Blather on then, fellows, rather than see.
As for art. This is soft porn. And haven't you heard, no porn is art? So here we have not art -not shown -with not art.
For the record --
I would rather not see the tattoo. It's their choice to have them -- I just don't care for them.
I have seen some of the most beautiful alpine meadows in the Bavarian Alps. It would sadden me imeasureably to see someone plant a billboard sign there.
One painting on the side of a barn and I would never want to an alp again.
Mia you are truly awesome, you exude beauty and eroticism, that cheeky smile just melts.
Thanks Dave for capturing Mia's beauty so perfectly. This is the best set ever!!!!
Whenever Mia comes up with a new set, someone always raises the tat issue. So today I am going to get long winded again. First thanks to David for sharing with us! The more the better, from artists. Over all Met across the board has an issue with Tat's. SexArt appears to have more acceptance and Jonathan has addressed the isssue more than one. When Bo was their primary artist he decided to not only accept them but in some ways feature them. Several models had far more ink than even Mia. MetArt on the other hand, or maybe it's artist, and not Management spurn them. Lets take Melena she has a very IMO "cute" little cat/critter right below her panty line to the right of her "landing strip" (When she had one.) This one we have all seen! Ah but it regulary disappears! I have no idea why? Which then raises the "photoshop" issue. Overall the ? is if the tat disappears with photoshop then what else is altered? Met claims they do support photoshop "alterations", but do accept the photos as submitted by the artists. So who is the "blame", if any blame is due! Now with Mia it is slightly different. Don't ask! But I have seen Mia's tat. It is exquiset and would be worth of a feature in one of the mags that specialize in tattoos. I do not recall if Mia herself has ever addressed the issue. If it is "her" choice for it remaining hidden then, to be totally honest, we should all RESPECT that. And stop even commenting on it, pro or con. And especially comments about her "defacing" herself. I raise this this way because I personally believe that Met itself is not the reason we don't see it. Now would be a good time for K to jump in and put this "DEBATE" to rest. As far as what we come her to see, to be blunt tits and ass, Mia has given us all we pay for, in some shots almost gynochologically. So accept that some "mystery" is acceptable and IMO a "neat" thing.
Hi swplf2 :)
As much as I would love to put this issue to bed, I think my honest reply will surely ignite something else.
I for one, do not care for tattoos at all on the skin. I always wish that such stunning women would not have any additions to their natural beauty. For me this sometimes even includes the changing of the hair color (I am a bit of a purist).
That being said, MetArt began with the policy: no tattoos, breast implants, piercings, plastic surgery, etc. We have sometimes let that slide, especially when we already published a top model without and she decided to add something later. A great example of this was Jenya D and her nipple piercings. For years, she was a top 10 model. Enter piercings, her ratings just tanked. We still published her sets, we had many that were shot before the little "additions".
Nessa A was another experiment because it was difficult to look past her stunning face (even though the implants imho are horrendous). Even so she eventually became a huge debate topic and phased out of the top models.
When talking about Mia Sollis specifically, of course our thoughts were "why the heck did she get this thing on her back?!" I did publish a set not too long ago where you can see the hint of the tattoo without it being the primary focus. I thought this would have been sufficient to satisfy everyone who had the curiosity about it. I do understand some of our viewers want to see more of her backside. I will definitely work on this but I do not have those sets just yet. Stay tuned!
In recent years we have decided to not have such a hard stance on our policies. Also my opinion does not reflect that of all of our Management team.
The debate continues! :)
If I were in charge of Met-Art, I would offer to pay to have that disfiguring tattoo removed. She would look so much more beautiful without it.
Thanks for your reply. In my comments I merely observed that it's unfortunate we only get to see one side of Mia -- the front. Why? Because the photographers don't want to shoot anything they know beforehand they can't sell. Or, OK, shoot it anyway but then photoshop it out before submitting it to the publisher. Self-censorship. Malena Morgan is a good example: in her sets for Jason Self her belly tatts are missing; in her sets for Luca Helios there they are. (And I'm glad the MET policy is flexible enough to allow the occasional tattoo, piercing, etc.) But to get back to Mia: I'd rather see her whole, including her back & bottom (as in her stairway set for Slastyonoff)rather than limited to one dimension because a photographer dislikes tattoos, or because he/she is afraid you won't buy a set because it shows a tattoo. If you want to see Mia's kamasutra tatt, check out her set on Watch4Beauty.
fer_reals hit the nail on the head when he says "hideous is in the eye of the beholder", just as with beauty. So with that in mind I'll state my own desire for no piercings or (larger) tats on this website.
The initial appeal for me with Met-Art when I joined, and what I think the Met-Art brand is, is the fact that the beauties here are very natural, clean and joyful looking. They are enjoying their shoot (very very important to me), and are a cut above what you see on your average "any content goes" website.
The sight of piercings and (larger) tats on women reminds me (rightly or wrongly) of the d-grade gonzo porn I have spent my entire adult life avoiding, and only ever puts me in mind of the type of woman I might find at a truck-stop.
If you want tats and piercings 90% of other sites are sure to contain this.
My opinion, feel free to disagree.
It's good to hear that there is flexibility on this issue. Personally I agree about breast implants being horrendous almost always ~ while not condemning women for wanting them, they almost always turn out looking unnatural IMO.
As for tats, I have one (and plan to have several more) so I completely understand why a woman would want one and support their right/privilege to do so. That being said, I don't want to look at women with ink all over their body, but if the tat is relatively modest and doesn't eat up the scene by itself, I see no problem with models having them.
As for piercings, I'd have to say the same. They can be tasteful/modest, or they can be hideous ~ but again, hideous is in the eye of the beholder, and if a woman wants to wear a dramatic piercing, I say go for it, but I might not like the way it looks.
Overall however, I feel that just like with other body issues ~ weight, height, breast size, complexion, etc. MetArt generally gets the overall mix right.
And it's not going to hurt any of us to see the occasional tat or piercing.
Thank you fer, this is the type of "debate" which I hoped my comment would generate, we seem to be acting more and more like adults!
I dearly hope so, swplf! Nice to dialogue with you, BTW. You always seem to be willing to hear all sides of an issue.
Personally, I think it's perfectly possible to have a very strong feeling about something and still be able to discuss rationally and calmly with someone who holds the diametrically opposite view. All it takes is patience, tact, and imagination.
Thank you very much for replying. This also should shut up the nay sayers that claim that "Management" cares less about our comments and doesn't pay attention to use. Your next issue will probably come from the anti-photoshop crowd. Good Luck. It also points out the fact that the limits on Met are not just on where touching, etc. is allowed. It also highlights that with a great variety of sites, now in our Met family, different sites can be just that different. I can predict the Delta will probably either have Mia address this directly to us at her first opportunity or he will ask her and report to us. Again. Thanks to you K.
There is no such thing as a cute tattoo. I find them revolting and hideous intentional scarring of the skin.
I think there will never quite be a hard stance taken on this because there is such a wide range of tattoos. A small discrete, tasteful tat is one thing but where do you draw the line? What is tasteful and what is not? and who determines that? Personally I think tats on a woman make her look cheap and hard. Thus they are a turn off for me. I like the idea of having a standard that says no but allows a small bit of room for exceptions. Thus far I think you guys are doing a good job walking the line and I think your decisions have been sound.
Mia is a beautiful and unique model and the solution thus far has worked fine. It would be a shame to lose her. Making policy to allow tats would be a big mistake and would be opening a huge can of worms. You could end up with this https://scontent-a-sea.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/t1/1504004_1404022009841543_1418337687_n.jpg
IN my mind, a tasteful tattoo would be on the small side (I still would find it revolting since its on the skin), say no larger than an inch or so at the longest and widest. The atrocity on Mia Sollis's back does not qualify as tasteful.
I should also note one other thing. Although I loathe tattoos, I do consider them a valid form of art. A well drawn tattoo is in fact a high quality piece of art. My problem with it is the medium it's on.
By the same token, I would never dream of outlawing tattoos. It's your body, if you want to decorate it with ink, go wild.
Mia Solis is an incredible red haired beauty. her creamy skin,perfect face and figure,and her posing skills make her a total stand-out,and I gave her a 10+++
It is unfortunate that Mia Solis is now only photographed from the front -- anything to avoid showing the tattoo on her back & neck. Unfortunate in that she has an admirable backside. See the sets she did for Slastyonoff (which also show a bit of the tatt). Too bad we only get to see half of this extraordinary model.
It is a shame that she chose to deface that lovely back. This obsession is one I will never understand. Why an amazingly beautiful woman chooses to deface herself forever seems self destructive to me.
A ridiculous and thankfully dying attitude...
hipshot, is it self destructive for a man to get a tat?
yes! though it is more mainstream and more accepted. Besides I am not looking for beauty when I look at a man. Having said that I do not like them on a man either. For me they have no artistic value in any way. Up until the last couple of decades tats represented the seedier side of society and were not considered art at all.
Guess I'm just getting old.
You just may have started out "old"... Expand your "vision" of what "art" can be...
IMO, it is her beauty to do with what she wants... it is not our beauty residing in her, that she has to respect in order to please us. She gets to make the decision, and if that makes her unattractive to us, so be it...
Maybe (to some extent) that's exactly what she wants to do... draw the line between those who will only be attracted to her so long as she pleases them with her body, and those who will accept her and see the beauty in her no matter what.
I would like to see her from behind as well. I always hear people complain about the tattoo we never get to see; lets just see the thing! This was a lovely set by Dave Lee however, and some of his best work since he left Van Halen (I hope someone gets that so I don't feel too old). Great set by one of the greats!
Me too, or is it 3? ;)
Nope, it's 4, cos I got it too. ( ;
I vividly remember the "Van Halen vs. Van Hagar" arguments on the Jr. High schoolbus... ( ;
I got it, so we can both feel old.
If ya like redheads, this is YO GAL!!!
After all these years with Met Art, I'm thinking that I should move to the Czech Republic or Russia.....they seem to corner the market on beautiful, sexy women.......
Wow! Great day on MET. Mia Sollis and Dido have probably got two of the top 10 nether regions on the site. Dave did a wonderful job of knowing where the focus should be for each shot. Couldn't say the same for Luca on Dido's set. I have to concur with hip, that this is one of Mia's best sets. Hopefully Mia and Dave have a couple more sets in the pipeline or plan on working together again based on the comments here. Thanks Mia and Dave.
I am sure your hopes will be fulfilled. Simple economics demand that when a model is hired they do as many sets as they can in the time allotted. I hope the following sets are bought by met and that they are as successful as this one.
This is one of Mia's best sets, and I think hipshot is right on about why. The coloration is perfect due to proper consideration of the lighting. Mia looks stunning in this set because she is not bleached out. The balance of poses mixes it up to keep the set interesting, not saying that the lovely Mia herself isn't enough. One of my favorite natural readheads, and one of MA's premiere ladies, Dave Lee does her justice in this set, a keeper for sure.
Thanks for all the nice feedback. Glad u liked our work.
Thank you for putting Mia back in the limelight and taking the time to let us know you read our feedback. I am partial to redheads but I had cooled to Mia because of the tendency to make her look ghostlike and very irritated in the neither regions. It is so nice to see her in this light. Redheads are a unique challenge for the photographer and Mia in particular is a difficult woman to present due to her delicate coloring. Your work with her in this set and I hope the others that you did during this shoot has renewed my interest in this lovely woman. It is difficult in this field of fine photographers to make a standout presentation but this one has really got my attention and admiration.
Thanks for stopping by and saying hi. Anything you would like to add about your recollections of the shoot or model is always appreciated.
Love this set. Thank you.
How sad this perfect redhead is shaved...!
Hi Viking, as you can see from skin texture Mia waxes. Having the ladies at the day spa do your grooming (If you feel you have to) is much better than doing it your self, as they are trained to do this(two years I think
Mia is a very attractive freckle factory.
Kudos to both Mia and Dave for this very nice gallery!
I salute you Dave Lee for your mastery of white balance and color control. I have never seen Mia's colors so perfectly balanced and true to life. Some great close in shots of her awesome woman parts "in true living color"
Wow! This is Mia at her best and David did a fantastic job getting the set and lighting perfect for this fair skinned goddess. Not an easy task for sure. She has had many sets with several artists with varying levels of success. It is so easy with her fair skin and the contrasting colors of her vulva to make her look less than attractive. It was a very wise move to do this set with subdued lighting in a window without sunlight streaming in. Her delicate coloring does not lend it's self to bright sunlight outdoor settings. Several of her previous set fell into that trap and though she is one beautiful woman but the artists need to be aware that this delicate beauty does not do well in outdoor settings.
Brovo Dave and Mia. This is IMO one of her best ever sets.
Thanks MIA for another beautiful shoot, you make me so glad I am a man.
18 U.S.C. 2257 Record-Keeping Requirements Compliance Statement. All materials © 2016 metart.com. All models photographed were at least 18 years old.