Cosmid.net (0)
|
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ Daily Updates
+ A lot of material - Just under 400 models
+ 4 formats for newer video - iPod, mpeg4, wmv and 720P mp4
+ Zip files for pictures
+ Decent variety of models
+ Tags to narrow down niches
+ Model list
+ User comments on every page
+ Cheap join at $20 |
| Cons: |
- Extremely inconsistent video quality even on newer video
- Pictures on the small size
- Highest video resolution 720
- No search function
- An apparently epileptic cameraman?
- Flash video starts immediately
- older wmv files download as wmv.wmv - need renaming |
| Bottom Line: |
Yeah, it's been over a year since I did a review. I can't see putting up reviews for the same 3 or 4 sites that I'm always going back to, but Cosmid reminds me why I tend to stick with what I know I'll like. I like sites that feature amateurs, or at least mostly amateurs so I thought this might fit the bill. In the amateur department, Cosmid does OK. Along with some "names" there are plenty of faces (and bodies) I've never seen before. The majority of the women are average looking or better which, as the quintessential amateur fan, really appeals to me. I found very few silicone jobs, not too much of the now common piercings and, surprisingly, not as many inked to hell bodies as I expected, although there were some I passed on. Most of the models run to the busty side of things which may or may not be your thing but I didn't mind too much. :)
But after that, things fall flat for me. They bill the site as "Uncut, unedited, unbelievable" and I find that totally believable. Way too many videos that look like they were shot on a 5 megapixel (or lower) point and shoot camera, overlit and underlight scenes, focus problems and, as I said in the cons, there were far too many videos where the camera was moving around to the point where I found myself talking to the monitor, asking it to keep still. The cameraman has another problem. Ever wish they'd just shut up and shoot? On top of all that, aside from the fact that there are a lot of models who don't go for full nudity, Cosmid seems to have "Abby Winters Syndrome", keeping the models that do go full nude clothed until the last minute or two of a 10 minute clip. Next issue? Streams and pictures that are missing, misnamed files and, despite user comments asking about them, aren't fixed. And, lastly, calling 720p video high def in 2015 is just plain wrong, especially for the scenes that had the distinct look of a webcam, complete with a horrible refresh rate, or just as bad, an early VHS recording.
The pictures. No real wow factor there either. Newer pictures are 3000 pixels long side, but it seems the majority on the site are 1600 long side, also seemingly shot on an outdated camera. In addition to the repetitiveness, some of the blurry and mid-blink shots tell me they live up to their creed - they truly don't like editing. The zip files are nice, but I can see me wading through the sets that I saved to weed out the clunkers and repetitive shots.
Navigating the site isn't too complicated with the tabs and click on keywords you find on almost every other site. You can sort the site by categories: Alphabetical, Highest rating, Age, Hair color, Model type, Boob size and Butt size. There are also tags on each scene but even they have issues - models listed as nude who aren't, listed as topless but go full nude, no tag for the several hardcore scenes, etc.
There's a blog that tells a bit of what's going on behind the scenes - where they are, who they're talking to, blah, blah, blah. Not my thing, so no further comment on that.
All in all, despite it's shortcomings and the score I gave it, I'm not too upset that I checked out the site. It's a great concept but one that's very poorly executed. For $20 it's was an OK join. I just don't see me coming back to it unless I see that they've started to pay attention to blatant problems and have stepped up to 21st century technology. |
Reply To Review Review in Favorites!
|
