Activity
Ines in Presenting Ines
Under a deep blue sky, Ines sits upon a whitewashed wall, her long, straight hair hanging down over her shoulders, her white cotton dress complimenting her natural figure. She is so hot that she turns a hose on herself, drenching her dress, which instantly becomes see-through, clinging to her body, revealing the curve of her hips. The wet cloth chills her skin, driving her to peel it from her shoulders and let it cling to her waist. Now she poses against a white wall, her beautiful body casting long shadows. Ines unclasps her white bra and drops it at her feet, her small breasts untanned, her nipples dark, small and hard. With the camera at her feet, the long-legged Ukrainian slides her wet dress down her thighs and bends seductively. Taking a rest on a sea of pillows, she momentarily hides her pierced pussy behind a thin chain of glass beads, then curls them around her sweet nipples.
- Amazing Content
- Become Affiliated
- Account & Services
WHERE FLAWLESS BEAUTY MEETS ART
18 U.S.C. 2257 Record-Keeping Requirements Compliance Statement.
Warning - This site contains adult material of a sexual nature - you must be of legal age in your area to view this material.
All materials on MetArt.com, are copyright © 2025 MetArt.com. All models were at least 18 years of age when photographed.
Epoch is an authorized sales agent, their billing support may be found at Epoch.com.
Segpay Billing Support can be accessed here: Segpay Consumer Portal.
3.8.7 d39d0b
30 Members commented on Ines's gallery
Wish this tall girl had done more photo sets. Her breasts in #58 are pure perfection for us very small breasted women fans.
Utter perfection . So gorgeous
If shower is stupid, water hose is more more stupid
HOLY FUCK!
OH, MY! I absolutely LOVE those magnificent small tits!
Image #58 is incredible. How I wish there more pictures of her flat chest.
It must be Tall Girl Day. The shortest of todaay's lineup is 5'8".
Please ask Ines to keep her beautiful eyes open? :)
You may call it "art" if you like --
But I think I'll just ....
PASS --
Too many people forget this is Met-ART, and there is plenty of room for artists like the wonderful Ms. Natasha Schon, who has been on Met since it began in 1999 for a reason!
Too many youngsters wanting to get to it as quick as possible, not knowing what this site originally is about and that there is an abundance of glamorous exposure stuff out there at other places which might suit their "taste" better. I'm just guessing here.
Interesting that the score is so low when it's significantly more revealing than your average Schon set.
re: rants about the photographer's ability: You know not of what you speak. You may not like her style, but she knows what she's doing.
I'll take a pass on this one and think of what the set could have been. I do hope Ines will one day work with another artist that is less reserved.
Since this is Metart, I totally agree with Rose. This is pure artistic exploration of the model, her beauty(which is great) and her personality (90 % of a woman's beauty) since the body is strictly the luck of the genetic draw. 10 to infinity for both.
So beautiful... erotic art I would love to see hanging on my wall. Natasha's attention to detail is incredible.
What detail??????? That is her problem! She never gets to the details! This is a very good reason why so many are complaining about the new short set policy. A total waste of storage space!
Gotta agree Rose,I have considered Ms. Shon one of the greatest artists on Met since it began, This IS Met-ART! And I love it!
Uhhh... I have a problem with your use of the term "details" herein. I might be entirely wrong here, but I take it you meant "lady bits" or something along in that same vein.
And to say that it's a "...waste of storage space"... it's only wasted space on your part if you download and save all her work on your system. Otherwise, I'm sure MetArt's storage space is more than adequate to handle Ms. Schon's very small amount of offerings. If not, then I'm sure they'd be deleting her stuff - as well as others - from their database.
By "attention to detail" I mean – look at the precision of the poses. The placement of the hands, pointed toes, the beautiful framing, the way the light catches the skin just so... the way the wet fabric clings, the little flashes of bare skin... these things don't happen by accident. This is an artist who knows exactly what effect she wants to create, and how to get it from her model. And that's what makes it erotic art to me.
Arkie, don't give them any ideas!
(...I'm only being half facetious there...)
The definition of art and the discussion about it are probably as old as some of the first drawings on some cave wall. And of course the discussions often gained heat when it went on about something off the mainstream. It's a little sad that there are many who are superficial and don't recognize detail, even sadder when they become intolerant against those that appreciate such detail or provide it in their work. Recently, greed has been added to that mixture. An unhappy combination.
Ines is just plain gobsmacking gorgeous. I appreciate the artistic aspects of Natasha's photography and I'm glad MA has stubbornly held on to her.
I do hope Ines decides to work with more photographers than Natasha, however, as Sofi Shane did. It is a good thing, not a bad thing, to see different artists' interpretations of a model's beauty.
Why Met Art continues to publish Natasha Schon,s photos beats me.This is a shocker,thank goodness it is only 80 photos.Surely photographers such as Ken Tavos and Deltagamma would be a far better proposition.Zero.
+1. Ines is a beautiful, tall and athletic girl, let down by garbage photography.
Although I respect the positive comments attempting to make the best a of a bad situation, This "art" is not what the majority of Met members are paying to see.
Ines, please don't be discouraged by the low score. It is by no means attributed to you. You are a beautiful woman.
I wouldn't term it "garbage photography". Perhaps it's not what you expect ( perhaps on the same level as Paromov's work - many people don't like his work either - or, for that matter, Catherine's work) - but I don't honestly think you could rightfully term it "garbage". It falls under the aegis of "erotic" photography. Seldom, if ever, explicit, but honestly "garbage"?
As a few other members have said in the past (myself included) THIS is what Ms. Schon does and how she does it. No amount of ranting or saber-rattling on the part of the masses is going to change how Ms. Schon approaches this kind of photography. She's said as much in an interview with Rose a good while back.
My humble suggestion, as I'm sure others will agree, when you see a set by Ms. Schon, perhaps it's best just to pass it by.
"... not what the majority of Met members are paying to see." Then, by extension, Met shouldn't be publishing photos of models with pubic hair? Since, as many, many members have voiced over the past, they only want to see completely shaved models, and certain individuals have most vociferously expounded, Met shouldn't publish unshaved or "trimmed" models either?
Ms. Schon's work represents only a minute part of the MetArt archives, but would you have them expunge these sets because it's not what you or a somewhat nebulous "majority" doesn't want to see?
After all, the old saw "variety is the spice of life" seems to hold most true here.
Exciting photos of an erotic new model. Hello and welcome Ines.
The first photos are promising. A pretty face and a sensational body. First dressed in transparent white, then naked and at the end naked with blue cloth.
Natasha has put many interesting color combinations and erotic highlights in the photos. And it has worked. A fulminating start.