Both model and photographer are wonderful. I don't know about the 32k and under light though. I know the good intention of the shadowy warm bedroom light reminicent of Carravaggio and bedroom candlelight are done with the best intentions but can't we agree sometimes the road to hell is paved with good intentions... this kind of light can be romantic and sweet... good for a few artistic wedding album pictures unless there are too many then people would start bitching "what's wrong whith the color" parts of the picture need to be more graphic. These are romantic but this kind of lighting can go as flat as a witche's tit if you don't highlight something with an occasional fresnel, maybe shadowed up a bit to show some skin texture or moisture. The yellow color makes me think more jauntis than Carravaggio or that i grabbed the wrong film (dated myself) even in old film noir movies the highlights didn't wash out, the shadows didn't go muddy. I admire the extra effort to make artistic light but no need to loose the raw drive
Much better set -- LESS bush helps.
out of focus low light crap
houu, what a shame to present this beautiful and, unfortunately many other erotic women in such a chapeau claque inartistic way. MetArt used to be high quality photography of naturally erotic beautiful women. Not much left of the arts, I'm afraid. Have most of the photographers lost their skills? Where is the excitement and grace gone to? Now merely presenting i-shots, little inspiring and many of them boring. The only lasting joy are the beauty of the girls, but the spitit of the page has gone to the dogs. What a shame.
Now that we have a couple dozen sets of her in full bush mode (here and elsewhere) can those of who like a bit more variety please begin to get some with at least a TRIM? I'm not asking for a full smooth-shaved beaver; but, a "landing strip" or "subway ticket" trim -- especially on a lady who has never done that, before -- can indeed be very nice . . .
Reminds me of Met years ago when they won awards, and my business, instead of just being another porn site. But that's what makes money now and why my subscription expires next month. It's been a fun ride and I doubt I'll ever see its like again. Take care everyone.
She might as well have been wearing panties.
Very lovely young lady enjoy.
Seeing the comments are either super yeah or not I thought i would also comment. In my opinion I found this set extremely sexy brought by her beautiful expressive face followed by her very wonderful body. I was holding my breath and panting at the same time. Difficult to do. I like Ms. Schon's work and love Una. IMHO.
It´s a different set but I like it, it's erotic and you dont have to do close ups to make a picture erotic.
Putting the art in Met-art is what this set is about. Beautiful lighting, excellent photography. Sultry, sexy, warm, and moody. The half-light shots with the skin texture are magnificent. Well done!
There's nothing wrong with this set. I think the mood was well captured and presented and I like the elegance. Well done!
I enjoyed this set too. The model and the photography makes me think of erotic films of the 70's, which are fantastic and will never happen again. there is also an enchanting sense of solitude. I'd like to hear what Roy Stuart thinks about this kind of work, if only he didn't have to return to his home planet. I miss Roy.
Una really shows her modeling skills in this set. She exhibits a wide variety of interesting poses and sensual facial expressions. She's the type of woman who makes you stop and say, "Whoa, man!" when you see her.
I've called Arkisi the master of light, but Ms. Schon is the master of light AND shadow.
I wish I could have #108 as a poster-sized, framed print. It is the masterpiece in an overall masterful set. It is powerfully sexy and sensual.
I have enjoyed Una Piccola from Natasha's eyes very much... Woman soul, softness and intimacy well captured. For me this is the best set of Una Piccola so far. Many thanks to both for these excellent pictures.
For a short time, I really liked the mood of the Dark Amber Lighting. However, it quickly grew tiring.
GREAT ASS, wish we could see more of it!!
This is an exceptionally beautiful young lady and I, for one, am thrilled to be able to gaze upon her loveliness. She is soft and very alluring but if you don't like it that's OK. You can just wait for the next one that suits your taste.
But I don't know any guy that would kick this knockout out of bed.
I would say "Thanx for the HEELS" --
But there were exactly five shots featuring the beautiful legs in those heels.
On top of which -- there was little else.
I absolutely agree...The only thing worse than no heels is to have a girl with great legs be wearing them and then not get any shots with her standing in them.
Yeah, yeah I have read all the comments but I still ask where's the pussy?
In my experience, it's usually located between the thighs. You're welcome!
You can see Una's pretty pink bits in her other sets, shot by other photographers, 0128tdln. It's a really disappointing fact ~ but a fact nonetheless ~ that you simply are NOT going to see those parts in a Natasha Schon set. It disappoints me and frustrates me too ~ but I've come to accept it.
The pussy is shown on many pictures in this set.
A beautiful sexy girl but a disappointing set. Nine.
This set made me look back and watch the video of her done earlier this month. I am a hairy bush fan and she displays the perfect hairy pussy quite nicely in that video. She is a very sexy young lady and I am thankful she models for us on MA.
Una Piccola is quickly turning into one of my favorite MET models, and this set by Natascha Schon is my favorite so far. What I like best is that Una can play the cute-and-girly role in one set, the teasing flirt role in another, and like today, the relaxed and glamorous role. It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that she has acting aspirations.
Epitome of artful erotica. Natascha's soft capture of recollections of beauty always make my heart sing. There are some truly stunning photos in this set. I was looking forward to this after seeing the preview and it did not disappoint.
Natascha Schon is the Antithesis of Vulgarity.The Seller
Terrible set! Lighting, poses, . . . The only good part was the model.
I agree with hipshot131's comments - all of them. And Biker13's. Not only does the set not show anything, it is cluttered with jewelry and handicapped (deliberately) with poor lighting.
I love the set, the mood the lighting creates and of course the very pretty Una.
Just one problem....ditch the long necklace...Please. In this set and every other one where one of these necklaces are featured, they only distract, cover up or draw attention away from the model.
Mild rant over. I really loved the set.
Vive la Difference!
Mellow yellow! I really like this set.
It is a superb study of the female form & what a female form Una Piccola possesses! Ms Schon uses the mellow lighting beautifully to reflect the wonders of Una's female form.
Undoubtedly room for more like this on MET - as she points out, there are plenty more extremely risqué examples to plunder if you need em...
This beautiful young model would go from a 7 rating to a 9+ immediately if she would shave her pubic hair. I recommend it.
You don't like pubic hair, I and a few other members do; life goes on.
100% pure erotic.
Sexy young lady . Shot No.8 is so sultry , little black dress , strappy heels , and we know she's not wearing panties . Ok , some upskirt shots would be nice , but if you don't like it , don't look.
Natascha,thanks for presenting Una Piccola in this intimate,classy,elegant way.
Once in a lifetime does not hurt.
Isn´t it?The Seller
Sorry but these sets just don't work for me. I don't come here for gallery sets. I come here for intimate shots not artsy R rated sets that I could buy off the shelf in my local grocery store! 2 or three full on shots of her feminine parts is all it would have taken get a 9 or 10 out of me with this lovely young lady but sadly that is not Ms Schon's style.
I really like the colours and the overall theme. The framing.
I am not a fan of the loss of detail caused by high iso but it was not as bad as Charles Lightfoot's set a couple of days ago
Oh, come on, hipshot! Let's not mince words with cutesy terms like "intimate", when you mean crotch shots.
In all of the grocery stores, in all of the states I've been in, I have yet to see one that stocks nude magazines. Even 7-11's quit carrying them years ago.
And in case you haven't noticed, my friend, unlike some of MetArt's sister sites, MA is nothing BUT "R-rated" sets, "artsy" or otherwise.
Actually, most sets on Met-Art would be NC17 or "not rated". But they're still tame by porn standards. This set, however, is just plain awful.
NC-17 doesn't come into play unless there is actual penetration shown, of which there is none on MA.
I feel sorry for all of you who can't be aroused by a woman without having her expose her pussy and/or asshole. The beauty and sensuality of women are not defined strictly by their crotches.
While crotch shots are nice to have a set does not stand or fail because of them.
For me at least.
Sadly, there are many comments from users who are happy with very bad sets (out of focus, dirty girl with diseased feet, boring, bad lighting, horrible colours and astonishing bad framing), as long as there are 50 closeup shots of the vulva.
The same people are willing to downvote a breathtaking set, technically perfect, telling a story, kickstarting the fantasy in overdrive mode, because there are only few - or worse no crotch shots.
I pity these people.
Comments like this = also boring.
First, new subscribers are exempt from this comment, but if you've been around MA for awhile ~ several years at least ~ you already know that Natasha Schon does not shoot explicit sets, so please spare us the outraged protestations. Schon just doesn't do explicit anymore, we veterans already know this, it's useless to yell about it in comments.
Interestingly enough, in my perambulations through archives, I find that Schon actually did do two or three rather explicit/risque sets, way back when. However, the vast majority of her sets are pretty tame by MA standards. If you don't like "pussy shy," save yourself the frustration and just don't open Natasha Schon sets...
I love this set, and my first impression wasn't of the lack of explicit/vulgar shots, but rather of a classy and elegant presentation of a beautiful woman. Not every set needs to be a gynaecology manual. It's great to see the photographers putting the "Art" into "Met-Art" and giving consideration to their styles. This is what sets Met-Art apart from many other sites.
Personally i found the set very erotic. Obviously Una is off the charts hot but the mood of this set was sexy too. It had a very intimate look and feel like a photoshoot we could do with Una in our living room.
And i must say, Una's bush is AWESOME and also added much to the arousal level of this set. I say well done to both Una and Natasha! Thanks girls. I enjoyed it.
I agree 100% Beautiful girl and photos.10+++.At met art you get it all that's why this is such a great site, Art in one set, explicit in another why not just appreciate what you get, and quit the gripping.
I just wanted to say how pleased I am to see such articulate and courteous comments. I generally avoid reading comments on any site since they are generally, at best, ignorant and at worst, hurtful or abusive. What a pleasant surprise! I hope this is typical of MA.
By and large, Mosienko, we've managed to keep things classy around here. There are occasional exceptions, and occasional flame wars, but that's inevitable given that we're all very opinionated folks.
I genuinely hope you won't be turned off when things get heated around here, usually we manage to keep things pretty civil and pretty un-vulgar. (:
And I have a lot of fun contributing to the conversation, I hope you will too. (:
Hi Mosienko, I've found that, with a couple of exceptions, members who dislike a set or disagree with each other's opinions are able to courteously and objectively. Perhaps most of us value that type of environment and would like to maintain it. Hoping to see you around more often.
Except that Checkers guy. He's a jerk. :)
I'm sorry that some members will automatically dismiss this set because it doesn't qualify as a gynecological exam, but to each their own. If every photographer shot every set of every model the exact same way, this would be a much less interesting site.
In her interview Natasha told me: "I don’t like vulgar photos at all… I think that’s not art anymore, and it can be done by any man... you don’t need to think too much about it or work too hard on it... I like working with the MetArt Network, you don’t limit my freedom and you don’t ask me to shoot only vulgar photos and I’m grateful for that... even if a couple of people say that they like my photos, I feel joy and it means I’m not doing it all in vain!"
There are enough explicit photosets here and elsewhere on the Network. I'm happy we can attract an artist of this caliber, and make her feel comfortable working here. But as we always say here, 'to each his or her own'! :-)
The Devil requested that I be his / her advocate.
The next time that you interview Natasha, please ask her if she is certain that all images she considers vulgar are shot exclusively by men.
Natasha is not the only woman who submits galleries and videos to MET. I resent her blanket description of vulgar (in her opinion) shots being exclusively the work of male photographers. Does she include some members of the Sisterhood as photographers who compose, capture, and submit vulgar images / videos? Or is it possible that said photographers, and also Natasha herself, are only trying to make a living?
@Baggy, I think you are reading something into Natasha's words that was not intended... she is a VERY sweet, humble person and I'm quite sure she was not intending to offend anyone! Her point was that SHE likes to shoot non-explicit erotic nudes, and there are very few places where she would be given the opportunity to do this – and certainly not to have that work displayed alongside more explicit work from other photographers. No doubt by 'any man' she meant 'any person' or 'anyone' – as I mentioned to Checkers, she is Ukrainian, her English is not perfect (although much better than my Russian!).
I wish she hadn't used the word "vulgar," when "explicit" would have done the job just as well without sounding pejorative.
Checkers, I get the feeling English isn't Natasha's first language... (: If it had been, I agree she would probably have made a slightly different word choice there. (:
Well, I guess one person's 'vulgar' is another's 'explicit,' Checkers... but also bear in mind that Natasha is Ukrainian, and English is not her first language! She loves to celebrate naked female beauty, so I'm quite sure she didn't mean it in a pejorative sense – it's just not her thing.
True, I didn't take the language barrier into account. I hope I didn't come across the wrong way. I'm a big fan of her work, and I'm glad she's featured here.
According to my dictionary...
• lacking sophistication or good taste; unrefined
• making explicit and offensive reference to sex or bodily functions; coarse and rude
I think Ms. Schon used the correct word to express exactly what she meant. Nothing was lost in the translation.
Wasted words my friend. As you are entitled to like her work I am entitled to not like it. Not yelling or being derogatory just stating my POV.
Hipshot, personally I'm rather frustrated by it ~ she shoots the most beautiful models on the site and hardly ever shows what I want to see. So no, I don't "like" it.
However, I do get tired of all the members complaining about Natasha's style ~ and I wasn't pointing my fingers at anyone in particular, just saying that it seems to me that we sometimes have short memories and some members forget between Natasha's sets that she just doesn't shoot in the explicit style that most of us like so much.
It frustrates me to read their comments because it's been an established fact for some time that she doesn't like to shoot that way. So the negative comments about her style frustrate me just as much as her tame style does. (:
A beautifully shot set, very high on artistic content rather than eroticism .
and very little erotic content!
Hipshot, if you look at ergo's comment again, you'll note, that's pert' n'ar what he said... (:
Now you think I can't read too? As you know I say it the way I see it and this type of set will never receive praise from me.
You don't have to praise the set, Hipshot, and I don't expect you to.
I was just pointing out that he said something, and you pretty much repeated exactly what he said. It struck me as amusing ~ and therefore I commented on my amusement. (:
Words seldom, if ever, written by me. I really like this gallery shot by Natasha Schon.
A great deal of why I like the gallery is obviously the participation of lovely Una.
If you held my toes in the fire, I would write that, on my first run through the images, # 28 is my favorite. Further reviews will probably add more “favorites”.
Thanks very much to all the ladies responsible for this pleasant visit.
Oh my goodness, this is SO sexy! Love how Natasha Schon takes a sweet little cutie and turns her into a seductive and sexually powerful woman :-)
I've been a fan of Natasha Schon since she started shooting Anna S and some of her other early models.
The way she uses shadows, and the filters she uses, just adds a dramatic element to the photos.
And the fact that many of the models she uses are drop-dead gorgeous doesn't hurt.
Schon just gives you clean, clear images that emphasize how attractive these ladies are--with eroticism, atmosphere,--Schon is one of my favorite photographers.
Schon gets the BEST models, hands-down. Every. Single. Model she shoots is drop-dead gorgeous.
Those are VERY definitive, no room for argument, statements.
Undoubtedly Ms. Schon has shot many attractive models. Myself, I would have left some wiggle room, and qualified the statements somewhat (think of qualifiers like amongst and...).
Think of all the beautiful women you have justifiably complimented who might read your comment and think that words you have written about them were just fluff and not heartfelt.
Thanks for the points, Baggy, but I made the statement I made VERY intentionally.
I am in the habit of perusing an artist's homepage and going through the sets they've shot one by one, and the single thing that strikes me repeatedly about Natasha are the models she shoots, even more so than any other artist here.
So I said what I said quite deliberately. (: No fluff.
I believe that you are sincere in describing why and how you arrived at your original statement about Natasha's models.
I might continue this discussion in private, if you agree that at MET is not the place for you and I to continue.
Quite possibly, Baggy... (: Schedule dependent of course.
Don't worry, I didn't take any offense as I know you meant none. I just thought it might make you feel better to know that I had actually given that statement thought before I made it. (:
18 U.S.C. 2257 Record-Keeping Requirements Compliance Statement. All materials © 2018 metart.com. All models photographed were at least 18 years old.