Hosted Free Sites - Do you like html photo pages as a choice?

Simon · 2005-07-19, 02:50 PM

This question is about sponsor supplied Hosted Free Sites, so I guess it's mostly for the Link List and TGP owners here, but really I'd welcome anyone's input. We're new at using Hosted Free Sites (and soon FHG) in our marketing, and I'd like advice from anyone who knows more than I do... which is almost all of you.

On our HFS right now, we have the full-size photos just open into the browser window directly, and I'm wondering if it would be worth offering an option to link to another version of each HFS that would open the full-size photos on html pages with an additonal link or two to our tour.

I know some LLs and TGPs have rules which allow full-size photos to open on html pages, while others have rules that forbid this, so I know the html-page versions won't be used by everyone. But my question is... is there usually enough increased click-thrus/conversions, or search engine benefits, to make it worthwhile for us to offer the "full-size photos on html pages" as an option?

Any advice from those in the know

on whether this is worth doing would be much appreciated.

Simon

Surfn · 2005-07-19, 03:01 PM

Yes it will increase your click through. The reason some Lists do not allow them is (as usual) some webmasters abused this type of building by adding tons of crap.

I don't mind a small text link to the sponsor on the full pic html page. The reason I say small is because if I don't then someone submitting to me might think they have license to write 5 paragraphs of linked text above or around the pic.

MadMax · 2005-07-19, 03:33 PM

I personally would rather list HFS with full sized pics on html pages if they're from a trusted sponsor like yourself. The ads would be tasteful. One thing to keep in mind is that a pic on an html page won't automatically resize, which will force the surfer to scroll on "portrait" pics in order to see the full pic. Not necessarily a bad thing if they scroll down (especially if the ad is at the bottom of the page

), just something to keep in mind when considering it.

I allow pics on html pages on submissions, as long as they only have one ad and it's tasteful.

Linkster · 2005-07-19, 03:50 PM

I think that based on past discussions most of us would like that option

MrYum · 2005-07-19, 04:58 PM

Absolutely...would love that option

Greenguy · 2005-07-19, 07:55 PM

I don't think I'd use it, but options are always nice & seeing as it's a HFS & the Link List owner is the one that picks them, I say go for it

Simon · 2005-07-20, 09:15 AM

Thanks for the input guys!

Surfn - Thanks for addressing the click-thru question.

It really is a shame the way the scammers, cheaters and spammers have such power to ruin things for the majority of honest builders out there.
So, with pics on html pages, you prefer them with only one (1) text link, and no banner link(s)?

MadMax - Thanks for the nice feedback.

I hadn't really considered the drawbacks/advantages of making the surfer scroll since I keep auto-resizing turned off in Firefox and it's not available in IE/Mac or Safari, which are the three browsers I tend to use most. Is auto-resize the default setting for all Windows platform browsers?
For pics on html pages for you, it's okay to use one graphic? Banner size or around that size? Text links okay too?

Linkster - Thanks! If that's the case, then we really should work on having the option available.

MrYum - Okay, another yes vote there too.

Greenguy - Yeah, I like options too.

And I have more options in mind, but I didn't want to waste time on things no one wanted, so I figured I'd ask first.
Can you tell me why you say you wouldn't use them? I know your L-O-R rules say they're allowed, so I must be missing something.

Everyone - Any other advice regarding the actual html page? Is the standard just one link on that page, either graphic or text? Do you think it's worthwhile to use a banner or other graphic along with the full-size pic? Are text links enough, or maybe even better?

Also - Any advice on Free Hosted Galleries for TGPs? Is it worth thinking about offering pics on html pages for FHGs too?

Thanks again for the advice guys, and please feel free to keep it coming.

Simon

Greenguy · 2005-07-20, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simon

Greenguy - Yeah, I like options too.

And I have more options in mind, but I didn't want to waste time on things no one wanted, so I figured I'd ask first.
Can you tell me why you say you wouldn't use them? I know your L-O-R rules say they're allowed, so I must be missing something.

I personally don't like them, both form a surfer & reviewer POV, but I've been too lazy to edit that rule

Surfn · 2005-07-20, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simon

Also - Any advice on Free Hosted Galleries for TGPs? Is it worth thinking about offering pics on html pages for FHGs too?
Simon

I doubt that would be worth the effort. I don't think any TGP of any real size that isn't CJ would use them.

Then of course what do I know?

Cleo · 2005-07-20, 10:03 AM

I would use them.

But don't link the big pic to anything and just one small text link above and maybe another below the pic.

Some TGP scripts, like the one that I use, will not allow pics on html.

MrMaryLou · 2005-07-20, 10:26 AM

In all the reviewing I do I rarely see any pics on html pages anymore, not and opinion but just what I see daily

Jimmer · 2005-07-20, 12:04 PM

I think it is a great idea. Sales 101 says your customer has to be asked for the sale 3 times or something to that effect so I think that the more they see your sales pitch the better.

Simon · 2005-07-20, 01:20 PM

Damn, Greenguy, I'm definitely gonna have to get a copy of your "The Lazy Man's Guide To Link List Riches!" LOL

Okay, maybe I'm starting to understand a little better ...I think... so from a reviewer standpoint it may mean more work since you have to scroll to see what some malicious creep may have stuck on the bottom of their html pic pages?

MrMaryLou - Thanks for that input. From what I could tell, there seemed to be real trend toward not using pics on html pages anymore, and what you're saying confirms that. Do you find they make reviewing more work for you too?

Surfn - I'm thinking you know plenty. Thanks for that input.

Cleo - Cool! I was hoping you would. And that's what I'm thinking too, just one small text link above and maybe one small text link below.

Hmm...sounds like html pic pages for fhg may not be as useful as on hfs.

Jimmer - Absolutely... a wise man once told me that a trout can't take the fly that's not on the water.

More good feedback, thanks! ... and more please.

Simon

MadMax · 2005-07-20, 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simon

MadMax - Thanks for the nice feedback.

I hadn't really considered the drawbacks/advantages of making the surfer scroll since I keep auto-resizing turned off in Firefox and it's not available in IE/Mac or Safari, which are the three browsers I tend to use most. Is auto-resize the default setting for all Windows platform browsers?
For pics on html pages for you, it's okay to use one graphic? Banner size or around that size? Text links okay too?

I know that auto-resize is default in IE for windows, which has still got around 85% market share. It's default in Firefox as you know, and most of the pseudo-computer literate people I know don't have the foggiest notion about changing browser settings.

I personally have no problems with text links or graphics. For a pic page IMO they shouldn't take up much space, just be one more chance for the surfer to click through to the tour. A 468x60 or 80 banner would be about the biggest thing that could be done tastefully IMO, but there's a general concensus that those particular banner sized really aren't what they used to be.

When I used to do pics on html pages I used a one line text ad right above the pic in size 4 text. Always got me good CTR

MrYum · 2005-07-20, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MadMax

When I used to do pics on html pages I used a one line text ad right above the pic in size 4 text. Always got me good CTR

Yep, back in the day when I still took the time to do pics on html...and link sites still accepted em that way...just a simple text link above the image worked nicely

Maj. Stress · 2005-07-21, 12:48 AM

Simon,
I build mainly search engine sites but one text link above and one below with a link back to the gallery works. The sales ratios are not as great as an index or main page but money is money and it all ads up.

Simon · 2005-07-22, 08:34 AM

Thanks Max, MrYum and Maj. Stress... it sounds like offering an option for "pics on html pages" would be worth doing.

I can see how a nice line of text above the pic could help lift CTR. Now maybe it would be going 'one link too far' but what I'm thinking is also having something like this _under_ the pic (with much better text of course):

<<click here to return to main page>> <<click here to see more at sponsor>>

So at the bottom you have an alternative choice instead of just 'click or don't.'

I'm wondering if anyone's tried having two links like this under the pic on a html page?

Surfn · 2005-07-22, 09:06 AM

I really don't like offering toooooo many options to bw sucking cheap ass surfers. Which is why I do NOT off an a exit of a back on my free sites.

A short text link above a full size pic on html and a short text below works with me. This is after all about getting them off the page.

Actually in the stone age I used the full size pic for blind links when that paid well. I guess I'm guilty of being one of the people who ruined that part of the biz. My thinking has always been if they get to your galleries you did a piss poor job of selling your sponsor. If I'm not making sales off the index or at least by the main page I need to rethink my advertising campaign. Once into the galleries they are season moochers that deserve what the get lol

I would not however post a site like I just described on my list...I need to keep my site surfer friendly.

2005-07-19, 02:50 PM	#1
Simon That which does not kill us, will try, try again. Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Conch Republic Posts: 5,150	Hosted Free Sites - Do you like html photo pages as a choice? This question is about sponsor supplied Hosted Free Sites, so I guess it's mostly for the Link List and TGP owners here, but really I'd welcome anyone's input. We're new at using Hosted Free Sites (and soon FHG) in our marketing, and I'd like advice from anyone who knows more than I do... which is almost all of you. On our HFS right now, we have the full-size photos just open into the browser window directly, and I'm wondering if it would be worth offering an option to link to another version of each HFS that would open the full-size photos on html pages with an additonal link or two to our tour. I know some LLs and TGPs have rules which allow full-size photos to open on html pages, while others have rules that forbid this, so I know the html-page versions won't be used by everyone. But my question is... is there usually enough increased click-thrus/conversions, or search engine benefits, to make it worthwhile for us to offer the "full-size photos on html pages" as an option? Any advice from those in the know on whether this is worth doing would be much appreciated. Simon __________________ "If you're happy and you know it, think again." -- Guru Pitka

2005-07-19, 03:01 PM	#2
Surfn If you don’t take a chance the Angels won’t dance Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Earth on occasion Posts: 8,812	Yes it will increase your click through. The reason some Lists do not allow them is (as usual) some webmasters abused this type of building by adding tons of crap. I don't mind a small text link to the sponsor on the full pic html page. The reason I say small is because if I don't then someone submitting to me might think they have license to write 5 paragraphs of linked text above or around the pic. __________________ Surfn's Links Are you a partner?

2005-07-19, 03:50 PM	#4
Linkster NO! Im not a female - but being a dragon, I do eat them. Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Sex Delta Posts: 5,084	I think that based on past discussions most of us would like that option __________________ Pussy Chompers Porn Links NSCash

2005-07-19, 04:58 PM	#5
MrYum Arghhhh...submit yer sites ya ruddy swabs! Join Date: May 2004 Location: Sunny Florida! Posts: 5,108	Absolutely...would love that option __________________ Porno Flixxx Submissions SOTI Site Submissions Free Porn Resource Submissions

2005-07-19, 07:55 PM	#6
Greenguy The Original Greenguy (Est'd 1996) & AVN HOF Member - I Crop Pics For Thumbs In My Sleep Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Blasdell, NY (shithole suburb south of Buffalo) Posts: 41,929	I don't think I'd use it, but options are always nice & seeing as it's a HFS & the Link List owner is the one that picks them, I say go for it __________________ Promote POV Porn Cash By Building & Submitting Galleries to the Porn Luv Network

2005-07-19, 03:33 PM	#3
MadMax "Without evil there can be no good, so it must be good to be evil sometimes" ~ Satan Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Motor City, baby, where carjacking was invented! Now GIMME THOSE SHOES! Posts: 2,385	I personally would rather list HFS with full sized pics on html pages if they're from a trusted sponsor like yourself. The ads would be tasteful. One thing to keep in mind is that a pic on an html page won't automatically resize, which will force the surfer to scroll on "portrait" pics in order to see the full pic. Not necessarily a bad thing if they scroll down (especially if the ad is at the bottom of the page ), just something to keep in mind when considering it. I allow pics on html pages on submissions, as long as they only have one ad and it's tasteful.

2005-07-20, 09:15 AM	#7
Simon That which does not kill us, will try, try again. Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Conch Republic Posts: 5,150	Thanks for the input guys! Surfn - Thanks for addressing the click-thru question. It really is a shame the way the scammers, cheaters and spammers have such power to ruin things for the majority of honest builders out there. So, with pics on html pages, you prefer them with only one (1) text link, and no banner link(s)? MadMax - Thanks for the nice feedback. I hadn't really considered the drawbacks/advantages of making the surfer scroll since I keep auto-resizing turned off in Firefox and it's not available in IE/Mac or Safari, which are the three browsers I tend to use most. Is auto-resize the default setting for all Windows platform browsers? For pics on html pages for you, it's okay to use one graphic? Banner size or around that size? Text links okay too? Linkster - Thanks! If that's the case, then we really should work on having the option available. MrYum - Okay, another yes vote there too. Greenguy - Yeah, I like options too. And I have more options in mind, but I didn't want to waste time on things no one wanted, so I figured I'd ask first. Can you tell me why you say you wouldn't use them? I know your L-O-R rules say they're allowed, so I must be missing something. Everyone - Any other advice regarding the actual html page? Is the standard just one link on that page, either graphic or text? Do you think it's worthwhile to use a banner or other graphic along with the full-size pic? Are text links enough, or maybe even better? Also - Any advice on Free Hosted Galleries for TGPs? Is it worth thinking about offering pics on html pages for FHGs too? Thanks again for the advice guys, and please feel free to keep it coming. Simon __________________ "If you're happy and you know it, think again." -- Guru Pitka

2005-07-20, 10:03 AM	#10
Cleo Subversive filth of the hedonistic decadent West Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Southeast Florida Posts: 27,936	I would use them. But don't link the big pic to anything and just one small text link above and maybe another below the pic. Some TGP scripts, like the one that I use, will not allow pics on html. __________________ Free Rides on Uber and Lyft Uber Car: uberTzTerri Lyft Car: TZ896289

2005-07-20, 10:26 AM	#11
MrMaryLou i fucking told i type to fucking fast wtf Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: New York Posts: 11,247	In all the reviewing I do I rarely see any pics on html pages anymore, not and opinion but just what I see daily __________________ <a href="http://www.greenguysboard.com/onthebench/">Join Me For On The Bench </a>

2005-07-20, 12:04 PM	#12
Jimmer They have the Internet on computers, now? Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 145	I think it is a great idea. Sales 101 says your customer has to be asked for the sale 3 times or something to that effect so I think that the more they see your sales pitch the better. __________________ Trade with my blogs atBlog Trade Finder

2005-07-20, 01:20 PM	#13
Simon That which does not kill us, will try, try again. Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Conch Republic Posts: 5,150	Damn, Greenguy, I'm definitely gonna have to get a copy of your "The Lazy Man's Guide To Link List Riches!" LOL Okay, maybe I'm starting to understand a little better ...I think... so from a reviewer standpoint it may mean more work since you have to scroll to see what some malicious creep may have stuck on the bottom of their html pic pages? MrMaryLou - Thanks for that input. From what I could tell, there seemed to be real trend toward not using pics on html pages anymore, and what you're saying confirms that. Do you find they make reviewing more work for you too? Surfn - I'm thinking you know plenty. Thanks for that input. Cleo - Cool! I was hoping you would. And that's what I'm thinking too, just one small text link above and maybe one small text link below. Hmm...sounds like html pic pages for fhg may not be as useful as on hfs. Jimmer - Absolutely... a wise man once told me that a trout can't take the fly that's not on the water. More good feedback, thanks! ... and more please. Simon __________________ "If you're happy and you know it, think again." -- Guru Pitka

2005-07-21, 12:48 AM	#16
Maj. Stress Progress rarely comes in buckets, it normally comes in teaspoons Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Dark Side Of Naboo Posts: 1,289	Simon, I build mainly search engine sites but one text link above and one below with a link back to the gallery works. The sales ratios are not as great as an index or main page but money is money and it all ads up.

2005-07-22, 08:34 AM	#17
Simon That which does not kill us, will try, try again. Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Conch Republic Posts: 5,150	Thanks Max, MrYum and Maj. Stress... it sounds like offering an option for "pics on html pages" would be worth doing. I can see how a nice line of text above the pic could help lift CTR. Now maybe it would be going 'one link too far' but what I'm thinking is also having something like this _under_ the pic (with much better text of course): <<click here to return to main page>> <<click here to see more at sponsor>> So at the bottom you have an alternative choice instead of just 'click or don't.' I'm wondering if anyone's tried having two links like this under the pic on a html page? __________________ "If you're happy and you know it, think again." -- Guru Pitka

2005-07-22, 09:06 AM	#18
Surfn If you don’t take a chance the Angels won’t dance Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Earth on occasion Posts: 8,812	I really don't like offering toooooo many options to bw sucking cheap ass surfers. Which is why I do NOT off an a exit of a back on my free sites. A short text link above a full size pic on html and a short text below works with me. This is after all about getting them off the page. Actually in the stone age I used the full size pic for blind links when that paid well. I guess I'm guilty of being one of the people who ruined that part of the biz. My thinking has always been if they get to your galleries you did a piss poor job of selling your sponsor. If I'm not making sales off the index or at least by the main page I need to rethink my advertising campaign. Once into the galleries they are season moochers that deserve what the get lol I would not however post a site like I just described on my list...I need to keep my site surfer friendly. __________________ Surfn's Links Are you a partner?