Advanced Search
Advanced Search

TheCriticalEye's Comments

T

TheCriticalEye 4 weeks ago

Don't worry, I guess that sooner or later you can find the other pictures of this set on either MetArt X or SexArt.

Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 on Kevea

T

TheCriticalEye 4 weeks ago

I guess the new "standard" of 80 pictures is due to the fact that there is now MetArt X that also needs some content and the more explicit photos that used to be shown here in the past are now deemed to be there as well.

And with quite a lot of sets, if you remove all the more or less duplicate or too similar photos from them, you end up at around 50-60 photos.

Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 on Kevea

T

TheCriticalEye 5 months ago

> Moreover, this guy gets published a lot. Quite frankly, I don't understand why.

My take on this is that MET buys way more than just the sets shown here from him (and others as well), but he (and others) fails to shoot actually erotic sets but just plain porn. Thus the "porn" part of there sets get posted on SexArt and MetArt X and everything that's left over is posted on other MET-Network sites.

That's also the reason why in most of his sets the picture's order is (sometimes awfully) scrambled - something that is also quite annoying. Not even a scrambled left-over porn set is transformed to "art" that way.

Thursday, June 8th, 2017 on Nemil

T

TheCriticalEye 10 months ago

While Heidi for sure is very beautiful and the sheer top and panties really worked very well, this set was sexy at best - not actually erotic.

There should have been much more playing around with the sheer clothes, and while the closeups of her beautiful face were really great, the lack of them showing her breasts and ladyparts was disappointing.

And speaking of closeup ladyparts: what were you thinking in #88? It looks like you just enlarged her pubic area of #87 without any post-processing. This just looks weak and is also absolutely unnecessary.
If she is unwilling to do proper closeups, just skip them entirely.

Saturday, January 14th, 2017 on Granita

T

TheCriticalEye 10 months ago

Nice idea, but a pity that the photographers are so limited in what may be shown here.
This could have been much more erotic and better balanced if some tease touching was allowed.
If you keep posting sets where the only aim is to see a girl masturbate, keep them to Sexart or MetartX. Nothing more frustrating than ending a set before seeing a girl getting a little comfortable with herself.

Saturday, January 14th, 2017 on Zemilo

T

TheCriticalEye 10 months ago

Butterflies like the ones in shot #62 can't spread their wings by themselves. It would be a highly erotic touch to see the helping hand that makes them fly.

Otherwise a very nice set, a beautiful model, but the closeups of her breasts were the real highlights

Saturday, January 14th, 2017 on Sedona

T

TheCriticalEye 10 months ago

Butterflies like the ones in shot #62 can't spread their wings by themselves. It would be a highly erotic touch to see the helping hand that makes them fly.

Otherwise a very nice set, a beautiful model, but the closeups of her breasts were the real highlights

Saturday, January 14th, 2017 on Sedona

T

TheCriticalEye 5 months ago

> Moreover, this guy gets published a lot. Quite frankly, I don't understand why.

My take on this is that MET buys way more than just the sets shown here from him (and others as well), but he (and others) fails to shoot actually erotic sets but just plain porn. Thus the "porn" part of there sets get posted on SexArt and MetArt X and everything that's left over is posted on other MET-Network sites.

That's also the reason why in most of his sets the picture's order is (sometimes awfully) scrambled - something that is also quite annoying. Not even a scrambled left-over porn set is transformed to "art" that way.

Thursday, June 8th, 2017 on Nemil

T

TheCriticalEye 4 weeks ago

Don't worry, I guess that sooner or later you can find the other pictures of this set on either MetArt X or SexArt.

Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 on Kevea

T

TheCriticalEye 4 weeks ago

I guess the new "standard" of 80 pictures is due to the fact that there is now MetArt X that also needs some content and the more explicit photos that used to be shown here in the past are now deemed to be there as well.

And with quite a lot of sets, if you remove all the more or less duplicate or too similar photos from them, you end up at around 50-60 photos.

Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 on Kevea

T

TheCriticalEye 10 months ago

While Heidi for sure is very beautiful and the sheer top and panties really worked very well, this set was sexy at best - not actually erotic.

There should have been much more playing around with the sheer clothes, and while the closeups of her beautiful face were really great, the lack of them showing her breasts and ladyparts was disappointing.

And speaking of closeup ladyparts: what were you thinking in #88? It looks like you just enlarged her pubic area of #87 without any post-processing. This just looks weak and is also absolutely unnecessary.
If she is unwilling to do proper closeups, just skip them entirely.

Saturday, January 14th, 2017 on Granita

T

TheCriticalEye 10 months ago

Nice idea, but a pity that the photographers are so limited in what may be shown here.
This could have been much more erotic and better balanced if some tease touching was allowed.
If you keep posting sets where the only aim is to see a girl masturbate, keep them to Sexart or MetartX. Nothing more frustrating than ending a set before seeing a girl getting a little comfortable with herself.

Saturday, January 14th, 2017 on Zemilo

N

NEWVERYKINKYME 4 weeks ago

OK, my dear TheCriticalEye.
Thank You for your precious information.

Wednesday, October 25th, 2017 on Kevea