English

This gallery contains 116 images @ 21 megapixels. Sign up now to see them all!


Comments

booooring.

  • [deleted]
  • 11 months ago:

This is beautiful photography.

  • [deleted]
  • 11 months ago:

This is beautiful photography.

  • H WU
  • 11 months ago:

This beauty would look nice in a bedroom set.

People are saying some really bad things about this photo set, and I do perhaps, favor the final page where the model is lit more strikingly from the front, but the other images definitely have their place too. It can't all be the same. Imagine, for example, image #58 blown up to near wall size at an art gallery. It would be a showstopper. Others may disagree but I don't care. Differing opinions are just fine. I'm sure the photographer would have a few things to say as well.

  • JaG9
  • 11 months ago:

As a long-time member, I allow myself to express some thoughts.
The 'meaningful' reactions to THIS set make me easy to do so.
Perhaps some will hate, ridicule or simply ignore these lines. Now that may be the course of things happening ...

(1) Since the beginning of MET, quality and handling of the photo material were associated with 'erotic photography' in the foreground. Over time, it became increasingly difficult to distinguish between 'erotic photography' and 'Porn' - a phenomenon that by far hasn't affected MET alone.

(2) Today the boundaries have long been blurred. What still is touted and sold as 'erotic photography' is basically 'Porn' in pure form ('Soft Porn').

(3) The time the MET Network was called into life, this process was completed. This is reflected in the expansion of SexArt, TheLifeErotic, but especially Michael Ninn and ALS Scan.

(4) The idea of SexArt could have served as an 'alibi' for the alternative of 'explicit' content, but the commercial consideration to conquer an even larger mass market is obvious.

(5) Please don't get me wrong - the idea and execution of SexArt had and has a certain kind of ... potential. Sometimes the explicity can be sensual and stimulating. But the TRUE SPIRIT of MET - some of you may know of what I'm talking about - has been abandoned, been neglected ... or whatever. The clearest comparison can be found with Femjoy, now struggling with a similar situation (see Joymii).

(6) As in times before, MET can proudly claim to be virtually unsurpassed in quality and supply. However, it becomes harder and harder to find sets that reflect the TRUE SPIRIT of MET. It must be stated and emphasized: Porn Portals are now countless, MET should continue as a 'role model' and an outstanding example of 'erotic photography' (such as (mostly) Femjoy, MPL Studios, Zemani and ESPECIALLY Domai).

(7) I see the possibility of ratings and comments particularly critical. Both aims increasingly to 'judge' and neglect the 'respect' and the acceptance of individual personalities of the models, which occur more and more in the background. Of course I know very well that MET has to serve a mass audience, but the demand for explicit poses or other quite sexist remarks here are not only ridiculous, but also annoying.

(8) What leads to my final statement. Wonderful and great sets (!) like this (just think of the incredible classic Goncharov sets in NATURE) are treated here 'disrespectful' or being classified as 'boring'. I, however, always feel the same about interior shots (room, bed, etc.) to be extremely boring and 'bloodless'. NOT the poses should be judged at the foreground, but the sensual-erotic 'charisma' of the photo material. Still MET meets a great potential (!) regarding beautiful models and outstanding photographers (I still have my favorite photographers), but the detection of 'interesting' sets (see above) seems to be more and more difficult. I miss the classic scenes in nature (although some are still being shot) and would hope that the 'Porn-heaviness' (especially in the reflection of the members - ALWAYS judging a set being 'good' or 'bad' is ridiculous and annoying) would disappear again ...

Big thanks for reading and listening. :)

Big time thanks for expressing your thoughts! You've done an excellent job. I'm
delighted to see a number of other MET members seem to agree with your sentiments.

I especially agree with your thoughts in paragraph "(7)". Plus, I hope exquisite
uber-fine models are not being discouraged or fully turned-off by ratings and
"annoying" comments on this site.

very well said.

Also: I liked the setting and the techniques - I am just not a fan of the model....

  • [deleted]
  • 11 months ago:

Very well said, I agree.

Aljena is incredibly beautiful and sexy in every way, but her face just makes me melt. Perhaps not a perfect set, but, imo, still quite good. A young lady so beautiful as Aljena looks transcendent under any circumstances. What a beauty!

ZZZZZZ...

Yawn

Sexy wholesome girl. Photoset doesn't do her justice. Please photograph her inside where her beauty will be easier to view.

Too much interference from grass, weeds, baby's breath, what ever these were; Maslof managed to ruin many shots by allowing them in. An example of why locales need to be pre-scouted before positioning the model.

It looks to me as though the angles were chosen to ensure the weeds would obscure the view.

We need more close-ups, Dmitry, old chap.

Correction: We need SOME close-ups.

Aljena is beautiful and sexy, but this is not a good photo set. Too many nearly identical photos, too little variety in the poses, no good close-ups, and some slightly overexposed shots where her hair merges with the sky. Her other sets (all with the same photographer) are better.

Q: Why is Aljena like a Nobel Prize winner?

A: Because they're both outstanding in their fields.

Hooray for silliness!




Access The Full Set Of 116 Images By Joining MetArt Today!
CLICK for FREE ACCESS