Photos - What are you looking for?

[Monk]

Photography is clearly one of the key tools in the arsenal of a provider selling her services online. And one of the most controversial. Why? Because photos aren’t really a depiction of reality, but a manipulation of reality.

We’ve certainly discussed at length the various tricks of the trade – hidden bellies, hidden scars, careful angles and lighting, etc. Does she reveal her face? (Or, simply, is she trying to pass images of someone else off as her own.)

My question is: what works? What types of photos tend to push your buttons and lead you to respond to an ad?

I’ve noticed, for example, that more and more explicit photos are being posted on the various ad sites with more frequency. There are more naked breasts on Eros, Exotics, CV and CL than ever before. Not to mention out and out nudes (retouched on some sites – who are they kidding?). It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to make an educated guess that more explicit images lead to higher responses.

But is that really what we’re looking for? Or, do you search for something else. Do you want those expensively retouched Penthouse-quality porn-like images? Or is a nasty amateur shot from a Web cam enough to get you going?

 

[nycresponder]

I prefer a non-pro, the idea of a non-pro, and/or the girl who's doing this on a casual basis on the side of school or a low paying job. For this reason, i tend to be drawn to girls who post photos that aren't obviously professionally taken.

I don't like the slick photos that agencies like to use, and from reading others' complaints, it becomes apparent that you're usually not going to see the chick whose photo is posted when you pay in the $250 - $400 range.

I think the porn industry has realized this and is not pushing the more amateur style of porn videos and pictures, and I'm much more apt to follow up with a Craigslist post that has photos looking like an amateur rather than a pro.

Also, the ad needs to include multiple shots of the chick so I can make my own decision about whether it really is her posting, or if someone just stole one or two pictures from a website. This is a difficult one, but something I run with my gut on. Unfortunately I think the Craigslist text message scam folks figured this out, as they always offer 2 - 4 pictures of the same girl offering great rates and service. I've never bitten though.

 

[Monk]

Great post!

Just for the record, I've seen plenty of providers in the $250-400 range who do post "real" photos (or, at least, professional, airbrushed photos of themselves). Not necessarily off of a CL ad, though.

The issue of how to determine the veracity of photos has been discussed at length on this board. Ways to protect yourself include: asking the provider up front on the phone whether the photos are real, checking to see whether she's received favorable reviews (and whether the reviews discuss her photos), and, of course, searching UG to see if she's ever been discussed here. And, remember, CL is just one source (and not a particularly good source) for provider ads.

 

[ecpaul]

Miki the Milf has a great photographer who does a good job and doesn't go into any of that artificial (and I mean very obvious) retouching. He makes her look quite good, bringing out her beauty, and not using the photography to hide what she really looks like.

 

[masquerade]

I never ever tried to pass-off a fake photo as my own when I was into this sort of thing. Of course, I always utilized craig's list for my ad purposed (text only) and never offered up the pics until there'd been a little back and forth *****ing and I was pretty sure the dude was for real. I tried to include an accurate description of myself within the ad so that people wouldn't be wasting their time trying to contact me. The bait and switch is pretty sleazy if you ask me. Even if it's just a photoshopped, airbrushed photo of yourself, it's still a little underhanded. I like it when chicks have photos that look like the ad campaign for American Apparel. That's hot, and more importantly real looking.. and therefore really, really hot.

 

[Bandaid]

I avoid photos that are too "studio" also. I don't like photosets that don't show the face. I don't like photos where the model scowls or looks "dead," if you know what I mean.

 

[Monk]

I never ever tried to pass-off a fake photo as my own when I was into this sort of thing. Of course, I always utilized craig's list for my ad purposed (text only) and never offered up the pics until there'd been a little back and forth *****ing and I was pretty sure the dude was for real. I tried to include an accurate description of myself within the ad so that people wouldn't be wasting their time trying to contact me. The bait and switch is pretty sleazy if you ask me. Even if it's just a photoshopped, airbrushed photo of yourself, it's still a little underhanded. I like it when chicks have photos that look like the ad campaign for American Apparel. That's hot, and more importantly real looking.. and therefore really, really hot.

Just out of curiosity, how many responses did one text-only CL post tend to generate? It would be interesting to test a text-only ad vs. a photo ad, both for response volume but also the quality of those responding. I'm sure photos pull more, but I might venture a guess that text-only ads tend to weed out a lot of unqualified leads.

 

[Happy Hooker]

Just out of curiosity, how many responses did one text-only CL post tend to generate? It would be interesting to test a text-only ad vs. a photo ad, both for response volume but also the quality of those responding. I'm sure photos pull more, but I might venture a guess that text-only ads tend to weed out a lot of unqualified leads.

I have done that.

Men do respond a lot to no photos because they want to see them.

Then I put a photo ad and the response is average........ HEY!!! I dont think thats a compliment to me or my face!!!! ..F&%%%% S&^%$

But seriously, I find face photos are favorites.

Then again... face with tits, and a lil stomach.... and maybe some crotch work well too.

 

[masquerade]

Just out of curiosity, how many responses did one text-only CL post tend to generate? It would be interesting to test a text-only ad vs. a photo ad, both for response volume but also the quality of those responding. I'm sure photos pull more, but I might venture a guess that text-only ads tend to weed out a lot of unqualified leads.

well, I never once included a photo within the body of my actual ad, so I can't really offer an answer to your question that involves any kind of comparison. However, I can say that my text only ads always drew in way more responses than I could ever even reply to - so I guess I must have been doing something right. As I mentioned before, I always tried my best to be as descriptive as possible when it came to my looks, "donation" amount, and what I was offering. Sometimes I felt like my ads were a little too long winded, but I think most people actually appreciated how thorough I was. I feel like it definitely did suffice in weeding out a lot of unqualified leads.

Even when I got to the point in the ***** correspondance where I sent them a pic, I would only send a body shot. I sent out a pic of my face once and instantly regretted it.

 

[Inara]

I think photography style depends on the girl and what she wants to accomplish and who she wants to attract. I love my photos and like professional shoots. I do not retouch or alter them because I don't believe in false advertising, I also like my figure. I post daily ones on my blog. Me riding horses or when I cut my hair. That is the place for those and the are very non professional.

 

[Samuking]

I with Monk, I like the amateur ones also. To me they are in it part timer who are just trying to make extra money to supplement their income.

I really don't like the ones that are too professional since most of the professional photographers know how to shoot the correct angles to make them look good.

 

[Monk]

Inara, you make a great point about blogs being the place for amateur photos (and photos that don't necessarily have any sexual content). The problem many hobbyists have is whether the photo accurately reflects the provider. Having been burned several times, some hobbyists simply avoid providers posting professional shots for fear that these aren't really shots of the provider but simply images that have been ripped off of other sites.

 

[justlooking]

Also, professional shots are usually flattering. Amateur shots are usually either accurate or unflattering.

A lot of johns want to know what they're ACTUALLY going to see.

 

[jwills500]

RE: Photos

Lots of girls, especially college girls, do not like to post their face. They maybe future teachers or other image sensitive profession that frowns on this types of photos. Look at Miss New Jersey, hell I didn't think anything was wrong with the pictures I saw, but look at the flak she got.
So I don't get concerned with just body shots of the girl.

 

[Monk]

Well, here's the quandary: My guess is that well shot, provocative professional photos will illicit a better response -- especially at the higher end (and not in an environment such as CL, but on a provider Web site or one of the mall sites, like Eros). And, there's a also a reputation/respect issue to take into consideration. As a provider becomes more established, she may want to create a more professional presence in the community, and professional photos (like it or not) have become a status symbol. The few times I've discussed this with providers, they take a lot of pride in their sites, how they put them together, how much it cost, who shot their photos, etc.

On the other hand, as I mentioned in an earlier post, there is a group of hobbyists who have been burned using sites such as CL in which providers have "repurposed" professionally shot photos of other providers to solicit responses to their ads. Some of these hobbyists then use the presence of a professionally shot photo in an add as a way of screening out the ad for consideration.

All of this is just to say that there are a variety of issues at play here.

 

[franca]

There is no question that professional photos shot with a hair & make-up artist will generate more interest and more business. As long as you are good-looking enough in person to look as attractive as you do in the photos, I don't see a problem.

 

[justlooking]

It's funny you should say that, franca. Because -- and I apologize if this is an inappropriate comment -- to my possibly extremely idiosyncratic taste, you're someone who looks MUCH more appealing (make that VERY appealing) in real life than in your professional photos (which just look too contrived to me).

Although, as I said, my taste is probably very idiosyncratic.

 

[fairemily]

I never understood why some people take a lousy picture while others look fantastic in every shot. My sister never took a bad picture in her life while I take very unflattering photo's with the rare exception. What is it? lighting, angles, shadows, confidence.

 

[jseah]

yes to all of the above.

 

[jseah]

missed the damn edit deadline.......

lighting is key....soft, diffuse, indirect lighting is always more flattering than flat, harsh direct lighting. toss the pop-up flash and go with bouncing the flash off a wall, ceiling, umbrella.

using angles to your advantage, you can minimize certain flaws

shadows are helpful in adding depth to a shot. with no shadows, a picture looks very flat. shadows also give a very dramatic effect and can be overdone at times.

confidence definitely comes out in a picture. if the subject feels comfortable in their own skin, and are willing to have fun with the photo shoot, it will definitely show.