Hey, I can think of several good explanations how she could be in that picture, yet never married. All of the explanations seem to star Julia Roberts or Meg Ryan or Sandra Bullock. hurl
It makes sense why the porcelain-skin-and-big-dark-eyes ‘goth’ look is so popular online. It covers up skin blemishes, makes plain girls look exotic and alluring, and with contrast controls, you don’t even have to bother with all that white makeup!
And when you compare this picture to what she looks like in person, you can see where it’s being perpetuated by the stars. Ick.
You have to be careful with this. You want a good photo but not the freak one that makes you look waaay more amazing than you actually do. I’ve met guys that obviously used the one photo that made it look like they have a chin, if you dont’ have a chin, don’t try to make yourself look like a completely different person. It only sets things up for disappointments.
The photos that creep me out are one with nudity, even if it’s just a guy without a shirt. You should be trying to make a good impression but shirtless photos (built or not) look like you’re just lookin’ for an easy lay.
My favorite with the girls are the heavy set girls who hold the camera above their heads so their double chins go away and their cleavage fills the frame. I think there’s a term for that angle (notroious on myspace) but I can’t think of it…
I agree with **Howie ** here. I like photos of guys with “prey” since it’s a pretty clear sign that they’re interested in similar things that I am. I happen to have a “prey” picture up on the secondary photos of my own ad. If those pictures filter out people that are totally not into that, wonderful. I wear who I am right out front there, for people to like or dislike as they choose. And yeah, I probably get way fewer responses with photos like that up, but I also probably wouldn’t be all that interested in guys that are really turned off by it. I have it on there for that reason, and because it’s a good conversation starter.
As far as my red flags?
Drivers license photos, complete with the hologram across the picture. Come on, you couldn’t find a better picture than that?
I saw one the other day that had friends whited out in a big blank square. Sure, it’s nice to narrow down which one you are, but if you can do that, why couldn’t you just crop yourself out? Baffling.
Pictures that are clearly from the 70s or 80s. Although I went out with one guy who was himself stuck in the 70s, and that turned out to be a current picture. Next!
Shirtless pictures, while not an automatic writeoff, are awfully close. Double bad points if he’s in a hot tub and wearing gold chains and a smile. Skeevy!
Pictures that show no detail at all, because you’re the size of a flea and in the foreground of what the photo was actually taken of. Nice enough if it’s a glorious background and it’s a secondary photo; bad, bad call if it’s your only picture.
When there’s one nice-looking pic of the lady in relatively understated hair/clothes/(optional) makeup, and like five of her tarted up like a Belarussian pickpocket’s moll.
Little yellow rat teeth.
Dowdy pastels.
Schlocky stuffed critters or figurines.
Looking overly tense or awkward when posing.
I met someone on line from a really cute picture. Spoke on the phone and when she described herself it was someone I used to work with. She was in graphics and had photoshopped herself into another dimension of cuteness. 
Not that she was unattractive, but I honestly didn’t recognize her from the picture.
Soooo beat you to it. (See my post above yours)
Of course, you don’t suffer from that problem, as I recall. Cutie.
Internet disease shots: http://pr0n.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/2/22/Internetdiseasetypes.jpg [should be SFW, despite the URL]
Somewhere around the year 2000, a friend of mine got divorced and was looking to meet women on some of the larger dating websites at the time. I remember checking one out that he had told me about and ended up running across an article from a guy that ran one of these dating websites. He said he had to go through the individual pages every week or so and delete pictures from quite a few pages because the pictures the women were posting were of movie stars and celebrities. Apparently, a dozen or so each week would post a picture of Heather Locklear as themselves.
Didn’t they think anyone would notice?
There’s one of those up right now on the page I use. It’s a picture of that kid who was Skywalker in the more recent Star Wars flicks, all done up in makeup. Is this guy trying to be ironic, a hopeless nerd, or just a jackass?
I don’t much care, since he so considerately made it obvious that he’s not someone that I would like.
Oops, missed that one. I did think there was another name besides “internet disease” (something a little more clever) but I may be imagining.
But you’ve only seen those carefully selected, uber-flattering shots. I only post the shots where you can’t see my conjoined twin. 
Two of my biggest dealbreakers have already been mentioned:
-Men with shirtless photos. In addition to the way it makes the guy seem “sleazy”, it also shows some profound cluelessness about how women think and how we get turned on. A guy who knows anything about women would realize that the majority of women do not find random nudity to be a turn-on the way guys do.
-Men posing with someone else’s kid. I agree that it seems like “trying too hard to appear sensitive”. I kind of laugh at how so many single guys use pics of themselves with a kid while the ACTUAL single parents tend to shy away from posting photos of their kids (which is probably smart since you wouldn’t want the kid to be targeted in any way by some lunatic).
However, the Easter Bunny pic is great. 
Hayden Christensen
If your intent is to meet people in the real world, you should probably try to keep the image manipulation to a minimum.
I haven’t been in the habit of meeting internet weirdos for a while, now, but considering the ease with which you could find pictures of attractive people… I didn’t place much faith in 'em. Oddly the people that sent completely fake pictures of attractive strangers generally turned out to be better looking than the people that sent inaccurately flattering pictures of themselves.
It’s a form of dishonesty, in short. If anything, post a bunch of everyday less-than-flattering pictures.
Yes. I really enjoyed your cleavage in that shot. 
Dude, if you bleached your eyebrows enough you could be Mr. Clean for Halloween! :eek:
I actually tried reverse-psychology for a while regarding images posted on dating sites. I posted a picture of myself looking very disheveled (I was at Santa Cruz, and my best friend snapped a pic of me staggering out of the ocean. Since I had salt water in my eyes, it kind of looked like I was squinting/crying)
A few people I met commented I looked much better in person (yes, the lan worked! 
) but later I realized that a somewhat more practical picture would probably attract more people. After all, the former picture had numerous red flags:
-Shirtless, so it scares off the babes freaked out by bare shoulders on guys
-Kind of looks like I’m crying, could be interpreted as being emo, or emotional baggage, or momma’s boy, etc
-Messed up hair, could be interpreted as being a potential rapist.
Man, I’ve been trying to re-find that image for ages. Thank you!
As for me, one of my red flags is when girls will “censor” the faces of their friends in pictures, either by blacking them out, or covering them with happy faces, or something similar. Part of it is that it looks like something out of a Japanese horror movie, and part of it is the “What, are your friends ashamed to be associated with you?” factor.