How do we evaluate in our reviews?

The rating system of PornSiteTest.com

On PornSiteTest.com we are publi­shing infor­ma­ti­on about the rating, com­pa­ri­son and ana­ly­sis of adult pay sites. On this page, you can read how the rating cri­te­ria of the star ratings are composed.

Although our test-reports are of cour­se purely sub­jec­ti­ve reviews, we try to crea­te a good and honest com­pa­ri­son with our experiences.

All stars and rating-bars are added tog­e­ther and from their sums the avera­ge from 0 to 100 in per­cent is cal­cu­la­ted. The posi­ti­on of the reports depends on the total avera­ge. The best reports are lis­ted at the top and the worst at the bottom.

Image quality:

How is the qua­li­ty of the photos?

• * high reso­lu­ti­on > 1200 x 800
• * good / bad light­ing, colors / contrasts
• * good / bad location
• * many / less dif­fe­rent perspectives
• * free of image errors / blur
• ** per­so­nal impres­si­on of the authors

Video quality:

How is the qua­li­ty of the vide­os rated?

• * high reso­lu­ti­on > 720 x 576 (SD)
• * good/bad illu­mi­na­ti­on, colors/contrasts
• * good/bad location
• * good/poor came­ra work
• * free of image errors / blur
• ** per­so­nal impres­si­on of the authors

Sound quality:

How is the sound-quality in the porn videos?

• * balan­ced volume
• * free from back­ground, came­ra, micro noises
• * Original sound/sync
• * good/bad music (or none)
• * free of sound errors/sound dropouts
• ** per­so­nal impres­si­on of the authors

Exclusivity:

How exclu­si­ve are the pic­tures and videos?

• 0 0% self-produced
• * 20% self-produced
• ** 40% self-produced
• *** 60% self-produced
• **** 80% self-produced
• ***** 100% own production/ but also on other web­sites (resel­ler)
• ****** 100% self-produced/ only on this website

Models:

How do the models look like on the pic­tures and videos?

• * Naturalness
• * well-groomed appearance
• * Appearance
• * Physique
• * Charisma
• ** per­so­nal impres­si­on of the authors

Authentic feelings:

How authen­tic do the models‘ fee­lings appear?

• * yes/no arti­fi­ci­al con­ti­nuous moaning
• * yes/no Real orgasms
• * yes/no Real phy­si­cal reactions
• * yes/no con­stant loo­king into camera
• * yes/no exag­ge­ra­ted faking (acting)
• ** per­so­nal impres­si­on of the authors

Variety:

Is varie­ty pro­vi­ded on the ero­tic sites and in the pic­tures and videos?

• * dif­fe­rent poses
• * dif­fe­rent loca­ti­ons (back­grounds, rooms, outdoor)
• * dif­fe­rent models
• * dif­fe­rent came­ra perspectives
• * dif­fe­rent plot / stories
• * Videos / pic­tures not leng­thy or boring
• * per­so­nal impres­si­on of the authors

Exceptionality of the project:

How extra­or­di­na­ry is the porn site?

• 0 theme, con­tent, con­cept are not­hing special
• * often seen theme, but well implemented
• ** alre­a­dy often seen topic, but new ideas brought in
• *** rare theme / litt­le competition
• **** total­ly new idea / unique
• ** per­so­nal impres­si­on of the authors

Content quantity:

Rating how many pho­tos and / or images are actual­ly included in the mem­bers area.

• 0 less than 2500 pho­tos / 25 videos
• * more than 2500 pho­tos / 25 videos
• ** more than 5000 pho­tos / 50 videos
• *** more than 7500 pho­tos / 75 videos
• **** more than 10000 pho­tos / 100 videos
• ***** more than 12500 pho­tos / 125 videos
• ****** more than 15000 pho­tos / 150 videos

Promises / Reality:

Do the pro­mi­ses regar­ding the quan­ti­ty, con­tent and qua­li­ty of the con­tent match?

• 0 do not match at all
• * it was exag­ge­ra­ted excessively
• ** agree, but some­thing was concealed
• *** agree, but some­thing was exaggerated
• **** agree, but bet­ter was expected
• ***** All expec­ta­ti­ons of the visi­tor were met
• ****** Expectations of site far exceeded

Sexual stimulation:

How arou­sing are the vide­os and images for the viewer?

• 0 dis­gus­ting / extre­me­ly bor­ing / disappointing
• * very abtur­ning / boring
• ** some­what tur­ning off / boring
• *** quite nice to look at (but not­hing more)
• **** sti­mu­la­ting (some­thing is stirring)
• ***** total­ly awe­so­me (boner alarm)
• ****** above avera­ge horny (dan­ger of spitting)

Design:

How is the design of the ero­tic site?

• * Clear structure/subdivision
• * Functional and easy to use
• * Appealing gra­phics and design elements
• * sui­ta­ble colors
• * coher­ent con­cept, the­ma­ti­cal­ly suitable
• ** per­so­nal impres­si­on of the authors

Navigation:

How easy is it to brow­se the site? How is the page structure?

• 0 extre­me­ly cumbersome
• * dif­fi­cult to use
• ** under­stan­da­ble after some training
• *** well operable
• **** very good
• ***** simp­le and intuitive
• ****** inge­nious concept

Preview area:

How inte­res­t­ing and infor­ma­ti­ve is the pre­view area of the sex site designed?

• * Photo pre­view (pho­tos in ori­gi­nal size) available
• * Video pre­view available
• * Model pre­view available
• * Information about the content
• * Information about AVS, costs, mem­ber­ship, can­cel­la­ti­on available
• * FAQ available
• * Number of pages grea­ter than 10

Updates:

How often is the site updated?

• 0 none / no information
• * irre­gu­lar­ly
• ** every 6 months
• *** every 3 months
• **** month­ly
• ***** weekly
• ****** daily

Download speed:

What is the down­load speed of the porn site when suck­ing in kiloBits per second?

• 0 less than 50kb/s
• * more than 50 kb/s
• ** more than 100 kb/s
• *** more than 200 kb/s
• **** more than 300 kb/s
• ***** more than 400 kb/s
• ****** more than 500 kb/s

Costs:

What are the costs for one month? 

• 0 more than $ 40 / month
• * less than $ 40 / month
• ** less than $ 35 EUR / month
• *** less than $ 30 EUR / month (avera­ge)
• **** less than $ 25 EUR / month
• ***** less than $ 20 EUR / month
• ****** less than $ 15 EUR / month

Price / Performance:

To what ext­ent do you get a reasonable per­for­mance for the price in comparison?

• 0 very bad
• * very bad
• ** bad
• *** accep­ta­ble
• **** good
• ***** very good
• ****** excep­tio­nal­ly good

Payment:

How is the pay­ment evaluated?

• * Payment pos­si­ble wit­hout cre­dit card
• * cor­rect debi­ting of the sel­ec­ted rate
• * Clearly reco­gnizable pur­po­se of the bil­ling com­pa­ny on account statement
• * simp­le and under­stan­da­ble procedure
• * Payment con­fir­ma­ti­on imme­dia­te­ly by email
• * Contact details of the bil­ling com­pa­ny available

Price transparency:

To what ext­ent is the price open­ly presented?

• * Price cle­ar­ly reco­gnizable in the preview
• * Subscription offers cle­ar­ly recognizable
• * Detailed descrip­ti­on of pay­ment methods and subscriptions
• * Terms and con­di­ti­ons available
• * Company data of the pro­vi­der available
• * Transaction over­view available (infor­ma­ti­on on follow-up costs after con­clu­si­on of contract)

Cancellation of the subscription:

Since most porn sites are bil­led as a month­ly sub­scrip­ti­on – How easy is the cancellation?

• * Cancellation noti­ce in the email sub­scrip­ti­on con­fir­ma­ti­on with direct link
• * Cancellation noti­ce on the web­site is not hidden
• * no can­cel­la­ti­on period
• * Cancellation via online-form (not writ­ten by mail or email)
• * simp­le, uncom­pli­ca­ted procedure
• * Cancellation con­fir­ma­ti­on imme­dia­te­ly by email

Advertising: Is the customer harassed with advertising (SPAM)?

• * no unso­li­ci­ted email advertising
• * no adver­ti­sing banners
• * no popups
• * no HTML5 / Flash layer
• * no adver­ti­sing for other offers of the operator

Fairness:

Are there any unfair rip-off methods on the porn site?

• * no pre­sel­ec­ted opti­ons in forms (cross-selling checkboxes)
• * no addi­tio­nal costs in the alre­a­dy paid mem­ber area
• * No hid­den costs in the pre­view layout
• * no other unfair methods
• * Subscriptions and can­cel­la­ti­on con­di­ti­ons are poin­ted out
• * easy to reach cus­to­mer support

Overall impression:

Subjective, sum­ma­ri­zed over­all impres­si­on of the author.

• 0 extre­me­ly bad
• * very bad
• ** poor
• *** accep­ta­ble
• **** good
• ***** very good
• ****** excep­tio­nal­ly good