Why don't good escorts have good quality images?

[dick_nyc]

Could it be that they are afraid that if they are called on a "bad hair day" or something the reviewer would say his pics were fantastic, but he was a total troll. Better to be told how much better in person. Besides, there are a lot who are worse in person. Pics are so out of date the escort must think he is another Dorian Gray.

[+ BenjaminNicholas]

Great topic Digi

 

In advertising, if you're going to try to sell a product to its greatest potential then you've got to show it in its best light. The same would go for any escort out there who wants not only business, but the very best in clientel.

 

Sure, any guy out there can get some $60 webcam, post pixelated images and try to drum up some business, but honestly a clean, professionally done image would suit much better. Personally, i am very careful about my image and how it comes across, thus i've always stayed with professional photographers who have a proven track record of quality images. I update my images frequently to keep up with any change in appearance as well. Common sense dictates that if a client shows up and you look nothing like your picture, then your business & reputation will suffer. Not a good thing.

 

How you sell yourself will surely dictate what type of clientel you get. That being said, if possible, never skimp on the basics: ie, your images, advertising copy, keeping up appearances, etc.

 

 

If you want the best, then be the best. Period.

 

 

 

 

Warmest Regards,

 

 

 

 

Benjamin Nicholas

[VaHawk]

And that is why you are the best, period!!!

[+ BenjaminNicholas]

You zesty tease

 

Flattery will get you EVERYWHERE... But until that time comes, i guess i'll have to wait it out in a very chilly Texas. Added, i still need a partner to go see 'Chicago' with and you're looking like the perfect canidate.

 

You bring the champagne, i'll bring the tap shoes

 

 

 

Warmest Regards,

 

 

 

 

Benjamin Nicholas

[Donnie]

>You bring the champagne, i'll bring the tap shoes

 

And I'll bring the barf bag.

[VaHawk]

Then by all means, consider this a formal invite! But you must bring at the very minimum a triple ply barf bag, as it will most likely nauseate you a whole heck of a lot more than this post did! BTW, the airfare is on you, but as they say the more the merrier!

[Rod Hagen]

Digicam,

 

Sent you an email. If you didn't get it, email me leandream1@rodhagen.com

 

"Having these balls makes

me feel something close to

joy, I think. I must caress

them." -FRIEZA

-Hagen

[Guest DevonSFescort]

Supposedly when Jack LaLanne opened his first gym in the Bay Area he went to the high schools and picked out the fattest kid and the skinniest kid and gave them free personal training. When the results started showing he was flooded with customers, so the story goes.

 

Maybe you should try that with this venture -- find the escort in your area with the worst pics and make him over into a well-lit stud, and have him agree to put your website somewhere on the image or in his ads. Then other escorts will have a before/after sense of what you're capable of doing for them. Good luck! :-)

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

The Eye Of The Beholder

 

>I have read review after review where the reviewer writes "He

>was much better looking than his pictures" or if he would show

>off his great bod or face He'd have more business than he

>could handle." :

 

There are a number of reasons, most revolving around other career choices or future plans some escorts may have, or simply a desire for privacy, why they do not show their face in their published advertised images. Rick Munroe and his partner are one prominant example. It apparently has not impacted their success. This particular topic has been discussed frequently on the site. These escorts often, but not always, will send an email with a face to a client who they believe is serious, but do not wish these to be published.

 

>As a photographer, I have always wondered why TOP QUALITY

>ESCORTS don't get top quality photos? Is it time? Expense?

>Shy in front of the camera? :o

 

Personally, about once a month a photographer solicits my business wishing to photograph me. As someone with a BFA, I prefer taking my own photographs. I also prefer owning the rights to all the negatives and images.

 

I also believe recent images are important, more so than professional quality. Were I use very good, quality professional pictures, but they were five years old, I would be more unhappy were I a client, than if I were shown recent, clear, viable images.

 

However, I agree that some escorts with digital cameras have not done their best to light, pose, crop or otherwise present themselves their very best and imagine you would do well.

[SmallTownJohn]

RE: The Eye Of The Beholder

 

I have to give Franco props cos he's pretty much "right on" with how I feel about pix.

 

I hate cameras. Usually when pic time comes I have to be rassled down. I use the approach of " clean it up, display it on the shelf & if someone wants some then they'll holler" I have no interest in furthering my career in mags or porn or modeling so I just go with the best of the lot after pix are taken at home. And I'm certainly NOT going to adjective up my pix or website with "hot, horny, hung or any other word that's interpreted as I'm far more incredible than all the rest LOL" That's for the buyer to decide:0)

 

I don't understand why more guys don't show faces in their pix. I was apprehensive early on but eventually, I just said fuck it & let the chips fall... My clients like to see a face. I think sometimes discreet is a cop out word for cowardice(not always but sometimes) BUT, I'm also not out in the club scene every weekend where folks tend to talk and point(er...um...ok, that can be a good thing at times<g>)

 

 

 

John

http://www.SmallTownJohn1.com

[Rick Munroe]

>Hey guys--I've been lurking here for a while and love the

>board and love reading the funny Rick stuff

 

Just the funny stuff? NOT MY ASS, TOO?

[Rick Munroe]

RE: The Eye Of The Beholder

 

>I have to give Franco props

 

Is he replacing Gallagher & Carrot Top? :+

[VaHawk]

I know your request was to escorts, but I am just throwing in my unasked for, totally irrelevant observations as a client, so please ignore if you wish, and if any escorts are reading this and want to tell me to "fuck off" that is okay also.

 

I personally love high quality, professionally done photos from escorts, and I feel that you have a great shot at being a pioneer in a very under utilized, "untapped" market. But I guess every escort knows how best to present himself to his intended market, and those who don't feel they need the extra expense of your services will not engage you, nor suffer business-wise as a result.

 

Just my opinion, and it seems I'm mostly in the minority, but I personally am much, much more intrigued and attracted and interested in engaging the services of a young man who is photogenic and is savvy enough to engage the services of another professional, such as yourself, to present himself in the BEST light!

 

As a potential client, nothing turns me off more than someone who presents only an amateurish, self-snapped photo of a hard cock only, or God forbid, a hands on spread ass cheeks shot of his "glory hole"! only. YUCK, YUCK, YUCK AND ANOTHER TRIPLE YUCK! TO BOTH!

 

A notch below that, IMO are those escorts who feel a need to show it all, especially via their own means! Although it is nice to look at,and of course I do and enjoy the views, there is no intrigue in what to expect, totally negating the "thrill of self-discovery". I never have and never will hire these guys without a face shot, and even if they have a face shot, would never hire them until I'm horny as hell, and never for more than a "one time thrill".

 

On the other hand, an escort who is "smart" enough to hire a professional photographer who can provide "truly artistic" quality photographs, will always peak my highest interest (with no frontal nudies required, thank you very much)! The mere fact that he has gone to all that expense and effort, indicates to me, that he will provide me, the client, the same amount of effort to please me! As such, I would pay more than usual for his services and engage him for many more times than I would others who go to less effort to "market" themselves! After all, IMO, these guys are the difference between a "paint by the numbers" picture and a Matisse in terms of quality!

 

But then again, I guess this makes me such a queer duck that when I speak I go "kcauq"! But I don't care, as I know what I like, and as such, what I wan't to spend my money on!

[digicamman]

>Just the funny stuff? NOT MY ASS, TOO?

 

Rick, Rick, Rick......my dear sweet rimmable Rick---there are some things that go without saying:9

[digicamman]

Thanks for the thoughts here, VaHawk--obviously I like what you said and agree with much of it.

 

The shoots I have done have always (well usually }( ) been tasteful, and go from nice portraits to semi-erotic to XX -- but even the XX is not what I'd call porn and is still be VERY tasteful :9

 

I am a big big fan of Bruce Webber and love his work. I am also a BIG fan of our own LES here at the MC and love most if not all of the his work (in bringing us tasteful hardons and cute butt). The full gamut between those two examples is where I'd like to see if there is a market for escorts, models and actors, etc.

 

MY BIG CONCERN, however is sorta raised by Franco when he says he gets solicited all the time by photographers to take pictures of him. The terms or proposals are his business, of course, but I have been told by escorts that they are always getting such proposals by photographers who have a digicam -- I mean with a couple of hundred bucks and 2 megapixels, a Chimpanzee can take a pic with an automatic digicam these days, and a lot of people would be satisfied with it. I'm told by escorts that they can get all the pics they need for free this way -- well not by the Chimp, but sometimes similar :7, so that is my concern. Are there enough people who would still pay money for a professional studio shoot when they can get hotel shoots for free or for trade of time?

[Rod Hagen]

> Are there enough people who would

>still pay money for a professional studio shoot when they can

>get hotel shoots for free or for trade of time?

 

For something as well done as this (rather old and over-used) photo, I don't see why not. And yet, you're already refusing business?!

 

http://www.rodhagen.com/travel.jpg

[Rick Munroe]

>Rick, Rick, Rick......my dear sweet rimmable Rick---there are

>some things that go without saying

 

Especially when you've got a mouthful of my hairy butt. }(

[Rick Munroe]

>I am

>also a BIG fan of our own LES here at the MC and love most if

>not all of the his work (in bringing us tasteful hardons and

>cute butt).

 

Well, you may have just lost me as a potential client. I don't know where Les gets those dated pics he posts but they usually feature awkward poses & really bad lighting that shows off the twinks' acne & awful 80's bleached hairstyles. I wouldn't want to work with any photographer that thinks those are good photos! (no offense, Les...I know everyone else here appreciates your efforts)

[+ Lucky]

How can you slam Les' pix and then say "no offense?" Les has a goal of showing juicy guys who turn us on. He succeeds admirably. You should have just left him out of this.

The question here is about the quality of pix that escorts use to sell themselves. One only has to look at the BAR in San Francisco to see how bad the quality of escort pix can get.

[guyinsf]

A couple of thoughts not already mentioned:

 

- The escort is doing well with the pictures he already has. Why pay for "artistic" or "professional" photos if one doesn't need them?

 

- The escort did engage the services of a professional but the "amateur" photos taken by a friend look better.

 

- The escort doesn't want a professional photographer to have negatives of pictures of him.

 

I'll admit that, as a client, seeing a good picture or pictures of an escort is important in my hiring decision. While a handsome face is very important to me, I can understand why many escorts do not want to show their faces in photos. Sometimes guys will show enough of their faces so that you have an idea of their "look" but not enough that anyone could pick them out on the street solely having seen the picture.

 

I also base my hiring decisions on personality. Someone who seems upfront, friendly, and "real" gets big points for that; those things make up for not having the most artistic and/or revealing photos. Someone who looks really sexy but who conducts himself like a pushy salesman or who conveys that he really doesn't want to do what he is doing isn't going to be hired by me.

 

True story here, and I'm not going to name names. I hired a very well reviewed and popular escort. His photos are awesome, not only of his face but of his body as well. The guy looks very muscular and tan, with very little body fat. His face looks handsome enough that he could be a mainstream (commercial) model. He literally has scores of photos on his website and they all appear to be professionally done. He has appeared in porn so I assume the photos were, in fact, taken by a professional photographer. Imagine my disappointment when I hired him and his skin was not tanned in the least, he was much "softer" than his photos indicated, and his face seemed more ordinary/less classically handsome. I'm not saying he was bad looking, but he certainly didn't live up to his photos. I thought that perhaps I caught him at a not so great time, even though he was travelling and soliciting clients. I didn't submit a negative or even lukewarm review. I don't like to write negative reviews unless I feel totally conned or had an especially bad experience. So here I had an experience like someone else mentioned on this thread -- the pictures were SO good that reality was a disappointment.

 

In two of the three areas -- being tanned and leaner -- the guy could have obviously put more effort into maintaining the appearance under which he was marketing himself. As far as the face, however, it is what it is. I've seen many photos of Tom Cruise where he looks very handsome, but sometimes he looks very ordinary. I hire someone regularly and he has let me take some pictures of him for my own personal "use." I'm far from a professional photographer and my pictures, with a couple of exceptions, make him look less handsome than he actually is. Now he obviously wouldn't want to use most of my pictures to market himself, but he has used one shot I took. It's a nice, accurate shot of how he looks. It isn't color corrected, perfectly lit, air brushed, etc. If someone likes what he sees in that photo, he will like what he sees in person.

 

I guess my long-winded post is attempting to convey that I think escorts should use ACCURATE photos. Certainly someone doesn't want to use really grainy shots or photos which capture him at a bad moment. Using overly flattering shots may help get new clients but some of those new clients may be disappointed when they finally meet the real person who doesn't look quite so "perfect."

[Rick Munroe]

>How can you slam Les' pix and then say "no offense?"

 

Easily. Les is not the photographer.

 

>Les has

>a goal of showing juicy guys who turn us on. He succeeds

>admirably.

 

I disagree. But I guess you have a right to your opinion and I don't. Oh yeah, I forgot...escorts should be seen and not heard.

 

>You should have just left him out of this.

 

I didn't bring him up. And what is "this" that Les has to be left out of? Is Les some deity now who can't be criticized? You guys will spend hours ripping apart or building up an escort, but I can't express my opinion about some random pics that Les finds, whose photographers are never even credited?

[+ Lucky]

"I disagree. But I guess you have a right to your opinion and I don't. Oh yeah, I forgot...escorts should be seen and not heard."

 

You sound like a Jewish mother! No one is trying to interfere with your right to express an opinion. You have posted 2055 times so don't try to take that approach.

You know that I not only agree with most of your posts, but that I often post positively about you. In this case, I just felt that you personalized this in regard to Les and that it wasn't necessary for you to do that to make your point.

[Rick Munroe]

>You sound like a Jewish mother!

 

That was very anti-semitic of you. (I don't really think that, but you're the one who's always so over-the-top PC; I figured I'd speak your language.)

 

>I just felt that you personalized this in regard to Les and that it

>wasn't necessary for you to do that to make your point.

 

I said nothing personal about Les (how could I? I know nothing about him) and I even followed up with "no offense, Les" just to make sure I wasn't misunderstood. But if it will make you happy, Lucky: I'M SORRY, LES! PLEASE FORGIVE ME! :*

[+ Lucky]

"you're the one who's always so over-the-top PC"

 

Am I really? I didn't realize that. Anyway, I am sure Les will forgive you as he is a nice guy. Of course, I am too!

[Rick Munroe]

>he is a nice guy. Of course, I am too!

 

I already knew that.