| Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
RagingBuddhist (Disabled)
|
Here's the layout of the site:
When you first enter the site, you're on the first of six headings - Models, What's New, Searches, FAQ, Contact Us, and Links.
• The models page starts with the last 8 shoots, with a page index for the rest - currently 43 pages of 8 shoots each
• The What's new page gives you 6 large thumbnails of "Coming Soon" and a list of the last dozen and a half shoots.
• Searches, as mentioned above, lets you search by fetish, date, model name or keyword
• The FAQ is kind of weak, although it does start with a cancellation link. It then goes onto briefly talk about video issues, model requests, Mac users and membership options (there are no options)
• Contact us - has (Surprise!) an email link and a CCbill link
• Links has five links to other sites (all nice and out of sight unless you want to see them)
To wrap it up, this site's a keeper. Expensive - and not without some issues, but still one to check out.
|
10-04-09 01:52am
Reply To Message
|
2
|
Drooler (Disabled)
|
I've had Firefox remember my login for it, so that it's already typed in when I go to the login page.
My big, really big, gripe with the site is that even though it's an "ass" site, there are almost never any shots of the models cropped from the mid-upper thigh to the top of the head when they're showing off their booties, evenly cheeked. It's either "ass fills the shot" or head to toe.
And I've pointed this out in a polite tone to the site when they were soliciting suggestions. Yet they remain locked in to their habits.
I find it very strange that "ass" sites are usually the worst when it comes to the subject, but that's been my experience.
InTheCrack should have 4000 pixel photos for the high price they charge.
|
10-04-09 03:13am
Reply To Message
|
3
|
mbaya (Disabled)
|
I totally agree with your assessment of the photographic style on the site. The closeups come well after a lot of whole body showcasing. This I felt was the perfect combination of whole body and closeups. In the site the closeups were really CLOSE.
|
10-04-09 08:51am
Reply To Message
|
4
|
ControllingMind (Suspended)
|
RagingBuddist, are you sure you didn't miss anything out in that review?
I like it, lots of detail.
I'm not too happy about that download speed, but this site is still next on the hit list.
|
10-04-09 08:57am
Reply To Message
|
5
|
Monahan (0)
|
REPLY TO #4 - ControllingMind :
I agree. RagingBuddhist writes terrific reviews in a very easy to read manner. I've been hanging on this site (on my futures list) because of price and will now hang patiently a little longer. Hopefully someone (Webmaster?) who can do something about the search and D/L issues in the near future.
|
10-04-09 09:08am
Reply To Message
|
6
|
RagingBuddhist (Disabled)
|
REPLY TO #4 - ControllingMind :
Actually, I did miss something. Updates come every 3 days. Thanks for making me take a look :laughs:
|
10-04-09 09:33am
Reply To Message
|
7
|
RagingBuddhist (Disabled)
|
REPLY TO #5 - Monahan :
Thanks for the compliment. I'm glad you appreciate the reviews.
Naturally, I can't speak for the site, but I wouldn't expect the site to change anytime soon - it's laid out pretty much like it's always been, even in the days when they had the token system in place. Because of the way it's laid out, it would've taken a long time to figure out exactly how much content is online, but I can tell you there's definitely enough to keep you busy for at least a month. Yes, there's a server speed/download manager issue but, if you don't wanrt to sit and manually add chunks to get acceleration, you can always line up a half dozen flicks and go make dinner. If you're a fan of the site's style, I just think the hi-def makes it worth the jump.
|
10-04-09 09:54am
Reply To Message
|
8
|
RagingBuddhist (Disabled)
|
REPLY TO #4 - ControllingMind :
I caught my mistake too late to edit my last reply to you - they add a new model every three days. They add a new video every day.
|
10-04-09 11:02am
Reply To Message
|
9
|
turboshaft (0)
|
Great review RB!
Pretty close to my score and I have to agree with a lot of your points. The "search" feature is definitely weak, especially considering it only applies to the videos and the photo sets don't necessarily have the same content. The alphabetical order is annoying too, but I like to organize by release date since that is how they are numbered.
I never had any login issues with Firefox, so maybe your browser is the problem? I also love the 1920x1080 videos since that's my monitor's max resolution, so combined with the wide angle lens it can make for some interesting videos.
Lastly, I think the number of girls with implants can be counted on one hand, and breasts really are not the focus of the site, unless they change the "C" from crack to cleavage. My favorite models are generally not these anyway. I like the ones who look like the girl-next-door with a nasty imagination and they usually are quite slim with reasonable proportions.
|
10-04-09 03:51pm
Reply To Message
|
10
|
turboshaft (0)
|
REPLY TO #6 - RagingBuddhist :
I would say their update schedule is really only an issue for longtime and regular members because everything else is archived.
|
10-04-09 03:53pm
Reply To Message
|
11
|
inthecrack (0)
Webmaster
|
Addressing some of your cons....
The collections page is now customizable in that you can sort it by release date, model name (alphabetical), model age, nationality, and shoot location.
There's only 2 out of 383 current videos on the site without audio. It was not a conscious decision to shoot them without audio but in fact an audio screw up. We just released them anyway.
Download speeds: See this thread https://www.pornusers.com/replies_view.html?id=44350 There may be something relevant to your issues here.
Your login not remembering your password appears to be a browser issue. We have not been able to duplicate that.
Oddly cropped pictures: We don't see how that is a con. The pictures are cropped according to how they work the best. If a shot is originally 2400x1800 (horizontal) and shows a model standing then there's going to be a lot of useless background on the left and right sides. If we can crop it 2200x2200 then the model is going to be larger in the picture with less pixels waisted on useless background. That's a good thing for everyone is it not? Just curious, if a picture is 2200x2200 that would be a bad thing WHY???
|
02-11-10 12:38pm
Reply To Message
|
