egafd.com

Purestorm's no better or worse than any model site! just stick to the T&C. But the mods do have an attitude problem - god know why !wink!

im not being funny purestorn is not a good site thats my my view

The only beef I have with Pstorm is that togs have to have a certain standard (studio standard I think it's called) with their pics to be accepted, while wannabe models can post any old shit taken with a mobile cam and be accepted.

But as schist says, I don't think it's any better or worse than others.

Secretease wrote:

> The only beef I have with Pstorm is that togs have to have a
> certain standard (studio standard I think it's called) with
> their pics to be accepted, while wannabe models can post any
> old shit taken with a mobile cam and be accepted.
>
> But as schist says, I don't think it's any better or worse than
> others.
>
>

Why do you say that as plenty of amateur photographers with profiles on Purestorm? AFAIK all that is needed is to upload a couple of reasonable images of a 'model' even if actually just a friend or relative.

What is important so your profile doesn't get deleted is to keep the images safely within the site rules and never mention anything other than solo work.

If a model shows interest I aim to get her direct email straight away and reply with links to my AIR profile so keeping correspondence off Purestorm and no issues if either profile is deleted.

I had my first profile deleted although I never worked out why hence have kept the second tame.

It's got nothing to do with amateurs or professionals.

Nikonman says his response rate has dropped. One reason could be that girls set up a portfolio then either lose confidence or weren't serious about it in the first place. If the site insisted on a certain standard for model sign ups aswell then it would cut down on timewasters and photographers wasting their time approaching new models who either aren't serious or change their minds.

Hi
I posted a casting for boy girl had great feedback for 20 mins then they cut me off they read my emails and told me that it was against rule 16 ie they want no interaction at all with models model/model or any other combo

the casting was popular but they were not interested but thaey are happy with heavy fetish and girl/girl ????????/

John

Trendkill sounds great see my post on here

here is a link to my site for a couple of pics as an example
I am NUJ Registered

www.classic-wedding.com/art

regards

john

Purestorm don't have a photographer quality threshold as I've got 2 portfolios on there - one glamour, one more lifestyle/portrait. If they'll take my crap they'll take anyone's. And I've never encountered the wrath of the mods.

If I put up a casting I get plenty of response, though much of it from models who haven't read the instructions so are any permutation from: too far away, too old, too young, don't work to the required levels, are unavailable on the day I've specified or far too expensive.

There is a small core of people on there though who do it right, so I'll continue to use it - which has the added advantage of allowing me to see the latest wannabe model photo style: the shot taken on a phone in a nightclub bogs!

On many occasions, the condom machine or the hand dryer appears in the background. I can only assume that the reason for so many of these shots is that the girl is dressed up for going out - so looking her best - and the bogs are brighter than the rest of the pub/club so the crappy camera in their phone is able to take a picture.

I have never even had the chance of having an ad on there, they see my face & thats me fucked.
I have to have bogus accounts on there & tell people who i am after i know i can trust them, if they have one sniff you have done hardcore you are out even if you just have a glamour listing.
Not the best of sites & only used by people wanting up to topless...