#92 is one of the best images I've seen on this site. Regardless of how spectacular the rest of the photo is, the greatness is 100% due to Ledona's smile.
I really like Ladona's tits. A lot! this set does a good job of featuring them. Yes, her pussy is awesome, too. Oh my, is she nice on the eyes!
She's amazingly beautiful
Shot 92 would have been great. But what does Fabrese do? He destroys all the detail around her pussy, then tries to hide it by adding false noise to the picture. Why do photographers on this site have to mess so much with everything?
I love her pussy.....WOW
Ledona is gorgeous. I'm not a huge fan of pool shoots; I actually prefer her earlier set in the blue dress, but either way you can't argue that she is beautiful. As for ratings.......they are certainly subjective, and you will never get everyone to agree on who is best, and who is second best, etc. My personal fav on this site has always been Vittoria......simply because she captures me in all the ways that I wish to be captured......she brings a sense of joy and gentleness to me, every time I look at her. But I can certainly see why others would say for example that Ardelia is number one. She is drop dead gorgeous, and is also in my top five on this site. So why is Vittoria number one with me? Because it's subjective. While you may get people to agree on certain girls, you will never get us to all agree on all girls. I don't know if what I wrote makes sense......but there is my opinion. I really appreciate what everyone wrote on this topic. Good discussion!!
Makes total sense, Whiplash, thanks for putting in your 2 cents' worth!
Fabrice is Goncharov
Not really news anymore, since early July 2014.
I'm just happy to be here.
Ledona, you have a beautiful, curvaceous, and sexy body; and I love the way you show it off. 10+++. You turn me on, baby.
Excellent set. Excellent photography. Well done. Keep up the good work.
Keep the comments PITHY (short and to the point). Some of you need to get a life.
And some need to learn manners.
You waste mine,oh fairy kingThe Seller
Below the sufficiency rating for aesthetic and technical value and for the location.
Beautiful girl in the pool.
Already seen a million times + 1.
Finally! A set that uses sunlight to properly illuminate a model. I especially love when it was used to set her auburn hair aflame.
Ledona is the perfect model to have in a wet t-shirt. Large, luscious breasts with large nipples/areolae that stand tall when erect. She's mouthwateringly delicious.
I completely agree with you second paragraph.
You are doing a fantastic job with Ledona, Fabrice! I love it.
@HEY,GUYS AND GALS!
After nearly two years since this fórum started,here´s what I have to say to whom it may concern.
-Met art should be proud not only about its contents and leading position,but mainly proud of its members.
-The dynamism and high intellectual level of this fórum (don´t include myself)is an unprecedented phenomenon in the biz.
-On a day like this,I thank all of you for your contribution to something
that with time has evolved to become a very nice habit.Connect and see
what you guys (and gals) have to say.Thanks also to all that left.The Seller
Well said, Seller.
My favorite comment of the day, Seller! What I love most about the discussions here is that for the most part, members are concerned not just with putting across their own viewpoint, but also with fairness - to each other, and to the girls. I've learned a few things here (and some new words too). Not so long ago, when I was new here, I was welcomed to the 'dysfunctional little family.' I like being a part of it :-)
We are an amusing bunch, are we not, Rose?
Holy moly, bottomless AND a wet shirt AND a dip in the pool AND Ledona's devastating curves? I think I might faint.
And again, wow.
Good heavens, Checkers, perhaps I should alert the lifeguard of your impending change of state of consciousness? ( ;
One of my biggest pet peeves in nude modeling is wet, stringy hair. For me it's a turn-off & ruins the set. However, this gallery is the rare exception. I'd still prefer well-coiffed hair, but I can live with it! LOL
Oh my goodness isn't Ledona a sight for sore eyes? Here we see the reason why, though I am not a large-breast fetishist, I sincerely love well-sized and shaped breasts... natural ones, that hang and act naturally... thank you for sharing your lovely attributes with us, Ledona! You have clearly made a bunch of admirers totally forget the winter outside our windows as we gaze at your loveliness... both inside that shirt and out!
Well said..You´re a true poet...made me weepThe Weeper
Here bro, let me lend you my hankie, before you start dribbling out your nose... ( ;
Thanks (sniff)The Seller
Ledona is beautiful and I really like this gallery, especially the impact that water has on her aereolae and nipples.
Very nice collaboration between Ledona and Fabrice.
Fantastically gorgeous, I've been looking forward to more from beautiful, sexy Ledona and this set doesn't disappoint, bottomless and wet t-shirt together, absolutely awesome!.
This is Fabrice's 2nd model in two days. Irene listed above was yesterday and what happened to her is the basis for this comment. A couple of days ago I posted a comment that was about my opinion on the use of targeted 1 votes as an abuse. And I still believe it is. I got both public and private feedback pro and con. I honestly could see the arguments from both sides. Even those who support it agreed it was being used in a tageted manner. K based on now my statistical analysis is very good at delivering to use very good models, that are all at least ~8.00 or above. In January for all 124 posted the average score was 8.67, and a standard deviation of only .38, 87 of the models scores land in that range. So in reality there are no 1's posted by her. It is imposible to tell if 1 votes are aimed at the model or as I believe the artist and thus an abuse. But we all pay or dues and thus should they have a righ to vote a 1. Thus I asked the Powers to Be, and got an answer. And that answer is yes. So official now while they realize it is an issue "we have to give the member the freedom to do so." So no matter how you feel about it it is now as far as I am concern a CLOSED issue and we all must live with it. Enough said!
The last words I will have on it are what I watched happen to Irene and Fabrice last night at this time. After only 2 votes Irene had a score of 5.00. That could only occur with 1 being a 1 and 1 being a 9. It took until she had almost 70 votes for her to climb to over 8.00. Her present Series average rating: 8.09 out of 10 (171 Votes) still leaves her almost the bottom of this months models set so far. There is not a single comment which finds a major flaw with the set. Byt "we" have voted and that is where she lands.
So issue or not this is "our" reality....
As I said, my last words on the subject!
"After only 2 votes Irene had a score of 5.00. That could only occur with 1 being a 1 and 1 being a 9."
Objection, your Honor! Assuming facts not in evidence!
You assume that one of the votes is a 1 to further your argument. Two votes averaging a five could be 5-5, 6-4, 7-3, 8-2, or your 9-1. And ya know what they say when you "ass-u-me". ;-)
Allright I was wrong it is not my last words above! Everything all of you are saying is what was presented to me either publicly or privately and all sides have SOME merit. However I did not make that quote up! For NOW it is CLOSED issue. The current system will remain. We may not like it but it is what it is. Comments which are respectful and helpful to the Artist and Models mean a lot more than a blind vote. And those of you commenting below are a good example of how this section has grown and matured into something which also makes the MetArt family sites unique in this business. Keep up the good work. And when fer realz comments he will probably clarify it even more for you.
Frank, I am in agreement with you about the abuse of "1" votes!
I cannot recall when I've seen a model here who I would rate less than a 7, so in my opinion, the voting scale should be 6 to 10. If anyone disagrees, please mention the model who you rate below a 6.
I've seen a few sets where I would rate the photography below a 5, but those are very few indeed. There are certainly sets with significant flaws in the photography, but very few with fatal flaws.
I think it would improve the voting system if individual sets could be rated for both the model and photography/photographer.
But why the rating scales for either model or photographer include the 1 to 5 range is a mystery to me!
l_l_c, think of it this way... when the powers that be took away the zero vote, the one vote became the new zero, am I right?
What happens when they take away 1-5?
Six becomes the new new zero.
Those that use their votes as a voice for their hate will simply go to 6, because that will be their lowest alternative.
Removing the zero vote did not solve the problem... neither will removing the one vote, or as you suggest the 1-5 range.
The haters will still intentionally vote down sets to the best of their ability.
I don´t agree.In that case,6 would turn to be 1 and we´d be in the same situation.
If you give the members the possibility of voting,you give up a big deal of control,even to those who are in minority and whose
actions are filled with frustration and hate.It´s inherent to all forms of democracy.
Recently,the "thumbs down" switch was deleted for the same reason.Now you want to delete 1 to 5.Last Saturday posts deleted
because "the powers" did not like its content (and were righ).
Want to make this fórum a place for complacency,censorship and double standard? Then better off dead
luv_lickn_clit_: That is an interesting twist to the rating of models and photographers. Your suggestion has many merits.
I anticipate a chorus of "nobody has the right to censor my comments" and all variants thereto.
I don't know how to get around the right of bigots to their opinions. Perhaps a slight modification of your suggestion ~ no vote of less than the chosen lower threshold is allowed unless it is accompanied by a written comment for both that model and the photographer / photography; be it for a specific gallery or the cumulative rating for either model or photographer.
A lot of work and bandwidth for K, MET, and their programmers. Let's see what they say.
And after the written comment call the Gestapo and get arrested.Who are you calling "a bigot"?The Seller
Seller: Please include the name of the member to whom you are writing.
If I am the one you were writing to, of course I can't identify "who" the bigots are. The cloak of anonymity protects and emboldens them! Just like the thumb down used to do.
If anyone has a strongly held opinion, they should not fear to express that opinion here. This is after all an adult erotica site and not a soapbox for political comments.
Excuses.I did not know well who I was replying to.This issue gets me a little..dissapointed.Of course I always express my opinions,and sometimes get my shirt lost!
In terms of pure statistic,the solution is a perfect nonsense,because the treshold means "NOTHING".You can use a 1 to 100 switch or maybe 6 to or a minus 2 to a square root of minus pi
The result would be the same.The low end would turn to be a punishment switch again.
The problem is iherent to all forms of democracy.We can see here
it clearer because the members cohort is short.I expect no change,presuming they´re civilized.And really tired to hear that stuff
My proposal for changing the rating scale is not statistical non-sense. If you believe that then you don't have a very good understanding of statistics or perhaps you're not very good at math (no offense intended). I've had 4 grad school courses in statistics, so let me explain.
The practice of rating women's beauty on a scale of 1 to 10 is a long-standing one. But is it reliable and valid in a statistical sense?
If there were more points to the scale, its' reliability might suffer. If there were fewer points to the scale, its' precision might suffer. In statistics the term reliability refers to how well a measurement can be repeated. So if the scale were 1 to 20, you might rate a girl 16 one day, and a 17 a week later (so 1 to 20 might not be very reliable). I would argue 1 to 10 is a good scale as far as the number of points go, and the reliability of the scale goes.
The next question, statistically speaking, is how valid is the scale. In statistics, the term validity refers to correctness or accuracy. So in reference to our 1 to 10 scale, the question is are there women in the world who would correctly be rated on all points of the scale? Go out into any public place (Ukraine excepted, as they seem to have only gorgeous women there), and watch the women who pass by for a couple of hours. You will see all degrees of beauty and non-beauty. If you kept a record of your ratings, you would probably find a "normal distribution" or bell-curve to your data.
So rating a woman's beauty on a scale of 1 to 10 is a practice that has reasonably good statistical reliability and validity.
If you come inside from your 2 hour public girl-watching field trip, sit down in front of your computer, and log into Met-Art, you will notice right away that these are not a random sample of women. They are pretty women, very pretty women! Selected! Part of an exclusive club. They don't let just any girl in here. Met-Art girls are easily in the upper half of the distribution! That is FACT, not open for debate!!!
So here on Met-Art with its' rating scale of 1 to 10, model scores of 1 to 5 (and particularly scores of 1) are NOT VALID!!! They are false, incorrect, not accurate, statistical outliers that should be discarded!!!
Therefore, the rating scale should reflect that.
You are correct when you say that the low end will always be used by some as a "punishment switch". No doubt there are those who rate a model "1" for a variety of reasons. But let's look at how the scale can make the rating system less valid when it is abused.
As an example, let's say Met-Art posts a photo-set of a new girl. She is very very pretty, and has a fantastically hot body. Everybody seems to love her. She gets only 9s and 10s. Lets say 10 people rate her, and five give her a 9, and five give her a 10. Her average score is a 9.5. Ahhh, but then the malcontents come along. Two folks log in to MA, and see that the new girl now has a higher score than their favorite model. So they rate her a 1. Her overall rating drops to 8.08, and she now ranks lower than their favorites. But is the rating of 1 valid? Of course not!
Lets use the same example with a scale of 6 to 10. After the first 10 ratings, her average is still 9.5. The two malcontents come along and rate her the lowest they can (6). Now her average score only drops to 8.92. A much more valid, accurate, and true number.
Right now Ardelia is the number one girl here on MA. It's nice to see her there, as she is very deserving. But no doubt, she has a little group of "1" votes in her totals, all of which are completely ridiculous and should be thrown out. Doing so would NOT be censorship, it would be an improvement in the accuracy of the rating system.
Are all of you really invested in this crap?..."1 vs 10", "stand in one place and rate the women that walk by and you'll likely get a bell curve distribution", etc...I read all of this and realize everyone arguing the merits of "scoring" might as well be ranking your preference for one car over another, e.g. all this talk ends up totally objectifying the women on this site.
Certainly the photography can vary from bad to good--so what? I'll take bad photos of a beautiful naked women over no photos at all.
As far as I'm concerned, any women willing to bear all on this site deserves a 10 score...and I hate even saying that, as it furthers the objectification of these beautiful women...if it was up to me the rankings would disappear altogether and we'd be left having to "just enjoy" the gift these women bring to us on a daily basis.
Your smart comment is not a Smart comment.It´s a commonplace.The sort of bell rings you hear anywhere any day.
By paying a fee to see poor girls of generally disdvantaged places photographed nude and intimally exposed YOU are the first contributing to the "objectification" of the woman body.A double standard one more time.We all do it all the time,and you are included.Ratings is only a way to give value and set trends.Take care of what you call crap,you fairy knight.The Seller
Who says I'm paying? And how do you know these are poor disadvantaged girls?
If you're not paying, please advise me in private how you accomplished that!
It´s amazing the things I learn from you,guys!Thank you for the lecture.I understand,but I still keep on believing the number of members that vote is short and it´s got an important influence.
I´ve made my best effort to understand the subtleties of your kind
explanation but still cannot fathom how the system could liberate
from the presumed abusersThe Seller
Are we REALLY speaking of "accuracy" when we are speaking of rating beautiful women on their beauty?
Standards of beauty are notoriously fickle and notoriously changeable ~ and notoriously SUBJECTIVE.
I believe that the factor of subjectivity is what you are completely missing here, in your quest for scientific objectivity.
What we CAN say about the rating scale is that K is going to pick models that SHE considers to be oh, probably 8s, 9s or 10s.
We CANNOT say that HER choice of 8, 9, or 10 is going to map perfectly to MY standard, or even yours.
What that means is... there IS a chance, though ever so slight it may be, that K may pick a model she considers an 8 that I (in my infinite wisdom) genuinely believe, for WHATEVER reason, to be a 1.
Yes, even I might judge a woman a 1, and it might even happen here, with MA and K's high standards.
There is simply no WAY you can look me in the eye and tell me "your choice of a 1 vote for that model is false or illegitimate." Why? Because YOU do not live in my head and you do not know why I choose to rate a woman the way I do.
Likewise, my choice of a 10 might not agree with yours. Are you then going to suggest that we discard the 10 vote because other peoples' standards for a 10 do not match yours?
Trying to solve this problem by removing options is only diving down a rabbit hole headfirst, my friend... because this is all subjective.
Attention friends fer_realz (always) and Seller (very often):
I MUST support luv_lickn_clit_'s challenge for either of you to name a model that K has chosen to publish who is a 1!
The lowest rating I ever gave a model is a 5, and I constantly rue my decision, since it was based solely on the terrible breast enhancement some quack performed on her. She is beautiful and has many many other lovely physical features. Of course we cannot know anything about her non visible features, beyond perhaps an unfortunate choice of falling victim to the idolatry attached to large female breasts.
So, I wonder what could possibly ever lead you to to consider reserving the right to rate a model a 1. It would surely be a reason unique to yourself. My mind boggles to try to identify such a reason.
Help me out here! Pick and write any such reason(s) you could ever have for such a score. I will not pre-suppose any answer(s) you may write; but I am fairly confident that your answer cannot include anything visible to the naked eye given that K is in place and screening the models for skankyness.
We are after all debating what constitutes beauty in the eye of the beholder; not the possibility that Einstein and Hawking and others MAY be wrong about The Big Bang Theory.
Baggy, yes! We are indeed taking about "what constitutes beauty in the eye of the beholder" and that includes an awful lot of OTHER beholders... not just K, not just K and Baggy, not just K, Baggy and fer_.... an awful lot of members who, being human, each have their own standards and reasons for those standards.
You cannot judge joe blow from baltimore's standards, because you are not joe blow from baltimore. Sometimes his standards might be remarkably in line with yours... sometimes not.
What is important is not the reasons a person might vote a 1 (and did I ever say I would ever vote a 1?) what is important is, if I want the right to vote a 10, or a 9, or an 8, or whatever... I cannot tolerate that joe blow from baltimore should not be able to cast the 1 vote he wishes to cast, for WHATEVER reason.
The reason is not important... if I want my privilege to be honored, I must honor the privilege of those I disagree with just as much as I honor the privilege of those who agree with me perfectly.
If it´s about quantum physics,my preference is clearly the Strings
Theory and the eleven-dimension space with the posibility of time arrow reversal.
But if it´s about serious things,All I can say is I´ve seen 1´s to
I´d like to please you,but the site is huge and don´t know how to locate themThe Seller
Seller: As Snoopy would say "curse you Red Baron". Now I have another quantum physics theory to learn about. I said to friend fer_realz at another time and place "it makes my head hurt and my eyes bleed to even think about trying to understand this".
As to you seeing 1's to 5's here; I know if I truly thought that a MET model was a 1, I would remember her and why I had such a low rating for her. I don't want names, just a description of why she / they rated a 1.
I know that beauty is subjective and standards change.
Can you or anyone else honestly name a model here who you consider to be a 1, 2, or 3?
Did I ever say I personally feel any of the models rate a 1, 2, or 3?
That is not the issue. Please see my answer to Baggy, in this same thread.
Last saturday comments were deleted because contained certain words.One of those was "ugly".
One might think there are no ugly girls on Met.In my opinión there are a few.But I´m not going to offer her names.I´m on the "powers to be" side that it can be a stigma for a new,innocent aspirant to model.
Make an effort and you will find 3´s,2´s,and even a few 1´s.
Good Luck,it´s hugeThe Seller
The Seller is right here.
It doesn't matter what the system is... if humans devise a system, other humans will abuse it. It is inherent to humanity, to the human experience.
Personally, I never use the 1 vote... but I frequently use the 10 vote.
What if l_l_c, or swplf2, or Yin-Yang, decide that my 10 votes are insincere and should be removed? Am I really any different than the 1 voters, even though I tend to vote high where they tend to vote low?
I certainly don't think so. I want my opinion counted... which means, by default, I HAVE to respect the haters' right to vote their opinion.
I simply cannot think of a system that could be devised that would be abuse-proof. Certainly, any of the alternatives to the current system that I have thought of, or have been suggested that I have heard of, hold far less appeal to me than the current system.
And all respect to Frank, but I cannot pledge sincerely that this will be my last word on this subject. ( :
Let's say there is a girl whose "true" rating is a 7. You rate her a 10, and someone else rates her a 1. I would have less of a problem with your 10 vote than I would with the 1 vote. Your 10 vote would be significantly more accurate, and probably within the "normal range" (a statistical term).
Again, the girls here on Met-Art are not a random sample of girls! There are no "1"s here!
WHO sets the standards for a "true" rating?
You? K? Me?
It's subjective, my friend.
Given the imprecise nature of measuring "beauty", the best approach is to use the average rating of a large pool of raters. That is the best approximation of the model's true rating. As always, raters will have disagreements among themselves.
"raters will have disagreements among themselves"
Yes, they will... and this is the central flaw in your premise, l_l_c, the idea that a model's beauty can be measured by ratings.
It cannot. It simply cannot. One person's beauty is another person's ugly, and this is not false, or insincere, or inauthentic in any way, this is a simple fact.
Now, this is entirely independent of the fact that some people cast votes that they do not believe in. You and swplf2 and some others feel that this constitutes "abuse" and that is another discussion.
I've already disclosed that my system of voting would strike some as "abuse" even though I tend to vote up rather than down (I think it's insulting to vote a model or an artist down).
However, the fact remains... I wish to be allowed to vote the way I want to... which means, to be logically consistent and follow the "Golden Rule" I must tolerate the fact that some people use 1 votes as statements rather than as "authentic" measures of their true feelings.
I cannot put myself into the head of anyone who votes a 1, so I do not know which 1 votes are sincere and which are "abusively" punitive. So, I must tolerate all of them, as I wish all of my 10 votes to be tolerated, even if not agreed with.
The rating vote is NOT a vote of agreement or consensus. It is a registering of very individual standards of beauty. The sooner we get rid of that idea, the happier we'll all be.
@LuvThere´s not a true rating.I hate this of "beauty is in the eye of the beholder",but it´s sadly true.It´s subjective.
The right sentence is "beauty is in the hole of the ass holder"The Seller
It turns out you´ve become a kind of Delphos Oracle.Frank was waiting for your precept.I said it before many times.You´re accurate and also translate it into words easily.
As of me,we have fully agreed.This surely speaks in my favor.
I´m going to celebrate it with a Chablis and some Vieux Bologne cheese!
Did not forget you,Ledona,you´re an inspiration for living!The Seller
I love the fact that you've got cheez with your w(h)ine, my friend. ;)
In this matter, you and I share the same opinion. Sadly, some abuses have no remedy, which means those of us who are not abusers must adjust our view of reality to include the abusers, because there is simply no way we can shut them out. Not without silencing ourselves...
Cheers, my friend. ( : And this goes for when you're wrong (i.e. don't agree with me) as well as right. ( :
May God keep you omniscient at least for the rest of my lifespan!The Seller
Oh, but I am not always omniscient, only when I speak "ex cathedra" LOL
Ledona is a wonderful model.Beautiful,sexy,and has lots of poweful feminine personality.Location and photography,refreshing.A prelude for
the upcoming summer.Made me happy to open and see Ledona.The Seller
Those shots with the wet top have my heart racing – somehow they are even naughtier than the naked ones! Ledona is a true beauty, and seeing the wet, transparent fabric clinging to her curves is very arousing :-)
Ledona is a beautiful girl with nice big boobs, a really pretty pussy (that we didn't get to see enough of), and a lot of booty!!!
I love the wet see-through top...very sexy!!!
This is a fantastic indoor pool, and I really wish Fabrice would have gotten some more reflection shots, maybe with Ledona laying on her side, tummy, and back! Still a great set!!!
18 U.S.C. 2257 Record-Keeping Requirements Compliance Statement. All materials © 2018 metart.com. All models photographed were at least 18 years old.