I really hate to say it, but I will not join a fitness model website if there is no nudity of some type. And it cant be just implied nudity - needs to be some topless or full nude. (God us men are horny toads)
At the same time I dont want there to be TOO many nude sets, because then I will get bored with seeing her naked. Then I would lose interest. I think a big mistake a lot of models make is that when they start going nude, they come out with too many nude sets too fast, and in order to keep fans interested, they have to then get into more exreme stuff. 20%-40% of the sets being nude seems like a good number. If you go to Nikki Warner's website, she tends to strike a great balance between nude and non-nude sets.
Downloads of pictures and vidoes MUST be allowed. There is nothing that irritates me more than a website that doesnt let you download pics and videos. Its insulting to fans and its asinine because the image becomes apart of my computer whether or not I download it or not. There is no getting around it. If one is concerned about pics being shared online - I heard about some technology that allows the customer to download the picture but will not allow him to upload it back onto the internet.
As far as the AMOUNT of content goes - Rebecca Ryann's website is what all models should emulate. She has tons of videos and tons of pics. It costs $30 bucks a month but it is well worth it. Unfortunately she is not quite fit enough for me.
The Michael Stycket websites used to be the best around because of their very frequent updates and massive amounts of pictures - but unfortunately they have taken a real downfall the past 18 months or so. They havent had as many fitness models as they used to. They have a good balance between nude and nonnude sets.
Fake boobs NOT REQUIRED - but I do need some muscle and tone and Sarah certainly has that.
Even though your site has no nudity I will probably still join your site Sarah because I think I still have your nude pics that you did in the past.
|