Make your hosted galleries like Phil-Flash - GoFuckYourself.com

MrLuvr · 03-03-2005, 10:13 AM

Why can't more sponsors make their hosted galleries like Phil-flash?

The pictures in his galleries are high-res originals unlike the ones I have seen in most other galleries.

I have looked at the hosted galleries from Felixflow, FTVCash, Spunkycash, Dutchteencash....

And they just don't compare. Their pictures are fuzzy low res copies. Isn't the point to entice the surfers?

Or maybe Phil-flash is giving too much away in his galleries? I don't know. I am just a newbie at this game. But, all I know is that Phil-flash galleries give me a boner, the other ones don't.

If was a surfer I would be more likely to sign up to his sites than some of the others...

CheeseFrog · 03-03-2005, 10:17 AM

I agree. I started with 640x480's of the original full sized images for my galleries, but about halfway through I switched to full sized images and noticed more conversions. I wasn't running up against overage cost, so why not?

Shooting_Manic · 03-03-2005, 10:28 AM

600x800 is enough for hosted galleries. The "idea" is to get them to click through to the site where they can see the real images, not to jerk off to the gallery. Having a sample of the full size image on the tour is one thing, having 15 or more on a gallery just does not make sense in the BW department.

I've never understood sponsors that use huge images on their hosted galls. Money to burn on BW I guess. Not knocking it and I've even tried ot for 90 days, but I just have never see it make a difference other then the amount of the server bill each month.

More power to them I guess.

MrLuvr · 03-03-2005, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shooting_Manic

600x800 is enough for hosted galleries. The "idea" is to get them to click through to the site where they can see the real images

How does the surfer know that the quality of the images in the member's area is better? Sometimes there are full size samples hidden away on the tour, most often there don't seem to be any.

psyko514 · 03-03-2005, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrLuvr

How does the surfer know that the quality of the images in the member's area is better? Sometimes there are full size samples hidden away on the tour, most often there don't seem to be any.

All you have to do is say so on the gallery and/or tour. You could also have 3 or 4 of your thumbs labelled as "members area quality" and have them go to the full size pics.

flashfire · 03-03-2005, 04:16 PM

100% agree, whats the point of hosted galleries that dont convert?

Dirty Dane · 03-03-2005, 04:25 PM

The Phil-Flash FHGs are with like 10 pics of hq-res.
Other sponsors might be with 15-20 pics of low-res.

So I dont think it would cost extra in b/w.

psyko514 · 03-03-2005, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane

The Phil-Flash FHGs are with like 10 pics of hq-res.
Other sponsors might be with 15-20 pics of low-res.

So I dont think it would cost extra in b/w.

it definetly would. the pics on Phil-Flash's galleries are all around 250 KB. other hosted galleries are 50-80 KB.

Dirty Dane · 03-03-2005, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psyko514

it definetly would. the pics on Phil-Flash's galleries are all around 250 KB. other hosted galleries are 50-80 KB.

yeah, then it would. But 50-80kb??
I mean, if HQ generates more sales, you also have to calculate the cost of lost sales if you are not using HQ.

Dirty F · 03-03-2005, 04:39 PM

Phil is the proof that is doesnt matter if youre the worst photographer in the world. If your girls are hot they will sell.
Phil always manages to make pics with 90% background and 10% subject haha.

psyko514 · 03-03-2005, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane

yeah, then it would. But 50-80kb??
I mean, if HQ generates more sales, you also have to calculate the cost of lost sales if you are not using HQ.

either way, if you have a good host, the bandwith costs are pretty negligible. i was just pointing out that there is indeed a difference in cost.

and yeah, 50-80 KB. i've seen some as low as 25 KB, actually.

DutchTeenCash · 03-07-2005, 02:30 AM

didnt see this so sorry for the late bump, weve got 600x800 hg, 16 pics each, some hg have on them the members quality is 1000x1500 but the sites have as well

the hg arent crappy lowres for sure take a look

http://www.dutchteengalleries.com/mma/10/index.shtml

approx 50-70kb, ours were fullsize as well, didnt convert better, but ill talk here and get the members size is 1000x1500 back on all galleries, good point thanks

killshot · 03-07-2005, 02:33 AM

I have had tgp's turn me down for using high res images...

so now i just keep the galleries at a kind of middle res.

03-03-2005, 10:13 AM	#1
MrLuvr Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 538	Make your hosted galleries like Phil-Flash Why can't more sponsors make their hosted galleries like Phil-flash? The pictures in his galleries are high-res originals unlike the ones I have seen in most other galleries. I have looked at the hosted galleries from Felixflow, FTVCash, Spunkycash, Dutchteencash.... And they just don't compare. Their pictures are fuzzy low res copies. Isn't the point to entice the surfers? Or maybe Phil-flash is giving too much away in his galleries? I don't know. I am just a newbie at this game. But, all I know is that Phil-flash galleries give me a boner, the other ones don't. If was a surfer I would be more likely to sign up to his sites than some of the others... Last edited by MrLuvr; 03-03-2005 at 10:15 AM..

03-03-2005, 10:17 AM	#2
CheeseFrog Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: AZ Posts: 1,724	I agree. I started with 640x480's of the original full sized images for my galleries, but about halfway through I switched to full sized images and noticed more conversions. I wasn't running up against overage cost, so why not? __________________ Cary \| AIM: cheesefrog \| ICQ: 4287002

03-03-2005, 10:28 AM	#3
Shooting_Manic Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: NY Posts: 1,740	600x800 is enough for hosted galleries. The "idea" is to get them to click through to the site where they can see the real images, not to jerk off to the gallery. Having a sample of the full size image on the tour is one thing, having 15 or more on a gallery just does not make sense in the BW department. I've never understood sponsors that use huge images on their hosted galls. Money to burn on BW I guess. Not knocking it and I've even tried ot for 90 days, but I just have never see it make a difference other then the amount of the server bill each month. More power to them I guess. __________________ SIG TOO BIG! Maximum 120x60 button and no more than 3 text lines of DEFAULT SIZE and COLOR. Unless your sig is for a GFY top banner sponsor, then you may use a 624x80 instead of a 120x60. Last edited by Shooting_Manic; 03-03-2005 at 10:31 AM..

03-07-2005, 02:30 AM	#12
DutchTeenCash I like Dutch Girls Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: dutchteencash.com Posts: 21,684	didnt see this so sorry for the late bump, weve got 600x800 hg, 16 pics each, some hg have on them the members quality is 1000x1500 but the sites have as well the hg arent crappy lowres for sure take a look http://www.dutchteengalleries.com/mma/10/index.shtml approx 50-70kb, ours were fullsize as well, didnt convert better, but ill talk here and get the members size is 1000x1500 back on all galleries, good point thanks __________________ ICQ 16 91 547 - SKYPE dutchteencash bob AT dutchteencash DOT com ... did you see our newest Sweet Natural Girl Priscilla (18)?

03-07-2005, 02:33 AM	#13
killshot Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: OGG / PDX Posts: 456	I have had tgp's turn me down for using high res images... so now i just keep the galleries at a kind of middle res. __________________

03-03-2005, 04:16 PM	#6
flashfire ICQ 1 6 7 8 5 3 4 9 2 Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 13,098	100% agree, whats the point of hosted galleries that dont convert?

03-03-2005, 04:25 PM	#7
Dirty Dane Sick Fuck Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: www Posts: 9,491	The Phil-Flash FHGs are with like 10 pics of hq-res. Other sponsors might be with 15-20 pics of low-res. So I dont think it would cost extra in b/w.

03-03-2005, 04:39 PM	#10
Dirty F Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 59,204	Phil is the proof that is doesnt matter if youre the worst photographer in the world. If your girls are hot they will sell. Phil always manages to make pics with 90% background and 10% subject haha.