Excellent post.anthonyhNot everyone has your level of disposable income which (assuming the average shoot costs around £100 in fees and expenses) would suggest (based on above) you spend at least £4000 p.a. on your hobby. Maybe those who can only afford say one paid shoot a month see things from a different perspective. And of course they might be spending that money via other sites. Or like me, photographing models is not my main photographic interest but I am still consious of the relative merits of the model sites I belong to.
All I hear from togs is that models mess them around, no show, reply a few times then stop, just generally mess them around. I can't understand why models would turn down work?! They must be bloody crazy! I have never no showed & am always keen to arrange as many shoots as possible. There are genuine, hard working models out there, it's just finding them. Don't give up Katie
My view of purestorm strengths is that it doesn't have tiny cropped thumbnails,. For all it's issues I think the references system here works reasonably well. The forums here may be quieter but most of the 'lovely hun' comments which ex-members used to post are no loss. Personally I don't want to connect stuff here with facebook or twitter. If i did want to, I would do it from facebook........... useful if people were to list what they like about purestorm so that no-one takes away it's strengths in an effort to modernise. (Personally I hate the USA ness of MM and the retro look of PP)
Just to throw something else into the discussion.......
. The world will keep spinning whether PS is on it or not John
Sum total of the thread (ignoring the 'lovely hun' 'thanks hun' posts) is that some people there seem to like the trashy thumbnails and some have problems loading Purestorm !!! I know there have been occasional problems of that nature, but can't say I have ever noticed a general issue.
And then there's Tamoo who seems less interested whether people actually book anyone on PP, only on their huge number of non-paying and probably non-modeling, non-photographing members.