paying membership for photos only - still viable?

[The Invader]

I've been slowly (limited time and money) working towards launching a glamour/adult nude site. It will be a girl only site of mainly uk/us mag style, but may also include up to toys and hard girl-girl.

My plan has always been not to include any explicit nude content among the sample photos in the free/tour parts of my site. So the only way members could see the explicit photos would be to pay the membership. The free samples would include topless and non-explicit nude though. Since it's all my own original content, I have previously reckoned that there will be people who are prepared to pay to see new explicit nude photos (of both known UK glamour models or unknown girl next door types).

Since the site would initially have only photo content (a lot of which is non-studio amateur style), I have always considered it would be a cheap monthly membership rate of no more than $5 (plus discounted rates for say 6 month or 1 year periods). Then I would hope to build towards being able to afford to host video content too, and then charge a more expensive tier of membership to access the video.

However...now I am wondering whether nowadays I can even expect to charge at all for a photo-only site? e.g. If I put myself into the position of the modern punter, I would probably not pay for photo content unless I was also getting video of the models too.

So perhaps I should think of an alternative way of building up my site to a position where I can offer paid membership to access video content?

My first thought would be to enter into some sort of agreement with a well established site which is similar to mine (i.e. girl only content), but one that is already offering lots of video content. So my site could be a partner/teazer site that offers entirely free and original photo content, but I advertise in favour of attracting users to join the established site. E.g. I will also have a Blog on my site so as well as links I could also have articles about the other site.

I would still want users to join my own site in order to see the restricted, explicit images, but it could be a free sign up. The sample images would still be on offer to casual browsers who don't join the site.

I know there is a lot to read here but I always think it's better to provide some info about what I am proposing, as it can affect the context of what I am asking, which to summarise is:

Should I stick with my original idea of charging a cheap membership for photo only explicit nude content?
or
Should I make all the photo content free and partner with an established site?
or
Any other suggestions?

Note: I have a really good domain name/brand logo for my site, which is why I'd like to persevere with building up my own site using my own original photo content, instead of just selling my photo content to other sites.

Thanks

[distrasdesigns]

I see what you mean about letting it go for free... But then what do you get for all your hard work and photography?

If you have truly "new" or "unknown" uk models on there, then people may pay to see a fresh new face.

I think there isnt any reason why you couldnt charge, even if its very low such as $2, at least your receiving something from the site, and maybe because it would be SO cheap, people wont feel like they're wasting much money.

Do you already have the video content? And simply cant afford the proper hosting to put them all on? If thats the case, send me an email (mike@distrasdesigns.com), and ill see what I can do.

[one eyed jack]

I think you have thought well about this but the one thing you may not have thought of is: If you have really good pics of good models and it is interesting, then people WILL pay for it. $5 sounds well cheap. I think you could go a fair bit higher depending on how much content you launch with

My only thoughts are if there sint much nudity beyond topless on the tour then people may not see any reason to join for just nice pics when other sites doing similar show more.... like bum, full frontal (no pink) otherwise it would just look like a glamour site.

I think people would pay for glamour definitely

Mores important...Regular updates. On time and all the time and you should do ok.

[rgb]

I agree - I doubt you'll get rich but if your stuff is good you should give it a try.

$5 is too cheap. By the time the billing company and your bank have had their cuts you are left with about ?2.50...if you get affiliate sales you only get about ?1.25 !! You'll need an awful lot of sign-ups to pay for the next shoot !wink!

[The Invader]

Thanks for the advice and video hosting offer, but no I don't have video content yet, other than myself trying filming twice with a couple of the models I did shoots with recently (one of which I cannot publish the video anyway as although she poses to explicit nude she only publishes to non-explicit nude).

So it's a case of start small and build gradually.

[The Invader]

Thanks for the advice and comments.

Yeah I am aware that most sites would show explicit in the sample images/tour but I'm purposely not planning to do that, purely to try something a bit different from the norm, or in some respect trying to rekindle an online version of the days of the punter buying his top shelf mag i.e. tempted by the front cover so decides to hand over his money to see the explicit shots of the model.

Who knows I may also have a better chance of attracting more first timers/fresh faces to pose if they see that the free areas of the site aren't as full on.

The quality of my photos will look nothing special to a professional tog, I am essentially a punter with a website idea and a consumer DSLR and no lighting equipment

However I have a mix of studio sets which obviously look more professional, plus non-studio and outdoor sets, which look more amateur in style.

I estimate I currently have about 2 years worth of photo updates, based on 2 photo sets published per week (although that includes splitting some sets up into parts).

I will also be at work during UK office hours and unable to provide support for my site or even access it during those periods of the day.

So I feel with the limited updates and support I shouldn't be charging that much.

I'm going to have a Blog too though, and write lots of blurb (as I have a good memory for remembering how the shoots went and what the models were like and what they talked about).

[The Invader]

With photos only I'm not expecting to get rich on my own with this site. But if I can get something back in return for the photo content I already have, I'd be happy with that if it helped towards building up the site's popularity. Maybe I would go up to $5.95 per month but I am trying to be realistic and fair with my pricing.

And to be brutally honest I am hoping that I may attract someone with more muscle from within the industry who likes the site and domain/brand that I have, and may want to get involved to take the site to the next level.

I'd rather keep the domain to myself for now but I know it's a cracking generic term name that is also 100% relevant to the subject matter of the site.

Anyways, thanks to yourself and the others for taking the time to offer some opinions. Although I still have my doubts about charging for my photo only content I think I'll revert to my original plan of a low subscription, and see how things develop.

If after 2 years or so I'm not making much progress with it, then I can close the subscriptions and leave it as an archive site.

Cheers

[paul jones]

I don't think a NEW photos only membership site has legs, (unless it's amazingly special).

If you're building your own and using low cost hosting, maybe you can try it and see, and maybe it wioll subsidise a hobby eventually, but I don't think I'd spnd business level investment on it.

BUT if your work is at the softer end and and of fantastic quality - MetArt standard - then instead of selling memberships why not try and sell high end prints?

Various sites offer photographers this type of service as turnkey, you just provide the images and marketing.

Cheers

[The Invader]

No my photos are not of MetArt standard, but then I never set out with this project to become an expert tog and only sell my images.

Rather I am the person behind the website idea, but who has ended up trying to manage everything about the project myself.

I initially worked with an agent in the UK glamour industry and my plan was to use pro togs with me only managing the site, but this agent suddenly went AWOL. But not before he had encouraged me to have a go at doing some shoots myself, and by this point affordable consumer DSLRs were on the market, so that's how I got into doing the actual shoots.

Despite the mysterious disappearance of said glamour agent, I learned a heck of a lot off this guy about how the adult industry works, and how to treat/handle the models, so it was a very worthwhile experience to have worked with him.

I really value your honesty, as the reason I posted was to get some honest opinions.

I am most certainly going to continue with the site through to completion though, as it's not going to screw me financially to do so, and I don't mind if it continues to tick along more like a hobby. Making enough money back to pay for ongoing shoots would be nice, but I am also prepared to publish all my photo content completely free if it comes to that.

If I do ever get to a position where I have quality video content, a UK version of the magnificent FTVgirls.com would be the sort of site I would love to aim for e.g. I guess that could be simonscans.com (another great site).

Cheers

[CK1]

Hi

I too am also looking into doing exactly the same thing, although I'm coming at it from a different angle - I'm a tog (of good standard) that wants to make money from my photography. Although I do have experience of running, managing and marketing websites (in completely different areas to this).

Perhaps we could work together on something? Double the updates, double the content, half the website running input etc. If you're interested let me know.