Lacy Nylons (0)
|
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
Models on the average are easy on the eye. Not porn star quality but not ugly either.
Site updates videos once every eight days. Not great but mentioned under the pros because other Ferro Sites are so much worse when it comes to updating.
Picture sets appear to update every two days.
Videos since 2009 (I counted 114) have been shot in HD at 1280x720p in wmv at a total bitrate of 3320kbps. Videos before that are at 640x480p.
Picture sets can be downloaded zipped, with the individual picture weighing in around 1000x1500px. |
| Cons: |
Separate sign-ins required for pictures and videos, because the username and password are generated by Ferro and therefore very convoluted, it is an impossibly aggravating extra task to have to sign in twice to every site you receive as a bonus that also contains pictures.
The huge watermarks in the bottom right hand corner as well as in the left top corner I've remarked upon in previous previews of other Ferro sites, are present here, too, and manage greatly to add to the aggravation factor. I almost didn't bother adding this site because while the technical quality of the videos isn't too bad, they are not worth looking at with that intrusive logo staring you in the face all through the video.
Picture sets are small and not very erotic.
Download and streaming are highly erratic. My downloads started at around 1MB/s, gradually reduced to 200K/s, and then see-sawed back and forth between those two values.
No proper search engine, no model directory or bio. |
| Bottom Line: |
This is a site I was prepared to love. After all, who, over fifty, does not like to see models dressed in nylons and garter belt?
And you get plenty of that in this site. For once pantyhose was not substituted in someone's mind for stockings and they stick to the old definition when it comes to nylons.
One idiosyncrasy of this site, or maybe two:
Most models start out naked and then get slowly dressed, rather than the other way around, also very few of them wear panties but walk around commando style under their lovely dresses instead.
This anachronism is jarring to an old-timer because nylons and garter belts belong to an era where no woman would have thought to get dressed without panties and slip.
Both picture sets and videos lack imagination, with the models looking stiff and uninvolved. Of course, it doesn't help that the videos are in a foreign language (Russian? Hungarian? Czech?) so you miss out on the context of the video as well.
Let me sum things up in a highly subjective way (in other words don't take every negative thing I have to say as the Gospel truth):
A. I wouldn't bother with the pictures. The quality is too uneven and the sets are too small. Plus the logo, even if it has been reduced to one only, is still too intrusive.
B. I wouldn't bother with the videos because they lack erotic heat as well as the tease factor, and on top of that they are being ruined by watermarks that are meant to protect their copyright but manage instead to aggravate purists like me who like to look at a clean picture with no, or at most, with a discrete logo.
The separate sign-in for the various sites is just plain dumb. Especially if a distinction is being made between pictures and videos requiring authorization by both.
If I judged this site, or any other Ferro site I got during this past month, for myself I wouldn't give any of them more than a 69 because I look and then throw away ... see humongous watermarks.
However because of their relatively good rate of update, plus the basically decent TECHNICAL quality of the videos, plus the fact that one monthly subscription will give you four sites eventually, I will give it a 79. Of the four Ferro sites I reviewed during the past month this site, despite its flaws, is the best.
BTW, the site is softcore with some toy play thrown in. A plus for me (the softcore part), might be a minus for others. |
Reply To Review Review in Favorites!
|
