Ampix Reviews

Review # 4

This is just a general preface, not necessary to the review, you'll find it two paragraphs onwards.


Have you ever heard of the line, "There are no ugly women, only women who don't know how to show their beauty"? I've pretty much always thought it was a load of bull, but in -photography- at least, I think it's true. So much of the time people settle for posting unflattering pictures or simply resort to gratuitous explicit nudity to make up for the unflattering ones, and it's so not necessary.

Also, a lot of big girls get bashed on the ampics forum, I think, not because they're big girls, but because they can't take a pretty picture. (Not that it's not due to fat bashing too, of course). There's a distinct prejudice there, because some of the skinny girls who are total uggos and can't take pictures either probably never get slagged nearly as much. It's why it always pleases me so much to see a woman who might not be the masses ideal of -perfect- be able to show that she -is- beautiful, if not by convincing the viewer that he finds her attractive then at least convincing him that plenty of others do...and she knows it.

Elizabeth's Thread

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=428230


Okay, so as she clearly states, Elizabeth's thread is a plus size chick's thread, so if you're looking for teeny tiny women in here, you're not going to get it. Having accepted that, you can appreciate the photos for themselves, how attractive aesthetically they are -- not how skinny they are.

To start with, an observation I have to make is that while I abhor shots that just say, show a pair of titties and nothing else, I love skin, and I -love- shots that only show a glimpse of say a breast, a leg, an ass. The threadstarter has lovely, creamy skin, and shows it off frequently. I'm also a fan of the artsy types of photos, and just the effort that's put in is a plus in the points column. That said, obviously these are amateur photoshop efforts, and it shows.

So far as I can see, at least from the photographs, Elizabeth's best features are her breasts, so it's pleasing that they frequently make appearances. Most of the pictures that I might otherwise find utterly useless are saved by the appearance of her nipples, which I have to say, are money.

In amongst the more mediocre of photographs that are scattered throughout the pages, there are some truly magnificent shots, and more like these will most certainly bring the overall thread score up.

Points were deducted for some general mediocrity in photographic quality (blinding white light) as well as repetition (the bad, not the good), ehh in conversation, and a few shots that might have well done to have been excluded from the final cut.

Thread score - 6.6.

https://forum.literotica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=626882
https://forum.literotica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=626928
https://forum.literotica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=627174
 
bg23 said:
Review # 4

This is just a general preface, not necessary to the review, you'll find it two paragraphs onwards.


Have you ever heard of the line, "There are no ugly women, only women who don't know how to show their beauty"? I've pretty much always thought it was a load of bull, but in -photography- at least, I think it's true. So much of the time people settle for posting unflattering pictures or simply resort to gratuitous explicit nudity to make up for the unflattering ones, and it's so not necessary.

Also, a lot of big girls get bashed on the ampics forum, I think, not because they're big girls, but because they can't take a pretty picture. (Not that it's not due to fat bashing too, of course). There's a distinct prejudice there, because some of the skinny girls who are total uggos and can't take pictures either probably never get slagged nearly as much. It's why it always pleases me so much to see a woman who might not be the masses ideal of -perfect- be able to show that she -is- beautiful, if not by convincing the viewer that he finds her attractive then at least convincing him that plenty of others do...and she knows it.

Elizabeth's Thread

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=428230


Okay, so as she clearly states, Elizabeth's thread is a plus size chick's thread, so if you're looking for teeny tiny women in here, you're not going to get it. Having accepted that, you can appreciate the photos for themselves, how attractive aesthetically they are -- not how skinny they are.

To start with, an observation I have to make is that while I abhor shots that just say, show a pair of titties and nothing else, I love skin, and I -love- shots that only show a glimpse of say a breast, a leg, an ass. The threadstarter has lovely, creamy skin, and shows it off frequently. I'm also a fan of the artsy types of photos, and just the effort that's put in is a plus in the points column. That said, obviously these are amateur photoshop efforts, and it shows.

So far as I can see, at least from the photographs, Elizabeth's best features are her breasts, so it's pleasing that they frequently make appearances. Most of the pictures that I might otherwise find utterly useless are saved by the appearance of her nipples, which I have to say, are money.

In amongst the more mediocre of photographs that are scattered throughout the pages, there are some truly magnificent shots, and more like these will most certainly bring the overall thread score up.

Points were deducted for some general mediocrity in photographic quality (blinding white light) as well as repetition (the bad, not the good), ehh in conversation, and a few shots that might have well done to have been excluded from the final cut.

Thread score - 6.6.

https://forum.literotica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=626882
https://forum.literotica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=626928
https://forum.literotica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=627174
You forgot YOU'RE FIRED!!!
 
bg23 said:
Review # 4

This is just a general preface, not necessary to the review, you'll find it two paragraphs onwards.


Have you ever heard of the line, "There are no ugly women, only women who don't know how to show their beauty"? I've pretty much always thought it was a load of bull, but in -photography- at least, I think it's true. So much of the time people settle for posting unflattering pictures or simply resort to gratuitous explicit nudity to make up for the unflattering ones, and it's so not necessary.

Also, a lot of big girls get bashed on the ampics forum, I think, not because they're big girls, but because they can't take a pretty picture. (Not that it's not due to fat bashing too, of course). There's a distinct prejudice there, because some of the skinny girls who are total uggos and can't take pictures either probably never get slagged nearly as much. It's why it always pleases me so much to see a woman who might not be the masses ideal of -perfect- be able to show that she -is- beautiful, if not by convincing the viewer that he finds her attractive then at least convincing him that plenty of others do...and she knows it.

Elizabeth's Thread

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=428230


Okay, so as she clearly states, Elizabeth's thread is a plus size chick's thread, so if you're looking for teeny tiny women in here, you're not going to get it. Having accepted that, you can appreciate the photos for themselves, how attractive aesthetically they are -- not how skinny they are.

To start with, an observation I have to make is that while I abhor shots that just say, show a pair of titties and nothing else, I love skin, and I -love- shots that only show a glimpse of say a breast, a leg, an ass. The threadstarter has lovely, creamy skin, and shows it off frequently. I'm also a fan of the artsy types of photos, and just the effort that's put in is a plus in the points column. That said, obviously these are amateur photoshop efforts, and it shows.

So far as I can see, at least from the photographs, Elizabeth's best features are her breasts, so it's pleasing that they frequently make appearances. Most of the pictures that I might otherwise find utterly useless are saved by the appearance of her nipples, which I have to say, are money.

In amongst the more mediocre of photographs that are scattered throughout the pages, there are some truly magnificent shots, and more like these will most certainly bring the overall thread score up.

Points were deducted for some general mediocrity in photographic quality (blinding white light) as well as repetition (the bad, not the good), ehh in conversation, and a few shots that might have well done to have been excluded from the final cut.

Thread score - 6.6.

https://forum.literotica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=626882
https://forum.literotica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=626928
https://forum.literotica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=627174


I don't believe that you captured the true beauty of this lady... she is fun, playful and her pictures are always sexy... Hope that you reconsider... I would score her much higher.... :) Reviewers always seem to want to be critical... Lighten up.....
 
Olivia_Yearns said:
bg, your reviews are great. I hope you'll put an index of reviewed threads on your front page, with scores next to them. This could be a classic.

Here is my request: You will become famous and many women will flock to you for reviews. Please don't reveiw the far from perfect women who didn't ask you to review them. There are people over there having their fun who are there for compliments, not critique, and specifically ask people to be gentle.

So far these have been great.

Hi Olivia,

Thanks, and thanks for the request. I'm staying far away from threads that ask people to "be gentle" -- chances are, most people already know what that means, and it's not necessary to review. I can't however promise not to review the threads with far from perfect women, because that's like simply reviewing all the award winning tv shows, and well, what's the point in that? I don't review based on looks alone, and I like to think that even if I grade harshly I don't do so cruelly. So while I will stay away from those who are specifically there for compliments alone, I can't promise very much else.
 
CanadianM said:
I don't believe that you captured the true beauty of this lady... she is fun, playful and her pictures are always sexy... Hope that you reconsider... I would score her much higher.... :) Reviewers always seem to want to be critical... Lighten up.....

i know you would. you're an ampic-er. i'm a GBer, i'm critical of almost everyone.

take a look at my other reviews, you won't see many particularly high scores.

i'm leaving room to be seriously wow-ed.
 
bg23 said:
you're an ampic-er. i'm a GBer...
Now the Star-bellied Sneetches had bellies with stars.
The Plain-bellied Sneetches had none upon thars.
The stars weren't so big; they were really quite small.
You would think such a thing wouldn't matter at all.
But because they had stars, all the Star-bellied Sneetches
would brag, "We're the best kind of Sneetch on the beaches."

https://www.tbpcontrol.co.uk/TWS/CoverImages_00/000/715/0007158505.jpg

/no idea why that came to mind.
 
CanadianM said:
I don't believe that you captured the true beauty of this lady... she is fun, playful and her pictures are always sexy... Hope that you reconsider... I would score her much higher.... :) Reviewers always seem to want to be critical... Lighten up.....


That is the point of reviewing.

If she made a thread about asskissing and ego stroking, we'd just have the same 500000 pages of "ZOMG UR SO HOT IM MASTURBATING" that every single picture, good, bad, and ugly, gets in that forum on a daily basis.

Which is why most of the GB tends to only peek in there when someone else reviews it and posts a link :D

Not everyone has the same opinion. This is BG's opinion thread, I'm quite sure she's not going to alter her opinions to suit you or anyone else.
 
Jailhouse said:
Now the Star-bellied Sneetches had bellies with stars.
The Plain-bellied Sneetches had none upon thars.
The stars weren't so big; they were really quite small.
You would think such a thing wouldn't matter at all.
But because they had stars, all the Star-bellied Sneetches
would brag, "We're the best kind of Sneetch on the beaches."

https://www.tbpcontrol.co.uk/TWS/CoverImages_00/000/715/0007158505.jpg

/no idea why that came to mind.


Your avatar is funny, but your old one was kind of sexy.

C+
 
Hey BG, these are really good.
Snappy and unapologetic, honest and brazen.

Rock on.
 
bg23 said:
Review # 4

This is just a general preface, not necessary to the review, you'll find it two paragraphs onwards.


Have you ever heard of the line, "There are no ugly women, only women who don't know how to show their beauty"? I've pretty much always thought it was a load of bull, but in -photography- at least, I think it's true. So much of the time people settle for posting unflattering pictures or simply resort to gratuitous explicit nudity to make up for the unflattering ones, and it's so not necessary.

Also, a lot of big girls get bashed on the ampics forum, I think, not because they're big girls, but because they can't take a pretty picture. (Not that it's not due to fat bashing too, of course). There's a distinct prejudice there, because some of the skinny girls who are total uggos and can't take pictures either probably never get slagged nearly as much. It's why it always pleases me so much to see a woman who might not be the masses ideal of -perfect- be able to show that she -is- beautiful, if not by convincing the viewer that he finds her attractive then at least convincing him that plenty of others do...and she knows it.

Elizabeth's Thread

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=428230


Okay, so as she clearly states, Elizabeth's thread is a plus size chick's thread, so if you're looking for teeny tiny women in here, you're not going to get it. Having accepted that, you can appreciate the photos for themselves, how attractive aesthetically they are -- not how skinny they are.

To start with, an observation I have to make is that while I abhor shots that just say, show a pair of titties and nothing else, I love skin, and I -love- shots that only show a glimpse of say a breast, a leg, an ass. The threadstarter has lovely, creamy skin, and shows it off frequently. I'm also a fan of the artsy types of photos, and just the effort that's put in is a plus in the points column. That said, obviously these are amateur photoshop efforts, and it shows.

So far as I can see, at least from the photographs, Elizabeth's best features are her breasts, so it's pleasing that they frequently make appearances. Most of the pictures that I might otherwise find utterly useless are saved by the appearance of her nipples, which I have to say, are money.

In amongst the more mediocre of photographs that are scattered throughout the pages, there are some truly magnificent shots, and more like these will most certainly bring the overall thread score up.

Points were deducted for some general mediocrity in photographic quality (blinding white light) as well as repetition (the bad, not the good), ehh in conversation, and a few shots that might have well done to have been excluded from the final cut.

Thread score - 6.6.

https://forum.literotica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=626882
https://forum.literotica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=626928
https://forum.literotica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=627174

thanks for reviewing.
 
CanadianM said:
I don't believe that you captured the true beauty of this lady... she is fun, playful and her pictures are always sexy... Hope that you reconsider... I would score her much higher.... :) Reviewers always seem to want to be critical... Lighten up.....

.......my hero :heart: :heart: :heart: :heart: :heart:
 
Excellent!
I'm glad I don't have an ampics thread though, I'm rubbish at the artsy stuff and you'd give me a crap score for it. :p
 
I'm looking forward to seeing the bg treatment unleashed on some of the juicier AmPics targets. Those mentioned so far are all varying degrees of good looking; i.e, not the norm. I sense she's just getting warmed up.
 
Angel said:
BG gave you extremely glowing compliments, and you focus on a number score LOL.

who said i focused on a number :confused:
i said thank you for the review and then i also posted my appreciated what canadian had to say.

i think BG gave me a fair assesment. i dont expect anything more/less.

tootles,
liz
 
elizabeth22673 said:
who said i focused on a number :confused:
i said thank you for the review and then i also posted my appreciated what canadian had to say.

i think BG gave me a fair assesment. i dont expect anything more/less.

tootles,
liz

Don't worry about her assessments whether yay or nay. She's most likely been hanging around the wrong types in here lately.

Not long before all this bg23 was posting how her mum had grounded her for the weekend.

But now she's an aficiondo of perfection/qualms with Ampix photos.

Good reading, though :)
 
elizabeth22673 said:
who said i focused on a number :confused:
i said thank you for the review and then i also posted my appreciated what canadian had to say.

i think BG gave me a fair assesment. i dont expect anything more/less.

tootles,
liz


It was my opinion based on your lackluster "Thanks" to BG and your "OMG :heart: :rose: :rose: :p " response to that other guy.
 
Morcheeba said:
Don't worry about her assessments whether yay or nay. She's most likely been hanging around the wrong types in here lately.

Not long before all this bg23 was posting how her mum had grounded her for the weekend.

But now she's an aficiondo of perfection/qualms with Ampix photos.

Good reading, though :)

Thanks Morch, I'm glad you find it good reading -- that was part of my intent.

As to your advice to Liz about worrying about my assessments - sound advice, of course, but I find myself thinking that it might have been more apt had Liz not actually asked me to review her thread herself.

Yes, you're right, I was posting about that. It's interesting that you should bring that up, I'm not sure what relevance it has except as some sort of implicit insult. After all, surely my ability to review pictures has nothing to do with my age, or my relationship with my mother?

As to being an afficionado (I assume that's what you meant, as I'm not sure what aficiondo is) of perfection/qualms with Ampics -- well, no. I'm not an afficionado of perfection or qualms, because being an afficionado means to be an avid admirer of, and I'm not certain I'm an admirer of perfection/qualms. Certainly I admire photographs and all their interesting facets, but to admire qualms is an odd thing to do. So yes, I'm an afficionado of photographs, but I suspect you may have meant the word in a different way, perhaps some sort of suggestion that I claim expertise, which of course, I do not.

All I have presented in these "reviews" is, as Angel said, my opinions. You are, of course, encouraged to form your own and raise objections should you take issue with any of my observations.
 
bg23 said:
but I find myself thinking that it might have been more apt had Liz not actually asked me to review her thread herself.
i want your opinion...but only if you promise to have an opinion i like.
 
Back
Top