TGP or not TGP, that is the question
September 29, 2006 9:06 AM Subscribe
A friend and I are starting an adult TGP. We're both highly skilled web designers / programmers and realize that the only way we'll have a shot in the crowded world of online porn is to make our site as unique as possible. So what features (existing or not) have you always wanted to see on a TGP site?
Eventually, if our TGP works well and manages to gather an audience, we'd like to license it to other webmasters (ala the Comus TGP Engine, or the more recent EonSex Engine). So, what nifty features should we include (invent) to set our site above the rest? FWIW, this is going to be a free, non-blind-linking, well-designed (not that that matters in the online porn world) website. Maybe we'll post it to projects when we're done!
Eventually, if our TGP works well and manages to gather an audience, we'd like to license it to other webmasters (ala the Comus TGP Engine, or the more recent EonSex Engine). So, what nifty features should we include (invent) to set our site above the rest? FWIW, this is going to be a free, non-blind-linking, well-designed (not that that matters in the online porn world) website. Maybe we'll post it to projects when we're done!
Response by poster: TGP = Thumbnail Gallery Post. Sort of like a gallery aggregator. You don't create the content, you just point people to free galleries, or host free content on your site. It's the cleanest type of porn site around.
posted by c:\awesome at 9:19 AM on September 29, 2006
posted by c:\awesome at 9:19 AM on September 29, 2006
Response by poster: And I'm not looking for content suggestions; I need unique site and/or feature suggestions. For instance, a digg like features where popular galleries can be voted up or down, or the ability to save galleries into a favorites folder (both have already been done, I know, but it was just an example).
Think of it as a MeTa for TGPs... I'm looking for feature requests.
posted by c:\awesome at 9:22 AM on September 29, 2006
Think of it as a MeTa for TGPs... I'm looking for feature requests.
posted by c:\awesome at 9:22 AM on September 29, 2006
how about not hiding tons of sponsored links and other fake results between genuine links?
besides, look to fleshbot. they are successful because they select by quality.
posted by krautland at 9:30 AM on September 29, 2006
besides, look to fleshbot. they are successful because they select by quality.
posted by krautland at 9:30 AM on September 29, 2006
It might not work well in a TGP as much as a full-blown porn site, but I've always wanted something like Amazon: "You viewed x and y, so check out z!" I'd say that easily 50% of stuff on a TGP is stuff that I have absolutely no interest in seeing, so something that would 'learn' what I liked would be amazing.
One way that you can really please users it to realize that, when I click a thumbnail, I want to see that. Too many sites take me to completely unrelated sites. (This might be deliberate, actually, to get click-throughs, but it drives me bonkers.)
And I always thought that the little things counted. Make it look spiffy. Not necessarily "Web 2.0 "(though I dont see why you couldn't?), but I've seen some sites that look like they've been around since 1990.
posted by fogster at 9:34 AM on September 29, 2006
One way that you can really please users it to realize that, when I click a thumbnail, I want to see that. Too many sites take me to completely unrelated sites. (This might be deliberate, actually, to get click-throughs, but it drives me bonkers.)
And I always thought that the little things counted. Make it look spiffy. Not necessarily "Web 2.0 "(though I dont see why you couldn't?), but I've seen some sites that look like they've been around since 1990.
posted by fogster at 9:34 AM on September 29, 2006
Quality, and a lack of dead/pay links.
Catagorization by name, content, etc., but that's been done already.
Perhaps interlocking catagories? Sort of like Amazon's "Users that bought X also bought Y..."
posted by craven_morhead at 9:35 AM on September 29, 2006
Catagorization by name, content, etc., but that's been done already.
Perhaps interlocking catagories? Sort of like Amazon's "Users that bought X also bought Y..."
posted by craven_morhead at 9:35 AM on September 29, 2006
A slideshow and easy download feature.
Not that I look at TGPs. No, sir.
posted by unixrat at 9:36 AM on September 29, 2006
Not that I look at TGPs. No, sir.
posted by unixrat at 9:36 AM on September 29, 2006
Bigger thumbnails?
Finding a good way to get users to rate sites AFTER they've seen them? Tags, favorites, recommendations, inboxes (a la del.icio.us.)
The problem with a Web 2.0 TGP is that the TGP model is anti-web 2.0. Web 2.0 gets most of its content from the users and TGPs are generally the opposite. Unless you're going to have users surfing the web and submitting galleries they find, which will probably run you into all sorts of copyright issues.
posted by callmejay at 9:41 AM on September 29, 2006
Finding a good way to get users to rate sites AFTER they've seen them? Tags, favorites, recommendations, inboxes (a la del.icio.us.)
The problem with a Web 2.0 TGP is that the TGP model is anti-web 2.0. Web 2.0 gets most of its content from the users and TGPs are generally the opposite. Unless you're going to have users surfing the web and submitting galleries they find, which will probably run you into all sorts of copyright issues.
posted by callmejay at 9:41 AM on September 29, 2006
Use tags/filter options and I do like the idea of a digg-like peer-review system. A good, working search function is vital if you intend on it being 'big'.
Labeling things according to media type is always good. And everything should be downloadable for, uh, future reference.
posted by slimepuppy at 9:42 AM on September 29, 2006
Labeling things according to media type is always good. And everything should be downloadable for, uh, future reference.
posted by slimepuppy at 9:42 AM on September 29, 2006
I think that you'd be better off using a passive system that compiles 'Most Viewed/Downloaded' rather than a "Click to vote!" system. Most users are interested in just getting their porn; implementing the former rather than the latter would be a better indicator of what's popular.
Tags: RedHeads, Toys, GirlOnGirl, Etc.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:42 AM on September 29, 2006
Tags: RedHeads, Toys, GirlOnGirl, Etc.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:42 AM on September 29, 2006
A really good tagging system. One in which people could somehow be persuaded to participate. This will pretty much never happen, since browsers on a TGP site aren't interested in tagging pictures, they're interested in jerking off. But still, it'd be nice.
A really good navigation system. One that let you move easily between pictures, possibly by using keystrokes instead of a mouse. Look at Gmail. (This may turn out to be bad for business, though. I have no idea how much of a TGP's revenue comes from people intentionally clicking on ads and how much of it comes from people doing it accidentally. If most of it's from accidental clicks, then a really good navigation system would lose you money.)
Honestly, though, what successful TGP sites seem to have in common is an editor who knows what he likes and finds a lot of it. The curvy-photoshopped-blondes crowd go to the TGPs whose editors like curvy photoshopped blondes. The BAR3LY-L3GAL-AN4L-FISTNG-CUMSLUT!!! crowd go to the TGPs whose editors like barely legal anal fisting cumsluts. It seems like you may just need what any editor needs — consistent tastes that other people share.
posted by nebulawindphone at 9:46 AM on September 29, 2006
A really good navigation system. One that let you move easily between pictures, possibly by using keystrokes instead of a mouse. Look at Gmail. (This may turn out to be bad for business, though. I have no idea how much of a TGP's revenue comes from people intentionally clicking on ads and how much of it comes from people doing it accidentally. If most of it's from accidental clicks, then a really good navigation system would lose you money.)
Honestly, though, what successful TGP sites seem to have in common is an editor who knows what he likes and finds a lot of it. The curvy-photoshopped-blondes crowd go to the TGPs whose editors like curvy photoshopped blondes. The BAR3LY-L3GAL-AN4L-FISTNG-CUMSLUT!!! crowd go to the TGPs whose editors like barely legal anal fisting cumsluts. It seems like you may just need what any editor needs — consistent tastes that other people share.
posted by nebulawindphone at 9:46 AM on September 29, 2006
Feed access, so that you could look at the site without having to technically visit the site.
posted by thanotopsis at 9:47 AM on September 29, 2006
posted by thanotopsis at 9:47 AM on September 29, 2006
nebulawindphone reminded me:
Proper spelling and grammar.
posted by slimepuppy at 9:52 AM on September 29, 2006
Proper spelling and grammar.
posted by slimepuppy at 9:52 AM on September 29, 2006
My favorite TGP site has always been Newgals, although I'm pretty positive it's laden with spyware.
I'd definitely go for the voting categories/digg thing. Try to avoid the clutter and shitty name that ruins so many TGP sites ("Horny Cow" or some such bullshit).
I don't like TGP sites that bury fake links within the real ones.
Maybe a way for users to leave comments or at least stars on certain galleries; popular ones of each week/month/etc. will go in the archives as "top quality."
Fuck pictures, I want movies. Preview Movie Thumbanils = god.
posted by Lockeownzj00 at 9:53 AM on September 29, 2006
I'd definitely go for the voting categories/digg thing. Try to avoid the clutter and shitty name that ruins so many TGP sites ("Horny Cow" or some such bullshit).
I don't like TGP sites that bury fake links within the real ones.
Maybe a way for users to leave comments or at least stars on certain galleries; popular ones of each week/month/etc. will go in the archives as "top quality."
Fuck pictures, I want movies. Preview Movie Thumbanils = god.
posted by Lockeownzj00 at 9:53 AM on September 29, 2006
Another vote for voting and categories, i.e. users add keywords as they browse.
posted by alms at 10:08 AM on September 29, 2006
posted by alms at 10:08 AM on September 29, 2006
All galleries should be series-only. No grab bags, ever. No screencaps, ever.
A complete lack of spiky yellow "join now" pictures.
Good, believable copy.
Larger galleries. A TGP with less than, say, 16 pictures is highly skippable.
Larger content with unobtrusive or no logos, urls, or other branding.
No arbitrarily chopped, miniscule movie samples, ever. Give me a scene or just save your bandwidth.
I'd suggest skipping any interactivity. Most users are not very bright and have poor taste. I don't care how they rate or tag things because they're usually wrong.
posted by majick at 10:27 AM on September 29, 2006
A complete lack of spiky yellow "join now" pictures.
Good, believable copy.
Larger galleries. A TGP with less than, say, 16 pictures is highly skippable.
Larger content with unobtrusive or no logos, urls, or other branding.
No arbitrarily chopped, miniscule movie samples, ever. Give me a scene or just save your bandwidth.
I'd suggest skipping any interactivity. Most users are not very bright and have poor taste. I don't care how they rate or tag things because they're usually wrong.
posted by majick at 10:27 AM on September 29, 2006
You know, majick's last paragraph raises a good point. Maybe when I'm wishing for a better tag system, what I'm really wishing for is more smart people watching porn.
posted by nebulawindphone at 10:29 AM on September 29, 2006
posted by nebulawindphone at 10:29 AM on September 29, 2006
One of the most successful free TGPs for a while has been the sites built on the Fusker codebase. The ads are typically minimal, the logic for finding and detecting photos is great ... the only place the developer fell down was on the community aspects.
Of course, there's a hurdle you have to get over here that's only been done tastefully by Fleshbot and a few others ... you have to get people to get over their embarrasment. More challenging than it sounds.
posted by SpecialK at 10:31 AM on September 29, 2006
Of course, there's a hurdle you have to get over here that's only been done tastefully by Fleshbot and a few others ... you have to get people to get over their embarrasment. More challenging than it sounds.
posted by SpecialK at 10:31 AM on September 29, 2006
How about a panic button that displays safe content in case the significant other unexpectedly walks in the room?
Also, no bait and switch. I want pictures/movies, not a link that will send me to the subscription page.
posted by cwarmy at 10:55 AM on September 29, 2006
Also, no bait and switch. I want pictures/movies, not a link that will send me to the subscription page.
posted by cwarmy at 10:55 AM on September 29, 2006
Don't mix in potentially off-putting content with the "cleaner" content. It's softy time if the thumbnails go: attractive lady, semi attractive lady, attractive lady, close-up of asshole. Users should somehow need to specify that they want to look at content that other users may find gross.
And ditto on the proper spelling and grammar. I'm sophisticated, dammit.
posted by Durhey at 11:04 AM on September 29, 2006
And ditto on the proper spelling and grammar. I'm sophisticated, dammit.
posted by Durhey at 11:04 AM on September 29, 2006
Ditto on everything mentioned above, plus:
How about automatic thumbnail generation for every link submitted?
1. Scrape the link submitted for images.
2. Find the common image size, etc. etc. put in thumbnail image detection.
3. Store 2-3 thumbs locally for the link, and auto-rotate between the thumbs every few seconds.
posted by blahtsk at 11:51 AM on September 29, 2006
How about automatic thumbnail generation for every link submitted?
1. Scrape the link submitted for images.
2. Find the common image size, etc. etc. put in thumbnail image detection.
3. Store 2-3 thumbs locally for the link, and auto-rotate between the thumbs every few seconds.
posted by blahtsk at 11:51 AM on September 29, 2006
Keep the layout clean. No gaish colors, no blinking .gifs, and please, no pics unless it's a thumbnail or something I've the visitor has clicked on.
posted by lekvar at 2:02 PM on September 29, 2006
posted by lekvar at 2:02 PM on September 29, 2006
Who needs a huge collections of links when there are adult blog aggregators now?
Let's put it this way, what the world needs now is NOT some collection of links that looks like was designed in 1995. Do somehing innovative to bring content to people, or you're doomed before you start. A TGP is not innovative, it's lame.
posted by Mr. Gunn at 5:33 PM on September 29, 2006
Let's put it this way, what the world needs now is NOT some collection of links that looks like was designed in 1995. Do somehing innovative to bring content to people, or you're doomed before you start. A TGP is not innovative, it's lame.
posted by Mr. Gunn at 5:33 PM on September 29, 2006
Study StumbleUpon, it's a very convenient way to look at porn- even though that wasn't it's original purpose. It takes some work to be able to view the x-rated stuff on there, but it's not too hard. They've implemented a lot of the features people in this thread have talked about: tagging, ratings, etc. One thing it has that people haven't mentioned is user pages (which let users post pictures and links they like, sort of like a mini blog). They also have communites based on pornographic genres (bdsm, fetish, etc.) I worked briefly for a site of the type you're talking about that was ahead of its time. Feel free to drop me a line if you have any questions or need more suggestions.
posted by matkline at 11:43 PM on September 30, 2006
posted by matkline at 11:43 PM on September 30, 2006
« Older Is this extraordinarily insane or just ordinarily... | Help me get my SanDisk mp3 player working again. Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by JeremiahBritt at 9:13 AM on September 29, 2006