Met Art X (0)
|
|
Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
Pros: |
Pretty solo site that does a lot right but isn’t without some subjective flaws.
I am not usually as into solo female porn as some, but this was offered in a promo, and I came away with a similar feeling I expected to have.
The site is large and has a new update each day. The sites on the Met-Art Network release photos separate from videos and number them. Not for sure how I feel about this practice.
There is some variety in models, but it’s not a lot. Most of these models are pretty, slim, white.
Videos are unlimited downloadable and there are downloadable photo zips. |
Cons: |
Camerawork and music in scenes. The camerawork is a major one for me to be convinced of the models’ orgasm.
This site unlike the other on this network that I just reviewed, splits the photos and videos up as separate updates but updates them on back-to-back days. Their other site spreads those out.
Most of my complaints on this site are going to be from me believing the visuals of the woman’s pussy is crucial to seeing how it reacts to orgasm, the camerawork has problems there and some of the women also close their legs in what is supposed to be the orgasm. |
Bottom Line: |
I find myself highly critical of solo masturbation sites. One of my regular practices is teaching women to orgasm without physical stimulation. This requires contractions and teasing of the vaginal vestibule or introitus. This, likely is not something porn wants to talk about since it explains the absurdity behind “size matters”. Think of all those 12 inch dick unemployed men walking around with nothing more than a visual stimulant.
These scenes are incredibly straightforward and do lack a lot of the creativity I would like to see in a solo female scene. Also, not all of the scenes include masturbation, which I thought was the point of this being Met Art X. A 22 minute scene of a woman dancing around nude does not constitute porn. It doesn’t even equal tease porn. It is more like watching a ballet or artistic performance.
Once into the masturbation scenes, some have soft music, which doesn’t bother me as much as others. I know some feel this blocks out the moans and noises from the female, but you can hear those and the music is very soft. I watched numerous scenes that did this: Camera explicitly focused on the pussy as the woman masturbates, then as she starts to writhe, twist and look like an orgasm is nearing, the camera moves to a view of her from the side. I know this is explicit and maybe shows how much I am interested in the female orgasm, but I usually can watch the vaginal vestibule and tell when a woman is having an orgasm. A lot of these more glam sites choose to remove the camera from seeing that. I believe it hurts the scenes a lot. Several scenes I was very much into just lost me with the camera choosing to show the side view of the woman during what was supposed to be an orgasm. There is a reason male cumshot compilation videos are popular. Seeing another person, either gender, orgasm, can and often will bring on orgasm for the person viewing. This site would score much higher if they fixed that one part with the camera changing during orgasm.
The site is large with 1,156 videos, 970 picture sets, only 345 models, but these do seem to be top-level models. I imagine they pull popular models from their other sites to this one. The update rate is very good and there are up to 4K downloads on the videos with 6 other options, also downloadable picture sets. For an overall good package. I made a comment over a year ago about not understanding why porn with tattooed models believed it had to be as violent and hardcore as possible. I will make a similar comment here. Why not show the explicit orgasm? If the model is okay with being videoed explicitly while masturbating, shouldn’t she be okay with showing her orgasm? I may even be being a little harsh with my score, but that camera movement during the orgasm ruins the scenes for me. |
Reply To Review Review in Favorites!
|