*
 
new! Write a short review of any site existing in our ratings and get the prize:
15-min prepaid pin-code to HotMovies.com — giant movie achive! Read more »

Author
Thread Reply to topic
 kit
    Webmaster

Registred: 07.02.03
Posts: 349
ALS Scan****/*
Sample Galleries: Gallery 1, Gallery 2, Gallery 3.
Pay site inspected by Missy
You can post your opinion about „ALS Scan“!
Please help us build an impartial review for each featured site!

 
User's Reviews
 spankingwilly
    

Registred: 10.30.05
Posts: 2
Posted: 10/28/06, 05:22    Quote 

ALS Scans is by far the best pornsite I've seen, and here's why:

1. They have gorgeous models. And sporting those fleshy waxed cooters is just so hot!

2. The quality of the content is great. The photos are fantastic--they're big, they're bright, and well-detailed (you can see the goosebumps on the girls). The movies are also of high-quality--new content is generally uploaded by segments, but eventually you can download the entire scene as a single file (which I prefer, thanks to broadband).

3. For all girl action, they've got a bit of a spread (no pun intended). You've got glamour shots, spread shots (open sesame!), and some lesbian action. It can be quite hardcore as well--there's the insertion scenes (speculums, dildoes, cucumbers icon_wink.gif ), some watersports scenes as well for the fetish-minded, and some really kinky fisting scenes (self-fisting, or girl-girl fisting).

The layout is a bit old-fashioned, but it's easy to navigate around it. I ain't complaining! I'm still a big fan of the site, and if you like shaved babes looking pretty or getting nasty with themselves, then you'll love this site too!
 
 
 jackmahog
    

Registred: 08.15.04
Posts: 33
Posted: 09/18/06, 11:55    Quote 

I like Suze Randall, Viv Thomas, pinkfever.com, DD Girls, I like girls all slutted up in high heels and make up and stockings and hot clothes and lingerie. I want to try a new site. ALS Scans looks like it has alot of completely naked girls in shorts and white cotton socks, so what do you think I should try?
 
 kit
    Webmaster

Registred: 07.02.03
Posts: 349
Posted: 09/18/06, 11:55    Quote 

ALS Scans is very old and very good site. It worth every cent!
 
 SexConnoisseur
    

Registred: 07.04.14
Posts: 22
Posted: 07/25/17, 14:54    Quote 

This site has the age old problem. The camera moves and the subject doesn't.

This site is about photography - photo (light), and (graphy), the capture of it. All shoots use one light and often it is the sun. There is no drama. There is no high-key photo shoots. There are no low key photo shoots. The photographers here are totally amateur.

Each shoot consists of over 100 photos. It's up to YOU to weed out the duds. That's suppose to be the site's job, but no, they leave that up to the users.

There is nothing special about the shoots. Not a thing!

The gals are about average, and a few are really stunning, yet there's no biographical info. You're told the model's age and that's all. You're not told where the model lives, what her hobbies are, what she likes to do in her spare time, or anything about here other than her name.

Videos are overly long and improperly named. If the shoot is called Nancy in the bedroom, the video is not named that. YOU have to edit that name.

There are next to no boy-girl shoots. All shoots are softcore.

The search function is a joke. The only thing you can search for is a model's name, and you have to know what that name is. You can't search on terms like 'blonde', 'x year old', height, breast size, eye color or anything except the model's name.

The photographers don't own a tripod or lights with reflectors.

The settings are outdoors or in non-luxurious settings. Some look like they were shot in a low budget mobile home.

Bottom line: This site sucks. AVOID!
 
 SexConnoisseur
    

Registred: 07.04.14
Posts: 22
Posted: 07/25/17, 14:57    Quote 

jackmahog wrote:
I like Suze Randall, Viv Thomas, pinkfever.com, DD Girls, I like girls all slutted up in high heels and make up and stockings and hot clothes and lingerie. I want to try a new site. ALS Scans looks like it has alot of completely naked girls in shorts and white cotton socks, so what do you think I should try?


No. This site is not worth subscribing to. The photographers can't afford a tripod or lights. The setting is usally outdoors or in a low budget mobile home. They have some stunning women, but they are not given any direction by the photographer, nor a script to follow.

This site is low-fi in many respects.
 
 SexConnoisseur
    

Registred: 07.04.14
Posts: 22
Posted: 08/09/17, 03:54    Quote 

This site, like any other is selling video and stills. I'm not buying girls. I expect good video and aligned stills. This site fails at delivering both.

The camera should be kept still. I don't want to see the background move, or the perspective change, nor rotated camera positions where the vertical lines are not vertical.

In a word, this site is dizzying.

I'm sick and tired of sites that don't offer good photography. That's what we come for. We're not renting or buying or downloading girls. We are downloading still photos and videos.

Somebody please! Tell these morons to learn their craft or to get out!

This site sucks all four ways.
 
 
You can post your opinion about „ALS Scan“!
Please help us build an impartial review for each featured site!

Smiles
Your name:   
Font colour: Close tags
Settings:
HTML On
BBCode On
Smiles On
Disable BBCode in this post
Disable Smilies in this post
Captcha code:
          

new! Write a short review of any site existing in our ratings and get the prize:
15-min prepaid pin-code to HotMovies.com — giant movie achive! Read more »

PornInspector.com
Discounts Categories Sample Videos Sample Galleries Featured Models Forum News Polls
My Profile
*
Last Poll
Is a paysite subscription discount important for you?
No, it doesn’t matter to me. I focus on other factors
Subscription discount may influence my decision
Subscription discount is very important for me
FAQ | Inspectors | Friends | Site map
 
*
Featured Sites
Babes.com (4.9)
1 By Day (4.8)