| Review:
Here's something we just cut and paste from our About page:
"A point of caution when reading any site review: Always keep in mind
the date of review. This should be posted. A site that was a dog
a year ago might have really improved under new management, while even
the best sites can go downhill or stop adding new material (hint: always
look to see if the preview lists recent updates before
joining)."
Why do we begin our review with this warning? Because SuperGlam got
in touch with us (and every other review site, apparently) just after
their launch. They wanted reviews right away. There are a number of
adult sites that have done this. For what it is worth, we think this is
a bad idea. Ideally, you shouldn't be getting reviewed until you've been
online for about a year. It takes that long to work out the bugs and get
a good archive of content going. Even for the big-budget sites it takes
time.
SuperGlam is a big-budget site. But it was also quite new when we
visited. And so we're giving it a good grade mostly on the strength of
its potential and the fact that it is coming out with a substantial
update every day.
Basically SuperGlam is a European site featuring a lot of young,
"completely shaved" girls in high-res photography solo action.
To our experienced (jaded?) eyes it seemed to be almost a carbon-copy of
ALS Scan. And in time
there's no doubt that's what it will turn into. The main difference is
that for now there is a lot less content.
When we visited (check date) there were a total of only 20 models and 28
videos. The site was full of
notes as to what was "Comming Soon!" There is a model named
Kim who is apparently the site's "host". It says she does
interviews with some of the models (in what language? we have to
wonder), but these were all "comming soon" (despite being
advertised on the main Join page).
Kim is also supposed to be writing a regular Editorial, but these were
also "comming soon". In the meantime Kim's "Personal
Tips and Suggestions for this Week" were just advertisements
for (unwashed) panties signed by the models and DVDs for sale.
To find the movies we had to go to the movie section. That may sound
obvious, but there were also a lot of inactive links to the movies from
the individual model pages. We got messages in the usual pidgin:
"We will add very soon also parts of the video to watch and to
download." Well, if it's not there, don't post a link.
All of this is just griping about a site that had only been launched
for a little over a month when we visited. However, if you ask for a
review we think it makes sense to have something that's fully up and
running first.
Otherwise the news is pretty good. The pics are huge and sharp
(1500x1000), but don't offer a great deal of variety within sets. The girls are
fresh. There are some familiar faces, but the site is shooting all its
own content. There is no filler or licensed material. The video files are quite large, all clocking in at well over 100
megs and playing back well fullscreen. On the downside, we thought the
pace was kind of slow and could have used some editing. It also might have
made sense to have broken some of the movies up into shorter clips. The
action is all solo girl stripping, posing, behind-the-scenes footage, and toy play.
Some lesbian was "comming soon", but not available when we
visited. Absolutely no cock. Like we said, the whole thing is a
duplicate production of ALS Scan. If you liked that site, you'll like
this because it's really more of the same. And vice versa.
We checked and the updates are faithfully occurring daily. In another
couple of months we'd probably feel better about this rating, but for
now we're grading it more on its potential (which is something we
hate doing). But it should be good.
When we visited it was just not living up to all its promise yet. And
not living up to its price.
|
