Ratings & Reviews
|
All the reviews and ratings from this user. |
| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Review
1
|
Nubiles.net
(0)
75.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for over 2 months (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ Up to 7 Updates a day, 3-4 new models each week
+ Some great Euro models
+ Masturbation videos
+ New 1080p videos encoded with H.264 are glorious
+ Thumbnails for videos and seeking
+ Sizable archive and links to models on other sites |
| Cons: |
- Update schedule is disappointing
- Photo & Video set duplication
- Comparatively low picture resolution with a huge watermark
- Paltry collection for each model (typically 4 sets)
- Older videos (before late 2013) are WMV & 720p |
| Bottom Line: |
Nubiles.net proves to be a jack of all trades, master of none. The site features a large variety of European and American female models. Videos include both hardcore and masturbation, with the latter being the most impressive and a major strength. Hardcode videos are few and far between and should not be considered as a reason to subscribe. Picture sets are clear, but image size is a problem. The updating schedule is unlike other sites and proves an early obstacle.
Nubiles.net currently features 3-4 new models each week with 2-7 updates per day. After a week, three or four new models are introduced and the process continues. So if you don’t like any of the models when the transition occurs, you won’t need to visit for another week. The upside is that when great model arrives, you’ll get all her content in about a week, and I do mean ALL. The number of updates for most models is four picture sets and four videos (6 or 8 is rare). This is not a huge amount of content, especially when you take into account the duplication.
Pictures and Video sets frequently copy each other. So you’ll see a picture set of a model in pink lingerie and in a few days have access to the video of her in the same pink lingerie. On one hand it’s good to see the video to back up the pictures, but it hurts variety when it happens regularly. It’s like a manufacturing plant of pictures and videos, leaving little surprise. You’ve seen the content before, now you are waiting for the crisp video. Thankfully the 1080p masturbation videos are often worth downloading even if you’ve seen the picture set.
Picture sets have plenty of photos and include a good ratio of clothing, lingerie and nudity. The backdrops are very clean, although models may repeat the actions from the video shoot or vice versa. The biggest problem with images is that they are inadequate resolution. Size is just 1600 x 2400 (under 4 megapixels) for the largest variety. This is not much bigger than a medium-sized set from met-art and a mere fraction of the full size. To make matters worse, all images have a watermark that is far too big for the picture dimensions. Nubiles.net does use a low compression jpeg (98), so the images are clear, but it still does not come close to similar websites in terms of picture size.
Overall, Nubiles.net struggles to compete with each of its elements. It only needs a few tweaks to become a great site. Firstly, change the updating schedule to produce surprises. Bring back popular models more often so they can build sizable collections. Change the video/picture set duplication so it’s not so formulaic. Increase the picture resolution to around 10MP, so it can at least match similar sites. Nubiles.net is still recommended due to the sheer number of great models populating its archives, but there is plenty of room for improvements. |
|
02-12-14 01:29am
Replies (12)
|
Review
2
|
MPL Studios
(0)
88.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for over 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
-Genuine
-Tasteful
-Variety
-Great Models
-Behind The Scenes and Postcard series |
| Cons: |
-Expensive
-3000 pixels max
-No download manager support |
| Bottom Line: |
There is something special about MPL Studios that most other artistic nude websites fail to capture. The first thing I notice is how happy the models are in the photoshoots, big smiles and lots of joyful faces in most shoots. The next thing I noticed is how quite a few of the shots move away from pure nude model shots towards to the artistic side of the female body. This is shown in the bodyscape series where the camera places the body as if it was a landscape to be photographed.
Tease factor is generally quite good, most photosets will avoid extreme exposure and instead focus on amazing poses, great face shots, simpler views and sometimes the “less is more” concept – which works wonders. Some clothing, but there is more clothing in the postcard series or behind the scenes sets. The models will be present in a variety of series including videos. Videos are broken into two groups, explicit and sensual, good to see a split but they are often poorly assigned.
Set location is quite varied, outdoor and indoor, old buildings, feature walls, water, bedding etc. The sets aren’t bad in size either, 50-80 images typically. What makes the sets much more impressive is the variety of the poses and/or the variety of the camera angles and focus. There are a few exceptions but most sets contain many varied shots and models all seem to be good at posing and talking to the camera.
The models on the site are also quite high quality, with mostly Russian, Caucasian and light framed models. Many will be familiar to FEMJOY and Met-Art members but with some exclusives. The great thing about the photo quality is that the models feel real, there is no touchup work, you can see the skin texture, you can see imperfections and everything feels genuine, aside from some blurry sets the quality is good. The maximum quality is 3000px on the longest size, in general this means about 6-7megapixels. This size is starting to get on the low size compared to other sites, but because of the quality and real nature of the photos it has an edge on the competition.
Site navigation needs some work; you cannot for instance head back to the main page of a gallery once you are browsing it, it’s similar to hege-art. All images default at 600px and you must click on the smaller text sizes for larger resolutions. The website didn’t support net transport for downloads, most sets aren’t large and firefox manages most downloads well enough, no resume. Update counts are at least 1 a day, recently one or two days a week will have two updates which is like a great bonus (other sites could learn from). This helps bring up the value, MPL studios is not cheap, it’s roughly twice the price of competing sites (hegre-art, errotica-archives, met-models) for the same set / picture amount. However I think the content is definitely worth the price of admission, purely to get the genuine, artistic, engaging photo series that other sites don’t have. Will be resubscribing. |
|
10-24-09 07:50pm
Replies (0)
|
Review
3
|
Errotica Archives
(0)
78.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for over 6 months (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
-Clean site design
-Consistent quality
-Some interesting videos
-Great set locations
-Good variety in sets |
| Cons: |
-Medium sets ~80pics (1 update per day)
-Very little tease (mostly nude)
-Too many ultra closeups
-Models are more curvy than other sites |
| Bottom Line: |
Errotica Archives is an interesting site, those familiar with met-art may know Erro. Currently number 1 user voted photographer on Met-Art. He's generally a good photographer, he produces consistent good quality shots, there is a certain texture to his work. He is fairly good at bringing out the good parts of models. This might be making them smile, making them more natural, this is seen in some of his videos.
He does love his close ups, and I mean really close. Super high resolution pictures of vagina in particular. So close I can clearly make out the 3D shapes of the grains of sand nestled in between pubic hair. It's really quite something to behold. For some it's a huge bonus, but for me I'd rather see more of the model.
One set a day and sets aren't huge, they range from around 50 to 120 images. Recent sets are around the 70-80 shot mark which is decent. The variety in the sets is pretty good, different locations, models have fairly good poses. Available in small, medium, large and sometimes extra large (for huge resolution). Download sizes are not that big, even extra large might only be a few hundred MB, depends on the size of the set mainly.
There are quite a few well known European models, verunka, iveta, danae, monika, marketa among the current 214 model count. Many from met-art, along with a few new models. Generally the models very curvy in comparison to met-art / hegre-art, which I don't enjoy as much. Another thing is that the sets feature very little clothing in general. Many sets are nude from picture one taking out another huge variable element and tease factor. Of the last 10 sets, only 2 had some form of clothing.
Overall I'd recommend the site. It does support download managers (flashget) and quality sets overall. The combination of lighting, location and Erro magic can produce some real gems. Navigation is alright, not having to reload the page if you change resolution is handy, but having to click twice to get to the set is a nuisance. Members area is the same as free tour and you can re-rate models. Personally I'd rather see more tease with clothes, less ultra close genital shots and perhaps some more petite models. |
|
07-18-09 07:14am
Replies (0)
|
Review
4
|
Erotic Beauty
(0)
85.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for over 3 months (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
-Extension of Met-Art
-Good quality photography
-Attractive models
-Download manager support, fast speeds
-Large sets zipped 100-150 photos per set (low, med, high)
-Popular models and artists
-Timely updates |
| Cons: |
-Database poor condition
-Mistakes in new updates
-Model name changes etc
-Very few videos (pro for some) |
| Bottom Line: |
Met-Models is possibly best thought of as an extension of Met-Art. Although it only offers one update per day it fits nicely in with Met-Art featuring a similar level of quality in both models and photographers. As a big fan of Met-Art I was often quite impressed by many of the sets from Met-Models, some of the better models also made their appearance on Met-Models first. The other good thing is that many of the models on MA will have photosets on MM, so as a collector you’ll want to check MM out.
Unfortunately the database holding all this beauty is substandard. Returning models may have different names, some name changes are minor others completely different. Many different models may be listed under the exact same name making voting useless (e.g. ALENA). I have seen some new sets with typos or mistakes on the cover sheet, naming a different photographer than the set indicates. If you want to search the archives you’ll be in for hell because of this poor database. They need some people to go through and sort it all out into correct model names and remove the duplicates. Not having model information also doesn’t help and is a bit disappointing. Another annoyance is the reluctance to use the Model’s name from MM or MA on either site if the model has been seen their first, this is possibly due to the backlog of updates. I’d like to see consistency across the sister sites so you don’t need to know what the model’s aliases are. I’ve tried contacting the website support with a list of duplicated models but they have not done anything or replied.
But the set quality is very good; navigation on the site is near identical to MA even though their non-member page looks very different. Main difference is models don’t have brief model bio. Works with download managers (Flashget), fast speeds, sets are zipped up and range from a few hundred MB to 900+ MB for high res sets depending on artist. Available in low/med/high res where low - 800x1200, med - 1365x2048, high – 8 megapixels+. Sets are quite large, typically 100-150 photos, similar size in comparison to Met-Art again. Videos are few and far between (35 total – and only 5 since start of 2007), good thing possibly for some. Leocont, Ingret, Nudero, Rylsky, Morenko, Rigin are recent popular artists who regularly post content on the site.
It’s really the ideal choice for fans of MA wanting more of either the models or the quality of photography with the biggest issue being the state of the database and lack of model info. If they fixed this up and added another update per day I’d be very impressed because at times I think the average quality of sets is probably better than MA in recent times. |
|
06-06-09 03:25am
Replies (4)
|
Review
5
|
MetArt
(0)
96.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for over 1 year (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
-Fantastic models
-Varied photographers
-Crisp Clear images
-Large sets
-4 daily updates
-Many new models
-Sensual poses and vibrant sets
-Continual improvements in models and average quality
-Superb Lighting
-Create Galleries
-Re-rate artists and models
-Amazing Value |
| Cons: |
-Recent Majoly (artist) sets
-Some boring videos
-Occasional quality lapse
-Met-cam models moved to private cams
-PSP videos low res |
| Bottom Line: |
The best artistic nude website online, there is no competition for Met-Art because they are easily in a league of their own. The reasons for this are an absolutely huge amount of archived sets and huge collection of models. New models are regularly added with increasing quality. New models that get rated highly are very quickly brought back for follow up photo shoots (usually 2 more). Completely amazing website, one you should check out as you have probably stumbled upon many great sets from them anyway.
Photo quality in the website is extremely good with models, artist and locations being of high standards. Artistic and photo quality is excellent, artists like Voronin and Ingret are masters at lighting and produce superb sets with wonderful colour contrast along with clear high megapixel photos. The actual set locations are great and varied on their own, although there is some reusing of set location there is usually a fair gap between those updates. Models are very attractive but of course people have different likes and dislikes and Met-art has the huge range to cater for anybody. I think there is plenty of variety for new models also.
The site does have a few minor negatives including movies and some artistic “choice”. Movies themselves are up and down, quality is fairly good but content varies from sexy to sterile. In some cases watching videos of existing photosets can be a bad thing. Other times videos are very nicely put together, some videos you can hear the sound of the camera clicking and the artist speaking and this may put off some people who prefer music, although many include music. Older videos tend to be sexier and racier. Another very big issue currently is the artist Majoly who seems to be bringing the quality of the site down, his recent works appear as if he has taken some shots of attractive models in good locations and then passed them through a very aggressive Vaseline filter making them look awful, thankfully most artists are not like this.
Content on the site is almost beyond quick description. There are so many great sets in the archives dating back almost 10 years. They will post up a preview of the four updates coming for the next day. You can rate on each model and each artist and then change your vote at a later stage, which I do quite a bit. There is a brief bio for the model which I think is sufficient, more community feedback, such as commenting on sets or voting on upcoming sets is something to look at. After a year with this site I still check it daily for content. It’s very much worth a yearly membership, especially considering the huge amount of existing photos you may need to download. I’ve still got hundreds of models to rate and I try to rate every new set, which again emphasizes the content and introduction of new models, 39 new models in January 09 alone. Its amazing value and I will continue to subscribe given what I have seen in the past year. I’m glad to be a subscriber. |
|
03-27-09 04:34am
Replies (4)
|
Review
6
|
Hegre Art
(0)
69.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for over 3 months (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
-Consistent quality
-Can comment on sets
-Fast site
-Some of the older videos
-Anna S |
| Cons: |
-Boring sets
-Lack of models / new models
-Expensive
-Limited tease
-Repeated set locations
-Small photo sets |
| Bottom Line: |
Overrated, sets are boring and model poses are usually standing still with arms in different positions. Anna S helps keep the site above poor quality. Many new sets are repeated models in repeated shoot places which makes it more boring. Sets can be pretty small and when you get one update a day it falls short and brings value into question.
Hegre does have the ability to bring out some true beauty in models, early videos on the site are very good. Wasted potential and some recent lame fetish in some sets including latex and bdsm which are both very unappealing to me. Signed up for a few attractive models and some promising sets. Quality of site seems to have gotten worse. Needs a fresh look, needs more sensual poses, needs more variety, needs to go back to basics. |
|
02-14-09 03:50am
Replies (6)
|
|
