Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
jc96

Unrealistic Noob Expectations?

6 posts in this topic

I saw my first WG a few weeks back. I'd done my research on here and picked a lady with nothing but positive FRs from a London agency that gets a good reputation on here for honesty and accuracy. Without wishing to be ungallant or name names, I was more than a little surprised when the door opened: my first reaction was "that's not her". I soon saw it was, just that the original photos were very flattering. In real life she was considerably heavier and with much worse skin. No previous FR had reported on this.

Don't get me wrong, she was a lovely girl, but in terms of sheer attractiveness she was not in the league of her photos, and walking through London the next day I was struck by how many more attractive women there were just out and about.

Obviously I expected there to be some liberties taken, but not as many as there were. Was I just unlucky, or did I just have unrealistic expectations?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you will need to at least name the agency if you want an informed response. Some of the EE agencies are very generous with the use of photoshop in pics and experienced punters might tend to so take that into account beforehand that it just wouldn't occur to them to mention in a review that the lady was older/heavier/smaller bosomed/less attractive than depicted. Asian and Latin agencies can also tend to be notable photoshop offenders (not that agencies specialising in British girls are immune - they aren't). A more extreme case would be an agency like abeautifulamore which many of us here are convinced is an out-and-out bait & switch agencies that submits false FRs to punternet and shouldn't be allowed to do so (sadly we have as yet failed to persuade Galahad of the fact). So I think we do need that information about the agency and perhaps the girl that you don't want to share if anyone here is to make an informed comment about how realistic or unrealistic your expectations are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was more than a little surprised when the door opened: my first reaction was "that's not her". I soon saw it was, just that the original photos were very flattering. In real life she was considerably heavier and with much worse skin.

Don't get me wrong, she was a lovely girl, but in terms of sheer attractiveness she was not in the league of her photos

Welcome to the minefield that is our hobby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I saw my first WG a few weeks back. I'd done my research on here and picked a lady with nothing but positive FRs from a London agency that gets a good reputation on here for honesty and accuracy. Without wishing to be ungallant or name names, I was more than a little surprised when the door opened: my first reaction was "that's not her". I soon saw it was, just that the original photos were very flattering. In real life she was considerably heavier and with much worse skin. No previous FR had reported on this. Don't get me wrong, she was a lovely girl, but in terms of sheer attractiveness she was not in the league of her photos, and walking through London the next day I was struck by how many more attractive women there were just out and about. Obviously I expected there to be some liberties taken, but not as many as there were. Was I just unlucky, or did I just have unrealistic expectations?

Welcome to the forum. :) Its not at all unrealistic to expect the real her to look like her photos, thats what attracted you and what you were paying your money for. Punting not being regulated can lead to pisstaking with little consequence, naming and shaming on here at least informs those that read the forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jc. As said above, it's a minefield out there but stick with it. Some London agency girls certainly DO meet and even exceed expectations of attractiveness (a personal subjective judgement) based on the photos. Others don't, to varying degrees. Photoshopping is a nuisance routinely used to improve skin tone and erase blemishes and tattoos. Even if the images weren't manipulated you'd have to contend with the fact that some people are more photogenic than others. Plus the photographers/hair stylists and make-up artists just can't resist producing glamour photographs that try to maximise web-appeal when really they'd do better not to stray too far from simply depicting how she looks when ready for work. Thighs, waists and tummies that are all too apparent in real life can be minimised by careful selection of clothing, camera angles, poses etc. Also watch out for old photos; some WGs get a new set taken every six months while others persist with photos that are literally years old. I find the little video clips used occasionally by some agencies (e.g 007) to be quite useful as they are much harder to manipulate than stills and are thus truer to life.

Edited by d123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She was a lovely girl, "but"...

If you're saying she was genuinely lovely then I think you've answered your own question there. ;)

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0