Way too much makeup. It makes her look like some kind of bizarre circus clown.
Wednesday, December 20th, 2017 on Adeta
Great photography. Every shot clear and well defined.
Friday, July 28th, 2017 on Arrio
Beautiful girl. It's a shame most shots are grainy and poorly lit. I also wish she would have gotten naked. Not Rylsky's best work.
Thursday, July 20th, 2017 on Prelona
Great job Lorenzo! Very erotic.
Thursday, July 13th, 2017 on Wylcane
Not only that, for the most part these shots are "soft focus". Soft focus sucks. It tries to turn real women into fantasy cartoons. The model is great. The soft focus sucks.
Sunday, June 18th, 2017 on Fellia
The back light is too blinding. I was praying he would let her out of there so we could see her clearly.
Tuesday, June 13th, 2017 on Ensha
i think some of the shots are a bit overexposed. The color and detail is washed out. The white sheets contribute to the problem, reducing contrast. She is, nonetheless, mind blowingly beautiful.
Friday, June 2nd, 2017 on Gocita
I think this set is great. But I have a problem with someone telling me what I should or should not want to look at. To be honest, I often skip past the pictures with clothing. Your personal taste is not universal.
Thursday, May 25th, 2017 on Lomnia
There are certainly some nice shots as abstract art but I am left with the feeling that I never actually saw the model. I like being given a chance to share physical intimacy with these women. Ms. Schon doesn't do that. Every shot seems designed to distance us from the real woman.
Thursday, May 18th, 2017 on Cavida
Unless you are employed by Metart and have seen the list of members, you do not "know for a fact" much of anything about female members. I would guess the membership is 99.9% heterosexual male. Metart presents art that is erotically stimulating for heterosexual men. There are exceptions, but women in general are aroused by different things than men. There is a whole industry devoted to pornography for women. It is more focused on story and emotion, much less focused on bodies, especially genitalia. A large percentage of women are actually turned off by pictures of penises and vaginas. Women are often turned on by things that have nothing to do with physical beauty. Woody Allen was voted sexiest man alive for a few years. To deny that difference is absurd. When you add to that the fact that there are no pictures of men here, you cannot expect women to be interested in this except for the curiosity factor. I do agree with you that there are women who can produce this type of art. But they are the exception.
Monday, April 24th, 2017 on Estinne
This is nonsense. If we follow this reasoning, a doctor would be the best photographer because he knows the most about bodies. You are making an error of logic. Do baseball players make the best sports photographers?
I think it is a mistake to have a female photographer photographing women for a heterosexual male audience. I also think it would be a mistake to have a male homosexual do the shoot. They don't share the same interests as heterosexual men. How many women want to look at pictures of pussy? They understand abstract beauty but they don't understand what men want to see.
Friday, April 21st, 2017 on Estinne
I love Bethany's breasts and areola. We have many small breasted white women but few large breasted black women. I hope we can see more. I hope you realize your personal taste is not universal. I have seen very few comments criticizing the models in Metart. I wonder why Ian feels compelled to attack a beautiful, erotic woman. Must be some powerful forces at work.
Thursday, April 6th, 2017 on Acura
nor is yours!
First of all the audience is NOT all heterosexual males by a long shot. I know for a fact that we have many female members and you will find that they look for exactly the same things we do. The problem is not her gender but the fact that she is a feminist! A woman with an open mind can publish wonderful erotic art and can appreciate the same things that we do. Look at Catherine's work. She does a great job of giving us a woman's view of the female body and has no problem showing us ALL of their bodies! And so it is with Koenart also!
who better than a female eye to see into, around, above and below lending insights to a woman than another woman? Lol sorry but gender has no bearing
in the photographic world and I might add what better viewpoint than from the female sensuousness? A woman knows another woman more keenly and conveys her to the viewer more keenly than most men, sensuous pleasuring is a key part of Met-Art where Flawless Beauty meets Art.
Women know - ask one!
Leon, I will disagree with you on women shooting women. We have two others in our collection of artists here that do wonderful work - Koenart and Catherine. There are others less known, but those two have contributed 498 and 436 sets respectively just on MA and not counting sister sites. They must be doing something right.
I know a few females of different persuasions, including a former girlfriend that was bisexual. Women so inclined look at much he same physical features as men do. I hope our own MA moderator Rose can chime in and elaborate on that.
What we see here in this set is the style of one female artist. She is a woman, yes, but that may have nothing to do with her non-explicit style. For the record, this artist does not find favor with me, but it has nothing to do with her being a woman.
18 U.S.C. 2257 Record-Keeping Requirements Compliance Statement. All materials © 2018 metart.com. All models photographed were at least 18 years old.