Escort Pics

[Greathands]

(( What am I going to do every morning without new reviews? Damn, I may actually get some more work over the next few weeks. ))

 

While reading this morning's posts I came across a question in the Deli for info on a specific escort. Clicking on the link, I went to the escort's profile with his pics. Half of his pics were of his dick, one of them while getting sucked.

 

My question is this: do pics like this affect whether you hire an escort or not? If so, is it more likely that you will hire them or less likely?

 

Perhaps I'm a bit prudish, but if the first pic someone sends me while chatting online is their dick, then the chat doesn't go much further.

 

Likewise, I'm less likely to hire an escort who advertises with pics of their dick.

 

Was curious how others felt about this.

[+ Charlie]

Call me perverse, but I'd rather not see an escort's dick at all until he strips to do the nasty. I like to have some surprises left before the act.

[Guest RandyRon]

Seeing an escort, especially for the first time, is like Christmas, half the fun is unwrapping the "gift." I always want to strip the guy myself.

 

The sexiest pictures are those which show enticements such as a partially unzipped fly, a guy with an open shirt, etc. Those are the pictures that get my engine reving. Total nudity leaves nothing to the imagination and I firmly believe that sex is 90% mental not physical.

[Guest n2colour]

In most cases, I'm with you. There are one or two exceptions but, as a rule, if all someone has to offer is a shot of his dick, there probably isn't much else there.

[+ Lucky]

I disagree. Take, for example, the shot of Raleigh escort Andre sitting totally naked in his bed. The shot captures his erect cock proudly beckoning above a smoothly cracked ass. The look on his face is not exactly "come hither" but more a "take it if you dare." He posted it briefly here before the rules required it to be taken down. But thankfully I saved it to my desktop and wake up to it each day.

 

So he's totally naked, yes. But my imagination runs wild at what happens next!

[Greathands]

Lucky, I can agree with you on this instance. I probably should have been more specific in my original post. I was referring to pics where the ONLY thing you see is the dick ... or in the one pic I had seen of the guys dick with someone else's lips.

 

There are some excellent, and artful, pics of escorts that show them completely nude, but this was not what I was really referring to.

 

I guess ... for me ... the bottom line is that when hiring an escort, a pic of the dick isn't what gets me to hire.

 

Similary, if I'm looking for some pornographic pics, I don't look for them on an escort review site.

[AdamSmith]

>Take, for example, the shot of Raleigh escort

>Andre sitting totally naked in his bed. The shot captures his

>erect cock proudly beckoning above a smoothly cracked ass. The

>look on his face is not exactly "come hither" but more a "take

>it if you dare."

 

A marvel of description, Herr von Aschenbach. Your appreciations of Andre continue to be accurate to the twentieth decimal.

 

>So he's totally naked, yes. But my imagination runs wild at

>what happens next!

 

Your imagination is correct, sir!

[Lankypeters]

Huge close ups of huge cocks turn me off fast. Especially if that's all that the site shows. Talk about objectifying the situation -- it's an insult to client and advertiser.

I'm not even that eager to see a full body shot with an erect dick sticking out there like a stinger. Demeaning.

 

I like a full body shot with the fuck stick nicely at rest in the nest. Part of the fun is seeing the transformation when it swings into action.

 

 

Lankypeters

[flboy25]

I don't mind at all if they have a picture of their dick or ass or whatever, but it always bothers me if there's not a face pic to go with it. Though I sometimes wonder if I'm missing out on a total hottie by pretty much ignoring the no-face profiles, I pretty much only even consider profiles that have a face pic.

[Epigonos]

Of the four type of photographs that escorts, most frequently, post on web sites:

Body

Face

Cock

Ass

To hire a guy I require the first, want the second, like the third and am indifferent to the fourth. In many ways the quality of the photographs presented is MORE important to me than the individual photographs. Really poor quality photographs are a real turn off for me. I don't understand why some of these guys refuse to go to a professional photographer and present themselves, to potential clients, in a PROFESSIONAL manner.

[SAdler]

OK so going with the wrapped present theory ... how do you feel about:

 

bulge and underwear butt shots?

 

do you prefer those to the actual naked shots. And most importantly, under what category do shots like these fit? }(

 

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/1292/3380/1600/Pretzel.jpg

[Guest PWIT]

>Of the four type of photographs that escorts, most

>frequently, post on web sites:

>Body

>Face

>Cock

>Ass

>To hire a guy I require the first, want the second, like the

>third and am indifferent to the fourth.

 

That is probably my ranking as well. Though ass & cock are probably equal for me. Rick and Derick ass shots make me drool like Pavlov's dog! I'm hoping for a live visual someday.

 

I have hired without the face shots. Sometimes it has been one of the best experiences; case in point, Eric aka ript4hire, what a hottie! Other times I was not so lucky. Trust the reviews to help eliminate making a mistake.

 

I also like the clothed shots. Those that know me also know I am quiet fond of the hot brief shots too! Speaking of briefs, the new photo of Scott Adler in the green boxcut briefs - yummy! :9

[+ deej]

>importantly, under what category do shots like these fit? }(

 

Depends on the fit of the underwear.

[SAdler]

it's actually a bathingsuit but thank you

[Guest PWIT]

>it's actually a bathingsuit but thank you

 

I'll have to see for myself to believe you - in person of course! and up close! hehe

[Rick Munroe]

>Rick and Derek ass shots make me

>drool like Pavlov's dog! I'm hoping for a live visual

>someday.

 

And we look forward to putting that drool to good use. }(

[JT Brooklyn]

Charlie ..Totally Agree..Personally I like a Nice Pretty Cut Dick!

 

But Please, I Like it when, it POPS-OUT in Person, not in a photo!

:P

[JT Brooklyn]

Charlie ..Totally Agree..Personally I like a Nice Pretty Cut Dick!

 

But Please, I Like it when, it POPS-OUT in Person, not in a photo!

:P

[Guest RandyRon]

>OK so going with the wrapped present theory ... how do you

>feel about:

>

>bulge and underwear butt shots?

>

>do you prefer those to the actual naked shots. And most

>importantly, under what category do shots like these fit? }(

>

>http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/1292/3380/1600/Pretzel.jpg

 

 

Have to say the escort that gave me the biggest turn on (although I can't remember his name and never got to hire him) was one who had a shot in his ad with him in a tux with his bow tie in his hand, his shirt open a couple of buttons at the neck and his fly unzipped and showing just a bit of the tighty-whities. To quote Mies van der Rohe: "Less is more."

 

;-) ;-)

[Guest RandyRon]

>OK so going with the wrapped present theory ... how do you

>feel about:

>

>bulge and underwear butt shots?

>

>do you prefer those to the actual naked shots. And most

>importantly, under what category do shots like these fit? }(

>

>http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/1292/3380/1600/Pretzel.jpg

 

 

Have to say the escort that gave me the biggest turn on (although I can't remember his name and never got to hire him) was one who had a shot in his ad with him in a tux with his bow tie in his hand, his shirt open a couple of buttons at the neck and his fly unzipped and showing just a bit of the tighty-whities. To quote Mies van der Rohe: "Less is more."

 

;-) ;-)

[SAdler]

>Have to say the escort that gave me the biggest turn on

>(although I can't remember his name and never got to hire him)

>was one who had a shot in his ad with him in a tux with his

>bow tie in his hand, his shirt open a couple of buttons at the

>neck and his fly unzipped and showing just a bit of the

>tighty-whities. To quote Mies van der Rohe: "Less is more."

 

Totally agree in thoery but perhaps not in practice I've just yet to find the right timing to bring my tux to NYC for a photoshoot ... I *might* get some great suit shots this trip though.

[johnnybrk25]

I would have to agree that quality of photos is one of the best investments an escort can make. I noticed a real surge in interest from potential clients when I found a good photographer and was happier with the photos than the ones I was using before. I do include an ass and cock shot in all my advertising. It keeps requests for photos from guys to a tolerable level and people are always interested in the tatoo on my lower back. It cost enough so I have to show it off.

[Guest Havan_IronOak]

I know that this is an old topic but I felt the need to add my 2 cents worth...

 

I think that as an escort you'd be crazy to NOT show a variety of shots. There is a wide variety of tastes out there and some will ONLY be satisfied with the "meatier" shots.

 

I suggest that the BEST way to handle this is to have a website where the more explicit shots are kept separate.

 

I for one am turned off by the ads that ONLY show a cock shot. I would recommend showing a face shot and a fully clothed shot as well the more revealing shots. But then to me, the eyes are the windows to the soul and MY most erogenous zone is the few inches between my ears, NOT the few inches between my legs. But then I realize that I am me and not everyone will or should agree.

 

I understand that some escorts are reluctant to show their faces and they certainly have the right to make that call for themselves. I have responded to escort ads withot seeing their faces and I probably willl again but given two to choose from I'd generally go with the escort who shows his face over the one that just shows his bulge.

 

As to showing a dick shot, one probably SHOULD. If a particulary prospective client doesn't like such things he doesn't have to look. And as to the Christmas present aspects... Seeing a toy in a commercial is always different than being able to play with it in person.

[Guest showme43]

And most

>importantly, under what category do shots like these fit? }(

>

>http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/1292/3380/1600/Pretzel.jpg

 

 

side show freak??

 

just kidding

[Louis]

Adds with those kinds of pictures are a turn off for me.. I want to see what the potenial escort is going to look like....Does the guy have the body that I like etc. So penis shots for me don't do anythin, unless I see the rest of the body in the shot.

Louis.