G4U should invest in professional photographer.
As for professional photographers....they do a worse job....their profession is to hide a girl's bad points and accentuate the good. In other words the image is distorted.
In this case a professional photographer or one with a good eye is an asset to everyone. Yes they do try to show the lady at her best, but that is what the agency and the lady hire him for. The photographer is there to increase agency profits, not expose faults. In any case, showing the lady at her best is not a distortion and using a professional is not about trying to create a distortion. I understand what you are saying and some photos can be made into lies about the lady. But showing someone at their best is not necessarily a deception. She is after all a fantasy and hopefully she is going to arrive at her best and the photos are showing what we should be able to expect and what we are seeking. What would you rather have, photos that show her just getting out of bed, hair a mess, rotten t-shirt, no make-up. Do you really expect any agency to advertise their ladies in a way that isn't showing their best side...at least not on purpose. Bad photography is just bad, it's not any more real, it's bad.
A good photographer knows how to show someone off and still make it real. Having met Megan of G4U I got exactly what the well done photos promised in my honest opinion, a beautiful young woman with a great body.
And frankly G4U's guy has a really good eye....
Like a lot of other agencies whoever it was who did the work has been hit and miss. Some are poorer photography.
I like sharp photos with full tonal range and interesting poses. In today's advertisements I see some that are flat, grainy, and discolored. It's the same with other agencies not just one. There's still plenty of information to make an informed choice and poorer pics don't necessarily put me off of anyone, especially when she has great reviews and great credible backers I know. But for instance, I think those of Penelope could have been very good with a little better eye and technique. Use a little more contrapposto in the first pic to the left to accent the curve of her hips, a very slight more frontal angle without cutting off the end shape of her derriere in the one to the right...and for God sake look up the words sharpness, tonal range, shadow modeling, fill light, which would improve the attractiveness 2 or 3 fold. She seems to have quite a great appearance, why water that down with lower quality pics? They don't have to be Hollywood glamour shots, but if you can do better for most of the others why not BE CONSISTENT.
That's the thing about Mojo's photos. High quality, high consistency, and bold difficult to hide the flaws full lighting. Not art, but very well done for the purpose. Add with the vids and I don't see where there's a real contest this time. Even my good buddy G4U party organizer Iggy is too impressed to hide his admiration.
In my opinion on the left this is a very hot lady well presented:
http://girls4u.provider-sites.com/models/24612 On the right this is a very hot lady being short changed:
http://girls4u.provider-sites.com/models/24612 even though you can still see in the poorer photo she's very hot. Same lady, big photo quality difference...and this thread is about QUALITY.
As I alluded to, it's really the ladies and their reputations that make the difference, but when it comes to weeding out two ladies from different agencies who seem very, very close, photography will make the difference. You can surely point out, look at the success of an agency and you'd be right. But it would be wise to keep every edge possible because you never know when another agency can become the next "hot thing". You don't want to be weaker in presentation if that happens.
Good luck,
Merlot
