This site is scored based on photo content—not video!
Whenever I review a site like Our Sex Photos, I am always amazed at how many couples out there not only film and photograph their sex life, but also agree to have it up on the Web for everyone to see. I mean, who knew that so much of the world's population has an exhibitionist streak? Then again with some celebrity careers being launched by sex tapes, many folks see themselves as stars.
Obviously, OurSexPhotos has the word "photo" right there in the sitename, but that doesn't mean that there aren't any vids. It does perhaps explain, though, why there's such a small number of them. You will only find seven videos. They can be found mixed in with a few photo sets in the section dedicated to couples who submitted both galleries and videos.
Enter one of the sets and scroll to the bottom of the page. There you will see several JW Players and beneath them is a download link to the files. The footage isn't all that impressive, as each scene is average in quality. Most are broken up into parts, but some are in full-length.
The content doesn't seem to be exclusive. Not only did I recognize some scenes, but I also did some investigating that seemed to confirm my hunch. Also, I recognized performers that I had seen on other porn websites (and not made-at-home sites either), meaning some of the content was of a more professional variety than you might assume heading into the site - although, much of it wasn't, which is nice.
The main content is really the 578 photo sets that combine to house 62,646 pics. The photos are presented as thumbnail links in the middle of the page as well as text links on the left-hand side of the page and they are divided into different niches. Some have the word "sets" and others "mix."
Most of the "sets" have about 60 shots in them (they conveniently give you the amount), but the ones called "mix" act as humongous galleries loaded with hundreds, sometimes even thousands, of pics. I find this odd since they essentially repeat the same niches, like hardcore, solo, mature and group sex.
It's also less convenient when you're looking through them. I wish they had divided them into individual sets when they redesigned the members' area, but it's essentially the same setup except with the 10 newest additions showing up on the right of the homepage.
There are some big, high-res shots that look great and also smaller blurry ones. Besides the niches I already mentioned, you can also look forward to seeing interracial action, blowjobs, lesbians and handjobs. They added Zip files to the galleries that are organized by set, but you'll have to save the ones in the "mix" sections individually.
The tour mentions daily updates, but there's no way to confirm if this is true. What doesn't help is that the collection is smaller than it used to be instead of bigger. For now we'll assume that things are like they were when we last visited the site, meaning they stopped updating. We'll know where things stand when we compare the content numbers on our next update.
The big selling point for Our Sex Photos is its low monthly price tag. If you're someone who likes true amateur action and prefer pics to vids, then there's a good chance that you'll enjoy visiting the site for the few bucks they are asking. If you have already been here within the last few years, then don't bother going back.
|By: A.K. Anderson|
|Number of Reviews: 1471|
|Average Score: 65.6|
|$11.95/30 days, rebills at $10.95|
|$29.95/90 days, rebills at $27.95|
|Cross Sales: No|
|Pic sets: 578+||Pics per set: 60||Zip sets: Yes|
|Pic Res: 1024x768||High Res: Yes|
|Number of movies: 7+||HD Porn: No||Streaming: Yes|
|Average Length: 8 mins||Full length videos: Yes||Download Limits: No
MP4 (856x480; 1152k)
MP4 (856x480; 1152k; streaming)
|Independent Biller(s):||CCBill, Epoch|
Pros & Cons
-some high-res pictures
-zipped photo sets
12/14/2012- Stays at 48. -Will
03/10/2012- From 60 to 48: Scores adjusted to new criteria. -A.K.
04/15/2011- From 64 to 60: Amount score reduced due to counting the pics by archive, rather than individually. -Will
11/02/2010- From 73 to 64: No updates in 10 months. -A.K.
04/16/2010- Stays at 73. -A.K.
10/09/2009- From 65 to 73: Updates are more frequent. -Chris - Initial review: 12/7/2008