images in a gallery, then any subsequent images would take a ridiculous amount of time to simply load. I have a high speed DSL connection and have never experienced anything this bad.
The site also limits you to 500 MEG download per day. You cannot stream or DL past this limit. In short, the strategy of this site seems to be to employ any possible means to get people to stick around longer than thirty days. They make it is hard as possible for you to stream or view the already limited content at the site in a thirty day period. Limiting to 500 MEG download a day and freezing the stream after viewing two photos means it will take six months to get to all of the content that would take a few days of viewing to get to at any other site. The goal is obviously to frustrate you by prolonging the time to to view images via streaming so you download the sets and quickly eat up your daily allotment.
Crooked? Underhanded? Shady? I will leave that for you to judge.
I would give the actual photo content a score of 70 but the experience a 0.05. Since I can only score a minimum of 50, I will give the site an overall score of 50. |
|
06-09-12 03:44pm
Replies (7)
|
Review
4
|
ATK Galleria
(0)
95.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 4 months prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
-- Extremely large amount of photo content.
-- High-quality photos/videos.
-- Outstanding site layout and user interface.
-- Custom features--user-defined zip files, preferences, settings etc.
-- Daily, high-quality updates. |
| Cons: |
-- Could use a little more diversity in ethnicity(latin, afro, etc.) |
| Bottom Line: |
I would classify this site as tastefull and traditional erotic nude photography. There are hardcore photo and video sets but the main emphasis is on erotic/nudes and exposing the model's natural beauty. No extreme stuff here and everything is in good taste.
Most of the models are of the young, early twenty-something variety. Although the majority fit a cerain profile--thin, well-toned etc, you can find a large diversity of model types spread around the very large number of photosets, once you discover the search feature. This is one of those sites that could keep your interest for quite a long time. There is no way you could manage to get through all of the content in a one-month period.
The only thing lacking is a more diverse representation of ethnicities. If it wasn't for this, I would not hesitate to give the site a perfect score.
The site layout and design is about as good as it gets. Serach utilities, custom zip downloads, and a number of other features are available. Everyting seems to be where it should be and you won't get lost in the large amount of content available.
The videos are of high quality and available in HD, but the emphasis is on photography. The quality of the photography ranges from semi-pro to professional, with most belonging to the latter category. The technical quality of the photos themselves ranges from eye-popping, HD quality to so-so, depending on the skill and experience-level of the photographer. There were times I was thinking, 'I would love to see this or that photographer shoot this model.' It is hard to classify this as a negative, however. It is unrealistic to expect every photoset and photographer to meet one's own personal demands regarding tastes and likes.
The number of photographers is also pretty diverse and you get a good range of styles. You can use the search function to display all sets from the photgraphers you like. In fact, there is so much content that, after a while, you can pick out the photographer just based on poses, settings, lighting, etc.. Most of the photographers seem to be into their work and are not just running around with a camera, trying to churn and burn content.
You will come across a few poorly-done photosets(blown-out images, overexposed, poor lighting, etc). But these are usually older sets and are the rare exception, rather than the norm.
The content is mostly unique. Although you will find a number of professional models here that you have seen elsewhere, the majority will likely be completely new to you.
The only people that probably would not like this site are those into extremes, either in model types or images. There is hardcore action, but no action like atm or other in-your-face kind of stuff.
This site is definitely a photography-lovers gem. |
|
06-03-12 01:36pm
Replies (4)
|
Review
5
|
Top Heavy Amateurs
(0)
50.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
None |
| Cons: |
-- Photo quality is abysmal.
-- Photosets are largely screen captures of grainy videos and are saved with high JPEG compression.
-- Video quality is even worse.
-- Site frequently freezes.
-- Advertusing bares no resemblence to actual site content. |
| Bottom Line: |
Anyone who has read my reviews in the past knows I am pretty fair and impartial. In an effort to maintain this reputation, I will limit my comments to the facts.
I am hard-pressed to say anything positive regarding my experience at this site.
The site design and layout is extremely primitive. When I was able to access the content, I was exceedingly dissapointed with the content and quality of images and videos.
The vast majority of images are small resolution photos that are saved with extremely high JPEG compression. The Pixelation is severe in the majority of images. Sets that are displayed as HD image quality consists of one or two images saved with 1400x800 resolution, with the remainder at 700x400 or below. I did not come across an image that did not contain compression artifiacts. More than half the images are blurry enough to be useless and appear to be nothing more than screen captures of videos.
The video quality is, in many cases, worse than the photo image quality and at times appears to be video captured with an older cell phone.
Connecting to the site is problematic. I frequently locked up and often could not access video content.
The advertising images are high-quality, but this kind of content is nowherre to be found in any of the actual content in the members area.
In short, I could not in good faith reccomend this site to anyone interested in this genre, whether it be photos or videos. I would even go so far as to supply an entirely subjective opinion, which is that sites like this give online porn a bad name. |
|
06-01-12 01:01pm
Replies (2)
|
Review
6
|
We Are Hairy
(0)
95.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ A good range of hirsute content to suit most tastes in this niche,.
+ Wholesome, pretty, amateur models.
+ Large Database of Photosets and videos.
+ Clean and efficient site design and layout.
+ Customizable user settings and search features provide a nice user experience
+ Custom zip files for downloads
+ Multiple Daily Video/Photo updates
+ Free Cam Shows
+ Good customer service |
| Cons: |
- Older photo content can have issues with soft-focus and stray focus.
- Lack of any substantial ethnic diversity in models.
- Web cam show scheduling conflicts with most schedules in north America. |
| Bottom Line: |
I found myself really hard-pressed to come up with any specific negatives beyond those listed above. This is one of the best sites--if not the best--I have come across in terms of the user experience and range of content available to a subscriber. There are extensive photo sets, videos, free interactive web shows, all for a single subscription price. The user experience I can only classify as top-notch, at least relative to the sites I have subscribed to in the past. There are utilities for just about any feature at the site. There are customizable search tools, gallery tools, favorite lists, and custom zip downloads where you are free to choose to select(or deselect) which images go into a zip. There is also a user forum and web masters are very quick to respond to any questions.
The content here is traditional solo softcore posing with some dildo and masturbation action. There is the occasional girl-girl scene as well. If your preference is softcore erotica, the content will meet your demands. If you demand hardcore action, this is not the place to find it and you will be disappointed.
If you are looking for the traditional airbrushed porn star look, this site will likewise not meet your needs. Makeup is used in moderation--it is of the kind you will see on any girl on the street-- and there is no attempt tot hide any blemish or mole with post-processing. The models are pretty and wholesome amateurs but they are not over-glamorized. That is not the look that this site aims for and it would detract from the natural theme. Most of the models appear to be in their mid-twenties, with a few MILF and a few of the just-turned-legal variety.
There is an abundance pf photo and video content and updates happen daily. Galleries are nicely done with semi-pro level photography. Super-high resolution images bring out every subtle detail and nuance on the models. Some of the older sets, however, do suffer at times from stray focus or a soft focus. This issue does not appear in most of the photosets posted after 2010, however. The videos are of high quality and they are clips of roughly 10 minutes in length. The main attraction here, however, is the photography. I found the DL speeds to be more than adequate.
Beyond the occasional image quality issue of older sets, the only other negative that stands out is the lack of diversity in the ethnicity of the models. Most are from Eastern Europe, the UK, or California. It would be nice to see the site expand this range a bit and offer more Latin and ethnic models in the galleries.
There are interactive web cam shows that happen a few times a week. These last an hour Unfortunately, the scheduled times appear to be centered around European time zones. Outside of the 4 PM Saturday show, if you are in North America, you will likely find it hard to attend during the week, out of personal work schedules. Never having attended a cam show in the past, I wasn't sure what to expect as I have no experience with cam media. I did sit in on the Saturday show with the model Raven. One can type questions or comments--or requests--and the model seemed willing to oblige(within reason). The feed quality was decent. The flow could be easily interrupted, however, when users ask questions(or act like toolbags)' Once you find the ignore user option, however, it is less distracting. If you are into cam shows, this is certainly a nice bonus, especially given that it is free of charge and from what I can tell, most fees for cam shows can be ridiculously expensive. Being able to interact with the models adds a personal touch to the site experience.
I chose to join this site as I prefer natural femininity over the glossed-over and heavily-toned airbrushed look of the majority of porn available today. What many people interested in this niche probably want to hear most about is the actual hirsute content available. Based on comments I have read here and elsewhere, it seems that what people find attractive in this niche is all over the board, which one would epect, given the broad scope and relative meaning that the word 'hairy' invokes. There is probably not a niche that has more diversity of tastes and opinions. When reading the review comments for various sites in this niche, I see complaints about models being too hairy or not hairy enough, or not having hair in the right place. What is hairy enough? What is too hairy? What is the right place? The answers are so relative to an individual that I cannot tell you if the content here meets your criteria. What I can say is that this site appears to cater to the middle of the road and it avoids extremes as a predominant feature. This is the way it should be, IMO, as there are so many tastes. No preference is given to any fetish and the content strikes a good balance. You will find just about anything here for most users in terms of hair. However, its unrealistic to expect to see every model always conform to your ideals. |
|
02-05-12 12:42pm
Replies (6)
|
Review
7
|
Jugg Master
(0)
85.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ Unique fetish content.
+ Creative photography.
+ Good nostalgic value.
+ Low subscription price.
+ One-month non-reccuring costs the same as ongoing monthly subscription rates. |
| Cons: |
- Low resolution images only.
- Primitive site navigation and layout.
- Site does not appear to be growing much.
- Videos are just a novelty. |
| Bottom Line: |
I can give all the reasons why you might or might not find this site attractive. However, If you know who hese models are without Googling, my guess is that there is a high probabilty that you would enjoy viewing the models at this site--Maria Moore, Denise Davies, Bunny De La Cruz.
If you don't know these names but have a breast fetish or enjoy viewing images of women with truly oversized and natural breasts, meaty nipples, and saucer-sized areola, this site would also be worth a one-month subscription.
If none of the above is true, you should look elsewhere. That's it in a nuthsell. This is a very simple site oriented towards photography. There are videos, but they are simply small low-resolution clips. The videos serve more as a novelty of sorts and really are not worth commenting on.
The site is entirely sofcore. Most of the photosets are of the slow tease variety. They start with the model fully clothed and proceed to various states of undress, with the emphasis always placed on the breasts. You see a lot of images of huge boobs jutting through bras, dangling in the air, or spilling out of clothing items. Many of the sets were taken in natural lighting, outdoors and in pools.
I did come across some full nudes, but this is the exception, not the norm. This is conservative, old-school erotic photography. It is the opposite of today's in-your-face erotica, although there is a section called juggs-eye view, where there are many images of breasts dangling in front of the camera, as if in your face.
IMO, the photographer does a wonderful job with posing. You can tell that he is into the subject. He is just not going through the motions. The photographer has a talent for bringing out the best features of the models and does a good job with angles. The natural lighting and the lack of intense post-processing adds to the natrual appeal of the models. Many of the churn-it-and-burn photographers in this genre simply have the model strip nude and take straigh-on shots of breasts. Post-processing is overused and images suffer from harsh artifical lighting. The approach is very forumlatic. If you've seen one photo, you've seen them all. The photographer here is always creative and uses various angles to capture and profile the breasts-- from the side. the rear, the front, arms in the air, etc.. These won't be the most professional-looking images in terms of lighting and studio backdrops. However, this is more than made up for with the way that the photographer deals with the models.
You will see many of the mdoels elsewhere at the classic breast sites. The sets themselves are all unique, howeve. I know many of the models well from my years of viewing this genre and have never come across these images. Many of the photo sets contain images of popular Big Breast models in their younger years-- Maria Moore, Denise Davies, etc. If you are a fan of these models, you might think this is worth the cost of admission, simply for their nostalgic value.
Where content starts to drop in quality is in image resolution, and this is my only beef about the galleries. This content represents a very unique and sometimes nostalgic cdollection. The photographer should offer these images at higher resolutions. They appear to max out at around 11100x710 and many of the older sets appear to be old chrome scans of low resolution around 700x400. As this is primnarily a photo site, there should be high-resoltion images available.
The site design and navigation is very primitive and has an amateur look to it. I never had any trouble getting to content I wanted to view but the site should be cleaned up a bit to supply it with a more modern interface.
This site obviously wont be for everyone. Unless you can find a way to place natural-looking, ten-pound each breasts on the frame of a ninety-pound runway model, you are left with finding them on women of the voluptuous and BBW variety. If this turns you off, you will likely not find the content appealing. Also, if you cannnot live without high resolution images, you also will be dissapointed.
It was somehwat difficult to provide a score as this site doesn't claim to be a slick and professional studio and is basicallty the work of a single photographer displaying a photo collection that has been accumulated throughout the years. Please take this into consideration when viewing the score. I ended up rating it based on what it meant to me as someone with a breast feitsh and lover of voluptuous women. I would rate it even higher if the not for the relatively low resolution galleries. As a one-month only quick stop for those with a fetish for oversized breasts, its worth a try, especially given the modest price and the unique content. |
|
01-29-12 01:34pm
Replies (9)
|
Review
8
|
Big Tits Round Asses
(0)
80.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
-- Good amount of content.
-- High video quality
-- Nice range of models.
-- Decent camera work.
-- Intros and elements of tease. |
| Cons: |
-- Download Speeds could be better
-- Poor image quality on stills.
-- Cameraman can be chatty and sometimes the background noises are annoying.
-- Older content lacks in quality.
-- Some models are overused. |
| Bottom Line: |
Background:
My erotic interests: I am a breast guy. Curvy Women, Slim-and-Stacked or Voluptuous, Natural Women, MILF, Shapely Behinds.
I am primarily a photo guy, as well. I enjoy streaming videos but my primary taste in erotica is photography. I also travel quite frequently, so much of my viewing takes place on an Ipad, after transfer of data. Keep this in mind here.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have this site as part of my BangBros subscription. It is worth a seperate review.
This is my favorite site from the Bangbros collection and was worth the price of admission to the BangBros network. There is a large collection of videos and photosets and the updates seem to appear weekly.
The models range from thin and stacked to voluptuous, with a bias towards the latter. There are a number of well-toned runway model types but the emphasis on this site seems to be more along the lines of curvy women, not thin and petite. If you are looking for the latter, you will likely find the site lacking. My two favorite models are Selena Starr and Jazmyn. Although the site is named Big Tits, Round Asses, the emphasis here is definately on the former.
There is enough content to keep the breast lover happy for a while. Site updates appear to happen weekly. Older content does suffer from quality issues, but in fairness, you have to go pretty far back.
The quality of the videos is generally very good to excellant. HD videos are pretty stunning, even viewed on an Ipad. Camera work is fine for my tastes. This is an amateur studio and it is not a professional studio setting so if you are looking for the spiffy lighting effects and all that, you might be dissapointed. If you just want high-quality video feeds of action, you won't be dissapointed.
The composition of the XXX video action tends to be of the up-close and personal variety--not POV, but there is a large use of wide angle perspectives from relatively close distances. Camera movements are not frequent enough to be annoying, as can often happen with some directors. The are intros to the clips and an element of tease. The models don't jump right into the action.
The only gripe I have about the videos is that the directors and cameraman can sometimes go overboard with dialogue. You can often hear the cameraman giving directions or engaging the actors in what most would consider to be cheesy conversations. Background sounds can also sometimes be present.
DL Speeds are nothing to write home about. I have seen better and I have seen worse. There is definately room for improvement here, however.
As far as the still images, this is not what this site is really designed around, IMO, and is where it is lacking. There are plenty of galleries with loads of images. The actual content and compositions of the galleries is not all that bad. The actual quality of the images, however, can be just OK in a bright sunlight setting to terrible indoors. The site should shore this up and use equipment for stills that deals adequately with the noise present at high ISO settings.
Although I am using this as my primary video site, I wish they would offer more quality in terms of the photo galleries.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
IMO, who would enjoy this site: Video fans, breast-lovers, and those who salivate over curvy women with a little bit of meat on their bones.
IMO, who won't enjoy this site: Those who prefer slim and petitie figures, prefer extreme hardcore action, or photo-hounds not interested in videos.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Grades(obviously subjective):
Amount of Content: B+
Video Image Quality: A
Video Composition: A-
Photo Image Quality: D
Photo Composition: C+
DL Speeds: C-
The Models: A
XXX Action: B
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Suggestions for improvement:
-- Pick up the DL speeds a bit.
-- More attention to photo quality. This site is excellant for high-quality videos. It would be an outstanding ste if the photos were up to the same standards.
As with any review, these are just my subjective opinions and YMMV. |
|
01-20-12 04:02pm
Replies (1)
|
Review
9
|
Bangbros Network
(0)
79.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
-- A large amount of content.
-- Easy site navigation
-- Diverse sub-site niches.
-- Decent video work for an amateur studio.
-- Very sexy amateur models with varying body types. |
| Cons: |
-- Terrible photo image quality--lots of noise and color issues.
-- DL Speeds seem to be a bit lacking.
-- Older videos can drop off in quality.
-- There is often small-talk or audible directing in videos.
-- Did I mention they could use a proper camera for stills? |
| Bottom Line: |
Background:
My erotic interests: I am a breast guy. Curvy Women, Slim-and-Stacked or Voluptuous, Natural Women, MILF, Shapely Behinds.
I am primarily a photo guy, as well. I enjoy streaming videos but my primary taste in erotica is photography. I also travel quite frequently, so much of my viewing takes place on an Ipad, after transfer of data. Keep this in mind here.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Good:
I decided to try BangBros as I have rented some of their videos in the past and enjoyed their work. Although I primarily prefer photos, I do enjoy their video presentations more than most of the stuff I have come accross out there in pornland. Part of this is due to the models themselves--pretty, natural amateurs from young amateur girls of college-age all the way to chesty MILF. I also really like the video work. It is down-to-Eqarth and they don't go overboard with lighting or other elements you find in the professional studios. There are intros to the videos and a bit of an element of tease to many presentations. They don't jump right into the action.
I found the site navigation to be very easy and straightorward. As far as content, the site should appeal to many interests and fills a number of niches. The subsites include subjects such as handjobs, feet, breasts, buns, latin, afro--a lot of bases are covered. The women also are generaly very beautiful, amateur models. There are few of the plastic runway model-types with softball shaped implants. The theme here trends towards shapely, natural beauty. BangBros has some of the best natural, amateur models I have come accross.
The Bad:
DL Speeds are a bit hit-or-miss.I never timed-out but there were periods where things slowed to a crawl.
As far as video content, there are a number of things to be annoyed with. The audio feeds often contain annoying noises and sounds such as dropped equipment, active vocal directions to the models, and general small-talk that can border on the rediculous. I understand that this is an amaetur studio and not a Hollywood production set with a soundstage. However, more care could be used in this regards, IMO.
The Ugly:
It is obvious from the image quality that the photographer is either using a cheap digital camera or using the video recorder itself to take stills. Images seem to unviersally suffer from white balance issues, purple fringing, and noise is often prevalent. The truth is, I could get better quality by taking images with my IPhone. The actual compsoitions are not terrible, just often repetitive and it is obvious by the style that they were composed by a videopgrapher, not a photographer.
Dedicated SLR kits are not terribly expensive these days--Hint, Hint. Please go down to Best Buy or Target and get something on sale from last year's discount bin. Even with the cheapo plastic lenses that come with the kit, you will find the produced image quality is light-years ahead of what is currently available in the image galleries.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
With all that being said, I do enjoy the videos and although I prefer still images to video, I plan on sticking around for a while and making this my dedicated video site. I have always enjoyed BangBros videos.
As a video site, I wouldn't hesitate to reccomend it. If you are going there for the photos, you can do a lot better and my advice is look elsewhere.
As with all opinions, just my two cents.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Grades:
Quantity of Material: A
Site Navigation: A
Video Quality: A
Video Compositions: A
Photo Image Quality: D-
Photo Compositions: C
DL Speed: C-
The Models: A
The XXX Action: B+ |
|
01-17-12 04:42pm
Replies (0)
|
Review
10
|
XL Girls
(0)
80.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
-- Large number of models.
-- Easier to naviagte and find content than Scoreland master site.
-- Photography and xxx videos are not over-the-top and the style is classic (think Playboy or Penthouse.) This is either a pro or con, depending on perspective. Will appeal to more classic consumers of erotica.
-- Galleries and vidoes do not jump right into the action. Plenty of tease photos and slow undressing.
-- Images are of high-quality, although sometimes can apper a bit plastic. |
| Cons: |
-- Photoshoots sometimes seem to be heavily air-brushed. Can sometimes appear 'plastic'.
-- Might not be as explicit in terms of xxx content as some would prefer. Either a pro or con, see above.
-- For some reason, the DL speed and streaming was slower than at Scoreland.
-- Probably not enough updates to keep long-term subscribers used to large volume. Best for one-month subscriptions.
-- Should be part of Scoreland main subscription. |
| Bottom Line: |
Background:
My erotic interests: I am a breast guy. Curvy Women, Slim-and-Stacked or Voluptuous, Natural Women, MILF, Shapely Behinds.
I am primarily a photo guy, as well. I enjoy streaming videos but my primary taste in erotica is photography. I also travel quite frequently, so much of my viewing takes place on an Ipad, after transfer of data. Keep this in mind here.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-- The photography and video presentations are sexy and alluring without being too in-your-face. If you are into things like ass-to-mouth, pile drivers, and things like that, you are not going to find it here. This is either good or bad, depending on your own preferences. About 80% of the photo and video content is softcore posing, either solo or girl-girl. hardcore content is typical fare-classic oral, missionary, doggy, etc., although the scenes usually end with popshots on the breasts rather than face--it's a breast site.
--Navigatiuon and menus are a bit simplified from the information-overload present at Scoreland.
-- Photography could use a little diversification in poses and sets. The photosets often to seem to follow the same script. The photographers could also tone down the airbrushing a bit. Sometimes this pervades the images.
-- Streaming and DL speeds are not as quick as at the master site Scoreland.
-- The site will likely not keep long-term interest. Site should probably be included with a Scoreland subscription and not exist as a seperate pay-site.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Summary:
I added this site when signing up for a one-month subscription to Scoreland. The cost was $19.99 for one month, non-recurring.
BBW stands for Big Beautful Women.
The first two two terms here are relative. I have had an erotic interest in this genre over the years.. I have discovered that 'Big' can mean anything from slightly plump to to morbidly obese. The women shown at XL girls generally falls somewhere in the middle. One characteristic all the models have is that that they all sport large, natural-looking breasts. Most appear to be young, twenty-somethings, althought there are a few MILF models. Pretty faces are the norm.
Beauty is also in the eye of the beholder and this genre won't be for everyone. It is refreshing, however, to see more natural-looking women in this industry--the kind you are likely to encounter on the street. Also, in the photosets, the models will actually smile and don't look irritated or annoyed.
The photos at the site are much more profresinal-looking than most BBW images I have come accross in the past, The photographers could tone down the airburhsing a bit, however.
I guess this genre is defined by anything that does not fit the cookie cutter mold of what the average man would find appealing in terms of physcique. The women at XLGirls look like natural women on the plump side, all with motherly figures.Silicone appears to be used sparingly.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Conclusion:
This is definately a niche site that will appeal to fans of plump, rubenesque women one would find in classic paintings, albeit with large chests.
The site is a mix of photos and videos. There is not a large amount of XX action here and most videos are solo or girl-girl.
IMO, who would like this site:
Photo lovers and those with a fetish for plump, rubenesque, motherly women or those who have a breast fetish. Also, this site will appeal to those who enjoy a more classic, conservative style in their photos and explicit videos.
IMO, who won't like this site:
Those who are looking for the cookie-cutter, well-toned models who spend most of their days in the gym and count their calories. Also, those who rarely view photosets or solo video action or those who enjoy more extreme hardcore action.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Grades(obviously subjective):
Site Navgigation: B
Video Presentation Style: A
Video Quality: A
Photo Presentations: B
Photo Content and Quality: A
The Models Themselves: A
Streaming and DL Speeds: C
Quantity: B
XXX Action: D
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Suggestions for improvement:
Addf this site to the standard Scoreland subscription.
More creativity in photos. Diversify the photosets to include more angles and perspectives. Photosets tend to stick to a classic script. |
|
01-15-12 03:12pm
Replies (11)
|
Review
11
|
Scoreland
(0)
80.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
-- Huge amount of content.
-- Large variety of model types within the 'big-boob' genre.
-- Fairly decent DL speeds.
-- Photography and xxx videos are not over-the-top and the style is classic (think Playboy or Penthouse.) This is either a pro or con, depending on perspective. Will appeal to more classic consumers of erotica.
-- Galleries and vidoes do not jump right into the action. Plenty of tease photos and slow undressing.
-- Images are of high-quality, although sometimes can apper a bit plastic. |
| Cons: |
-- Not the most user-friendly site when it comes to navigation or finding content.
-- Photoshoots sometimes seem to be heavily air-brushed. Can sometimes appear 'plastic'.
-- A little pricey compared to competition.
--- Although the content amount is huge, it is easy to become a bit overwhelmed by it when trying to decide on selections.
-- Might not be as explicit in terms of xxx content as some would prefer. Either a pro or con, see above.
-- No HD Video Download Option--Only Streaming. |
| Bottom Line: |
Background:
My erotic interests: I am a breast guy. Curvy Women, Slim-and-Stacked or Voluptuous, Natural Women, MILF, Shapely Behinds.
I am primarily a photo guy, as well. I enjoy streaming videos but my primary taste in erotica is photography. I also travel quite frequently, so much of my viewing takes place on an Ipad, after transfer of data. Keep this in mind here.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Pros and Cons:
-- The amount of content here is huge. I used to subscribe to Voluptuous and Score back in the 90's. The models represent the type of women I find attractive. You can find content dating back to the 90's on the site.
-- Streaming and DL speeds seem to be up to par and there are no problems to report here, so far.
-- The photography and video presentations are sexy and alluring without being too in-your-face. If you are into things like ass-to-mouth, pile drivers, and things like that, you are not going to find it here. This is either good or bad, depending on your own preferences. About 80% of the photo and video content is softcore posing, either solo or girl-girl. hardcore content is typical fare-classic oral, missionary, doggy, etc., although the scenes usually end with popshots on the breasts rather than face--it's a breast site.
-- It can be a bit difficult at first to navigate around the huge of amount of content in the archives. More user-friendly options would be nice.
-- Photography could use a little diversification in poses and sets. The photosets often to seem to follow the same script. The photographers could also tone down the airbrushing a bit. Sometimes this pervades the images.
-- Subscription rates also seem to be a little bit higher in cost than the typical site.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Conclusion:
This is definately a niche site that will appeal to fans of large-breasted women, especially of the voluptuous and/or curvy variety. Models can range from thin-and-stacked to soft and voluptuous.
The site is a mix of photos and videos. If viewing softcore images of chesty, well-endowed women is your thing, you won't be dissapointed. There is a fair amount of xxx video action to be found, but the majority of presentations, both photo and video, are softcore solo or girl-girl.
Update 1/24/12-- HD Video Downloading is NOT an option. One can only stream HD videos. I discovered this recently. One must subscribe to Score HD to download HD.
IMO, who would like this site:
Photo lovers and those with a breast fetish who enjoy a variety of body types and those who enjoy a more classic conservative style in their photos and explicit videos.
Who won't like this site:
Those who rarely view photosets or solo video action or those who enjoy more extreme hardcore action.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Grades(obviously subjective):
Site Navgigation: C-
Video Presentation Style: A
Video Quality: A
Photo Presentations: B+
Photo Content and Quality: A
The Models Themselves: A
Streaming and DL Speeds: A
Quantity: A+
XXX Action: C
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Suggestions for improvement:
Improve the site navigation utility and add options to make the user experience a bit easier. |
|
01-15-12 12:04pm
Replies (9)
|
Review
12
|
Reality Kings
(0)
80.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
-- Large Amount Of Content, both in quantity and variety. Enough to satisfy many interests.
-- High Quality Videos.
-- Sexy models. Model-types range from bra busters to thin and petite.
-- Good number of sub-sites with decent content(mostly) |
| Cons: |
-- Streaming and Downloading can be hit or miss.
-- No High-Resolution Photos.
-- Repetitive photos in sequences.
-- Downloading Limit of 10 G daily. |
| Bottom Line: |
A little background to put things in perspective:
My erotic interests: I am a breast guy. Curvy Women, Slim-and-Stacked or Voluptuous, Natural Women, MILF, Shapely Behinds.
I am primarily a photo guy, as well. I enjoy streaming videos but my primary taste in erotica is photography. I also travel quite frequently, so much of my viewing takes place on an Ipad, after transfer of data. Keep this in mind here.
With that being said, I have found the site to be somewhat lacking for my preferences, not in content or quality of the presentations, but in the medium available.
If you are looking for sexy models and high quality videos you will not be dissapointed. If you have a bias for high-resolution photography, you are likely to find the site lacking a bit in terms of photographic standards. However, given that I do view many of the images on an Ipad at times, this hasn't been a show-stopper. When viewed on a high-resolution flatpanel monitor, the images are lacking, simply due to the smaller formats and low pixel counts.
The videos themselves are of high-quality and the camera work is fairly decent. Many of the scenes start with the model fully clothed and do not jump right into the action.
Navigating the site is very simple and straightforward. It is designed quite well and is not lacking here, IMO. Jumping from one site to the other is seamless. Getting to the downloads is also seamless and straightforward. Everything is a click away.
As far as DL and Streaming speeds, this is where I give the lowest marks. At times, it was difficult to even stream videos at standard quanity. Most of the time, I was getting nowhere near the claimed DL speed and bit-ratre transfer when I did attempt to download videos at standard resolutions. The times I did try a HD download, I would often timeout and have to restart. On weekends, the problem was particularly noticeable. Slow connections are quite understandable at this time of the week. However, the server seemed to slow to a crawl and would often become asburdly slow.
To sum up, if variety, quality content, and video presentations are your primary interests, it's a safe bet that you probably will not be dissapointed. If transfer rates and streaming connectivity are of paramount importance, I would take this into consideration.
Cancelation: Just a note on this as I know this is one of my concerns when I sign up over the net. When I read reviews, I sometimes hear of extra charges taking place after an order has been canceled. I experienced no issues and giving notice of intent to cancel was no issue and took place as requested.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Grades: (obviously subjective calls, so take that into consideration as well.)
Presentation and Site Navigation: A
Overall Quality of Content: B+
Subject Matter Variety: A +
Content Variety for Varied Interests: A
Standard Video Quality: B
HD Video Quality: A
Scene Content and Videography: B+
Photo Gallery Compositions and Content: C+
Photo Resolution and Image Quality: C-
The Models Themselves: A
The Action: B
DL Speed and Streaming: D-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My favorite sub-sites within the URL--relative to my interests and not quality:
Dangerous Cuvres, Big Naturals.
Least Favorite: Pure 18 and Cum Fiesta. (Models too thin and young-looking for my tastes)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Other things to note: There is a download limit of 10 GIG daily. This was of no concern to me as I stream videos mostly and did not download much in the way of videos. If you are a massive user of downloadable HD video content, this very well might be soemething to consider. If you aren't downloading HD more than twice a day, it shouldn't be a problem. In fairness to these guys, you would have to be downloading a lot of content every day to hit the max.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Suggestions for improvement:
-- Address concerns with streaming connectvity and download speeds. Slower speeds are to be expected on weekends but not weekdays.
-- Add high-resolution image galleries. The days of CRT monitors have long since passed. 800 pixel-width images images no longer cut it in the day of 2800x1900 high-resolution monitors. |
|
01-11-12 06:08pm
Replies (15)
|
|
