For those of you ladies who post clear and descriptive photos in your ads or website, my deepest thanks.

For those who post "artsy" shots please listen up. Please remember who your audience is, it’s us not Cosmopolitan magazine. I see far too often “Glam shots” that just simply convey no information.

How many times has it been discussed here that guys are visual? Too many by my count. So, here is a stab at a do-not-do list when it comes to photos.

These are just my opinions so I encourage all hobbyists to contribute to this list. Also, I deliberately did not post example of the “don’t” because I’m not trying to humiliate or embarrass anyone in particular. Hopefully this post will provoke some decent discussion.

Don’t’s
* The shots where the angle looks down from above, you know the one where the photographer has to get on a ladder looking down? Or maybe where you’re lying down and he is taking such an oblique shot where we can see your cleavage but not your knees? Ditch them.
* The ones where you are stretched back on the bed exposing your adam's apple and stretching your arms out? Ditch those too.
* The classic view of just a crack of your ass or a section of your cleavage, or for that matter any zoomed in shot of a single body part? They are useless too.
* The shot’s where you are looking sassy over your shoulder? Sorry, doesn’t work either.
* Any shot where your face is upside down when displayed on-screen is a bad shot.
* Any shot that hurts to pose for too long is probably not a good shot either. (notable exceptions of course)
* And last but not least, how about those strange expressions with your mouth wide open or staring up at the ceiling? Seductive maybe? C’mon, what were you thinking? It just looks foolish.

Do’s

(Disclaimer, for this section I deliberately picked examples of ladies that I either have not seen or are not known providers so that I could not be accused of shilling)

* The shot of you standing up or sitting up topless without a bra and letting us see the natural fall of your breasts? A winner in my book!
   http://www.eros-ny.com/file-images/1137456246869-8334.jpg
   http://corpsebabes.juicypornhost.com/johanna/pages/14.jpg
* That shot of you laying back with your hands supporting you and giving us a full view of the whole torso? Another winner.
   http://www.thebabelog.com/galleries/danni/Charmane/Charmane_17.jpg
   http://www.eros-lasvegas.com/file-images/lv-alexis82-inga1-5-14295.jpg
   http://corpsebabes.juicypornhost.com/johanna/pages/17.htm
* Any shot where it's clear enough to show the pores of your skin or the fine hair on your belly or arms is a great shot. It means it was not airbrushed.

The best advice? Follow your gut not your photographer’s artistic spirit. Simpler is better in this business. What I like to call “documentary” shots that show realism work real well for me.

Oh! Almost forgot. For those ladies who take bad posture shots to conceal their identity. That's fine but rely more on blurring your face rather than concealment by bad posture.
Here is a great example of a photo of a lady who uses the blur technique while still showing off her full assetts.
   http://www.decadentdesires.net/Satin/images/satindoll9.jpg

Sounds like you wamt all escorts to have similar, standard photos - how boring!

Photos were the photographer gets on a ladder can be fine if done well, I attach one as evidence

Most photo are touched up and smoothed.  Mine certainly are, for example if I have a visible bruise then I have it taken out.

At the end of the day, if you don't like her photos see somebody else.  Simple!

...in this hobby.

The first camp, which I'll affectionately refer to as the WBTYM (Wham Bam Thank You Ma'am) camp, wants to be getting down to business within in 30 seconds of coming through the door. For those in that camp, I'm certain trustNo20's comments are accurate. They're looking for a body, not a person, so they have no need of smiles, poses, lighting, etc. For these fellows a full-body mugshot will do just fine.

For those of us the the second camp, however, trustNo20's observations couldn't be more wrong. We want a more sensual, tantalizing experience from the session, so we're looking for a little personality in the photos to help ensure we'll "click" with the lady (at least from our end). I for one love to see a lady in a variety of poses, with as much or as little "artistry" as she deems a appropriate. A picture is worth a thousand words, so the more unique a lady's photos are, the more I can get a feel for her before we ever actually meet.

There are still some of us who prefer Playboy to Hustler.

-- Modified on 1/19/2006 12:25:35 PM

Most ladies already have the same photos and make many of the same mistakes. All I am highlighting in my post are the mistakes (IMHO) that are being made and then offering up some positive examples of what I believe are the improvements that are more likely to get me interested. PM me if your interested in more specific feedback.

Recognizing that this is very highly a matter of taste I respect that there might be differing opinions. That’s what the forum is for. But in the end, if I may speak with my sales and marketing hat on, a lady does herself a disservice if she thinks that a photo that conceals rather than reveals her best asset will win business. That said, I'm sure that some guys might not care, but for me personally, clear photos are what convince me to see a lady. Conversely, concealed or obtuse photos make me question the legitimacy of the ladies appearance in her ads.

Hey, let's face it, a lady has a right to post whatever photo she thinks is good for her. But the intent of my advice here is that if her objective is to drive business, then that objective is not being served by shadowy or artistic photos that conceal her true image. I believe you will find that most guys respond better to clear unobtuse photos than they do to unclear photos that do not paint the total picture.

Here is another example of a great shot.

http://51amour.sultryserver.com/devynne/image012.jpg

Sure it was probably airbrushed but the photographer got the lighting and contrast balanced and the photo was shot at eye level. This would be considered a more documentary shot but what is featured here are the ladies features... not what mood she is in. When I'm shopping for a session online that photo get's a click-through. The obtuse photos get a pass.

However, I consider myself more of a playboy admirer than a Hustler admirer. For me the clarity of the shot is what determines if the body type is my type. As for the sensual part, no photo will convince me positive or negative. If you've read some of my posts GFE is real important to me. However, a photo will never determin that. For me, only the lady's reviews will determine that. But the photo is what got me to search the review in the first place.

...so you'll have to make one up.

Please make sure your shoes fit !! That they arent 2 inches left behind and your toes arent floppping out the front! God that drives me NUTS!!!

but I don't remember pictures of naked women.  Maybe that's why I stopped playing...hmmm

I know that having pictures taken is a bother but keeping them fresh is a big plus.  Some of the ladies have had the same site up for 2 or 3 years.
Also, having them large enough, or employing the enlarge feature for each shot is very sensual.  The larger the better.
One negative shot,to me, is the one straight up the rear.  I'm sorry, but there is no way that comes off as flattering.
Also, a smile is nice.

Do you honestly think any provider is going to think to herself, "Trustno from TER doesn't like it when I look over my shoulder. Fuck, I better do something different."

If the answer is yes, please check your self importance elsewhere, because it doesn't work here.

you assume that the prov wants a certain type of business, ie, men slobbering all over her.  Of course that is the obvious marketing plan.

But it only takes one fool with a couple million bucks who thinks that some photo is "mysterious" enough to warrant paying for it.

I'm with you, shots that are honest & complete are more convincing than anything else.  But I'm not gonna pay a grand and think that I'm doing more than getting off, unless & until she starts showing me more than TER reviews.

Since this link would be very difficult to trace back to a specific provider I thought it would be safe to use as an example. Only if she speaks up would her identity be known.

But you've got to agree, this photo is an example of too small, too obtuse and in the end, it just doesn't close the sale.

-- Modified on 1/19/2006 2:01:01 PM

Ladies, you already know what we like.   A photo is pointless if it doesn't show what we like.  If it doesn't show it, we're gonna assume there's a reason to hide it.

To simply convey what a lady's form is there would only be two pictures required. One from the front and one from the back in the same pose. The pose would be what is generally the default pose for any study of anatomy:

Standing, arms at the side, with the forearms slightly outward, palms facing forward, weight evenly distibuted on each side, feet should width apart, one foot facing forward the other turned out slightly, head held level either facing forward or at a three quarter profile.

This would give you complete reference to what the lady looks like, what her body type and style is.

The shots you say you do like are "artsy" in that they are more visually pleasing than that default anatomy pose. A female figure posed with her arms back propping up her torso is "artsy" it gives less information than "default" pose. it does have things like foreshortening working on it. It is not simply "documentary" and does convey a mood and thought.. it is a seductive pose, it is meant to be sexual withour being vulgar.  The three quater profiles you have used as examples are also  "artsy" three quarter profile of the figure slims the hips and width of the figure in general.  If just the torso is turned with the hips remaining static is excentuates the muscles of abdominal region and at the same time making that area seem flatter.  

What you are actually saying is you want "artsy" poses that you like and only up to the point you like them.  That would be fine if the ladies were marketing to an audience of one, but they are marketing to a much larger audience.  

You say that ladies should never have the head back exposing the muscles of her neck photo (by the way not an Adam's Apple...if you are looking at a woman that has an Adam's Aplle she is a TS). Now it seems obvious you don't like that pose, oddly enough I really like that pose, maybe it is some latent Vampyrism in me but the exposed throat I find very appealing.

There are many ladies that include shots of their feet in their galleries, some actually have galleries just for foot shots, now this doesn't really do anything for me, I'm not a huge fan of feet, I don't dislike feet, I think ladies look good if they have feet, but they aren't what I look for in finding a lady attractive or desirable, but to someone with a foot fetish those feet shots are what will make the sale. Those photos are there for people that like feet a lot, just because I'm not one of those people doesn't mean I think ladies that have those need to get rid of them.

The way I see it it doesn't cost me anything to click through images that don't really appeal to me, but if a lady were to get rid of the shots I don't like, or that you don't like, it could cost her the client that that pose would have sold.  

Most ladies have many poses in their galleries, an attempt to try and have something for everyone I assume. So, if a lady has one or two exposed throat shots, so what, she probably has few standing and sitting and lying down shots too.
There are many shots in many ladies galleries that don't a lot for me, but I don't tell them not to have them because for all I know that may be just the picture that makes someone else want to see her.

As for Lex's point of telling something of the lady from the gallery and your counter statement of looking to reviews for that.  I don't really read reviews much, other than to maybe see that she isn't a "Ripoff" and that she's "really Bi" (by the way, ladies if I could be so bold, if you could put on your site one line that said you would be willing to see women clients that would help a lot, thanks. *grin* ). I don't find a lot of reviews from women, and the one's I do seem to find aren't from skittish, nervous, unattractive, shy, twitchy, women so what they experience I probably won't.  Whether or not I am going to click with a lady can't be predicted by your experience with her...that's why everyone says "YMMV".  So I actually read the lady's website, see what she she says about herself, or what she had another include as a reflection of what she sees as being important to her persona, and yeah try to glean something from her photos actually a lady that prefers "artsy" shots would to some extent appeal to me from that alone since I do have that annoying figure artist thing going for me.

As for the face blur thing I actually prefer a creative cropping of the the ladies face from the shot.

Ok...I'm gonna go draw a figure now. *grin*

Yes I agree a clear shot is much better than that which is out of focus etc. On your idea that we should give you documentery type pictures I much prefer those which leave a little bit to the imagination rather than a graphic representation. So far it seems that my pictures have always attracted the caliber gentlemen I prefer to see but I do appreciate your suggesting we ladies develope a generic format for our websites to document what is to come.
Take care
Kisses
Georgia

I fit the second camp.
I prefer a bit of creativity in the way a lady presents herself.
Anyone can lay down or stand up and take a picture, it takes some class to present an image.
I want the lady to show some uniqueness, personality, and a bit of mystery in her presentation.

I want them to be bold, sassy, creative, unique in their photos.

As an example, the photo Carrie supplied with her post was very sexy, very sensual, and very attractive.

Just my opinion...
B



-- Modified on 1/19/2006 5:19:54 PM

-- Modified on 1/19/2006 5:23:17 PM

Go get em girlie
Love,P.T.

Hmm, I'm not sure artsy overhead photos off a ladder are all so bad.  Consider these three photos of Alexis of Portland:

http://www.eros-portland.com/g/scr/gallery.htm?file=po-alexis92-1114&image=5
http://www.eros-portland.com/g/scr/gallery.htm?file=po-alexis92-1114&image=1
http://www.eros-portland.com/g/scr/gallery.htm?file=po-alexis92-1114&image=3

They certainly get the point across for me..!  How about everyone else, do these drive you nuts (whether in a good or bad way)?  Maybe I'm just a weird artsy type..

A beautiful photo of a beautiful lady.

Just my opinion...
B

-- Modified on 1/19/2006 5:31:02 PM

As Carrie of London and InterstingWoman suggest, there cannot be one standard approach to taking photographs.

The above photo more than likely appealed to the escort who used it. It certainly appeals to me - hard nipples on well-defined breasts, a delicate blue negligee. I want this woman!

Use your imagination.

Don't know how to photograph that, but I am willing to say that creativity in the photographs do demonstrate something of a personality... and what the person may be like - or at least how they think of themselves....

Does not always work - just like some ladies make it look like they have big boobies... or a small toosch...  when the opposite is true....

As far as truth - well, lets just say that sometimes pictures lie - even if they are shot under the harshest conditions...  Several providers that I have seen are quite better looking than their photographs...

What I don't like are the misleading photos - with misleading statistics - 36C-26-36 and you get to the door - and the lady is - shall we say "large" or a perfect 24 - that is 24-24-24....  

So - anything that keeps the message simple (stats, phone or contact info, in or outcall offered - availability and donation), some heavy dose of reality and a bit of personality....

As someone who does some photography for fun I gotta say those were all fun shots.  I like the last one.

OMG you are a very beautiful woman.  Your photographer has done a great job capturing your beauty.  The camera loves your face!

With me!!!!!!!!


We hand lots of pictures of Pussies and musical instrments.

...now I have to find a way to get to Portland!  Alexis is hotter than a pistol!!!

Spoken like a true artist.... What may be a good compromise is a blending of the two - and there are some who actually have both types of shots on their web sites....  muh favorite - Keri's t-shirt collection!  Says a lot about her - and makes ya want to know what else she collects....

it was not fun, we had to march in the Gulf Coast August weather (what fun) sleep in non-airconditioned huts and in general smell pretty bad... what fun there was to be had mostly involved "shaving creme" and warm water....

As I mention below - what would this hobby be without your t-shirt collection?   love it.

pussies, too!!!

Btw, that pic is toooo cute!

I looked at those links and my first reaction was, based solely on these three photos I'd pass on clicking any deeper because I can't tell what her body proportions are or if she busty, thin, fat, flat or otherwise from those three photos.

However, then I clicked on the link and fortunately she has some really really good photos. These photos show her face and upper torso in enough detail where you can figure out what she looks like. And yes, she's smokin hot.

These three examples are precisely the example I didn't want to volunteer but since there here, it's worth talking about. IMHO, too many women post only these kinds of photos. The result? One never gets a clear picture of what the lady looks like.

-- Modified on 1/20/2006 9:07:00 PM