Thanks to you and your team for consistently making the best out of your models, and for sharing those gifts. It's a daily delight, and the first thing I check when I settle in with my computer, because it IS such a delight.
Tom A. - Savannah, Georgia, USA
Your photos are always erotic and sexy, but at the same time, tasteful and never vulgar. Over the years, I've tried other websites, thinking that I was missing something ... but I always end up coming back to this site. I've decided that there is no need to check out the others anymore ... the real deal is right here. Please don't change a thing that you're doing. You are far above the others as far as tasteful, erotic photos and videos go. I hope that you guys will be around for a long time.
Mike H. - Cedar Rapids, Iowa, USA
I've actually been considering over the last few weeks how to express my appreciation for Digital Desire, and defining what makes the website of particular value.One thing, for certain, is professionalism. I've had subscriptions at other, primarily European, sites with daily galleries of beautiful young women but have been ultimately frustrated by their inconsistency and inattention to detail. At [MetArt] there are a few photographers that understand composition, light and color, but far too many of them produce shots that are poorly exposed or simply lame. Amazingly, few of them bother to put effort into the model's makeup, or to employ anyone to attend to that detail -- just because a model is a pretty girl does not mean she knows t he first thing about makeup, particularly her own. Some have no makeup at all, and look washed out and plain in set after set. And some of the photographers pay no attention to a model's color in the context of the set; the most common mistake is placing a very pale, very blonde Eastern European model on a set with white walls, white furnishing, white sheets -- where'd she go?
All of this is compounded by a complete lack of editing. The photographer shot 150 pictures? Fine, throw them all against the wall and post them. Don't review them for color balance or composition, just chuck them up and go on to the next one. Once you've created the expectation of four sets per day, with at least 100 shots, I guess you're stuck with that formula and have to keep feeding naked girls to the customers regardless of the quality. I'd rather find 30-40 photos that someone has taken the time and effort to create, compose and edit, and that's what I get here.
I also really appreciate you and your staff's honesty. "Yes, those are fake boobs, and sometimes that works other times it doesn't." I love the lack of hardcore and agree that the models are so much more fun to look at without the "weiners the size of my arm" getting in the way. I did love porn when there was a lot of kissing, and foreplay, and at least the pretense that the people onscreen liked one another. Today's porn, to me, is far too cold and demeaning to women and I appreciate the respect and affection I see in your work.
I know that, coming in off the street, many of the models have flaws--pimples, big noses, thick waists--but you and the other photographers bring out so much beauty it doesn't matter that they (like all women) aren't perfect. With your art and craft, they come damn close.
Jasper L. - Birmingham, UK
Hi JSH -- I've collected DD/Hicks material for 12 years, have been a DD site member for (I think) 6 years. I like the site for the models you photograph, but I see many/most of these models elsewhere. What keeps me renewing my membership is the way DD presents these models. I guess I would have to call it your aesthetic -- the atmosphere you create that allows these women to stretch out and do some of their best work. There is your eye, of course -- and Mark & Charles (& Scott Evans when he was there) -- but there are other talented photographers.
Your eye, your way of seeing, combined with your aesthetic, your bringing out the best in each model, make your work instantly recognizable, even in another venue. Kayden Kross comes to mind: the sets & videos she did for DD & the material your shop did for Twistys are some of her best work; there is no comparison to the majority of the sets on her website (mostly junk). Hailee Rain is another example: She's now CyberGirl of the Month for Playboy (as Kylie Pyles) and she's still the same beautiful, voluptuous model, but her sets are flat and unimaginative. Her DD sets, on the other hand, had a snap to them that the PB sets entirely lack. Going back even farther: the work Kyla Cole did for you was absolutely her best, and some of the best sets ever. (I hope you plan to re-scan & reissue those wonderful set in the future).
To sum up: I subscribe because as a member I get to see the best models doing their best work, both still photography and video. Keep up the standard & good luck in these rocky economic times.
Geoff Ingle, - Cincinatti, Ohio, USA
Hi guys at DD, Just wanted to tell you of my recent experience with other websites. I've had a subscription to DD for a number of months and love the site but found myself wanting something steamier if you want to call it that. Well I'd gotten myself a subscription to another site (videobox), it lasted a day, I've cancelled already. I've grown tired of the hardcore sites where the photography/videography is crap and the models are treated like meat. Thanks for showing me the DD way, I love the lighting, photography style, models, background info, model info and the general feel about DD and long may it be king of the hill. Keep the good stuff rolling!
Hi Stephen, so why do I keep returning to the site? I've lost track how long I've been a member but it was since your site was called Digital Dreamgirls I think. One KEY reason for my support is simply the classy way the girls are being presented. I'll compare against sites I've seen, Twisty's gets somewhat mechanical, lights are straight on, girls are overdone, the hardcore is ok for a while, but again, overdone after some time. Metart imho, feels weird--the girls seem too cold, presentation appears rigid, it is almost like a catalogue if you know what I mean?? Playboy, is very inconsistent--girls are too random, and in my view not too special. Probably because they keep fishing in the same pool.
What I've found digital desire to have done very well is the ability to present a girl in such an erotic fashion, YET never letting the girl seem cheap or classless. It's the ability to portray a girl who seems to be trying to turn you on in person, vs. a girl who's POSING in front of a camera! Let's face it, with all the outstanding work you guys have done, it's still very easy for someone to belittle you as a "porn provider". But you guys just do it with so much CLASS. Please keep up the good work. track the ratings and give us more great stuff!
Jack W. - Auckland, New Zealand
I've been a member of many other adult sites and your site is definitely the best I've ever experienced--most other sites don't even come close for quality, variety and value for money. I would highly recommend your site to other people.
Kenneth T - El Paso, TX, USA
Just wanted to let you and your team know that you've got an AWESOME site running!! EXCELLENT photography (got me interested in purchasing a Digital SLR camera!) and BEAUTIFUL BEAUTIFUL models!
Phil L. - Rochester, NY, USA
This is really just to say thanks for another great year of inspiring pictures, amazing women and superb photo technique. You guys really do know how to make a man happy Keep up the good work.
Jo G. - Sydney, Australia
Your photography is unmatched! And your girls are beautiful. Thank you for your hard work.
James A. - Vancouver, BC, Canada
Guys, I've joined plenty of sites over the years, but Digital Desire is one that I'm always coming back to. The attention to detail is evident in every one of your images. I also feel that your work is more of a celebration of a girl's beauty, rather than simply an exploitation of it. Hell, I even look at your photos and videos with my wife. Keep rockin'!
Peter W. - Bakersfiend, CA, USA