Why no full size images
 

Why do 95 percent "just a guess" of webmasters build their pay site tours with no full size photo samples?

Are you all cheap and worried about bandwidth or what?

They don't have to be nude photos so forget 2257 answers.

I am guessing that by this question you are kind of new to this industry.

what pic dimensions you consider full size? Surfers are on various resolutions and very large sizes are annoying.

Congratulations
You successfully added another useless post to your post count

What ever but 768x 1024 for example.
I?m of a firm belief that surfers appreciate a taste of what they are going to see inside and to be honest it?s got me stuffed how any of these ordinary template tours get any sales at all.

because it looks bad to have a big ass image up there, surfers like to see clean images embedded into a nice design

Yes it would but opening the samples in a new window I?m talking about.
So surfers can see the quality of your content ETC

a fuckload of surfers come from galleries where they already saw the full size content

oh well, it doesnt matter, there's plenty of paysites doing $millions a year without full size images like this

Good idea, thanks for the tip.

yeah i do agree, he did have a good idea there

oh ok, I had something like 1600x1200 in mind. It's definetely a good idea and it's something I have suggested to several paysite owners through time when they requested my opinion, but I don't remember anyone adopted that. Alscan does that and I can tell you for sure it converts better than 99.99999999 of the paysites. The reason why they don't? It's simple. Adult webmasters take as granted that something that is repeated from others it's the best option. Very of them the track results, so what you see is just a matrix of borrowed stuff that rarely work well as one unit.

I see your point, however not everyone comes from galleries also a lot of galleries don?t reflect the true resolution and quality of the members area content.

It does convert that's why I just don?t get these lame ass template sites. They must rely on a huge amount of traffic to make a buck.

It is something a lot of content providers do and it does make it a lot easy when I?m choosing content. You can never really tell what the full sized images are going to look like until you see one or two.

edit typo

if there was a list of best things ever said on gfy, this would be tops.

I was saying this same thing last week, about the Nikki Nevada site.

Galleries ? Every pic (gallery) that I've seen is fucking horrible. Like it's shot with a 2megapixel camera.

I go to the site, hoping to see at least ONE decent-sized sample image that reflects the quality of what's in the member's area.

Nothing on the tour convincing of a sale, at least not my sale.

its pretty funny, the TGPs have better samples than the paysite tours..never could figure that out..

WTF does 2257 have to do with ANY of this? Why did you even mention that as a factor?

So this thread would be graced with the all mighty ones presence :hi

Nothing I guess but I thought some people might be concerned about using nude samples for fear of the proposed 2257 regs.

But a more logical reason for not using nude is to tease the surfer and not give too much away.

Bandwidth and load speed.

Same reason they reduce resolution (as opposed to picture size)

I don't mind paysites since I don't join... but I do mind not getting a decent sample from a content provider and being disappointed after the sale.