toomuch

Amateur Photos...

24 posts in this topic

...are great!

  1. As judged by a jaded punter's eye, hot girls look worse in professional photos than in amateur photos. It's because we make allowances for the professionalism of the photographer, but the pro photographers make plainer girls look better, which leaves the hot girls with less of an advantage than if all photos were amateur. In an amateur pic, if she's hot, you know it's real - but she also looks a lot better compared to all the other girls than she would on a site with professional photos.
  2. Professional photos are often really low resolution compared with amateur pics. A girl who uploads her own photos, or the ones her friend took with her phone camera, doesn't cut the resolution down. So you can actually see more than a blur when you look at a photo full screen. The professionals crop and scale them down, presumably so they don't have to pay too much for all the downloads.
  3. Amateur photos haven't been artfully posed . Often in professional photos you get the impression a girl was worried that some particular part of her body that's probably just lovely isn't perfect, and so all the tricks to make that aspect look perfect are rolled out. To a jaded punter that has the opposite effect than intended: you start thinking "what's she hiding?".
  4. You can sometimes tell something about the girl's personality. She chooses where she is (OK, it's her flat), her pose, how many photos she's going to put up, whether she bothers with the lighting or whether to clean the mess off the bed first, how she's interacting with somebody else out of shot, etc. Yep, this one's at the end, sorry I'm so shallow.

The downside is sometimes they make..... odd choices. Just *one* photo (or two - why bother)? *No* lighting at all? No focusing? *Only* your left thigh?

It makes me laugh sometimes how the decisions I make about whether to call don't have much connection to what the girl - or the photographer - must have had in their head when they took the photos. You're always reading between the lines, just to figure out whether the pictures are real, whether they're of the girl who's actually working, and whether they've been photoshopped. And yes, what her personality is like. Before the girls jump in to say they're all photoshopped - no, they're really not, there are plenty of warts-and-all pictures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take my own photos in my own flat, and I'm perfectly capable of cropping and resizing them - they're a nightmare to work with otherwise. I also adjust things like lighting, contrast, white balance and saturation (what was called 'digital darkroom' back in the day) and touch out odd bruises, cooking burns and so on, although I'll be the first to admit that I couldn't figure out Photoshop if you held a gun to my head.

And you can't see my cauliflower ear, vestigial tail or hunchback in any of them :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  1. You can sometimes tell something about the girl's personality. She chooses where she is (OK, it's her flat), her pose, how many photos she's going to put up, whether she bothers with the lighting or whether to clean the mess off the bed first, how she's interacting with somebody else out of shot, etc. Yep, this one's at the end, sorry I'm so shallow.

The downside is sometimes they make..... odd choices. Just *one* photo (or two - why bother)? *No* lighting at all? No focusing? *Only* your left thigh?

It makes me laugh sometimes how the decisions I make about whether to call don't have much connection to what the girl - or the photographer - must have had in their head when they took the photos. You're always reading between the lines, just to figure out whether the pictures are real, whether they're of the girl who's actually working, and whether they've been photoshopped. And yes, what her personality is like. Before the girls jump in to say they're all photoshopped - no, they're really not, there are plenty of warts-and-all pictures.

I'm a rather keen Amateur Photographer myself :D

I'm rather proud to say there are some pictures I have taken in galleries on the purple site :ph34r:

Some in her flat, as you say, toomuch, some in hotel rooms, and some in my own home. I tend to leave the poses to the lady, rather than trying to give "direction", although I sometimes drop a hint or two about what would turn ME on in the next few seconds :P

What a lady does with them afterwards is her business, but few, if any, of my photos have been photoshopped, as such, although many have been cropped to preserve anonymity, before being uploaded to a gallery. The natural nature of these pictures tends to enhance rather than detract from their appeal, I believe, particularly as the connection between the girl and the photographer, and what is about to happen between them can be so much better than a professionally done photo-shoot, where it's all slightly posed, rather than a prelude to .... well, you know what :D

The way the lady chooses to use or exclude particular shots MUST also be left to her, I believe. I have a few in my own private archives which bring back many happy memories for me and are favourites of mine, but are not used because "I look old/fat/tarty/messy/hippy/droopy/not as good as I would like to" in them !! Strange creatures, ladies are, and they see imperfections and blemishes in themselves that we, their admirers, fail to see, particularly when thinking with our nether regions, rather than our brains :wacko:

I do not see this as a "downside", merely a lady being allowed to choose the pictures SHE thinks show her in the way she would like to be perceived by her existing and prospective gentlemen.

Jack. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, so I, yes ME rather than the lady, "got rid of" a spot on her bum by digital means, before she uploaded it to her gallery.

As I know, FOR CERTAIN, that this was a temporary blemish, is this wrong, or "cheating" ?

Jack :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take my own photos in my own flat, and I'm perfectly capable of cropping and resizing them - they're a nightmare to work with otherwise. I also adjust things like lighting, contrast, white balance and saturation (what was called 'digital darkroom' back in the day) and touch out odd bruises, cooking burns and so on, although I'll be the first to admit that I couldn't figure out Photoshop if you held a gun to my head.

I'm thinking anybody who says "nightmare to work with" probably isn't really an amateur on the level I'm talking about. I think a lot of girls just upload them as-is.

And you can't see my cauliflower ear, vestigial tail or hunchback in any of them :)

I bet it's a cute little cauliflower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that's maybe fair :cool: , but I only knew because my website lady told me how to do it so they'd work properly when people clicked on them (so you don't wind up with a grainy screen full of somebody's living room ceiling) and it means you can email them easily. I treated myself to a camera (plus a remote control and a cheap tripod from Argos) four years ago with a few quid I had spare from selling my old house as I was sick of pro shots for exactly the reasons you mention - I'd not long had some done which cost me £450 and they were universally so soulless, overprocessed and generic I hated them, and despite my expressed wishes that they weren't to be airbrushed, I looked like a plastic Barbie.

The quality of mine isn't all great (more because of the lack of natural light on the North Yorks coast than anything else), but I can take, upload and delete as many or as few as I want whenever I feel like it, I also own the copyright (as the photographer) and I would recommend any lady who's thought about it gives it a try. My camera is a nice entry-level DSLR, but the better compact cameras take fantastic pictures, the free Picasa download is virtually foolproof (at least for anybody who's fit to be allowed near a computer on their own) and if you don't like them, just dump 'em and nobody ever has to see.

I do agree that temporary things like occasional spots, insect bites and bruises ought to be removed - they're not going to be there in a week, after all. Anything that couldn't be recreated in real life (I have brown contact lenses and/or a clip in fringe in some of mine, and enough makeup to fill a skip in just about all of them; all of which are 'fake' but can be put back on if needs be) I think is out of order. The jury's a bit out on tattoos, mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I much prefer amateur photos, as they just seem much more natural, and give a far better idea of what the girl is like, in my experience anyway. Photography is another of my collection of expensive hobbies, and I've taken photos of a couple of the girls I've seen, and they're now in their private galleries, so I guess they liked them sufficiently to use them. I was also very pleasantly surprised to find one of mine being used on one of the girls personal websites - and I hadn't even thought that set were very good.

I'll clean up lighting levels etc. but no more than that, and as I have the originals I know that the girls have done nothing further to them before they made use of them, they're up with whatever spots etc. were in evidence on the day that I took them - and I think they look more 'real' because of it. Don't we all get the odd spot/blemish/whatever from time to time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll clean up lighting levels etc. but no more than that, and as I have the originals I know that the girls have done nothing further to them before they made use of them, they're up with whatever spots etc. were in evidence on the day that I took them - and I think they look more 'real' because of it. Don't we all get the odd spot/blemish/whatever from time to time?

Well we do, but they don't last long and I would have thought that the aim of the pictures would be to accurately represent the lady as the punter will meet her on the day? If I had a huge spot on the end of my nose and left it untouched in my photos I could be accused of not using honest, representative images when a punter who booked three weeks later turned up expecting to see it ;).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like amateur pictures when taken by myself..

(there have been, still are, several ladies with website who have posted pictures taken by yours truly... all very discreet, done in hotelrooms and serviced-appartments).

Edited by ptrleeds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The jury's a bit out on tattoos, mind.

Is it? If a WG has any wish not to be identified to 100% certainty, then I think that tattoos must be covered or photoshopped! Even very generic designs, are usually made unique by their position!

and, while on the subject:

There is a lady who advertises on another well known adult site as "Miss-Sexy-" Looking at her gallery, and indeed, her Private Gallery, I see two things, (other than that she probably really is very good looking):

a) A total lack of eroticism,

B) Every shot, every single one, has, I am sure, been santised, probably with PortraitProfessional, which removes any sign of life.

(If you have a mo' spare, go www.portraitprofessional.com - I'm sure that many of you will, like me, think that the original is often more attractive than the improved version!)

and, finally, to the ladies, if you do any resizing or other legitimate processing of your photographs, please do it so that you keep the Exif metadata, so that for those who are interested, it can be seen whether these are recent photos or ones up to five years old!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it? If a WG has any wish not to be identified to 100% certainty, then I think that tattoos must be covered or photoshopped! Even very generic designs, are usually made unique by their position!

Sorry, I was talking only about my own opinion, not speculating on what others might think because I've no way of knowing. I do agree anything very obviously unique or identifying should be covered or removed, but I also think tattoos should be mentioned in text somewhere purely because some punters really don't like them.

and, finally, to the ladies, if you do any resizing or other legitimate processing of your photographs, please do it so that you keep the Exif metadata, so that for those who are interested, it can be seen whether these are recent photos or ones up to five years old!

I would dearly love to, but Picasa seems to remove it completely and I don't know how to put it back so I just put dates on my site. I'd recommend OPanda for anybody who fancies a poke about for a laugh - I've found supposedly 'recent' photos taken in 2003 :eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would dearly love to, but Picasa seems to remove it completely and I don't know how to put it back so I just put dates on my site.

I've never used Picasa, so don't know its ins and outs, but with other programs the Exif killer seems to be "Save for web".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amateur pics are all well and good but when you are on an agency gallery and lets face it, fighting to be noticed amongst 35 other girls then they are just no good really. New professional ones get noticed immediatley by the guys but a girl who goes onto the website with non professional ones often, not always but often, gets overlooked and just not noticed, then when she gets professional ones all the guys are calling asking about the new girl who has actually been on there for a good few weeks usually. Professional pics are more colourful and eyecatching, its a fact.

Edited by Chloe MKEscorts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, so I, yes ME rather than the lady, "got rid of" a spot on her bum by digital means, before she uploaded it to her gallery.

As I know, FOR CERTAIN, that this was a temporary blemish, is this wrong, or "cheating" ?

Jack :ph34r:

No its not cheating.

People often complain about tattoos being removed, but if a lady has a tattoo and does not blur it then there is no point blurring her face as they can be a way of instant recognition. If someone has an actual dislike of tattoos all they have to do when making a booking is to ask if some have been airbrushed off. Saying that if a girl is happy for her face to be showing online then I see no point in blurring any tattoos off as it can only be for reasons of deception rather than identity hiding, its a different matter for girls who want to hide their face though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(If you have a mo' spare, go www.portraitprofessional.com - I'm sure that many of you will, like me, think that the original is often more attractive than the improved version!)

Couldn't agree more! The difference when you mouseover the images in their gallery is positively transformative. If the examples in the gallery were actual WGs I'd be hugely tempted by most of them on the basis of their pre-processed photos. Post-processing I'd be skipping over them all as being dull, soulless, and completely unerotic. That may work in a modelling environment where the focus is required to be more on the clothes than on the model, but for an escort it's a complete turnoff for me and I suspect many others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amateur pics are all well and good but when you are on an agency gallery and lets face it, fighting to be noticed amongst 35 other girls then they are just no good really. New professional ones get noticed immediatley by the guys but a girl who goes onto the website with non professional ones often, not always but often, gets overlooked and just not noticed, then when she gets professional ones all the guys are calling asking about the new girl who has actually been on there for a good few weeks usually. Professional pics are more colourful and eyecatching, its a fact.

No its not cheating.

I was talking about Indies, rather than Agency or Parlour Girls. Would you like me to take a few pics of the MK escorts about to be F...... ? ( just to see how they compare with the "professionally posed" ones, to see which get the most interest ? ... purely in the interests of research, you understand ? )

People often complain about tattoos being removed, but if a lady has a tattoo and does not blur it then there is no point blurring her face as they can be a way of instant recognition. If someone has an actual dislike of tattoos all they have to do when making a booking is to ask if some have been airbrushed off. Saying that if a girl is happy for her face to be showing online then I see no point in blurring any tattoos off as it can only be for reasons of deception rather than identity hiding, its a different matter for girls who want to hide their face though.

One of my favourites of all time has a tattoo which can almost be described as her "trade-mark" ! This will NOT be obvious to the the outside world unless she goes shopping in her under-wear. So, Chloe, the point here is that there IS an argument for not showing the face, which can be seen at the shops, but allowing a tattoo to be seen in Galleries, do you not think ?

Jack. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(If you have a mo' spare, go www.portraitprofessional.com - I'm sure that many of you will, like me, think that the original is often more attractive than the improved version!)

Thank you for that, that was hilarious. Almost every last one, the original is so much prettier / sexier and just more real, than the "enhanced" one. Lots of girls there with beautiful freckles that somebody thinks they should be keen to eliminate, but it's not just that. Argh, girls just don't know what they've got.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't agree more! The difference when you mouseover the images in their gallery is positively transformative. If the examples in the gallery were actual WGs I'd be hugely tempted by most of them on the basis of their pre-processed photos. Post-processing I'd be skipping over them all as being dull, soulless, and completely unerotic. That may work in a modelling environment where the focus is required to be more on the clothes than on the model, but for an escort it's a complete turnoff for me and I suspect many others.

In fact this site so impressed me with its amazing transformative effect, I wonder if the fact that these days I find a lot of girls on escort sites less attractive than I used to is totally down to being a miserable jaded punter as I'd assumed. Maybe it's also that this damned software and its like is getting used all over the place? I'm serious... when I think about it, it is very often girls with this sort of wax-like look that I find myself cold to, but even though I was complaining about pro photos, it hadn't really sunk in why they look this way since it's not always obvious.

It's quite insidious I think because on some level the conscious effect often seems a clear "improvement" in a way, but the emotional effect is just the opposite. That must be an oversimplification and it's hard to separate the two in your head, but I think something like that is going on. Since presumably girls aren't going to have the same primitive emotional response to their own pretty face that we do, they're not going to notice that. Tragic!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amateur pics are all well and good but when you are on an agency gallery and lets face it, fighting to be noticed amongst 35 other girls then they are just no good really. New professional ones get noticed immediatley by the guys but a girl who goes onto the website with non professional ones often, not always but often, gets overlooked and just not noticed, then when she gets professional ones all the guys are calling asking about the new girl who has actually been on there for a good few weeks usually. Professional pics are more colourful and eyecatching, its a fact.

I'm not into agency or parlour girls myself, Chloe, as I find the Indies generally better, and they get to keep all my hard earned cash for themselves :unsure:

Sorry Hon, but why should I pay over the odds to keep the "handlers" in business ? :wacko:

Jack :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm glad a lot of you are keen on amateur photos as at the moment that's all I have !!! :)

Erica xXx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I ask my photographer to use as little PS as possible, I have spotted exif data on photos on a website claiming they were taken fairly recently, but the file date is rather much older than that. I would have just assumed incorrect time/date setting on the camera if I hadn't remembered seeing those photos on the much earlier by years date.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only photos I dislike are the obvious scams of european pornstar and playboy model pics being attempted as passing of 'Trudy of Bilston'.

Infuriates me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only photos I dislike are the obvious scams of european pornstar and playboy model pics being attempted as passing of 'Trudy of Bilston'.

Infuriates me.

Do blokes never pass comment if or when they see a girl who obviously does this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of my favourites of all time has a tattoo which can almost be described as her "trade-mark" ! This will NOT be obvious to the the outside world unless she goes shopping in her under-wear. So, Chloe, the point here is that there IS an argument for not showing the face, which can be seen at the shops, but allowing a tattoo to be seen in Galleries, do you not think ?

Jack. :ph34r:

This may be true for some but from the number of girls I have had begging me not to forget to airbrush their tattoo in case a loved one spots it in the past I would say most girls see a tattoo as shouting "its me" as if their face were showing...even ones that dont show when wearing their clothes could be recognised by any family member who has seen them in a bikini. None of the girls requesting tats removed have mentioned that they dont want to be recognised at the shops. ;)

I'm not into agency or parlour girls myself, Chloe, as I find the Indies generally better, and they get to keep all my hard earned cash for themselves :unsure:

Sorry Hon, but why should I pay over the odds to keep the "handlers" in business ? :wacko:

Jack :ph34r:

That of couse is your personal perspective although I think if you read some of the frs for my girls you will see that most of them deliver a top service. Also a lot of Indies also work in parlours, you may not know it as they use a different name and sometimes even a different set of pictures but that too is a fact. Stereotyping girls who work in parlours is not what this thread is about, its about pictures and this was the topic of my answer from MY personal perspective.

Just a little point to chew over for you, I worked in parlours, for outcall agencys AND I worked as an Indie, all the guys got the same treatment from me which was the best I could give. At the end of the day and Indy wont get repeat bookings if she offers a crappy service yet we know there are plenty of crappy ones out there, same goes for a parlour girl, she isnt guaranteed bookings or even to keep her job if she offers below par, I know plenty do but I doubt they make much money in this game or last that long.

Edited by Chloe MKEscorts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now