egafd.com

I imagine most new members are simply appalled by the quality of your images. The ones which are in focus...

Images should be at least the size of the screen, so think 800x1200. Try that.

Focusing problems? Well, I recommend that you only ever select one focal point on your camera. If the model is standing/kneeling/sitting & facing you, then select the highest point in your camera, compose, semi-depress the shutter button so that you've focused on the models face, recompose & fully depress the button. Do not move when you're doing this until the image has been taken. If the model is flat on her back with her legs open & she's facing you. Try using the centre point to focus on her face, and recompose, or simply focus on her abdomen.

I'm not commenting on the video content because I do not know where to start...

I hope this helps.

Well we are all entitled to our opinion, and as you well know you are certainly not trying to help.

I tend to throw in the less good shots along with the good ones. If a shot is slightly out of focus I may include it on the website, but there are only a fairly small number of such photos on the site and I usually add a note to that effect. The same applies to other mistakes, the shot is usually accompanied by a note pointing out the error. I also include screen capture images from video sequences, which by their nature are not as focused as still images. I make no claim to be a technical photographer, my images are what they are, mostly ok, some good and some that wouldn`t get in a magazine but that is true of many images on the internet. Sometimes the most correct shots from a technical point of view are the most sterile.

There are plenty of very good shots on my website as I am sure you are aware if you have looked through my members area. I have been published in Escort three times and had other sets accepted only for them to be kept on the waiting list so long that I withdrew them. This forum is full of comments that reveal more about the person making the comment than the person it is made about. Marlyn Lindsay is certainly not my greatest fan, but she said the set we did in Godmersham church was the best set she had ever done with any photographer. She uses two of my shots on her Purestorm profile, taken on the Thames Cycle Path.

There are now over 8,500 still images on my website and the idea that they are all appalling is ridiculous. The sets I did with BBW models Busty Cookie and Nicoletta are not so good, simply because of the appearance of the models, but apparently some guys like that sort of thing. Sometimes the light conditions were not ideal for outdoor shoots and I had to do the best I could with them. As to the size of the images the viewer only needs to click on the icon at top centre to the right to obtain a full screen image. The viewer can also view the videos at full screen size. These are web design matters in any event.

The videos are experimental. Most are meant to be humorous. Some are better than others and I have never claimed that they are to a professional standard, but the video of Marlyn masturbating in Bishopsbourne church is not to be missed. Tori Baynes`s encounters with Noddy and Bigears are so bizarre that you would not see such videos anywhere else, but you need a sense of humour to get anything out of them.

To anyone with an open mind the latest gallery on my site is a fetish set with Tori Baynes being `punished`. I thought Tori might kick off about it but she took it all in her stride. She is not a naturally submissive woman, in real life I would say she is neither sub nor dom, just feisty and spiky, but I was pleased to discover that she can do submissive. If you want to see Tori being `punished` you will have to join my site, and you can judge for yourself how `appalling` the images are. I reckon around ?7.50 for 8,500 images plus 78 video clips is pretty good value.

I don`t recognise Dynamatiques as a member of my website, unless he signed up under a different identity. This raises an interesting question, is he a member or ex-member, has he hacked into my site or has he really only seen my Preview page? It must be one of those things. A site calling itself fetishpasswords.com is claiming to be able to supply a free password to my site and others. I think this is bullshit, because what purports to be a password simply leads the viewer to my home page, but I will be very interested to know if anyone has been able to bypass security and hack into my website, and also how it was done. In that case I will take this up with the guy who designed my site, but I don`t understand what fetishpasswords.com is all about. Even if they were able to breach my security they would not gain anything by it.

If anyone knows anything about fetishpasswords.com I would be interested to hear about it.

Hey there,
I wouldn't worry too much about hacks, honestly. *Anything* designed by anyone is hackable and will happen, despite your best efforts. The thing to do is to get a decent protection system in place so when a hack DOES happen, the damage is limited.

Things to look for in a security script provider;
1) Bandwidth protection
2) Concurrent account usage blocking when used from multiple GEOs
3) an automated system where users get a new pass sent to them directly by the system automatically will be a big time saver for you in the long run. (No site owner wants unhappy users because their account has been blocked!)

I don't know what you've got in place, but I'd recommend looking at PhantomFrog and StrongBox for a good starting place.

Cheers
Robin

P.S. Don't worry too much about fetishpasswords either. There's literally hundreds of password sharing forums and crack sites. Just protect yourself. and minimise the damage.
You wouldn't go out without a coat on if it was raining would you?

Thanks

Yes I always thought there was a way of doing it, but I`ll have to ask the guy who set up the site. His sites are based on a format and I am sure he put something in place but I will have to ask him.

The strange thing about fetishpasswords.com is that there is even a comment on the site by someone saying that he has never known one of their passwords to work on any site- not a great recommendation! At least they refer to my site as a `quality fetish site` when it isn`t specifically a fetish site. Better than `Dynamatiques` remarks, which are deliberately calculated to spike my site. Whether a photograph is good or bad is a matter of opinion but to imply that large numbers of my photos are out of focus is a carefully planted falsehood. I am sure he is not a member so I am interested to know how he accessed my site. The simplest method of hacking would be to use another member`s log in details. I`m not really bothered about someone sharing his details with his mates, but I draw the line at sharing this information online.

Cheers from the Tog and his Leprechaun.

www.lepssmuttywebsite.com

I'd imagine Dynamatiques is referring to the pictures on your preview page. You do have a lot of poor quality photo's on there. As that is the main advertisement on the site to get people to join I would recommend changing a lot of them. Even the picture you use here is out of focus - http://www.lepssmuttywebsite.com/about. You are not maximizing your chance of getting members by using pictures like this.

Morph

Well thank you for your opinion. A few shots on the Preview page are screen capture images which are not necessarily in the sharpest focus, but as to the others you are seeing something that I think can only be very marginal. Some images were not taken in the best light but you would need to look very hard at them to say they are out of focus. I only use a standard digital camera and I have never claimed to be a professional photographer. At least you are only saying I should change some of them, so you obviously don`t think they are all bad. There would be no point in putting my best images on the preview page because then nobody would need to join. As to the photo of Tori on my Home Page the light wasn`t that great and it was pissing down with rain, but to say it is out of focus seems to me to be very picky. I refer you to image number 12 on my preview page. I think that is as flattering an image as anyone could ever achieve of this particular BBW model, who uses very out of date images on her modelling profiles and is fairly gross from the neck down.

People are entitled to their opinions, but I am more concerned as to how Dynamatiques entered my members area. If he has really seen the videos as he claims he must have entered the members area so he is either a computer genius or he has hacked in the easy way, using a member`s log in details. I am very much on the case of whoever may have passed on his details, but so far I have been unable to identify anyone as the culprit.

[quote]Ashleigh is a beautiful and talented young woman, but I am not sure a model needs to be that slim. It seems to be a requirement for the fashion industry, but I don`t think it is really necessary for the adult market. I think Ashleigh could look just as good or even better if she put on a few pounds.[/quote]

I think it's only because Ashleigh is quite tall that she appears extremely slim. I think she looks lovely as she is (for the record I don't like stick-thin women) though I don't think there's a perfect size and shape. Your post reads as though she is wilfully as she is - some girls can eat like pigs but stay slim.



[quote]I only use a standard digital camera and I have never claimed to be a professional photographer. At least you are only saying I should change some of them, so you obviously don`t think they are all bad. There would be no point in putting my best images on the preview page because then nobody would need to join.[/quote]

In some cases, the saying "only a bad workman blames his/her tools" does hold truth. Many "standard" digital cameras are capable of good shots with enough knowledge of the camera's limitations and with decent lighting.

I don't think the mentality of not showing your best images because you don't think people will subscribe otherwise is a positive one. It's always possible to do thumbnail galleries or reduced resolution/watermarked previews of the really good stuff. Personally, if I saw poor quality photos or videos on the preview, it wouldn't fill me with confidence that there's better on the inside. To be blunt, it would suggest laziness and indifference almost to the point of contempt for potential customers. As Welshmorph implied, you have to demonstrate the best you are capable of in your preview to maximise your sales opportunities.

Re Ashleigh that is not what I meant. She is one of the best models I`ve worked with but I was a bit worried about her health. In some poses her ribcage is visible and I know that is what some fashion model agencies seem to require. That is not fair on the models in my opinion.

As to my Preview page I`ve gone through it in the light of previous criticism and I think it is fairly representative of what is inside the members area. I believe I can see which shots are being referred to, but the page shows a mixture of good, reasonable and not so good images. I will never put my very best images on the Preview page, but I refute your allegation that I am showing contempt for anyone. The viewer can get some idea of the material on the site from the Preview page and if he doesn`t want to pay for membership he doesn`t have to.

Two things I do object to are what `Dynamatiques` seems to have done, which is to access my members area without paying a subscription, and what fetishpasswords.com are implying that they can do, which is enabling people to access my members area without paying a subscription. And I don`t believe `Dynamatiques` got in via fetishpasswords.com because as far as I can see they are blagging it and it is not possible to bypass the security of any paysite by going through that site.

I am not entering a photographic competition. The title Lep`s SMUTTY Website is a clue to its low brow content! When I am paying a model by the hour I need to get as many shots as possible, and inevitably some are less good than others. I tend to leave those shots in unless they are seriously unusable.

As I said previously I have been published three times in Escort. They also accepted five other sets I sent them. One could not be used because I was unable to get the right documentation from the model and four were put on what seemed to be an endless waiting list, until I gave up and started my website instead. This doesn`t necessarily make me a brilliant photographer but nor does it make me anything like as bad as `Dynamatiques` in particular is claiming.

But no doubt the criticisms will keep coming! So far they have been relatively mild compared to the abuse hurled at people in some other threads, but forums in all subjects tend to get used in this way.

To anyone thinking about joining I would say don`t be put off by all this negativity. It will only cost you a few quid to sign up anyway so if you don`t like it you will not have lost much, and I think you will enjoy some of what you will find in the members area.

www.lepssmuttywebsite.com

I didn't allege that you were contemptuous of potential customers so you have nothing to refute.

I only suggested not demonstrating what you're capable of (i.e your best) in your preview could suggest laziness and possibly contempt.

Allegations and suggestions aren't the same thing.

Ok thank you for the clarification. I guess it is possible to get too sensitive about forum comments.

On the subject of Ashleigh I will just add that she has in the past been represented by model agencies. So far I have only done one shoot with her, but during the shoot we stopped for a cup of tea, I offered her something to eat but she declined, I bought a packet of crisps for myself and offered her one, but she only accepted a very small crisp. She had a busy day ahead of her after the shoot and I don`t know if she intended to eat later, but when I saw her ribcage in some of my photos I wondered if she was going to more lengths than necessary to remain slim. If I have a criticism it is directed towards model agencies and not Ashleigh, who now manages herself in any event.

Ashleigh has stunning bright eyes that shone out of some of my photos. A bit like Marlyn Lindsay without the em... complications! Marlyn is so photogenic that even when our final shoot degenerated into chaos the results were still better than they were with certain other models. It is a shame things went the way they did because when she was modelling properly for me she made me look a better photographer than I really am.